Rex B

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:37:36 -0500, TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote:

|Actually, the hard part is understanding the rational for calling this
|a $28 part. It's just mental gymnastics to create rational
|explanations for made up "facts".... kind of fun and creative but not
|meaningful in any kind of real way.
|
|The only fact is that the part costs $193 from Honda. Is that
|expensive? Is that inexpensive? Who knows. The only other thing I'm
|sure of is that the price has nothing what-so-ever to do with weight!
|
|On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:02:06 -0400, "Den and Barb"
|<dj1732spam@alltel.net> wrote:
|
|>I have tried to follow this thread and have yet to read "WHY" a $28. part
|>retails for $193.

Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.

Rex B

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:37:36 -0500, TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote:

|Actually, the hard part is understanding the rational for calling this
|a $28 part. It's just mental gymnastics to create rational
|explanations for made up "facts".... kind of fun and creative but not
|meaningful in any kind of real way.
|
|The only fact is that the part costs $193 from Honda. Is that
|expensive? Is that inexpensive? Who knows. The only other thing I'm
|sure of is that the price has nothing what-so-ever to do with weight!
|
|On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:02:06 -0400, "Den and Barb"
|<dj1732spam@alltel.net> wrote:
|
|>I have tried to follow this thread and have yet to read "WHY" a $28. part
|>retails for $193.

Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.

redrum

expensive <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote in message news:<300720032051280859%common_sense@emodgnik.com >...
> In article <wg%Va.14771$Vx2.7304037@newssvr28.news.prodigy.co m>, Bob
> <XXLightningserver2@XXhotmail.comXX> wrote:
>
> > If you are driving a Honda that is 22 years old, I would say that both your
> > car, and Honda owe you nothing. That is twice the life of most cars, and
> > judging by your shock at the price I assume that you have never replaced
> > this particular component before. You should consider yourself lucky.
> > Just my opinion
> > Bob
>
> If the car had 200,000 miles on it, then I would agree. But the
> odometer just turned 110,000, so the car has some miles to go before I
> get my money's worth out of it. 22 years means nothing, it's miles not
> years that count for me because I don't drive that much. The car still
> owes me some miles.
>
> I have never heard of an ignitor burning out. The mechanic said it's
> rare for it to happen. I don't particularly care what breaks as long
> as it doesn't cause an accident or involve an outrageously expensive
> repair.

Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
of years.

So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
I've ever seen.

redrum

expensive <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote in message news:<300720032051280859%common_sense@emodgnik.com >...
> In article <wg%Va.14771$Vx2.7304037@newssvr28.news.prodigy.co m>, Bob
> <XXLightningserver2@XXhotmail.comXX> wrote:
>
> > If you are driving a Honda that is 22 years old, I would say that both your
> > car, and Honda owe you nothing. That is twice the life of most cars, and
> > judging by your shock at the price I assume that you have never replaced
> > this particular component before. You should consider yourself lucky.
> > Just my opinion
> > Bob
>
> If the car had 200,000 miles on it, then I would agree. But the
> odometer just turned 110,000, so the car has some miles to go before I
> get my money's worth out of it. 22 years means nothing, it's miles not
> years that count for me because I don't drive that much. The car still
> owes me some miles.
>
> I have never heard of an ignitor burning out. The mechanic said it's
> rare for it to happen. I don't particularly care what breaks as long
> as it doesn't cause an accident or involve an outrageously expensive
> repair.

Miles and years factor into this equation whether YOU care or not.
That is why all car warranties are for x amount of miles and x amount
of years.

So given that you are discouraged that the part failed you should
consider it has lasted for 20+ years, which surpasses any warranty
I've ever seen.

Stephen Bigelow

"Rex B" <NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote in message
news:3f293ad4.269372433@news.txol.net...
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:37:36 -0500, TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
>
> |Actually, the hard part is understanding the rational for calling this
> |a $28 part. It's just mental gymnastics to create rational
> |explanations for made up "facts".... kind of fun and creative but not
> |meaningful in any kind of real way.
> |
> |The only fact is that the part costs $193 from Honda. Is that
> |expensive? Is that inexpensive? Who knows. The only other thing I'm
> |sure of is that the price has nothing what-so-ever to do with weight!
> |
> |On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:02:06 -0400, "Den and Barb"
> |<dj1732spam@alltel.net> wrote:
> |
> |>I have tried to follow this thread and have yet to read "WHY" a $28.
part
> |>retails for $193.
>
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.

