Rising Sun wrote:
> The Autobeat http://snipr.com/1n8lb
>
> ..General Motors and Chrysler tumbled down the list in J.D. Power and
> Associates’ annual Initial Quality Study. The study measures problems
> found in the first 90 days of ownership after interviewing 97,000
> consumers.
>
> GM did poorly and a company spokesman argued that the survey doesn’t
> matter. All of GM’s brands finished below the industry average, which
> is 125 problems per 100 vehicles...
>
> The reason it doesn’t matter, says the spokesman, is that the
> difference between top performers and the middle of the pack is
> statistically irrelevant. Toyota, which tied Jaguar for sixth with 112
> problems per 100 vehicles, beat Chevy by just 17 problems per 100 cars.
> He makes a point. Few consumers will notice 17 problems per 100
> vehicles. The Power study, he told me, is becoming less and less
> relevant because quality is reaching parity.
>
> There's some truth to that. But the argument naively misses a huge
> point. While some brands like Mercedes moved way up the charts this
> year and others, like Chrysler, tumbled way down, hot names like Honda
> and Toyota are in the top 10 every year. Every year!
>
> Consumers love and trust those brands. And those companies have been
> dining on Motown’s market share for decades now. Sure, Detroit is
> close, by the numbers anyway. But consumers won’t believe that Detroit
> is as good as Honda and Toyota until they beat them and beat them
> consistently in J.D. Power surveys, Consumer Reports studies, word-of-
> mouth recommendations and just general buzz. I’m sorry, why should a
> guy who’s on his third Toyota or Honda buy a Chevy? Because the initial
> quality is almost as good and the disparity is statistically minuscule?
> There’s a great sales pitch...
> ==========
> Rising Sun: http://snipr.com/eat_me_jarhead
>