From: C. E. White on 27 Oct 2009 11:04 A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of all Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed to be a very low number to me. What do other think? I would have thought given Toyota's increase in sales over the last twenty years they would have had more like 90% of the cars sold in the last 20 years still on the road. Toyota sales have been increasing over the last twenty years, so a higher percentage of Toyotas will be newer models. Since a high percentage of Toyotas are newer vehicles that are more likely to still be on the road, the overall percentage of Toyotas sold in the last 20 years will be higher (becasue of the newer car bias). For GM, the math works the other way. GM sales have been stagnent or actually declining over the last 20 years, so a higher percentage of their cars will be older and therefore less likely to still be on the road. I am sure the 80% number is based on registrations, so it might be that it over estimates the number actually in daily use - or under estimates it in cases where cars are used off road (or illeagally) and not registered. Does anyone have any actual numbers? I am confident that 100% of the NEW vehicles I purchased in the last 20 years are still on the road, but maybe I am an exception. Here is sort of what I am thinking.....NOT REAL NUMBERS - For a manufacturer with increasing sales (5% increase per year) Year Original Percent Total Sold Sales On road On Road 1990 500000 33% 165000 1991 525000 38% 199500 1992 551250 43% 237038 1993 578813 48% 277830 1994 607753 53% 322109 1995 638141 58% 370122 1996 670048 63% 422130 1997 703550 68% 478414 1998 738728 72% 531884 1999 775664 76% 589505 2000 814447 80% 651558 2001 855170 84% 718343 2002 897928 88% 790177 2003 942825 91% 857970 2004 989966 93% 920668 2005 1039464 96% 997886 2006 1091437 97% 1058694 2007 1146009 98% 1123089 2008 1203310 99% 1191277 2009 1263475 99% 1250840 Total 16532977 80% 13154033 For a manufacturer with slightly decreasing sales (1% decrease per year), but same percent still on the road: 1990 1263475 33% 416947 1991 1250840 38% 475319 1992 1238332 43% 532483 1993 1225949 48% 588455 1994 1213689 53% 643255 1995 1201552 58% 696900 1996 1189537 63% 749408 1997 1177641 68% 800796 1998 1165865 72% 839423 1999 1154206 76% 877197 2000 1142664 80% 914131 2001 1131238 84% 950240 2002 1119925 88% 985534 2003 1108726 91% 1008941 2004 1097639 93% 1020804 2005 1086662 96% 1043196 2006 1075796 97% 1043522 2007 1065038 98% 1043737 2008 1054387 99% 1043843 2009 1043843 99% 1033405 Total 23007003 73% 16707535 The net is, manufacturers that have similar reliability can have significantly different percentages of vehicles built in the last 20 years still on the road. Ergo, the Toyota's ad claim is at best meaningless, at worst deliberately misleading....but then I've always assumed that the Chevy (or sometimes Dodge) ads that clam their trucks are the most reliable and longest lasting (based on registration data) are deliberately misleading. So, I don't think Toyota is being espeically misleading, but I wonder how many people understand the ad? I'll bet many people think Toyota is saying 80% of 20 year old Toyotas are still on the road, instead of 80% of the Toyotas sold in the last twenty years....isn't marketing wonderful. There is a huge difference in the two statements. Ed
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 27 Oct 2009 11:15 "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message news:4ae70c7c$1(a)kcnews01... >A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of all >Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed to be a >very low number to me. What do other think? > > I would have thought given Toyota's increase in sales over the last twenty > years they would have had more like 90% of the cars sold in the last 20 > years still on the road. Toyota sales have been increasing over the last > twenty years, so a higher percentage of Toyotas will be newer models. > Since a high percentage of Toyotas are newer vehicles that are more likely > to still be on the road, the overall percentage of Toyotas sold in the > last 20 years will be higher (becasue of the newer car bias). For GM, the > math works the other way. GM sales have been stagnent or actually > declining over the last 20 years, so a higher percentage of their cars > will be older and therefore less likely to still be on the road. I am sure > the 80% number is based on registrations, so it might be that it over > estimates the number actually in daily use - or under estimates it in > cases where cars are used off road (or illeagally) and not registered. > > Does anyone have any actual numbers? State motor vehicle deparments probably have the data, although it might need to be massaged in order to make sense of it. If magazines & newspapers can get the information, you probably can too. That's a big "if", though. It might cost money.