$73.55USD from Majestic Honda
http://tinyurl.com/in0t

Stephen Bigelow

"Rex B" <NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote in message
news:3f293ad4.269372433@news.txol.net...
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:37:36 -0500, TL <tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
>
> |Actually, the hard part is understanding the rational for calling this
> |a $28 part. It's just mental gymnastics to create rational
> |explanations for made up "facts".... kind of fun and creative but not
> |meaningful in any kind of real way.
> |
> |The only fact is that the part costs $193 from Honda. Is that
> |expensive? Is that inexpensive? Who knows. The only other thing I'm
> |sure of is that the price has nothing what-so-ever to do with weight!
> |
> |On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:02:06 -0400, "Den and Barb"
> |<dj1732spam@alltel.net> wrote:
> |
> |>I have tried to follow this thread and have yet to read "WHY" a $28.
part
> |>retails for $193.
>
> Just to stir the pot: Borg Warner charges us $41.17 for a 1991 igniter.

$73.55USD from Majestic Honda
http://tinyurl.com/in0t

John D.

> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense.

Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!

As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
1973 Datsun 1200!

Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.

But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.

John D.






expensive <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote in message news:<300720032202478713%common_sense@emodgnik.com >...
> In article <eH0Wa.7179$Jz2.368@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>, vinniemak
> <vinniemak@netzero.net> wrote:
>
> > '81 Honda with 109,000 on it. You're sure the odometer did not go all the
> > way through and so you actually have a 1,109,000 on it??
>
> Nope. I don't drive that much.
>
> > Those are my 2 cents. You sure "touched a nerve" talking about HONDA
> > DEALERS. They will exploit customers as they think they have a product that
> > cannot be replaced & they think they will always have customers. But I
> > cannot agree with you regarding not buying Honda products. Honda in my
> > opinion is the best bang for the buck, even though they are not close to
> > being perfect.
>
> It's done the job for me for many years. But, at 110,000 miles, it has
> a long way to go yet. It has to get me to retirement age when I will
> buy my last car.
>
> The arrogance of the dealer really put me off as much as the cost of
> the part. Someone who sells something should not laugh at the anguish
> of a customer. Until a few days ago, I'd planned my last car to be a
> Honda. Not any more.
>
> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.

John D.

> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense.

Well, I sure do! It IS a rip-off!

As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
1973 Datsun 1200!

Fortunately, though, it's got no igniters, ECU, CEL or sensors to
speak of...just a simple carbuerator, points, condensor, plugs...and
an oil filter that not only is mounted vertically (instead of
horizontally), but is quite easily accessible.

But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.

John D.






expensive <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote in message news:<300720032202478713%common_sense@emodgnik.com >...
> In article <eH0Wa.7179$Jz2.368@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>, vinniemak
> <vinniemak@netzero.net> wrote:
>
> > '81 Honda with 109,000 on it. You're sure the odometer did not go all the
> > way through and so you actually have a 1,109,000 on it??
>
> Nope. I don't drive that much.
>
> > Those are my 2 cents. You sure "touched a nerve" talking about HONDA
> > DEALERS. They will exploit customers as they think they have a product that
> > cannot be replaced & they think they will always have customers. But I
> > cannot agree with you regarding not buying Honda products. Honda in my
> > opinion is the best bang for the buck, even though they are not close to
> > being perfect.
>
> It's done the job for me for many years. But, at 110,000 miles, it has
> a long way to go yet. It has to get me to retirement age when I will
> buy my last car.
>
> The arrogance of the dealer really put me off as much as the cost of
> the part. Someone who sells something should not laugh at the anguish
> of a customer. Until a few days ago, I'd planned my last car to be a
> Honda. Not any more.
>
> Somehow I get the impression that folks here do not consider $193 to be
> a burdensome expense. But I live on a fixed income and $193 is
> approximately 1/5 of what I have to live on. So the towing and the
> repair wiped me out as far as discretionary income is concerned.

Rex B

|
|As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
|years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
|1973 Datsun 1200!
|
|But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
|years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
|guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.

Buy a parts car from an individual and pay someone to store it for you where you
can access it as needed.

Rex B

|
|As for finding an 1981 car in an auto salvage yard after all these
|years, I have the SAME problem but a whole lot worse: Try finding a
|1973 Datsun 1200!
|
|But as for parts, I haven't seen one of these cars in a junkyard for
|years. Eventually I may have to give it up just for that reason...I
|guess that sometimes happens if you keep a car long enough.

