used gmc : But taking your example, GMC orders hood onraments for your car. Because GMC DID order them AND they have GMC's official logo on them, do you think it wouldn't be prudent for GMC to ensure they were destroyed if they were found faulty? As an on-going concern, the OEM would naturally destroy them. However, if this was a first-time order, wouldn't it be prudent of GMC to make certain they were destroyed? Now, let's talk about this error being life-threatening. Had these bladders not had the OMS logo on them, I would totally agree with you. However, regarding public safety, you cannot waive liability on an expectation. OMS ordered them, knew they existed, knew they held the OMS logo on them, ....and didn't make absolutely cetain they were destroyed. Yes, the OEM should have destroyed them ....but they didn't, ...and now they are in circulation and the OEM is defunct. Who's liability is left to carry the load? OMS. The problem is, OMS KNEW THE BLADDERS WERE DANGEROUS! Sure, the majority of the blame lies on the OEM's doorstep, but OMS also dropped the ball. My big beef is that they are now asking the public to pay for it ...and someone may pay for it with their life.
used gmc : Case in point: Let's say you found what looks like a slightly used GMC. It says GMC, runs like a GMC, you even found out GMC ordered them built. After a family member is killed, you then find out GMC rejected them and ordered them destroyed but it didn't happen. This vehicle was IN THEIR HANDS so they knew it existed (and because they ordered them). Now, do you have the right to sue GMC? YES!!!! GMC STILL has a legal responsibility to ensure the SAFETY of the public ...at all costs. This goes far beyond tampering with a product at a consumer level as you used in your example. We are talking about what the legal responsibility is for the public's safety ESPECIALLY now that the OEM is no longer in business. OMS didn't ensure that safety.Even simpler, I am making a SAFETY product with your name on it that you ordered. But when it arrived you found it was dangerous, ...lethal to the public. While it is my duty to destroy them, it is your legal responsibility to monitor that they were destroyed. Why? Because they are a safety, life-support device that has YOUR registered name on them.
used gmc : any dealer of their cars that they could not advertise used trade-insfor sale,Actually, you don't have to imagine that Tony ... control over usedcar sales is an active priority for OEM's. They can't/don't legallyrestrict or totally control it, but many of them have very elaborateprograms they voluntarily recruit their dealerships into which setpolicies, standards of refurbishing, warranty, marketing practices,etc., over used products.And as far as jumping all over JB for his cheerleading a bit forTaylor guitars ... for chrissakes, the level of blind devotion to theMartin name on the headstock is so pervasive in this group (read ChrisJohnson's hopelessly clueless BJ'er of Martin guitars earlier thisweek for a representative sample) that it's amusing to hear folksreact negatively to some outright Taylor fans.And to translate objections of their marketing policies into damningof their product is just plain childish, IMO of course. (Not sayingyou do that Tony, but I hear it all the time ... ).<<Actually, you don't have to imagine that Tony ... control over usedcar sales is an active priority for OEM's. They can't/don't legallyrestrict or totally control it, but many of them have very elaborateprograms they voluntarily recruit their dealerships into which setpolicies, standards of refurbishing, warranty, marketing practices,etc., over used products.>>
used gmc : Yup. Notice how those "we sell cars" programs at the big car rental agenciesseem to have dried up? Those leasing companies now get significant incentiveson their new cars IF they agre to turn them back as "program cars" at the endof the leasing run. So those cars end up being sold used, at dealerships (andat considerably higher prices than the car rental companies charged).Well sure. The greatest competition for a new GMC is a used GMC. But partof what the manufacturers do is require that the used cars that the dealerssell, and which they have taken as trade-ins, meet a particular qualitystandard. They do want the dealers to sell used cars, because they wantpeople to trade in their used cars and buy new ones. Dealers often(usually?) have another lot, up the street and 'round the corner, where theysell cars that do not meet the manufacturer quality standard. What did youthink they did with those "If you can drive it in, we will give you $1000off" sales. Your criticism of my analogy fails in that they do not activelytell their dealers that they can not advertise that they have used GMCs forsale(Or any other manufacturer) They just set a quality standard for usedcars which will be sold under the flag of a dealer. But it was just ananalogy anyway, which seldom perfectly match the object to which you arecomparing. Differences usually exist.
used gmc : Agreed. But someone had asked an honest question about the newsgroupattitude toward Taylors, and I thought that JBs answer was misleading. And,in fact, most people here and in the guitar industry in general recognize thecontributions which Taylor has made, both direct and indirect. But blanketstatements that people dislike a brand out of jealousy at their success orthat every guitar which is produced is perfect while other manufacturersguitars are not and they are merely living off of their name and such illserve either the person who asked the question, the credibility of theAround here, (Ohio) the dealers ship them off to the auction barn, whereindependent used car dealers bid on them to sell off their lots. Thedealersdon't want anything to do with cars over a couple of years old. (Sometimesthe dealers will make an exception if the car is the brand they sell, and ifthecar is really a creampuff.) Everything else - off to the auction.Sorry, the homework mode "on/off" reference went over my head ... huh?Actually, there's quite a bit more to it than just quality standards,but yes, it's an imperfect analogy for sure. And I didn't reallyintend to defend Taylor's policies ... but I will say that all Iusually hear is a bunch of emotion directed towards it, and haverarely heard a calm, evenhanding presentation of why they do it orwhat the majority of retailers think of it's effect and fairness.
|
|
1989 jeep cherokee, 1999 jeep cherokee, 2003 jeep rubicon, 2004 jeep grand cherokee, farrish jeep, full size jeep, hummer jeep, jasper jeep, jeep 2003, jeep acessories, jeep auto parts, jeep bicycle, jeep bicycles, jeep bike, jeep cheroke, jeep cherokee, jeep cherokee accesories, jeep cherokee parts, jeep cherokee report, jeep commando, jeep compass, jeep decals, jeep forum, jeep golf, jeep grand cherokee accessories, jeep ika, jeep liberty, jeep liberty 2003, jeep liberty review, jeep magazine, jeep performance, jeep pics, jeep replacement parts, jeep reviews, jeep rims, jeep rubicon, jeep sahara, jeep seats, 2002 gmc sonoma, 2003 gmc sonoma, 2003 gmc truck, 2003 gmc yukon denali, gmc 2003, gmc autos, gmc boxing, gmc c3, gmc ca, gmc cinemas, gmc consultores, gmc danali, gmc delorean, gmc delorian, gmc denali, gmc denanilli, gmc envoy, gmc envoy recall, gmc envoy reviews, gmc envoy xuv, gmc gnome, chrysler 2003, chrysler 300c, chrysler atlantic, chrysler building architect, chrysler building new york, chrysler building pictures, chrysler caravan, chrysler cherokee, chrysler credit canada, chrysler crossfire, chrysler daimler, chrysler daytona, chrysler de, chrysler deutschland, chrysler eagle 90, chrysler employee discount, chrysler equation, chrysler es, chrysler espaa, chrysler gebrauchtwagen, chrysler gem, chrysler homepage, chrysler hndler, chrysler italia, chrysler jeep, chrysler logo, chrysler mexico, chrysler minivans, chrysler neon insurance, chrysler racing outboard, chrysler sailboats, chrysler service center