From: C. E. White on 27 Oct 2009 11:42 "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message news:08EFm.33212$eJ4.26377(a)newsfe07.iad... > "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message > news:4ae70c7c$1(a)kcnews01... >>A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of >>all >>Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed >>to be a >>very low number to me. What do other think? >> >> I would have thought given Toyota's increase in sales over the last >> twenty >> years they would have had more like 90% of the cars sold in the >> last 20 >> years still on the road. Toyota sales have been increasing over the >> last >> twenty years, so a higher percentage of Toyotas will be newer >> models. >> Since a high percentage of Toyotas are newer vehicles that are more >> likely >> to still be on the road, the overall percentage of Toyotas sold in >> the >> last 20 years will be higher (becasue of the newer car bias). For >> GM, the >> math works the other way. GM sales have been stagnent or actually >> declining over the last 20 years, so a higher percentage of their >> cars >> will be older and therefore less likely to still be on the road. I >> am sure >> the 80% number is based on registrations, so it might be that it >> over >> estimates the number actually in daily use - or under estimates it >> in >> cases where cars are used off road (or illeagally) and not >> registered. >> >> Does anyone have any actual numbers? > > > State motor vehicle deparments probably have the data, although it > might > need to be massaged in order to make sense of it. If magazines & > newspapers > can get the information, you probably can too. That's a big "if", > though. It > might cost money. I should have been a little clearer. I am sure RL Polk & Co. has amassed the registration data for all the US into a huge database. RL Polk is in the buisness of selling this information. Ads claiming longevity often reference RL Poolk data as the source of the claim, but I can't access the raw data without paying for it. I was hoping there was an open source (i.e. free), possibly a simplified version, available to the public. Without being to actually see the data, it is hard to know how to treat the claims based on the data. I once wrote Chevy and asked about their claim that Chevy makes the longest lasting most reliable trucks. All they said was that it was based on RL Polk registration data for a particualr period. Of course without actually ahving access to the data, I can't see how the claim means anything. Even worse, even if I had the raw registration data, I doubt it is meaningful unless you also know how the trucks were actully used. I always assumed that a higher percentage of Chevy trucks were purchased by suburban users than was the case for Ford (i.e., more Fords were in commercial use / farm use / fleet use), and therefore the Chevy trucks were more liekly to be gently used, better cared for, and used less, so therefore registration data byear alone would tend to suggest they lasted longer... which might not really be true for vehicles used in the same manner by similar populations of users. I guess the old statement that "Figures don't lie, but liars figure" sums up the problem with claims made based on RL Polk registration data. I've always assumed that manufacturers actually have good data, but that they have no intention of publishing it. No manufactuer builds perfect vehciles, and if they start putting out the good data, sooner of later someone is going to demand to see the bad data as well, and use a lawsuit to pry it out into the open. Better to make unverifiable claims based on third party information that can be checked but don't actually prove anything. I am 100% sure that Toyota is telling the truth when they say 80% of the Toyotas sold in the last twenty years are still on the road. I am also certain that it is virtually a meaningless statement, but that it sounds like it means something important. It is the perfect sort of marketing claim - true, verifiable, and easily missunderstood to be more significant than it is. At least that is how I see it. Ed
From: David on 27 Oct 2009 11:55 Here in the UK the Government is trying to get older cars off the road. If you buy a new car and scrap your present one of 10 years or older they give you �2000. I think in Europe is �3000 ( in Euros of course.) -- Regards, David FREESAT HD as it is now it is a joke.
