Unions killing Detroit

[Sammy Jankis]

If it is "demonstrably false", then please offer up some evidence other than your pitiful claims.

You already stated that their adverstisiting does indeed help create demand. Their position of complete reactivity is something you already disagree with.

The topic came up because someone said that the Big Three built what people wanted. They didn't say it was the ONLY reason.

Yet it was the only reason listed. That's an implied ONLY. Stop being a belligerent queeftaster.

 

[Cancel3]

Let me give you hard facts to show where you are wrong.

In 1998 & 1999, General Motors increased the size of their Tahoe/Yukon vehicles. Their sales were excellent.

In 2000 Ford introduced the Excursion. It was the biggest SUV in the Ford line then.




Do you think Ford retooled an entire manufacturing plant because the thought they could manipulate buyers?

Or do you think they did so because they saw what the consumers were buying?




If you answered that they thought thye could manipulate buyers, you are either an idiot or are flat refusing to admit you are wrong.




The Nissan Armada was introduced in 2004 and is made solely for sale in North America. Nissan did so because american consumers have shown a desire to buy large SUVs, and they wanted a slice of the revenues.

 

[Cancel3]

You already stated that their adverstisiting does indeed help create demand. Their position of complete reactivity is something you already disagree with.

Yet it was the only reason listed. That's an implied ONLY. Stop being a belligerent queeftaster.

You are being an obstinate idiot.

They only listed the MAIN reason. There are dozens of reasons for almost anything happening. But the MAIN reason is what is being discussed.

In another thread you accused me of being a nipicker, and yet here you are being a much bigger nitpicker.


It takes something to admit when you are wrong. I guess you don't have it.


The MAIN reason the Big Three automakers manufacture what they do is public demand. That is simple and demonstrably true.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Nobody is a "victim" in this. Auto manufacturers did not form some kind of conspiracy to sell large trucks. They offered a line of "SUVs" and the consumers purchased more of the larger ones than the smaller ones. So the next year they made them a bit bigger, and stil the larger vehicles sold more than the smaller.

Advertising was not to make people want big trucks, it was to make people want THEIR big trucks, or THEIR mid size cars, or THEIR sport cars, etc. etc. etc. Yes there are all the trucks, but there are also Saturn sedans, Dodge Neon compacts, Ford Escorts, etc. All kinds of cars have continued to be offered, including fuel efficient compacts.

The consumer saw ALL those ads and large numbers chose the larger vehicles. Some did it because they thought it was "cool". Some did it because their neighbor did it. Some actually had a need for a full size truck. Some thought it would be better in winter to have a full size 4WD. (Then drove them like idiots, ass if 4wd is some kind of magic) There were numerous reasons for choosing a big truck over mid size cars or compacts. None of them were because the car manufacturers told them to want a big truck.

Maybe those brain dead enough to buy into the "it's all the corporations' faults" mentality are also brain dead enough to be mindlessly manipulated into making purchases they knew were wrong. But most U.S. citizens were aware of what they were doing and why - even if the "why" was kinda lame.

I'm not identifying a victim. I'm claiming it's a lie to say coporations are merely reactive.

The auto industry has been colluding with the gas industry to prop up fuel prices. That much is obvious.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

You are being an obstinate idiot.

They only listed the MAIN reason. There are dozens of reasons for almost anything happening. But the MAIN reason is what is being discussed.

In another thread you accused me of being a nipicker, and yet here you are being a much bigger nitpicker.


It takes something to admit when you are wrong. I guess you don't have it.


The MAIN reason the Big Three automakers manufacture what they do is public demand. That is simple and demonstrably true.

And public demand is created by their own advertising.

 

[Cancel3]

I'm not identifying a victim. I'm claiming it's a lie to say coporations are merely reactive.

The auto industry has been colluding with the gas industry to prop up fuel prices. That much is obvious.

No one ever said it was the only reason.


This topic is done and you have succeeded, yet again, in losing a debate.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

No one ever said it was the only reason.


This topic is done and you have succeeded, yet again, in losing a debate.

You have lost. Because the corporate position that they are only reactive is false.

They didn't say MAIN reason. You interjected that.

 

[Cancel3]

You have lost. Because the corporate position that they are only reactive is false.

They didn't say MAIN reason. You interjected that.

No, you are clinging to your entire argument because they didn't say there were other factors involved. I said that it was the main reason, and it is. Hands down it is the main reason. You are just being petty because they didn't state the obvious, that there are other factors involved. But there are always other factors involved.



You never answered by question of whether you maintain that Ford Motor Company retooled and entire manufacturing plant based on their thinking they could manipulate buyers or that there was a demand for their product.

 

[Cancel3]

You have lost. Because the corporate position that they are only reactive is false.

