Parsing "it's the cars, stupid" explanation for Detroit's troubles

I think one of the reasons that Japanese automakers do a good job on their entry level cars is that they know the loyalty customers feel about cars and brands. You bought my cheap car today, but 10 years from now you'll buy my mini-van. In some sense it's marketing costs.

Every time my 200,000 mile civic started without a catch, I felt like it was doing me a favor. Now, when it was time to replace it, where do you think I went?

"But that's asking an awful lot of executives of publicly traded companies with impatient shareholders."

No, we can't really expect to buy responsibility with that $8.5 million dollar pay package...

Justin, I can see you're point in arguing that because of the undue costs that Detroit has to deal with and in planning for the future back in the '90s they switched to the SUVs that at that time American's were certainly buying up. The problem really Justin, is that saying that that execs at a public company beholden to public shareholders who all too often seek short term results and they do, is still a cope out. Toyota, Honda and others also made strategic moves into SUVs but at the same time made changes and plans to offer a deeper product line across demographics...the end result:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/top-picks-for-2007-4-07/overview/0704_top-picks-2007.htm

Not alot of picks from American manufacturers. Unfortunately Detroit execs clearly respond slowly and inefficiently. I would say its because of their size, but its not been a problem for Toyota. And I don't think its a cultural issue - just look at all the innovation Americans are creating in so many other areas. Detroit has become so sacrosanct they fail to be creative, to be innovative, daring, or to change. They'd like to blame their union, like to blame all of those pesky costs, but they still haven't done more in terms of their products. I think you're letting them off the hook here Justin, and clearly the marketplace says the opposite as it buys up more of those imports.

Thanks for the Consumer Reports link, YMM. It led me to another page where I came across this interesting verdict on reliability:

"No carmaker does everything right. Volkswagen builds vehicles that perform very well in our testing but vary in reliability. Despite very good reliability, not all Toyota models score well.
Just because a car is Japanese doesn't mean it's a great car. Honda, Toyota, and Subaru make consistently reliable cars, but other Japanese automakers have mixed results.
U.S. automakers build some good models. But many vehicles are mediocre, and even the best seldom rise to the top of their categories against stiff competition."

So maybe I'm giving Detroit a little too much credit on quality. And I agree, the Detroit Three aren't as well run as Toyota and Honda. But I think the huge distraction posed by their legacy costs is part of the reason for that.

I think the issue with reliability and innovation only affects the US branches of the Detroit auto makers. I live in Naples, Italy. After reading a story on CNN earlier this week regarding how the major auto makers are fighting increased fuel efficiency standards proposed to take place in 13 years (2020, if I remember correctly), it occurred to me that all of them, except Chrysler, which is curiously absent from the scene here, already HAVE smaller, much more fuel-efficient cars ON THE ROADS RIGHT NOW in the European Union. Ford, GM, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, Subaru, all the big names we know and recognize in the US. I know the next "but" is going to be about differing emissions standards, but those are also quite strict over here. So, exactly what WOULD be the excuse for not having those models quickly available to the US market? Certainly more quickly than 13 YEARS from now! It's strange that in countries where the auto makers are forced to comply, they manage to do so, and manage to make a profit doing so.