What did Toyota know, and when did they know it?
in [Toyota Prius]
|
From: Tegger on 23 Feb 2010 10:51 "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in news:BGSgn.21785$e%2.14730(a)newsfe08.iad: > "Tegger" <invalid(a)invalid.inv> wrote in message > news:Xns9D286B5665EF6tegger(a)208.90.168.18... >> >> The Wall Street Journal had an article a week or so ago that had to >> do with >> the culture of Japan, specifically in relation to the current Toyota >> controversy. The article described how, while perfection is always >> the goal, the failure to attain it is accompanied by deep social >> opprobrium. Japanese culture thus offers considerable encouragement >> for Japanese to keep mistakes from public view (to save face) but to >> fix them them on-the- fly as quickly as possible. >> >> I wish I'd kept that article, so I could give a link here. > > Pictures don't match, but is this the article? > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487045332045750473706332344 > 14.html > > > That's it! -- Tegger
From: C. E. White on 23 Feb 2010 12:19 "Clive" <clive(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:DUfKFvKrS$gLFwnp(a)yewbank.demon.co.uk... > In message <hm0qlt$6dc$5(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Hachiroku > <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> writes >> It almost seems the NUMMI experiment backfired, and instead of >>Toyota teaching GM how to build a quality, reliable vehicle, GM >>taught >>Toyota how to lie and cheat...? > Just what happened to Daimler and Chrysler, Daimler thought they > could boot-strap Chrysler into a maker of reliable cars for the > American market, instead Chrysler pulled Daimler down to it's level, > now after a messy divorce, Daimler's reliability is seriously in > question and they're having to through a lot of money at building > reliability and prestige again. Youa re going to have to explain to me how Chrysler pulled Daimler down to it's level. I don't think Daimler sent a bunch of Chrysler managers to Germany to run things. Given the attitude of Germans I have worked with think, I think it is highly unlikely (impossible) that Daimler adopted any Chryler proceedures for building or evaluating vehicles. I've always liked German cars - at least when new. And a lot of the hard mechaical parts are excellent. But German electronics...well they suck. And since modern cars that are so heavily dependent on electronics, is it any surprise that German cars, particualrly older German cars, are having lots of problems? In Germany there are very few cars older than 8 years. German attitudes and German laws make it unpopular/impractical to keep cars much past eight years. So I think I can understand why 10 year old BMWs in the US always seem to have tail light out, burned up alternators, and power windows that don't work. Ed
From: Hachiroku on 23 Feb 2010 20:54 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:19:11 -0500, C. E. White wrote: >> Just what happened to Daimler and Chrysler, Daimler thought they >> could boot-strap Chrysler into a maker of reliable cars for the >> American market, instead Chrysler pulled Daimler down to it's level, >> now after a messy divorce, Daimler's reliability is seriously in >> question and they're having to through a lot of money at building >> reliability and prestige again. > > Youa re going to have to explain to me how Chrysler pulled Daimler > down to it's level. Um, that's pretty much what happened. I don't know how. It was something like a very good swimmer going out to rescue someone who was drowning, and the drowner pulls the good swimmer under. That's why Diamler dumped Chrysler on the market for comparatively pennies. Diamler quality suffered during the partnership.
From: Hachiroku on 23 Feb 2010 20:56 On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:08:14 -0600, Bob Cooper wrote: >> BTW, I just heard on the radio, a spokesman for GM saying, "We have >> ALWAYS complied with recall guidelines..." >> >> ROFLMAO!!! RIGHT!!!! > > > Once again. It's GM'S fault. > If you have a problem with that, then don't bring up GM when talking > about Toyota. Pretty simple. > If you can't manage that, it means it's GM's fault. > Fine with me. OK. It's GM's fault. so there.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 23 Feb 2010 18:16
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:12:35 -0600, Bob Cooper wrote: >> >> And if 'you're not used to it', don't respond. Nobody says you have to. >> But this is usenet, and that's why almost all news readers have Bozo >> Bins. You can roll around with the few morons in there that have nothing >> to say, but need to say it anyway. And why is there a whistling noise >> attached with all your posts? >> >> HINT: Put some cotton balls in your ears... > > Seems you're the one who is disturbed by my postings. You are quite > welcome to put me in your bin. But you're nuttier than I thought if you > think I need, or would heed any advice from you. They don't really bother me, except for the fact you're a foghorn that needs to sound off even when it's not needed. White noise. Useless. Do you even know what a car is? Like I said. You don't have to respond. But you keep doing so anyway. Waste case. But you'll keep running your yap, anyway. TTFN! |