They didn't say MAIN reason. You interjected that.

Please point out to me where anyone posted that the corporations are only reactive.

I know there are plenty that talked about them being reactive. But your entire argument is about someone saying that they are ONLY reactive.

When, in fact, no one said that.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

No, you are clinging to your entire argument because they didn't say there were other factors involved. I said that it was the main reason, and it is. Hands down it is the main reason. You are just being petty because they didn't state the obvious, that there are other factors involved. But there are always other factors involved.

And you are clinging to your own belief that they meant MAIN reason, amongst others.

You never answered by question of whether you maintain that Ford Motor Company retooled and entire manufacturing plant based on their thinking they could manipulate buyers or that there was a demand for their product.

I believe they knowlingly colluded with the fuel industry and pushed gas guzzling models to prop up demand. They then created advertising for this effect.

 

[Cancel3]

Asshat, let me know when you are man enough to admit when you are wrong. I have done so in the past. And you are simply too stubborn to admit that your posts are wrong. You have been shown to be wrong and yet you continue to blather.

I'm done. I am not debating someone who refuses to accept facts. And yet uses none on their own.


Go away, little boy.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Asshat, let me know when you are man enough to admit when you are wrong. I have done so in the past. And you are simply too stubborn to admit that your posts are wrong. You have been shown to be wrong and yet you continue to blather.

I'm done. I am not debating someone who refuses to accept facts. And yet uses none on their own.


Go away, little boy.

I'm not wrong. Corporations and lackeys would have us believe that corps are merely reactive. They are not. they create demand with their own advertising. This is what they try to deny.

You're fisted, fascist.

 

[Cancel3]

I'm not wrong. Corporations and lackeys would have us believe that corps are merely reactive. They are not. they create demand with their own advertising. This is what they try to deny.

You're fisted, fascist.

Let me guess, reptilian-hybrids have designed the advertising based on information gained from human abductions by alien spacecraft?

So we are unable to resist its subliminal messaging.

Or have they developed a "Consumer Ray" that overpowers our ability to make our own decisions?

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Let me guess, reptilian-hybrids have designed the advertising based on information gained from human abductions by alien spacecraft?

So we are unable to resist its subliminal messaging.

Or have they developed a "Consumer Ray" that overpowers our ability to make our own decisions?

Are you say advertising doesn't affect people's purchasing decisions?

The billions spent in advertising indicates otherwise.

 

[Cancel3]

Are you say advertising doesn't affect people's purchasing decisions?

How about you go back thru this thread and count the number of times I have said that it does effect the consumers.

Its not nearly the main reason people buy what they do, but it does have an effect.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

How about you go back thru this thread and count the number of times I have said that it does effect the consumers.

Its not nearly the main reason people buy what they do, but it does have an effect.

It is the main reason.

 

[Cancel3]

It is the main reason.

I have cited evidence that it is the consumer's purchases that are the main driving force behind what is produced.

You have cited no evidence to support your theory.


Let me know when you have some actual facts.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I have cited evidence that it is the consumer's purchases that are the main driving force behind what is produced.

You have cited no evidence to support your theory.


Let me know when you have some actual facts.

And the consumer's purchases that you cite, are, indeed, effected by the advertising they are exposed to. That's a fact, jack.

 

[Cancel3]

And the consumer's purchases that you cite, are, indeed, effected by the advertising they are exposed to. That's a fact, jack.

So the consumer was effected by advertising that hadn't happened, to buy a vehicle that hadn't been made?

Its quite obvious that the car manufacturers were responding what the consumers were buying.

 

[Good Luck]

And the consumer's purchases that you cite, are, indeed, effected by the advertising they are exposed to. That's a fact, jack.

And the additional FACT that you ignore is the business is NOT going to push what is not in demand, in advertising or otherwise. Advertising can have an effect on demand, but it does not CREATE new demand. The demand must already be there.

If the Hummer had been introduced in the late 70s or early 80s it would have fallen flat no matter HOW they advertised it. It would have fallen flat because there was no market for large gas guzzlers at that time. The Hummer did not come into play until people were already demanding big honkin SUVs. THEN, and only then were they able to market it as the ultimate status symbol in large SUVs.

You also ignore the FACT that large SUVs and other gas guzzlers are not the only vehicles advertised. Other cars were made and sold to those who were not in the market for a big SUV. An SUV ad is not going to affect the purchase of someone in the market for a small commuter car. People don't just decide to get "some kind of car" and then allow themselves to be led by the nose into something they don't really want. SUV ads only affect those already in the market for a large vehicle. What advertising affects is the choice of WHICH large vehicle they get, not the decision to get a large vehicle in the first place.