Hey I remember when GM was Fortune 1...those comments you are making StevieC sound all too familiar! I swear that all the Harvard Business Review case studies are never taken into consideration by those that "Know what's best for the business". Let's hope that Mobil can see that mismanaging the brand portfolio is not good for long term viability. In the end the consumer votes with currency not words.
Mobil 1 "fails" Seq. IVA wear test.
- Thread starter Corvette Owner
- Start date
- Status
Mobil has just butchered their lineup and now offer too many different oils. I would have rather them just make 1 Mobil 1 that is good for 15k/1yr when out of warranty. Two M1's says they cut costs somewhere.(end quote)
This is market segmenting. Every company does it- Tide, Era, Coke, Pepsi-it obviously works and the consumer buys based on needs and wants (real or perceived).
This is market segmenting. Every company does it- Tide, Era, Coke, Pepsi-it obviously works and the consumer buys based on needs and wants (real or perceived).
Yes, but at some point you dilute the value proposition of your core business and the complexity of supply chain to produce/carry inventory and market all these UPC's is overwhelming. It can gradually erode your RONA and short term net profitability. There are millions of dollars in wasted profitability that remain hidden amongst the need to produce 2,000 cases of XYZ just because we can sell it in a major market.
The consumer will also many times become overwhelmed with choice minutia and look for clarity/meaning in a competitor's offering. Look back to last year's advertising on big yellow any make and model safe antifreeze...that campaign made money. All and all topline growth is nice, but companies that I invest in must continue to watch their bottom line as well...well unless I'm shorting them LOL!
The consumer will also many times become overwhelmed with choice minutia and look for clarity/meaning in a competitor's offering. Look back to last year's advertising on big yellow any make and model safe antifreeze...that campaign made money. All and all topline growth is nice, but companies that I invest in must continue to watch their bottom line as well...well unless I'm shorting them LOL!
I think profitability was fine for EM the last couple of years. I wouldn't break a sweat for them. Losing a bit of profitability might actually gain them some more consumer favor.
LOL...yeah I think that I calculated they were knocking down close to a million dollars per minute with last year's earnings schedule. NICE!
Walmart was making close to $750k/minute based on their last year's profit...so they got to be Fortune 2!
Originally Posted By: wannafbody
I think profitability was fine for EM the last couple of years. I wouldn't break a sweat for them. Losing a bit of profitability might actually gain them some more consumer favor.
I'm sure GM thought the same thing as one point and we all know how that worked for them!
I think profitability was fine for EM the last couple of years. I wouldn't break a sweat for them. Losing a bit of profitability might actually gain them some more consumer favor.
I'm sure GM thought the same thing as one point and we all know how that worked for them!
Originally Posted By: StevieC
Go get some sleep and then reread my posts above...
I knew it!! 32 hours.... I agree with you. The oil thing too.
But you know how some companies are. Won't use the right toilet paper without their lawyer's OK.
Go get some sleep and then reread my posts above...
But you know how some companies are. Won't use the right toilet paper without their lawyer's OK.
Originally Posted By: pickled
Yes, but at some point you dilute the value proposition of your core business and ...
Anytime I am in a room with someone and hear them say "value proposition" I put my hand on my rear to make sure my wallet is still there.
Yes, but at some point you dilute the value proposition of your core business and ...
Anytime I am in a room with someone and hear them say "value proposition" I put my hand on my rear to make sure my wallet is still there.
Life was much simpler when a customer would just tell me they wanted a case of red top.
I'm going to say it once again, and leave it at that.
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
Originally Posted By: StevieC
Originally Posted By: buster
Mobil 1 was originally good for 25,000/1year. They later backed off this claim as everyone knows.
Their GF-3 oils had a 12 Tbn and a lot of Ca. They were clearly long drain oils and held up as good or better than Amsoil ASL/ATM IMO.