Buy a parts car from an individual and pay someone to store it for you where you
can access it as needed.

expensive

Max:

You're right, I don't have towing coverage. I drive an old car and I
know that I will have to be towed every now and again, maybe once every
decade. I keep $100 in a strategic place in the car just for that
purpose. But, remember, I have the work done that needs to be done.
The car is in perfect mechanical condition, at last as perfect as it
can be for it's mileage. My insurance is to tell the mechanic at oil
change time to sniff out anything that detracts from safety and
reliability. This time, I remember sitting in the car waiting for the
tow truck thinking that this was the first time that this car had been
on the hook, so my strategy works.

Your statement that "things are worth what people are willing to pay
for them" is good for discretionary purchases. But an igniter is not a
discretionary purchase. The car doesn't work without it and I needed
one now, not after trying to beat my mechanic's price and ticking him
off. It's a bit like the television ad where the tow truck drives up
and the stranded motorist asks the tow truck driver for his
competitor's rates. It just doesn't happen.

For your information, after the car was repaired, I drove to an auto
parts store and asked their price. $266. The dealer part actually had
a lower price! Go figure. My mechanic said that the same part for
later models was half or less than the one I hadda have.

I reject the notion that "You are just bitter you had something break
on you, even though it happened after 22 years of use (and all things
considered, did not cost that much.)." As I said before, it has
110,000 miles on it, not 22 years. If a car is used every few days and
is maintained properly, then time is irrelevant except for paint and
upholstery and other things that succumb to UV degradation and rust.

You say that "the cost of that part is not the just the cost of the
materials and manufacturing - it's the millions of dollars that went
into the design." Sorry, I don't agree with you. Companies write off
the expenses you refer to in the year of manufacture. The subsequent
cost of parts for replacement purposes is more in line with the actual
cost of producing the part and putting it through the distribution
chain.

If there is any residual cost like the one to which you refer, then it
is the "designing" (meaning scheming) costs of management trying to
figure out how to take advantage of their customers who break down and
have to get the part. This is not a part that the dealer mechanic
looks at during routine maintenance and tells you that it looks worn
out or is in jeopardy of failing and needs to be replaced. It ain't
that kinda animal. The only reason anyone needs the $193 (for a $27)
part is because of a breakdown. They have their customers over a
barrel on this one. And they really stick it to them. There IS no $60
aftermarket part.

-

In article <yg2Wa.6852$dk4.317025@typhoon.sonic.net>, Max
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> > I reject your analysis. It's a derivative of my comparison, which
> > doubles any error. As a matter of fact, the part has a steel plate on
> > the bottom, steel sleeves, and several metal electrodes and connectors,
> > not to mention having been filled/sealed with some sort of resin. My
> > comparison is just fine, thank you. Even a 50% error still makes the
> > part outrageously expensive.
>
> LOL. You REALLY missed the point. Sense of humor and sarcasm are clearly too
> expensive for your taste as well. :-)
>
> > Apple computers are great. A lot of people who work with IBM
> > compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> > home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> > compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> > thanks.
>
> So it is ok for Apple to "rip you off" because you like them? How
> hypocritical of you.
>
> Look, in all seriousness, things are worth what people are willing to pay
> for them. You are willing to pay $2400 for a computer even though a
> comprable machine can be bought for half the cost, because you like it
> better. It has nothing to do with size or weight. My company produces
> software that weighs nothing (ok, you can count weight of the CD we could
> theoretically put it on) and we sell it for millions of dollars - and we
> have buyers because they believe it is worth it. If $200 part was not worth
> it to you, you should have bought the $60 aftermarket part and installed it
> yourself. You had a choice, but you paid for it, which means it was worth it
> to you at the time. Do not kid yourself, this has NOTHING to do with Honda
> or any other car maker. You are just bitter you had something break on you,
> even though it happened after 22 years of use (and all things considered,
> did not cost that much.) You are bitter you did not have towing coverage.
> But get over yourself, cuz happens. The bottom line is that if your car
> was of any other make, it would have been a similar price. This has nothing
> to do with Honda. I am sure Honda's prices are not any different that any
> other maker. And yes, the dealer parts will always cost more than
> aftermarket parts, because for them the cost of that part is not the just
> the cost of the materials and manufacturing - it's the millions of dollars
> that went into the design. Grow up and take some responsibility.
>
> -M

expensive

Max:

You're right, I don't have towing coverage. I drive an old car and I
know that I will have to be towed every now and again, maybe once every
decade. I keep $100 in a strategic place in the car just for that
purpose. But, remember, I have the work done that needs to be done.
The car is in perfect mechanical condition, at last as perfect as it
can be for it's mileage. My insurance is to tell the mechanic at oil
change time to sniff out anything that detracts from safety and
reliability. This time, I remember sitting in the car waiting for the
tow truck thinking that this was the first time that this car had been
on the hook, so my strategy works.

