In article <9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > Honda is a marketing company.
>
> if that's what they think, that's the problem!

well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>
> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>
which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>
> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>
which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>
> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>
which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

 

Jim Yanik wrote:
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
> news:9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured".
>>>>> It's just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all
>>>>> Honda cares about.
>>>> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.
>>> That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
>>> selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.
>> but they're not selling as well as they used to - honda have lost
>> significant market share to toyota. and the rsx or whatever the
>> successor to the integra is, [same civic platform] isn't selling at
>> all!
>
> the RSX is defunct;they stopped making them,ISTR.
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>>
>>> If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
>>> care.
>> but handling /does/ sell!
>
> Look at how well the Integra sold. 3dr and 4 dr versions!

absolutely!!!

> Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.

it had the power and the fittings. the only differentiator was handling
- basically, it was a dog.

> the old 1996-2000 Civic hatchback sold very well,and newer versions were
> uglier and didn't sell as well.

indeed.

> Tuners would rather buy an older Honda and rework it than buy a new Civic.

not just tuners - ordinary drivers too. i had a bunch of people
fighting over my 2000 civic hatch when i sold it.


>
>> if they think they're just going to sell cheap generic crap, they're
>> in trouble because toyota can do that better. and frankly, hyundai
>> [etc] is breathing hard up their tail pipe as well. they'll also have
>> their margins cut to the bone and have no brand loyalty. if they make
>> something that people like because it's better, price is less elastic
>> /and/ they retain repeat customers. like subaru.
>>
>> honda used to play the game /way/ better. there's no reason they
>> can't do it again.
>>
>
> Sochiro Honda is no longer around,that's the problem.

 

Jim Yanik wrote:
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
> news:9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured".
>>>>> It's just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all
>>>>> Honda cares about.
>>>> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.
>>> That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
>>> selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.
>> but they're not selling as well as they used to - honda have lost
>> significant market share to toyota. and the rsx or whatever the
>> successor to the integra is, [same civic platform] isn't selling at
>> all!
>
> the RSX is defunct;they stopped making them,ISTR.
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>>
>>> If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
>>> care.
>> but handling /does/ sell!
>
> Look at how well the Integra sold. 3dr and 4 dr versions!

absolutely!!!

> Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.

it had the power and the fittings. the only differentiator was handling
- basically, it was a dog.

> the old 1996-2000 Civic hatchback sold very well,and newer versions were
> uglier and didn't sell as well.

indeed.

> Tuners would rather buy an older Honda and rework it than buy a new Civic.

not just tuners - ordinary drivers too. i had a bunch of people
fighting over my 2000 civic hatch when i sold it.


>
>> if they think they're just going to sell cheap generic crap, they're
>> in trouble because toyota can do that better. and frankly, hyundai
>> [etc] is breathing hard up their tail pipe as well. they'll also have
>> their margins cut to the bone and have no brand loyalty. if they make
>> something that people like because it's better, price is less elastic
>> /and/ they retain repeat customers. like subaru.
>>
>> honda used to play the game /way/ better. there's no reason they
>> can't do it again.
>>
>
> Sochiro Honda is no longer around,that's the problem.

 

Jim Yanik wrote:
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in
> news:9POdnbeoAoYK0hDbnZ2dnUVZ_r-onZ2d@speakeasy.net:
>
>> Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> In article <j9idnQBEgfMliBDbnZ2dnUVZ_u2mnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
>>> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In the Civic line, I don't think there's anything to be "cured".
>>>>> It's just not a problem. Civics are selling well--and that's all
>>>>> Honda cares about.
>>>> disagree! it's handling that put honda on the map.
>>> That may have been so years back, but you can't dispute: Civics are
>>> selling well, AND that's all Honda cares about.
>> but they're not selling as well as they used to - honda have lost
>> significant market share to toyota. and the rsx or whatever the
>> successor to the integra is, [same civic platform] isn't selling at
>> all!
>
> the RSX is defunct;they stopped making them,ISTR.
>>> Honda is a marketing company.
>> if that's what they think, that's the problem!
>>
>>> If handling doesn't sell, then they won't
>>> care.
>> but handling /does/ sell!
>
> Look at how well the Integra sold. 3dr and 4 dr versions!

absolutely!!!

> Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.

it had the power and the fittings. the only differentiator was handling
- basically, it was a dog.

> the old 1996-2000 Civic hatchback sold very well,and newer versions were
> uglier and didn't sell as well.

indeed.

> Tuners would rather buy an older Honda and rework it than buy a new Civic.

not just tuners - ordinary drivers too. i had a bunch of people
fighting over my 2000 civic hatch when i sold it.


>
>> if they think they're just going to sell cheap generic crap, they're
>> in trouble because toyota can do that better. and frankly, hyundai
>> [etc] is breathing hard up their tail pipe as well. they'll also have
>> their margins cut to the bone and have no brand loyalty. if they make
>> something that people like because it's better, price is less elastic
>> /and/ they retain repeat customers. like subaru.
>>
>> honda used to play the game /way/ better. there's no reason they
>> can't do it again.
>>
>
> Sochiro Honda is no longer around,that's the problem.

 

In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
> >
> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
fulfilling *your* goals.

But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.

 

In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
> >
> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
fulfilling *your* goals.

But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.

 

In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
> >
> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?

But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
fulfilling *your* goals.

But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>>>
>> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
>> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?
>
> But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
> fulfilling *your* goals.
>
> But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.
>
if their goals are losing share to toyota on the civic vs. corolla,
failing completely on the rsx and ridgeline, and giving away the vast
and loyal civic/prelude customer base to subaru, you're dead right -
they've succeeded handsomely!

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>>>
>> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
>> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?
>
> But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
> fulfilling *your* goals.
>
> But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.
>
if their goals are losing share to toyota on the civic vs. corolla,
failing completely on the rsx and ridgeline, and giving away the vast
and loyal civic/prelude customer base to subaru, you're dead right -
they've succeeded handsomely!

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <KaOdnY1mYNcjBBDbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> well, they are--they exist solely to sell product and make money.
>>>
>> which requires that they satisfy demand, and repeat those sales! how
>> are they going to do that if they make junk and can't retain?
>
> But jim, the thing is that they are fulfilling their goal without
> fulfilling *your* goals.
>
> But they *are* fulfilling *their* goals.
>
if their goals are losing share to toyota on the civic vs. corolla,
failing completely on the rsx and ridgeline, and giving away the vast
and loyal civic/prelude customer base to subaru, you're dead right -
they've succeeded handsomely!

 

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:45:39 -0700, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>> Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.
>
>it had the power and the fittings. the only differentiator was handling
>- basically, it was a dog.

Wot?

They tried to sell the RSX as pre-riced, for more money. It's the
marketing that didn't work, not so much the car. The handling on
those old Integras wasn't anything to write home about. I never
actually drove the RSX, ... oh, maybe I test drove one once about
1998, I don't recall, but I'll eat a bug if it handled worse than any
stock Integra.

J.

 

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:45:39 -0700, jim beam
<spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

>> Then Honda redesigned it to the RSX,which was uglier,and it didn't sell.
>
>it had the power and the fittings. the only differentiator was handling
>- basically, it was a dog.

Wot?

They tried to sell the RSX as pre-riced, for more money. It's the
marketing that didn't work, not so much the car. The handling on
those old Integras wasn't anything to write home about. I never
actually drove the RSX, ... oh, maybe I test drove one once about
1998, I don't recall, but I'll eat a bug if it handled worse than any
stock Integra.

J.