MORE than expensive - outrageous!
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
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
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
Somehow I have to believe that this is not the only thing that astounds
you.
The $19.30 figure was derived from the $193.00 price and my speculation
that perhaps some math-challenged Japanese fellow misplaced the decimal
point.
If you happen to run across an '81 Honda in a junkyard, take out the
igniter and pry off the cap to look inside. It REALLY DOES look like a
$19.30 part. If they sold it for $50, I wouldn't have a problem with
it.
By the way, I'm not a complete mechanical idiot. Next time you fly you
should think about the fact that I may have just worked on one of the
engines or perhaps the flaps or landing gear. Sorry in advance.
Oh, and age may have something to do with it, but a well-maintained car
is is less a creature of age than mileage. My '81 Honda is really sort
of middle-aged at 110,000 miles. But, if you looked at it, mostly due
to the bad paint year of 1981, it looks like it should be scrapped.
In article <Xns93C939428AD72wyrmshutup@130.133.1.4>, Pahsons -
Somnolent <pahsons@juno.com> wrote:
> Falling asleep through expensive's post...
>
> > The igniter really does look like a $19.30
> > part.
>
> You are too much. Your ignorace around cars astounds me. Keep thinking
> age has nothing to do with it
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
Somehow I have to believe that this is not the only thing that astounds
you.
The $19.30 figure was derived from the $193.00 price and my speculation
that perhaps some math-challenged Japanese fellow misplaced the decimal
point.
If you happen to run across an '81 Honda in a junkyard, take out the
igniter and pry off the cap to look inside. It REALLY DOES look like a
$19.30 part. If they sold it for $50, I wouldn't have a problem with
it.
By the way, I'm not a complete mechanical idiot. Next time you fly you
should think about the fact that I may have just worked on one of the
engines or perhaps the flaps or landing gear. Sorry in advance.
Oh, and age may have something to do with it, but a well-maintained car
is is less a creature of age than mileage. My '81 Honda is really sort
of middle-aged at 110,000 miles. But, if you looked at it, mostly due
to the bad paint year of 1981, it looks like it should be scrapped.
In article <Xns93C939428AD72wyrmshutup@130.133.1.4>, Pahsons -
Somnolent <pahsons@juno.com> wrote:
> Falling asleep through expensive's post...
>
> > The igniter really does look like a $19.30
> > part.
>
> You are too much. Your ignorace around cars astounds me. Keep thinking
> age has nothing to do with it
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <Xns93C966A202374jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> A company I used to work for would yearly INCREASE the price of parts for
> their products as they neared the end of their 'long-term product support
> period'.They explained this as their way of letting the customer know it's
> time to buy a new unit.After the long-term product support period
> ended,parts for that item were discarded,and made 'no longer available'.
> Most consumer products have NO guarantee of parts support for any length of
> time,especially not after 22 years after last manufacture of the product.
Makes sense.
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> A company I used to work for would yearly INCREASE the price of parts for
> their products as they neared the end of their 'long-term product support
> period'.They explained this as their way of letting the customer know it's
> time to buy a new unit.After the long-term product support period
> ended,parts for that item were discarded,and made 'no longer available'.
> Most consumer products have NO guarantee of parts support for any length of
> time,especially not after 22 years after last manufacture of the product.
Makes sense.
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <Xns93C966A202374jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> A company I used to work for would yearly INCREASE the price of parts for
> their products as they neared the end of their 'long-term product support
> period'.They explained this as their way of letting the customer know it's
> time to buy a new unit.After the long-term product support period
> ended,parts for that item were discarded,and made 'no longer available'.
> Most consumer products have NO guarantee of parts support for any length of
> time,especially not after 22 years after last manufacture of the product.
Makes sense.
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> A company I used to work for would yearly INCREASE the price of parts for
> their products as they neared the end of their 'long-term product support
> period'.They explained this as their way of letting the customer know it's
> time to buy a new unit.After the long-term product support period
> ended,parts for that item were discarded,and made 'no longer available'.
> Most consumer products have NO guarantee of parts support for any length of
> time,especially not after 22 years after last manufacture of the product.
Makes sense.
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <Xns93C9670A9EFC9jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> 22 years sure counts to the parts manufacturer,as they have to
> store,inventory,and pay taxes on parts inventory.
> I'd say you were lucky to have gotten it at all.
>
> TANSTAAFL
I was speaking of 22 years not being as important as the mileage
strictly in relation to the unit, not to any parts
manufacturing/distribution/stocking dynamic.