Amsoil a few years ago had oxidation issues with their oils and was using what appeared to be old chemistry. For example, when Mobil started using over based Ca and Boron, Amsoil was still using Mg, which is hardly found anymore in any modern oil. Once GF-4 came around, Amsoil ASL/ATM looked identical on paper to M1. (base oils excluded). Don't be fooled in thinking Amsoil doesn't cut costs. Amatuzio has admitted to playing hardball with additive suppliers.
Mobil has just butchered their lineup and now offer too many different oils. I would have rather them just make 1 Mobil 1 that is good for 15k/1yr when out of warranty. Two M1's says they cut costs somewhere.
Not all Amsoil's oils are better than Mobil 1 too. SSO/ASM are but some of the others like AFL/AFO etc. are nothing to brag about IMO.
SSO is their top of the line oil and is most likely using additives that are about a year or so away from being found in OTC oils.
Every oil company has it's woes and Amsoil is no exception. But this is a company that has always guaranteed their oils for the mileage on the bottle as printed without trying to get out of it with fancy wording.
I could care less whats in a an oil in terms of base-stock or additives. I just care how well the real world performance is and if the company stands behind their products in the event that they need to pay out.
And to me M1 doesn't seem to be confident enough in their product as Amsoil is in backing it up by a Mileage guarantee. That's all I'm saying.
I never said one product was better than the other and I have always said M1 is a darn good product and I have used it in the past with great results.
When everyone else catches up to SSO, then SSO will reformulate as they do with all their oils to become the very best if not better than everyone else as they are always striving to be and can afford to because they aren't spending ridiculous sums of money on some IMO, stupid API certification that doesn't mean much anyways when a company is willing to back their product with a mileage guarantee and pays out if it doesn't work or causes a failure.
So again I raise the question... What is the problem?
Did you read the three exceptions you posted with the Amsoil warranty? Some of that looks pretty weak to me. No severe duty use, no modifications (no chip, no exhaust modifications).
Originally Posted By: buster
Mobil 1 was originally good for 25,000/1year. They later backed off this claim as everyone knows.
Their GF-3 oils had a 12 Tbn and a lot of Ca. They were clearly long drain oils and held up as good or better than Amsoil ASL/ATM IMO.
Amsoil a few years ago had oxidation issues with their oils and was using what appeared to be old chemistry. For example, when Mobil started using over based Ca and Boron, Amsoil was still using Mg, which is hardly found anymore in any modern oil. Once GF-4 came around, Amsoil ASL/ATM looked identical on paper to M1. (base oils excluded). Don't be fooled in thinking Amsoil doesn't cut costs. Amatuzio has admitted to playing hardball with additive suppliers.
Mobil has just butchered their lineup and now offer too many different oils. I would have rather them just make 1 Mobil 1 that is good for 15k/1yr when out of warranty. Two M1's says they cut costs somewhere.
Not all Amsoil's oils are better than Mobil 1 too. SSO/ASM are but some of the others like AFL/AFO etc. are nothing to brag about IMO.
SSO is their top of the line oil and is most likely using additives that are about a year or so away from being found in OTC oils.
Every oil company has it's woes and Amsoil is no exception. But this is a company that has always guaranteed their oils for the mileage on the bottle as printed without trying to get out of it with fancy wording.
I could care less whats in a an oil in terms of base-stock or additives. I just care how well the real world performance is and if the company stands behind their products in the event that they need to pay out.
And to me M1 doesn't seem to be confident enough in their product as Amsoil is in backing it up by a Mileage guarantee. That's all I'm saying.
I never said one product was better than the other and I have always said M1 is a darn good product and I have used it in the past with great results.
When everyone else catches up to SSO, then SSO will reformulate as they do with all their oils to become the very best if not better than everyone else as they are always striving to be and can afford to because they aren't spending ridiculous sums of money on some IMO, stupid API certification that doesn't mean much anyways when a company is willing to back their product with a mileage guarantee and pays out if it doesn't work or causes a failure.
