I get your point, but this particular illustration doesn’t cut it at all. The Space Shuttle and prior space programs have incredibly high quality levels. They just happen to have even smaller margins for error.

that was supposed to read “…and exploiting what has become a green advertiser’s marketplace.”

Detroit focused on the profit in its truck markets, and got broad sided when gas prices spiked and going green was suddenly the fad. Left a lot of very expensive, very hard to move, steel sitting on dealer lots. Even today, w/ gas prices more moderate, and a significant number of consumers truly needing trucks for their hauling/towing capacities, Detroit continues to place huge incentives on those products to sell – due in part to old inventory. This practice cuts into both profits and resale value (resale, or residual, value is used to set lease costs, and is also widely perceived by the industry as an indicator of long term quality/reliability), ultimately shrinking sales in some markets (by driving up lease costs) and damaging the long term reputation of the brand. Huge incentives drive down quality perceptions over time by stretching the difference between MSRP and trade/auction values at resale. Heard a Ford ad just today for $11,000 off MSRP on a number of their supercabs. GM and Dodge similarly. None have found a way to wean consumers off of big discounts – Americans seem to want “a deal” more than they want a good price to start with.

Toyota, and some of the other foriegns, also reaped advantage from avoiding the truck market for many years, keeping their CAFE numbers down, and avoiding what has become a green advertiser’s marketplace.

All that aside, the “Lemon Lawyers” of the world brought claims against Toyota, Honda, and the like as readily as they brought claims against GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Tellingly, in my mind, most of those same lawyers don’t drive Toyota product. When opinion matters (as it does on perceptions of “quality”), the source of the opinion matters. I won’t volunteer which brands most Lemon Lawyers do buy, but I do consider their opinion more valuable than Consumer Reports when it comes to what to buy.

BTW, if you think “you get what you pay for” is a hard and fast rule, you should read “Doppes v Bentley” out of CA. Or the recent decisions against MBUSA (Mercedes Benz) in the same venue. Ugly case in Washington (more Discovery violations) against another import vehicle manufacturer, Hyundai, in Washington, as part of a products lit matter. More expensive does not always mean better customer service, or more reliable transportation. The US Space Shuttle program, unfortunately, illustrates that point quite well. As did the Appolo project, and its predecessors.

Toyota, if anything, just entered the field American players have been faced with for years. Its election year politics, driven by a media frenzy. Our politicians are more interested in sound bites than getting to the bottom of this, or much of any other issue. Consider this, at best, a look behind the curtain at “the great and powerful Oz.” With no guarantee that its the “real” Oz…

Buyer Beware.

You are correct and I knew that.

I spoke in error. Please accept my apology.

I believe that Toyota workers are unionized, but their contracts and work rules are not as debilitating as those of Detroit.

Toyotas are made in the US by non-union workers. Fords, GM’s and Dodges are made by union workers.

During the same time frame tonka toyota has reaped nothing but praise, adulation and awards, not to mention sales figures to match.

Now in mere months, it seems, that tonka is being taken to the dirt pile. I’m not even suggesting such is without merit, but why did it take so long or possibly is there another wolf in the woods?