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> 22 years sure counts to the parts manufacturer,as they have to
> store,inventory,and pay taxes on parts inventory.
> I'd say you were lucky to have gotten it at all.
>
> TANSTAAFL
I was speaking of 22 years not being as important as the mileage
strictly in relation to the unit, not to any parts
manufacturing/distribution/stocking dynamic.
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <Xns93C9670A9EFC9jyanikkuanet@204.117.192.21>, Jim Yanik
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> 22 years sure counts to the parts manufacturer,as they have to
> store,inventory,and pay taxes on parts inventory.
> I'd say you were lucky to have gotten it at all.
>
> TANSTAAFL
I was speaking of 22 years not being as important as the mileage
strictly in relation to the unit, not to any parts
manufacturing/distribution/stocking dynamic.
<jyanik@nullkua.net> wrote:
> 22 years sure counts to the parts manufacturer,as they have to
> store,inventory,and pay taxes on parts inventory.
> I'd say you were lucky to have gotten it at all.
>
> TANSTAAFL
I was speaking of 22 years not being as important as the mileage
strictly in relation to the unit, not to any parts
manufacturing/distribution/stocking dynamic.
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <7n8iivktl42tp9o19l6mphfl78c8ifj9ij@4ax.com>, TL
<tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
I had fun with it. Have you seen the inside of an igniter? Inside and
out it really has a lot in common with a computer. Now, I'm silly
enough to say that they're equivalent, but it was a good comparison.
> Electronics pricing by weight? That's about the best laugh I've had in
> a long time.
>
> Why not just weigh the whole car and do the math that way. LOL
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:12:06 GMT, expensive
> <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >The whole gizmo with the cap on weighs 1.25 ounces. Comparing with my
> >notebook computer at 7 pounds, that's 7 pounds times 16 ounces = 112
> >ounces; divided by 1.25 ounces I get a factor of close to 90. 90 times
> >$193 comes to approximately $17,000.
> >
> >That's pretty astounding. And I thought Apple computers were
> >expensive! Listen, my Apple notebook, a marvel of miniaturization, was
> >$2,400. Dividing $2,400 by 90 I get about $27, which seems like a
> >reasonable price for the part.
> >
<tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
I had fun with it. Have you seen the inside of an igniter? Inside and
out it really has a lot in common with a computer. Now, I'm silly
enough to say that they're equivalent, but it was a good comparison.
> Electronics pricing by weight? That's about the best laugh I've had in
> a long time.
>
> Why not just weigh the whole car and do the math that way. LOL
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:12:06 GMT, expensive
> <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >The whole gizmo with the cap on weighs 1.25 ounces. Comparing with my
> >notebook computer at 7 pounds, that's 7 pounds times 16 ounces = 112
> >ounces; divided by 1.25 ounces I get a factor of close to 90. 90 times
> >$193 comes to approximately $17,000.
> >
> >That's pretty astounding. And I thought Apple computers were
> >expensive! Listen, my Apple notebook, a marvel of miniaturization, was
> >$2,400. Dividing $2,400 by 90 I get about $27, which seems like a
> >reasonable price for the part.
> >
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <7n8iivktl42tp9o19l6mphfl78c8ifj9ij@4ax.com>, TL
<tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
I had fun with it. Have you seen the inside of an igniter? Inside and
out it really has a lot in common with a computer. Now, I'm silly
enough to say that they're equivalent, but it was a good comparison.
> Electronics pricing by weight? That's about the best laugh I've had in
> a long time.
>
> Why not just weigh the whole car and do the math that way. LOL
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:12:06 GMT, expensive
> <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >The whole gizmo with the cap on weighs 1.25 ounces. Comparing with my
> >notebook computer at 7 pounds, that's 7 pounds times 16 ounces = 112
> >ounces; divided by 1.25 ounces I get a factor of close to 90. 90 times
> >$193 comes to approximately $17,000.
> >
> >That's pretty astounding. And I thought Apple computers were
> >expensive! Listen, my Apple notebook, a marvel of miniaturization, was
> >$2,400. Dividing $2,400 by 90 I get about $27, which seems like a
> >reasonable price for the part.
> >
<tlehman@visi.com> wrote:
I had fun with it. Have you seen the inside of an igniter? Inside and
out it really has a lot in common with a computer. Now, I'm silly
enough to say that they're equivalent, but it was a good comparison.
> Electronics pricing by weight? That's about the best laugh I've had in
> a long time.