So again I raise the question... What is the problem?
Did you read the three exceptions you posted with the Amsoil warranty? Some of that looks pretty weak to me. No severe duty use, no modifications (no chip, no exhaust modifications).
Originally Posted By: StevieC
That's what I was talking about above... A scare tactic and they can't legally deny you your warranty unless they prove that the engine failed because of lack of lubrication due to an overused oil or because the oil wasn't capable of doing it's job and it caused the engine to fail.
Tell them to read the M.M. act.
If the engine fails for any other reason other than lubrication they can't ask and don't need oil receipts!
They are just trying not to pay out using oil changing as an excuse.
If you were to get a UOA on that oil and it came back with a good TBN & TAN that said it was good for continued used they couldn't deny your warranty. Ask Terry Dyson who has helped people win a case using one of his analysis and the judge ordered Honda to pay for an engine!
I'm not making this stuff up...
Wake up and smell the coffee. They can and do deny a warranty claim if you do not abide by the warranty conditions. Warranty is a contract, and there are two sides to a contract. Both sides must live up to their obligations. You can't ignore your end of the bargain and expect the other party to make up for your ignorance.
That's what I was talking about above... A scare tactic and they can't legally deny you your warranty unless they prove that the engine failed because of lack of lubrication due to an overused oil or because the oil wasn't capable of doing it's job and it caused the engine to fail.
Tell them to read the M.M. act.
They are just trying not to pay out using oil changing as an excuse.
If you were to get a UOA on that oil and it came back with a good TBN & TAN that said it was good for continued used they couldn't deny your warranty. Ask Terry Dyson who has helped people win a case using one of his analysis and the judge ordered Honda to pay for an engine!
I'm not making this stuff up...
Wake up and smell the coffee. They can and do deny a warranty claim if you do not abide by the warranty conditions. Warranty is a contract, and there are two sides to a contract. Both sides must live up to their obligations. You can't ignore your end of the bargain and expect the other party to make up for your ignorance.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
I'm going to say it once again, and leave it at that.
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
Excellent points.
You should know that nothing in M-M permits you to go outside of the warranty requirements as far as oil change intervals is concerned.
StevieC,
You really should, for your own health, quit drinking the Amsoil Cool-Aid. If you continue to insist on drinking it, do us a favor and quit spraying it out on all of us.
I'm going to say it once again, and leave it at that.
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
Excellent points.
You should know that nothing in M-M permits you to go outside of the warranty requirements as far as oil change intervals is concerned.
StevieC,
You really should, for your own health, quit drinking the Amsoil Cool-Aid. If you continue to insist on drinking it, do us a favor and quit spraying it out on all of us.
Originally Posted By: StevieC
addyguy,
That's not true... They can't deny you for using a Non-API certified oil
They can and will do ANYTHING they want!!!!!!
They did it to Cathy Covington. Do a search.
They'll deny you for anything they want. Then, it's up to you to fight it, even going as far as court.
You can sight some legal theory or what not about how they have to prove the non-API certified oil caused a failure.
In the real world, if you showed a dealer records that non-API oil was used (even knowing that that oil, such as Amsoil, is a top tier product), a dealer and a manufacturer, if savvy enough, would deny warranty. Then what do you do? Hire Robert Sahpiro?
Manufacturers deny warranty work everyday based on technicalities like this.
addyguy,
That's not true... They can't deny you for using a Non-API certified oil
They can and will do ANYTHING they want!!!!!!
They did it to Cathy Covington. Do a search.
They'll deny you for anything they want. Then, it's up to you to fight it, even going as far as court.
You can sight some legal theory or what not about how they have to prove the non-API certified oil caused a failure.
In the real world, if you showed a dealer records that non-API oil was used (even knowing that that oil, such as Amsoil, is a top tier product), a dealer and a manufacturer, if savvy enough, would deny warranty. Then what do you do? Hire Robert Sahpiro?