Your statement that "things are worth what people are willing to pay
for them" is good for discretionary purchases. But an igniter is not a
discretionary purchase. The car doesn't work without it and I needed
one now, not after trying to beat my mechanic's price and ticking him
off. It's a bit like the television ad where the tow truck drives up
and the stranded motorist asks the tow truck driver for his
competitor's rates. It just doesn't happen.

For your information, after the car was repaired, I drove to an auto
parts store and asked their price. $266. The dealer part actually had
a lower price! Go figure. My mechanic said that the same part for
later models was half or less than the one I hadda have.

I reject the notion that "You are just bitter you had something break
on you, even though it happened after 22 years of use (and all things
considered, did not cost that much.)." As I said before, it has
110,000 miles on it, not 22 years. If a car is used every few days and
is maintained properly, then time is irrelevant except for paint and
upholstery and other things that succumb to UV degradation and rust.

You say that "the cost of that part is not the just the cost of the
materials and manufacturing - it's the millions of dollars that went
into the design." Sorry, I don't agree with you. Companies write off
the expenses you refer to in the year of manufacture. The subsequent
cost of parts for replacement purposes is more in line with the actual
cost of producing the part and putting it through the distribution
chain.

If there is any residual cost like the one to which you refer, then it
is the "designing" (meaning scheming) costs of management trying to
figure out how to take advantage of their customers who break down and
have to get the part. This is not a part that the dealer mechanic
looks at during routine maintenance and tells you that it looks worn
out or is in jeopardy of failing and needs to be replaced. It ain't
that kinda animal. The only reason anyone needs the $193 (for a $27)
part is because of a breakdown. They have their customers over a
barrel on this one. And they really stick it to them. There IS no $60
aftermarket part.

-

In article <yg2Wa.6852$dk4.317025@typhoon.sonic.net>, Max
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> > I reject your analysis. It's a derivative of my comparison, which
> > doubles any error. As a matter of fact, the part has a steel plate on
> > the bottom, steel sleeves, and several metal electrodes and connectors,
> > not to mention having been filled/sealed with some sort of resin. My
> > comparison is just fine, thank you. Even a 50% error still makes the
> > part outrageously expensive.
>
> LOL. You REALLY missed the point. Sense of humor and sarcasm are clearly too
> expensive for your taste as well. :-)
>
> > Apple computers are great. A lot of people who work with IBM
> > compatibles go home to Macs. Very few people who work with Macs go
> > home to an IBM compatible. I like 'em. I've never used an IBM
> > compatible, mainly because I see my friends struggle with them. No
> > thanks.
>
> So it is ok for Apple to "rip you off" because you like them? How
> hypocritical of you.
>
> Look, in all seriousness, things are worth what people are willing to pay
> for them. You are willing to pay $2400 for a computer even though a
> comprable machine can be bought for half the cost, because you like it
> better. It has nothing to do with size or weight. My company produces
> software that weighs nothing (ok, you can count weight of the CD we could
> theoretically put it on) and we sell it for millions of dollars - and we
> have buyers because they believe it is worth it. If $200 part was not worth
> it to you, you should have bought the $60 aftermarket part and installed it
> yourself. You had a choice, but you paid for it, which means it was worth it
> to you at the time. Do not kid yourself, this has NOTHING to do with Honda
> or any other car maker. You are just bitter you had something break on you,
> even though it happened after 22 years of use (and all things considered,
> did not cost that much.) You are bitter you did not have towing coverage.
> But get over yourself, cuz happens. The bottom line is that if your car
> was of any other make, it would have been a similar price. This has nothing
> to do with Honda. I am sure Honda's prices are not any different that any
> other maker. And yes, the dealer parts will always cost more than
> aftermarket parts, because for them the cost of that part is not the just
> the cost of the materials and manufacturing - it's the millions of dollars
> that went into the design. Grow up and take some responsibility.
>
> -M

expensive

In article <ru2Wa.1065$V_4.47722@eagle.america.net>, SusanR
<sam3r@msn.com> wrote:

> what about a couple having trouble conceiving a baby and going for in vitro
> fertilization? For about a fraction of an ounce of sperm and a speck of an
> egg the couple will pay $15,000 and up.