>
> Why not just weigh the whole car and do the math that way. LOL
>
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 02:12:06 GMT, expensive
> <common_sense@emodgnik.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >The whole gizmo with the cap on weighs 1.25 ounces. Comparing with my
> >notebook computer at 7 pounds, that's 7 pounds times 16 ounces = 112
> >ounces; divided by 1.25 ounces I get a factor of close to 90. 90 times
> >$193 comes to approximately $17,000.
> >
> >That's pretty astounding. And I thought Apple computers were
> >expensive! Listen, my Apple notebook, a marvel of miniaturization, was
> >$2,400. Dividing $2,400 by 90 I get about $27, which seems like a
> >reasonable price for the part.
> >
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
<garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>
>
>
> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
> start to fail and blow up.
Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
<garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>
>
>
> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
> start to fail and blow up.
Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <rd9iivkq8vf4s2aubpavn98aeijb4enlg3@4ax.com>, Gary Seven
<garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>
>
>
> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
> start to fail and blow up.
Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
<garyluckynospam@nospa.yahoocom> wrote:
> >$193 for a $27 part, indeed! That's abusive!
>
>
>
> This whole doller per unit of weight thing has got to go... A
> pentium 4 3.2 Ghz costs about $600. It weight about 500 grams. Thats
> $120 / gram. Convert to ounces youself. maybe you should buy a
> Buick? I know you gave up Detriot long ago, but you said you're near
> retirement age... i doubt you'll live long enough to see that car
> start to fail and blow up.
Oh, c'mon. The comparison was not intended to be scientific certain
nor meet any particular standards, specifications or conventions.
But, both parts are made of electronic components in plastic. So, it
was fun. Thanks for being so broad minded.
A Buick? Think it'll be as good as my '50 (3 on the column, straight
eight) or my 1955 Roadmaster?
My real objective is to ditch cars altogether. Perhaps I'll do it
earlier than I'd planned. Public transportation is okay with me. When
I need a car, a rental will do. The older I get the fewer places I
seem to have to go. That's why I have an '81 Honda with 110,000 mile
on it. And a brand new outrageously expensive ignitor, geeze.
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
Okay. That's fine. Mental gymnastics... kind of fun and creative... I
can agree with that. The only really pertinent facts are that the part
cost an arm and a leg as far as I'm concerned, I feel like I got ripped
off, and I am not taking it without complaint. The rest of the
discussion is fluff.
In article <3m9iivokngeatkjfn59h8k4uppktjhk0pr@4ax.com>, 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.
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
Okay. That's fine. Mental gymnastics... kind of fun and creative... I
can agree with that. The only really pertinent facts are that the part
cost an arm and a leg as far as I'm concerned, I feel like I got ripped
off, and I am not taking it without complaint. The rest of the
discussion is fluff.
In article <3m9iivokngeatkjfn59h8k4uppktjhk0pr@4ax.com>, 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.
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <3f293205.267116273@news.txol.net>, Rex B
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> So, the more oddball or expensive the part, the more it pays to shop.
I really didn't have much of a choice. My only means of transportation
just got dropped off the hook and it needed that part. Shopping was
out of the question. What do I say? Loan me a good ignitor so I can
drive around to try to find a better price than the one you are wanting
to charge me? I don't think so. Don't be that guy.
I was stuck paying for the expensive part. No other option was
reasonably available.
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> So, the more oddball or expensive the part, the more it pays to shop.
I really didn't have much of a choice. My only means of transportation
just got dropped off the hook and it needed that part. Shopping was
out of the question. What do I say? Loan me a good ignitor so I can
drive around to try to find a better price than the one you are wanting
to charge me? I don't think so. Don't be that guy.
I was stuck paying for the expensive part. No other option was
reasonably available.
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: MORE than expensive - outrageous!
In article <3f293205.267116273@news.txol.net>, Rex B
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> So, the more oddball or expensive the part, the more it pays to shop.
I really didn't have much of a choice. My only means of transportation
just got dropped off the hook and it needed that part. Shopping was
out of the question. What do I say? Loan me a good ignitor so I can
drive around to try to find a better price than the one you are wanting
to charge me? I don't think so. Don't be that guy.
I was stuck paying for the expensive part. No other option was
reasonably available.
<NOSPAMrex@REMOVEtxol.net> wrote:
> So, the more oddball or expensive the part, the more it pays to shop.
I really didn't have much of a choice. My only means of transportation
just got dropped off the hook and it needed that part. Shopping was
out of the question. What do I say? Loan me a good ignitor so I can
drive around to try to find a better price than the one you are wanting
to charge me? I don't think so. Don't be that guy.
I was stuck paying for the expensive part. No other option was
reasonably available.