Isn't it Ironic?
There is a strong irony taste in my mouth when I think about the fate of the US car companies. The main reason is this: for years, they built uninspired shitboxes that had nothing on the competition from Asia and Europe. The only thing they had going for them were their trucks, which were usually the best. Today, they actually make good cars, and they are going out of business because, a certain extent, people believe that they make uninspired shitboxes.
For example, the all-important mid-sized sedan segment:
Ford now makes the Ford Fusion. Its a good car, a very good car. It commonly wins comparison tests against the Accord and Camry. The latest version comes with a hybrid which gets fantastic fuel economy and is cheaper than comparable Japanese offerings. Ford sells far less of them than it did of one of the most soulless cars ever made: the 90's Taurus.
GM now makes the new Malibu. Though the old Malibu was designed by a pensions committee, the new one is a really nice car. It looks great, it dives well, it is stylish inside, and again is ranked better than the Camry and Accord on many fronts. GM still sells more Impala's than Malibus, last time I checked.
Chrysler now make the Charger. Yeah, you can say it is a muscle car and all that, but underneath it, it is a 4-door family sedan. It is a nice car that does not get the recogntion it deserves - granted, its not as nice as the malibu or the fusion, but its still a good car.
And yet, all three companies are failing. Ford is doing the best, Chyrsler the worst, but none are doing well (all have pretty significant debts that are not going to be pretty when they come due).
As best as I can tell, there is a timelag in public perception: it takes a long time to build a reputation, and it takes a long time to shake a reputation. Just look at Hyundai: it was still the brunt of jokes for 5-7 years after it started making good cars. Today, most people recognize Hyundai as reliable and well-built cars. It will take 5-10 years of the "Big 3" making good cars for public perception to catch up with reality - for now, they are still dealing with the repurcussions of thier disastrous decisions to ignore cars for 15 years.
For example, the all-important mid-sized sedan segment:
Ford now makes the Ford Fusion. Its a good car, a very good car. It commonly wins comparison tests against the Accord and Camry. The latest version comes with a hybrid which gets fantastic fuel economy and is cheaper than comparable Japanese offerings. Ford sells far less of them than it did of one of the most soulless cars ever made: the 90's Taurus.
GM now makes the new Malibu. Though the old Malibu was designed by a pensions committee, the new one is a really nice car. It looks great, it dives well, it is stylish inside, and again is ranked better than the Camry and Accord on many fronts. GM still sells more Impala's than Malibus, last time I checked.
Chrysler now make the Charger. Yeah, you can say it is a muscle car and all that, but underneath it, it is a 4-door family sedan. It is a nice car that does not get the recogntion it deserves - granted, its not as nice as the malibu or the fusion, but its still a good car.
And yet, all three companies are failing. Ford is doing the best, Chyrsler the worst, but none are doing well (all have pretty significant debts that are not going to be pretty when they come due).
As best as I can tell, there is a timelag in public perception: it takes a long time to build a reputation, and it takes a long time to shake a reputation. Just look at Hyundai: it was still the brunt of jokes for 5-7 years after it started making good cars. Today, most people recognize Hyundai as reliable and well-built cars. It will take 5-10 years of the "Big 3" making good cars for public perception to catch up with reality - for now, they are still dealing with the repurcussions of thier disastrous decisions to ignore cars for 15 years.
Does Alannis Morissette know you're stealing her song lyrics?
ReplyDelete