Don't get your panties in a bunch old pal, there's no confounding here.
Originally Posted By: gofast182
Sure, a Panther is every bit as reliable as an Accord, maybe even more reliable, but the fact is those cars were not selling very poorly *to regular consumers* for years. And the ones that were sold into fleet duty often have different ways of re-entering the used car market.
Not maybe,a Panther is demonstrably more durable than a FWD unibody Accord although that's not the issue. Why should they or any other 200K+ mile car (GM B body, even Camrys) be exempt from consideration? Because if they didn't filter with the "sold from dealers" metric, the Accord wouldnt be the only car on the list? So they're selecting data and presenting it out of context with the help of some [sponsored] journalist/publication using data from your given contracted firm? Is that it?
Bottom line is, to me, it's undeniably the usual "Power of Psychology" bit again. I throw up in my mouth a little bit everytime some (any) corporate entity start peddling stupid and irrelevant economic data as though that affects my motoring or (car) ownership experience. I get exponentially offended with each repeat offence. How about peddling the actual objective merits of the product, instead of subjective suggestions about the brand.
Still don't see what the problem is? Let me ask you, what is any average consumer supposed to glean from such tripe?
"OH WOW, HONDA ACCORD IS SO DURABLE IT RUNS WITH ALL THE BIG TRUCKS AND SUVS" "IF YOU WANT YOUR CAR TO LAST LIKE A TRUCK, YOU WANT AN ACCORD" "ACCORD IS THE MOST LIKELY TO LAST 200k MILES" "ACCORD HAS HIGHER DEALER-TO-FLEET SALES RATIO, THEREFORE IT'S WHAT CONSUMERS LIKE YOU REALLY WANT" lol garbage!!!
It's all deception by SUGGESTION (the intention and basis of effective maketing) by way of caveat-ridden, selective data.
Volumetrically speaking, Camry easily outsells Accord any week in USA, but oh no... because Toyota (or anyone else) sells fleet, they don't make the list- they're less likely to last 200K....because they're not on the list. Wut?
Also, mind explaining this Honda logic "We don't sell to fleets, our cars are too good for that- we profit more per unit off the backs of consumers who are paying sticker premiums to "license" our Holy H badge" and how I'm supposed to respect that. What utter moronic arrogance that I could never reward with my money.
Honda Motor (America) needs to get their collective head out of their butt and pipe down on the brainwashing, and perhaps focus on getting back to their roots--- you know like the 80's when the investments went to the engineering house rather than marketing psych, PR/brand perception,sponsorships and management performance incentives. I would love to see that happen in my lifetime.
Originally Posted By: gofast182
Sure, a Panther is every bit as reliable as an Accord, maybe even more reliable, but the fact is those cars were not selling very poorly *to regular consumers* for years. And the ones that were sold into fleet duty often have different ways of re-entering the used car market.
Not maybe,a Panther is demonstrably more durable than a FWD unibody Accord although that's not the issue. Why should they or any other 200K+ mile car (GM B body, even Camrys) be exempt from consideration? Because if they didn't filter with the "sold from dealers" metric, the Accord wouldnt be the only car on the list? So they're selecting data and presenting it out of context with the help of some [sponsored] journalist/publication using data from your given contracted firm? Is that it?
Bottom line is, to me, it's undeniably the usual "Power of Psychology" bit again. I throw up in my mouth a little bit everytime some (any) corporate entity start peddling stupid and irrelevant economic data as though that affects my motoring or (car) ownership experience. I get exponentially offended with each repeat offence. How about peddling the actual objective merits of the product, instead of subjective suggestions about the brand.
Still don't see what the problem is? Let me ask you, what is any average consumer supposed to glean from such tripe?
"OH WOW, HONDA ACCORD IS SO DURABLE IT RUNS WITH ALL THE BIG TRUCKS AND SUVS" "IF YOU WANT YOUR CAR TO LAST LIKE A TRUCK, YOU WANT AN ACCORD" "ACCORD IS THE MOST LIKELY TO LAST 200k MILES" "ACCORD HAS HIGHER DEALER-TO-FLEET SALES RATIO, THEREFORE IT'S WHAT CONSUMERS LIKE YOU REALLY WANT" lol garbage!!!
It's all deception by SUGGESTION (the intention and basis of effective maketing) by way of caveat-ridden, selective data.
Volumetrically speaking, Camry easily outsells Accord any week in USA, but oh no... because Toyota (or anyone else) sells fleet, they don't make the list- they're less likely to last 200K....because they're not on the list. Wut?
Also, mind explaining this Honda logic "We don't sell to fleets, our cars are too good for that- we profit more per unit off the backs of consumers who are paying sticker premiums to "license" our Holy H badge" and how I'm supposed to respect that. What utter moronic arrogance that I could never reward with my money.
Honda Motor (America) needs to get their collective head out of their butt and pipe down on the brainwashing, and perhaps focus on getting back to their roots--- you know like the 80's when the investments went to the engineering house rather than marketing psych, PR/brand perception,sponsorships and management performance incentives. I would love to see that happen in my lifetime.
