Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

Have you ever known anyone for whom an SUV seemed all wrong, and asked
them why they bought one? I have. Their wants and desires are simple,
usually: They want a boxy vehicle that's higher off the ground because
they feel it's safer in collisions. It probably is. And, they want
more luggage space. Not seating. Luggage space. (Uncovered luggage is
actually dangerous, but never mind that for the moment.

No, I haven't asked any vehicle owner that wasn't a family member or
close personoal friend why they own a particular vehicle.

Make a presumption as to whether or not a vehicle is appropriate to
someone based upon seeing them once is ridiculous and idiotic.

These people do not fantasize about driving over rocks and through
streams, like you see in the commercials. They would not know the
difference between a 4WD 8-cylinder SUV and a 2WD 6 cylinder model.
They just want their boxy up-off-the-ground car. They can have that
wish, in a vehicle that uses less fuel.

Your powers of calirvoiance are amazing. The State Departmet, CIA and
DOD might be interested in hiring you.

Either you weren't alive in the 1970s, or you never look out the window
of your car. There are vastly more SUVs around now than 30+ years ago.
There is absolutely NO WAY all these new owners are the type who
actually use the mechanical capabilities of those vehicles. And, don't
blurt out stuff like "Oh yeah? Well, in places like Big Gulch, Colorado,
elevation 3000 feet, there were always lots of SUVs 'cause it snows like
crazy there, and lots of people live on unpaved roads". Of course.
That's where SUVs belong, as opposed to making up 50% of the vehicles in
a shopping mall in Cherry Hill, New Jersey.

I was around in the '70's. There are vastly fewer station wagons now than
there were SUV's. There are vastly more fuel efficient vehicles now than
in the '70's. This is all due to choice by the buyers and the
manufacturers providing those choices.

People should have a choice. Why don't you argue that choice is bad?


I'm not arguing that choices should be taken away. You keep saying this.
So, let's try another way. According to Ford, the company trying to
develop a much more efficient SUV, but with the same physical size &
comfort features of their current ones. They will still continue to sell
the more powerful ones, as well. This information came from a Ford
spokesperson. DO YOU BELIEVE THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE?

Whether the statement is true or false is irrelevant.

Why do you want to control the public's behavior? Why do you want to take
away their freedom by removing choices?

I'm describing how a company is developing a NEW set of choices, not
taking away an existing choice. How do you interpret that as a desire on
my part to limit choices?

But, the real choice is to make the consumer pay more or less. The hybrid is
the more costly of the two choices. And, the government will try to remove
the less costly choice.

Does your family appreciate you making all of their daily decisions for
them. Will your children live with your for the rest of their lives?

You've tried this "family" stunt before, when you're about to run out of
ideas and you're being backed into an alley. Drop it.

Why? You are a control freak at a minimum. If someone disagrees with you
then you do anything and everything to try and coerce them into your way of
thinking. You have stated many times that you will not allow your children
to make choices on their own if they disagree with what your want them to
do. This is telling of your character and your tactics in a debate or
discussion.

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

Are you the same Fred Dehl who suggested that ANWR, a tiny incremental
step, would be better than nothing?

You're the only one who's suggested ANWR is a "tiny incremental step".
It's far more than that.

Use numbers. What percentage is, or is not incremental, in your opinion?

Until they started drilling in the Arabian Pennisula the didn't think there
was any oil.


And yes, one new vehicle could make a difference. Ford & GM didn't
take the idea of mini-vans

Mini-vans are loathed by your ilk.

Not relevant to this discussion. This is about marketing a product, not my
opinion of certain vehicles.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/

Ford Escape $19,995 (Base price)

Ford Escape Hybrid $27,515 (Base price)

That is a $7,520 dollar difference which translates into 3,008 gallons of
gas at the average price in the DC area today of $2.50 per gallon. At 25
MPG that would mean that I could drive my non-Hybrid Escape 75,000 miles
before I reach the acquisition cost of the Escape Hybrid.

You tell me which one you would buy?

seriously until Chrysler started selling
them like hotcakes. One highly efficient SUV that's successful will
lead the competition into the same market.

The cost of operating these SUVs is little different from operating a gas
one.

I'll need a link for your source of that information. Good luck. The
vehicles don't exist yet.

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With a
projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed this
vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less desirable to
acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you if you are trading
something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we don't take those in trade
what are you going to do?

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

You have stated many times that you will not allow your children to make
choices on their own if they disagree with what your want them to do. This
is telling of your character and your tactics in a debate or discussion.

Please search at Google and show me where I've "stated many times".

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

I'm not arguing that choices should be taken away. You keep saying this.
So, let's try another way. According to Ford, the company trying to
develop a much more efficient SUV, but with the same physical size &
comfort features of their current ones. They will still continue to sell
the more powerful ones, as well. This information came from a Ford
spokesperson. DO YOU BELIEVE THIS STATEMENT IS TRUE?

Whether the statement is true or false is irrelevant.

More drivel. Not surprising.



Why do you want to control the public's behavior? Why do you want to
take away their freedom by removing choices?

I'm describing how a company is developing a NEW set of choices, not
taking away an existing choice. How do you interpret that as a desire on
my part to limit choices?

But, the real choice is to make the consumer pay more or less. The hybrid
is the more costly of the two choices. And, the government will try to
remove the less costly choice.

Sorry. I didn't know you were involved with formulating pricing for Ford
products. Is that where you work? Or, do you have other information about
prices for products they haven't begun selling yet?

