Quote:
|
Originally Posted by a_stupid_box
We're capable of making machines that can fly to the moon and back multiple times, undergoing conditions that make ANYTHING a car goes through seem like a walk in the park.
Do you honestly think they can't make a car that won't last longer than any human will live?
If you think Mr. P.'s philosophy is any different than the outlook any car maker has had in the last 50 years you need to wake up. Just as doctors and drug dealers know, the money is in the treatment, not the cure.
If you could pay $100,000 USD for a car that was guaranteed to last as long as you live, half the cars on the road would be that machine -- regardless of mileage or looks. Problem with car dealers is that the average person spends more than $100k on vehicles in their life, so there's no incentive to make something so reliable.
|
My point is that Nissan is on a tough spot economically, according to their Nissan Global Web Site, but at the same time they are avoiding things, because they need to save money, that will make their Nissan vehicles
less reliable.
Is not practical to keep a vehicle for "as long as you live" and I am not talking about that in my message.
I am talking about the 10 years limitation that the executive from Nissan, Mr. Patrick Pelata, says the owners have regarding how much time the owners of a Sentra are going to keep their vehicles.
Not so long ago, Volvo said that the average life of a Volvo was 15 years and I used that as a comparison. A reliable vehicle, with good durability, could easily last 15 years if it is well built,that is why I am taliking about and let me add that I am not talking of a vehicle with limited use, meaning 10,000 miles per year or less. I am talking about vehicles that are used with 15,000 miles per year or more, like my 1993 Sentra has, which means 225,000 miles or more like some of the examples of Nissan we can see here at the Nissan Forums.
There are people who take every precaution of not using their vehicles for things other than the normal use things, so their vehicles always have a low mileage indication in the odometers and they could sell them more easily.
In that case, you will not know how good the vehicle is because you are using it in a limited way, protecting it.
I understand your point, and I agree with you when you suggest that other car makers have the same "philosophy" as Nissan of avoiding what the Nissan's executive called "overquality".
Examples of companies avoiding overquality are GM (Pontiac, Chevrolet, Cadillac, GMC) Ford, Chrysler, Dodge and others, including luxury brands.
My point is that the philosophy of avoiding "overquality" is not going to help vehicle manufacturers, like Nissan, to establish a good reputation among the owners and future owners, like the one Toyota-Lexus and maybe Honda-Acura has.
And as you know, specially Toyota, has a lot of followers because they built reliable vehicles over the years and the owners know it. If you check the main Toyota web site you'll find that Toyota sold their whole production inventory last year, even during times where the other car makers are struggling with too low sales.
Toyota's reputation for durability and quality wins over the weak reputation of the other brands regarding the quality of their products and that is one of the reasons buyers like you and me might prefer to purchase from Toyota, investing money wisely and at the same time contributing to Toyota's wealth and excellent economic position even these days.
To my point again: if Nissan is going to rebuilt itself in order to sell more vehicles, I don't think avoiding overquality is the answer. Eventually, that will backfire and the owners would make an opinion about the company that no marketing gimmick will change.
Companies like GM spend lots of money in marketing, but the quality of their products is behind according to good publications like Consumer's Reports web site. The same is happening to Nissan with the current Sentra according to Consumer's Reports too.
That "avoiding overquality" philosophy is not the answer to establish a solid position again in sales, and that will have a price eventually, or bad things for the future.
Even more; maybe the 2005 Nissan Sentra will not be better than the 2004 Sentra, and Nissan needs to make the Sentra or any other model which in several markets is the entry level, a hit.
The Sentra is not a hit in sales, and I think that goes back to 1995, with the 1995-1999 Nissan Sentra B-14 model. Even their Nissan Global Web Site recognized the slow sales of the Sentra.
A detail to notice is that the sales of the 1995-99 Sentra went down, and in 1999 Nissan started their Nissan 180 economic plan to recover and their alliance with Renault....they are in the second stage of Nissan 180 according to them.
I think I make my point more clear now. What Mr. Pelata said is something you can imagine, but when you have a press report that says it, is something you can use as a reference.
Anyway, I think our enthusiasm with Nissan has to be intelligent and informed.
I am not married with a company and I think is good to know the facts before buying again, specially if we like to keep our vehicles for more than 10 years, 12, 15 years or more. We should know about this executive's opinions.
Other than that, if there are people spending $100,000 in their lifetime in vehicles, which is possible, that statistic would change soon because the economic situation and the low sales point in that direction.
If Nissan wants to sell more vehicles, they should also listen to their customers, not to Mr. Pelata and Carlos Ghosn.
I am sure most Toyota owners don't know who is the Chief Executive Officer from Toyota, or an executive vice-president like Mr. Patrick Pelata.
But, most of the Toyota-Lexus owners know what is really important: their vehicles have the quality and they are happy with them and they will even purchase a Toyota again in the future. That is what Nissan wants for them...
Thanks