First of all, half of that cost involves insurance and administrative
expenses. The rest pays the doctor and overhead like equipment. Of
course, I'm guessing, but just for the purposes of discussion. A part
is a part and not so complicated as the procedure you refer to. The
cost of distribution and stocking are amortized over thousands of other
parts in inventory. Apples and oranges.

> you can't judge the cost of a part on its weight, that's patently
> ridiculous!

Remember, now, my comparison was a "what if." I picked a notebook
computer because it has electronic components in a plastic case just
like the igniter. So the analysis was not "patently ridiculous," it
was maybe at most coincidental due to the similarity of materials and
components.

> I once had to have the motor mounts replaced on my old Nissan.
> They're just a tiny piece of metal sandwiched between two pieces of rubber
> but only available from the dealer. One of them was $93.

Yeah, but likely you had warning that this repair was needed. You
could have shopped around. You likely had time to prepare. I got
dropped off the hook and had no choice except walk or get the car
fixed. One of life's little extortions.

> its not just the mileage on a car, its also the age.

Okay, there's an age factor, but if the car is kept in good repair,
mileage is the primary consideration. The matter of age was brought up
in another context (i.e., my being grateful that the car lasted so
long, but I reject that notion because it is a low -mileage
well-maintained car).

> was this just for the part or part plus labor?

$193 was the cost of the part alone.

expensive

In article <ru2Wa.1065$V_4.47722@eagle.america.net>, SusanR
<sam3r@msn.com> wrote:

> what about a couple having trouble conceiving a baby and going for in vitro
> fertilization? For about a fraction of an ounce of sperm and a speck of an
> egg the couple will pay $15,000 and up.

First of all, half of that cost involves insurance and administrative
expenses. The rest pays the doctor and overhead like equipment. Of
course, I'm guessing, but just for the purposes of discussion. A part
is a part and not so complicated as the procedure you refer to. The
cost of distribution and stocking are amortized over thousands of other
parts in inventory. Apples and oranges.

> you can't judge the cost of a part on its weight, that's patently
> ridiculous!

Remember, now, my comparison was a "what if." I picked a notebook
computer because it has electronic components in a plastic case just
like the igniter. So the analysis was not "patently ridiculous," it
was maybe at most coincidental due to the similarity of materials and
components.

> I once had to have the motor mounts replaced on my old Nissan.
> They're just a tiny piece of metal sandwiched between two pieces of rubber
> but only available from the dealer. One of them was $93.

Yeah, but likely you had warning that this repair was needed. You
could have shopped around. You likely had time to prepare. I got
dropped off the hook and had no choice except walk or get the car
fixed. One of life's little extortions.

> its not just the mileage on a car, its also the age.

Okay, there's an age factor, but if the car is kept in good repair,
mileage is the primary consideration. The matter of age was brought up
in another context (i.e., my being grateful that the car lasted so
long, but I reject that notion because it is a low -mileage
well-maintained car).

> was this just for the part or part plus labor?

$193 was the cost of the part alone.

expensive

I know better than try to get any leverage with threats to a sales
manager that I'll buy a different make of car because of the
outrageously overpriced part. However, I guess I did say as I left
that he should think about how to keep customers coming back after
having been ripped off by his parts department.

I didn't say anything about goodwill/word-of-mouth. This incident will
be my pet peeve for a long time. I'll keep that part right up on the
dashboard as a reminder to jawbone it to my passengers. Other dealers
might rip their customers off too, but this is the incident I will
remember and talk about for a long time.

Remind me not to buy a Dodge.


In article <Qw2Wa.6865$dk4.317215@typhoon.sonic.net>, Max
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> > The arrogance of the dealer really put me off as much as the cost of
> > the part. Someone who sells something should not laugh at the anguish
> > of a customer. Until a few days ago, I'd planned my last car to be a
> > Honda. Not any more.
> >
>
> I think him laughing at you had less to do with the cost of the part, and
> more to do with what you were saying. Of course I wasn't there, and it is
> just a guess.
>
> Of course if you want a fun dealer experience, buy a dodge. It's a kind of a
> "once in a lifetime" mistake. And I quote the dealer: "That backfire-type
> noise you keep mentioning is actually a normal function of the afterburners"
> I almost fell off the chair when he told this to me. I never knew there was
> an F-16 Dakota. Plus another gem: "Well, since it took us over a week to
> figure out what was wrong and clean up the aluminum chips from the oil pump
> that broke into pieces and got into the oil and thus into the engine, and
> Dodge extended warranty you purchased on this brand new truck only pays for
> 3 days labor for such an event, so you owe us..." - he never got to finish
> THAT sentence.
>
> -M