Manufacturers deny warranty work everyday based on technicalities like this.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
I'm going to say it once again, and leave it at that.
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
+1 Well said.
I'm going to say it once again, and leave it at that.
Stevie, you are probably right that the man. can't deny your warranty, and you have backing of the M-M act to cover you.
But that doesn't mean they won't try. They'll fight you on it, pure amd simple. They may be completely in the wrong, but they will still fight!
And while you are duking it out, your car/truck will not get repaired, until it is settled. It will go to a head office, it may go to a court, or an arbitrator. All the while, your car is not getting repaired.
So, you have to ask yourself, is it worth it? I'll tell you, with how busy I am, I wouldn't want to spend the time doing that. Amsoil makes an oil, their XL line, so you don't HAVE TO do this. You can use Amsoil, and still be in compliance. Sounds good to me.
Is it wrong/immoral/deceitful of the manufacturer's to do this? Sure it is. But you try to stop them. Go for it!
+1 Well said.
Whatever... You all continue to be the good little sheep the dealers want and I will continue not to be. When/if I have to fight a dealer, I will get a UOA and use my good lawyer and take care of them and get my engine paid for.
I'm not worried at all.
Also FWIW... Engine failures aren't that common so the chances that it will fail on you in the warranty period with proper maintenance (even with E-OCI's) is next to none. (Sludgers aside) I think we are a little too OCD about the remote possibility of our warranty being denied or attempted to be denied on a technicality such as OCI's.
Dealerships are made up from a bunch of different people, all of which aren't chemists, engineers, or tribiologists so [censored] would they know about oil? Pretty sure a UOA, engine tear down pics would stand up better in court than their "Well he didn't do what we asked argument"
Also I would sue for a rental car and lost time while I'm fighting them for the engine repairs...
Also in the off chance that my lawyer can't win or a judge rules in favour of the Manufacturer I still have Amsoil to fall back on should I need to.
As for Jim's comment about drinking the Amsoil Koolaid, perhaps Jim would like to read all my posts where I have been a fan of many different oils always comment positively about Pennzoil Platinum and the posts above where I said I could care less what oil anyone uses and that I was only using Amsoil as an example for arguments sake. So Jim, TAKE A HIKE until you read everything I have said!
I'm not worried at all.
Also FWIW... Engine failures aren't that common so the chances that it will fail on you in the warranty period with proper maintenance (even with E-OCI's) is next to none. (Sludgers aside) I think we are a little too OCD about the remote possibility of our warranty being denied or attempted to be denied on a technicality such as OCI's.
Dealerships are made up from a bunch of different people, all of which aren't chemists, engineers, or tribiologists so [censored] would they know about oil? Pretty sure a UOA, engine tear down pics would stand up better in court than their "Well he didn't do what we asked argument"
Also I would sue for a rental car and lost time while I'm fighting them for the engine repairs...
Also in the off chance that my lawyer can't win or a judge rules in favour of the Manufacturer I still have Amsoil to fall back on should I need to.
As for Jim's comment about drinking the Amsoil Koolaid, perhaps Jim would like to read all my posts where I have been a fan of many different oils always comment positively about Pennzoil Platinum and the posts above where I said I could care less what oil anyone uses and that I was only using Amsoil as an example for arguments sake. So Jim, TAKE A HIKE until you read everything I have said!
I have read it all. Patiently and painfully so.
Originally Posted By: Big Jim
I have read it all. Patiently and painfully so.
I suggest you re-read them because although I like Amsoil I also like Pennzoil and M1 and have stated so many times. Ask the other members here.
I have read it all. Patiently and painfully so.
I suggest you re-read them because although I like Amsoil I also like Pennzoil and M1 and have stated so many times. Ask the other members here.
And above it all, you always end up on the Amsoil soapbox. Are the others just a diversion?
- Status
Similar threads
