Originally Posted By: meborder
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Your source of the truth is one former employee of Ford who posts on internet forums?
I'll take the official word from Toyota or Ford over Mark's. No offense to Mark.
your source is a corporation that has nothing to gain by telling you the truth?
i'll take the word of someone that has nothing to gain over someone that has everything to lose every time.
in the interest of full disclosure, go back and re-read my reply above. I added to it after you quoted and responded.
not that it will matter much in the end as I can already tell your opinion won't be changed, but if there is something more there to talk about then it could be worthwhile.
The manufacturer has nothing to gain by telling the truth if that means recommending increased PM? I disagree. The manufacturer's reputation increases if their product is more reliable and lasts longer. They gain market share and increased sales volume which grows their company and leads to more profits.
You say that the consumers are swayed by Consumer Reports and maintenance costs into purchasing vehicles with lower costs. You claim the manufacturers claim lower PM to increase their sales. Then you claim that the buyers choose to ignore the recommended PM intervals and go with an increased PM schedule. That makes no sense. You can't simultaneously claim the consumers purchase cars due to lower PM costs and then claim they ignore those PM schedules when I point out the cars are not falling apart as you claim they would be.
It's in the best interests of the shops to recommend an increased PM schedule. It makes them more money.
This is turning into too much of a debate club exercise and not an educational experience. You can go on thinking there is some big conspiracy against your vehicle and you have some "secret" information on how to make it last longer and I'll go on trusting in Toyoda-san.
Safe motoring.
Originally Posted By: Leo99
Your source of the truth is one former employee of Ford who posts on internet forums?
I'll take the official word from Toyota or Ford over Mark's. No offense to Mark.
your source is a corporation that has nothing to gain by telling you the truth?
i'll take the word of someone that has nothing to gain over someone that has everything to lose every time.
in the interest of full disclosure, go back and re-read my reply above. I added to it after you quoted and responded.
not that it will matter much in the end as I can already tell your opinion won't be changed, but if there is something more there to talk about then it could be worthwhile.
The manufacturer has nothing to gain by telling the truth if that means recommending increased PM? I disagree. The manufacturer's reputation increases if their product is more reliable and lasts longer. They gain market share and increased sales volume which grows their company and leads to more profits.
You say that the consumers are swayed by Consumer Reports and maintenance costs into purchasing vehicles with lower costs. You claim the manufacturers claim lower PM to increase their sales. Then you claim that the buyers choose to ignore the recommended PM intervals and go with an increased PM schedule. That makes no sense. You can't simultaneously claim the consumers purchase cars due to lower PM costs and then claim they ignore those PM schedules when I point out the cars are not falling apart as you claim they would be.
It's in the best interests of the shops to recommend an increased PM schedule. It makes them more money.
This is turning into too much of a debate club exercise and not an educational experience. You can go on thinking there is some big conspiracy against your vehicle and you have some "secret" information on how to make it last longer and I'll go on trusting in Toyoda-san.
Safe motoring.
