Toyota safety crisis prompts 'black box' plan for new cars and lorries
in [Drive]
|
Prev: Does this ever happen to you?
Next: Public Transit?
From: Larry G on 1 May 2010 17:44 On May 1, 2:21 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > said: > > >> >black boxes in each new car? I bet all both the manufacturers and > >> >customers are going to like that idea - not! > > >> They're certainly not going to appreciate the additional CO$T. > > >Customers maybe, manufacturers won't care - that cost is paid by the > >consumer. > > Manufacturers absolutely will care. The more cars cost, the harder it > is to sell them. Lower sales means less profit for the automakers. > -- > The MFFY Litmus Test: > If your maneuver forces another driver who has the right-of-way > to alter course or speed, what you did was probably MFFY. if the govt "believes" that ultimately black boxes will result in less accidents, and less irresponsible driving.. and a way to get to the bottom of claims like unintended acceleration.. brakes that don't work, etc... then I think it's a no brainer. you asked to give an example. My understanding is that things like air bags, ESC, and such have a positive cost benefit. Didn't the insurance companies make this point? If the insurance company offered you a 30% reduction in your premium if you allowed an on-board event recorder.. would you do it? 40%, 50%? how about they tell you they are going to RAISE your premiums 50% if you do not? Bonus Question: if the insurance company did that to you - would you go running to that big bad over-regulating nasty big govt for help?
From: Harry K on 1 May 2010 22:33 On May 1, 11:21 am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > said: > > >> >black boxes in each new car? I bet all both the manufacturers and > >> >customers are going to like that idea - not! > > >> They're certainly not going to appreciate the additional CO$T. > > >Customers maybe, manufacturers won't care - that cost is paid by the > >consumer. > > Manufacturers absolutely will care. The more cars cost, the harder it > is to sell them. Lower sales means less profit for the automakers. > -- > The MFFY Litmus Test: > If your maneuver forces another driver who has the right-of-way > to alter course or speed, what you did was probably MFFY. When the cost to every manufacturer goes up, the competition to sell stays the same. There is a market out there that will be satified no matter what the cost (withing reason). That is the same reason the manufacturers are not overly concerned about raising taxes - they know it just passes through them and the consumer pays it. Harry K
From: Larry G on 2 May 2010 07:07 On May 1, 6:05 pm, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On 2010-05-01, Larry G <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 1, 2:21 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > >> said: > > >> >> >black boxes in each new car? I bet all both the manufacturers and > >> >> >customers are going to like that idea - not! > > >> >> They're certainly not going to appreciate the additional CO$T. > > >> >Customers maybe, manufacturers won't care - that cost is paid by the > >> >consumer. > > >> Manufacturers absolutely will care. The more cars cost, the harder it > >> is to sell them. Lower sales means less profit for the automakers. > >> -- > >> The MFFY Litmus Test: > >> If your maneuver forces another driver who has the right-of-way > >> to alter course or speed, what you did was probably MFFY. > > > if the govt "believes" that ultimately black boxes will result in less > > accidents, and less irresponsible driving.. and a way to get to the > > bottom of claims like unintended acceleration.. brakes that don't > > work, etc... then I think it's a no brainer. > > > you asked to give an example. My understanding is that things like air > > bags, ESC, and such have a positive cost benefit. Didn't the > > insurance companies make this point? > > > If the insurance company offered you a 30% reduction in your premium > > if you allowed an on-board event recorder.. would you do it? 40%, > > 50%? how about they tell you they are going to RAISE your premiums > > 50% if you do not? > > > Bonus Question: if the insurance company did that to you - would you > > go running to that big bad over-regulating nasty big govt for help? > > If an insurance company did that to me it would because they went to > government and had laws changed/passed. Otherwise I'd just go to a > different insurance company when they raised my rates for no reason > other than a desire to track me. Lots of people don't want to be > tracked. There is just barely enough of a free market in auto insurance > in IL that such customers can go elsewhere. > > Every notice that in some states auto insurance is very expensive for no > good reason? There's a reason for that, and it starts with a "G". > > It is the closing off of a free market that forces people to seek help > in the political process rather than just taking their business > elsewhere. well.. if the market was truly "free" like it was before govt anti- trust laws - you would find companies colluding with each other to fix prices and other actions to increase their profits and disable true competition. and in terms of safety - would you really want a market where companies could sell cars without air bags and the like - for cheaper? some folks might, I dunno
From: Larry G on 2 May 2010 16:58 On May 2, 4:04 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > said: > > > > > > >On May 1, 11:21 am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > >> said: > > >> >> >black boxes in each new car? I bet all both the manufacturers and > >> >> >customers are going to like that idea - not! > > >> >> They're certainly not going to appreciate the additional CO$T. > > >> >Customers maybe, manufacturers won't care - that cost is paid by the > >> >consumer. > > >> Manufacturers absolutely will care. The more cars cost, the harder it > >> is to sell them. Lower sales means less profit for the automakers. > > >When the cost to every manufacturer goes up, the competition to sell > >stays the same. > > Doesn't matter. If the prices of new cars go up, fewer people will be > able to afford new cars, and fewer will be sold. > > >There is a market out there that will be satified no > >matter what the cost (withing reason). > > And more and more of it will be satisfied either with a used car or by > keeping and repairing the current car. I dunno. There are quite a few cars out there that are pretty low priced and meet the standards and from what I hear both China and India plan on offering fully compliant cars in the sub 15K range.... sub 10K if you believe this: http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/090608-Tata-Nano-World-s-Cheapest-Car-Coming-to-U-S-/
From: Harry K on 2 May 2010 17:05
On May 2, 1:04 pm, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > said: > > > > > > >On May 1, 11:21 am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Harry K <turnkey4...(a)hotmail.com> > >> said: > > >> >> >black boxes in each new car? I bet all both the manufacturers and > >> >> >customers are going to like that idea - not! > > >> >> They're certainly not going to appreciate the additional CO$T. > > >> >Customers maybe, manufacturers won't care - that cost is paid by the > >> >consumer. > > >> Manufacturers absolutely will care. The more cars cost, the harder it > >> is to sell them. Lower sales means less profit for the automakers. > > >When the cost to every manufacturer goes up, the competition to sell > >stays the same. > > Doesn't matter. If the prices of new cars go up, fewer people will be > able to afford new cars, and fewer will be sold. > > >There is a market out there that will be satified no > >matter what the cost (withing reason). > > And more and more of it will be satisfied either with a used car or by > keeping and repairing the current car. > -- > The MFFY Litmus Test: > If your maneuver forces another driver who has the right-of-way > to alter course or speed, what you did was probably MFFY.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Would you care to back that with statistics on how many new cars sold in, say 2008 comaared to 2000? I don't have any figures but if the number was less in 2008 I would be very surprised. The cost of installing airbags didn't have much (if any) slow down on new cars sold when that was mandated. Harry K |