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

Are you the same Fred Dehl who suggested that ANWR, a tiny incremental
step, would be better than nothing?

You're the only one who's suggested ANWR is a "tiny incremental step".
It's far more than that.

Use numbers. What percentage is, or is not incremental, in your opinion?

Until they started drilling in the Arabian Pennisula the didn't think
there was any oil.


And yes, one new vehicle could make a difference. Ford & GM didn't
take the idea of mini-vans

Mini-vans are loathed by your ilk.

Not relevant to this discussion. This is about marketing a product, not
my opinion of certain vehicles.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/

Ford Escape $19,995 (Base price)

Ford Escape Hybrid $27,515 (Base price)

That is a $7,520 dollar difference which translates into 3,008 gallons of
gas at the average price in the DC area today of $2.50 per gallon. At 25
MPG that would mean that I could drive my non-Hybrid Escape 75,000 miles
before I reach the acquisition cost of the Escape Hybrid.

You tell me which one you would buy?

seriously until Chrysler started selling
them like hotcakes. One highly efficient SUV that's successful will
lead the competition into the same market.

The cost of operating these SUVs is little different from operating a
gas
one.

I'll need a link for your source of that information. Good luck. The
vehicles don't exist yet.

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With a
projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed this
vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less desirable to
acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you if you are trading
something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we don't take those in trade
what are you going to do?

Beats me. I don't care. I'd never buy that type of vehicle, regardless of
how it was powered.

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 04:34:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

You have stated many times that you will not allow your children to make
choices on their own if they disagree with what your want them to do.
This
is telling of your character and your tactics in a debate or discussion.

Please search at Google and show me where I've "stated many times".

Bassy? Is that you? :)

Bass-ish?

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With
a projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed
this vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less
desirable to acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you
if you are trading something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we
don't take those in trade what are you going to do?

Beats me. I don't care. I'd never buy that type of vehicle, regardless
of how it was powered.

Moron, ANY Hybrid is going to have the same situation on trade-in, not
just SUVs. Now answer the ****ing question, dickwash.

The numbers will be different for trade-ins on those vehicles. They're
different for a Peterbilt than for a Chevy sedan. If a competent dealer
finds out you never changed the timing belt on a trade-in that needed it,
the numbers will be different. It's a non-issue.

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

Are you the same Fred Dehl who suggested that ANWR, a tiny incremental
step, would be better than nothing?

You're the only one who's suggested ANWR is a "tiny incremental step".
It's far more than that.

Use numbers. What percentage is, or is not incremental, in your opinion?

Until they started drilling in the Arabian Pennisula the didn't think
there was any oil.


And yes, one new vehicle could make a difference. Ford & GM didn't
take the idea of mini-vans

Mini-vans are loathed by your ilk.

Not relevant to this discussion. This is about marketing a product, not
my opinion of certain vehicles.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/

Ford Escape $19,995 (Base price)

Ford Escape Hybrid $27,515 (Base price)

That is a $7,520 dollar difference which translates into 3,008 gallons of
gas at the average price in the DC area today of $2.50 per gallon. At 25
MPG that would mean that I could drive my non-Hybrid Escape 75,000 miles
before I reach the acquisition cost of the Escape Hybrid.

You tell me which one you would buy?

seriously until Chrysler started selling
them like hotcakes. One highly efficient SUV that's successful will
lead the competition into the same market.

The cost of operating these SUVs is little different from operating a
gas
one.

I'll need a link for your source of that information. Good luck. The
vehicles don't exist yet.

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With a
projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed this
vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less desirable to
acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you if you are trading
something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we don't take those in
trade what are you going to do?

Beats me. I don't care. I'd never buy that type of vehicle, regardless of
how it was powered.

What do they say in tennis? Game, set and match.

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With
a projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed
this vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less
desirable to acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you
if you are trading something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we
don't take those in trade what are you going to do?

Beats me. I don't care. I'd never buy that type of vehicle, regardless
of how it was powered.

Moron, ANY Hybrid is going to have the same situation on trade-in, not
just SUVs. Now answer the ****ing question, dickwash.

The numbers will be different for trade-ins on those vehicles. They're
different for a Peterbilt than for a Chevy sedan. If a competent dealer
finds out you never changed the timing belt on a trade-in that needed it,
the numbers will be different. It's a non-issue.

I can change a timing belt for a couple of hundred dollars vs. several
thousands of dollars for a hybrid battery pack.

Fuel prices moving up, just in time for spring boating and driving?
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

The battery life of an Hybrid is estimated to be 100,000 miles. With
a projected cost of $5,000 to replace the batteries you have removed
this vehicle form the used vehicle market making them even less
desirable to acquire in the first place. When the salesman asks you
if you are trading something in and you say a Hybrid and he says we
don't take those in trade what are you going to do?

Beats me. I don't care. I'd never buy that type of vehicle, regardless
of how it was powered.

Moron, ANY Hybrid is going to have the same situation on trade-in, not
just SUVs. Now answer the ****ing question, dickwash.

The numbers will be different for trade-ins on those vehicles. They're
different for a Peterbilt than for a Chevy sedan. If a competent dealer
finds out you never changed the timing belt on a trade-in that needed it,
the numbers will be different. It's a non-issue.

I can change a timing belt for a couple of hundred dollars vs. several
thousands of dollars for a hybrid battery pack.



Do you mean doing the timing belt job yourself?