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 27 Oct 2009 11:58
"C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message news:4ae71565$1(a)kcnews01... > > "JoeSpareBedroom" <newstrash(a)frontiernet.net> wrote in message > news:08EFm.33212$eJ4.26377(a)newsfe07.iad... >> "C. E. White" <cewhite3(a)removemindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:4ae70c7c$1(a)kcnews01... >>>A Toyota commercial they are running in my area claims that 80% of all >>>Toyota sold in the last 20 years are still on the road. This seemed to be >>>a >>>very low number to me. What do other think? >>> >>> I would have thought given Toyota's increase in sales over the last >>> twenty >>> years they would have had more like 90% of the cars sold in the last 20 >>> years still on the road. Toyota sales have been increasing over the last >>> twenty years, so a higher percentage of Toyotas will be newer models. >>> Since a high percentage of Toyotas are newer vehicles that are more >>> likely >>> to still be on the road, the overall percentage of Toyotas sold in the >>> last 20 years will be higher (becasue of the newer car bias). For GM, >>> the >>> math works the other way. GM sales have been stagnent or actually >>> declining over the last 20 years, so a higher percentage of their cars >>> will be older and therefore less likely to still be on the road. I am >>> sure >>> the 80% number is based on registrations, so it might be that it over >>> estimates the number actually in daily use - or under estimates it in >>> cases where cars are used off road (or illeagally) and not registered. >>> >>> Does anyone have any actual numbers? >> >> >> State motor vehicle deparments probably have the data, although it might >> need to be massaged in order to make sense of it. If magazines & >> newspapers >> can get the information, you probably can too. That's a big "if", though. >> It >> might cost money. > > I should have been a little clearer. I am sure RL Polk & Co. has amassed > the registration data for all the US into a huge database. RL Polk is in > the buisness of selling this information. Ads claiming longevity often > reference RL Poolk data as the source of the claim, but I can't access the > raw data without paying for it. I was hoping there was an open source > (i.e. free), possibly a simplified version, available to the public. > Without being to actually see the data, it is hard to know how to treat > the claims based on the data. I once wrote Chevy and asked about their > claim that Chevy makes the longest lasting most reliable trucks. All they > said was that it was based on RL Polk registration data for a particualr > period. Of course without actually ahving access to the data, I can't see > how the claim means anything. Even worse, even if I had the raw > registration data, I doubt it is meaningful unless you also know how the > trucks were actully used. I always assumed that a higher percentage of > Chevy trucks were purchased by suburban users than was the case for Ford > (i.e., more Fords were in commercial use / farm use / fleet use), and > therefore the Chevy trucks were more liekly to be gently used, better > cared for, and used less, so therefore registration data byear alone would > tend to suggest they lasted longer... which might not really be true for > vehicles used in the same manner by similar populations of users. > > I guess the old statement that "Figures don't lie, but liars figure" sums > up the problem with claims made based on RL Polk registration data. I've > always assumed that manufacturers actually have good data, but that they > have no intention of publishing it. No manufactuer builds perfect > vehciles, and if they start putting out the good data, sooner of later > someone is going to demand to see the bad data as well, and use a lawsuit > to pry it out into the open. Better to make unverifiable claims based on > third party information that can be checked but don't actually prove > anything. > > I am 100% sure that Toyota is telling the truth when they say 80% of the > Toyotas sold in the last twenty years are still on the road. I am also > certain that it is virtually a meaningless statement, but that it sounds > like it means something important. It is the perfect sort of marketing > claim - true, verifiable, and easily missunderstood to be more significant > than it is. At least that is how I see it. > > Ed > Write to Polk and ask if anyone (maybe a magazine) has published articles which answer your questions using that data. While you're at it, see if they have any data which backs up your bullshit claims about what types of people buy certain brands of trucks for particular purposes ("work" versus "just to haul groceries and the dog"). |