Turtle n Peeps wrote:spoon059 wrote:45Ricochet wrote:itguy08 wrote:
There's a reason Ford sells the most of them.
So does McDonald's, great burger's I would assume :W
Such a played out statement. McDonalds sells the most hamburgers at that price point, therefore you can absolutely make the argument that in the $1 hamburger market, McDonalds is clearly the best.
Comparing a $1 McDonalds hamburger to a $5000 Fleurburger is stupid.
In this case, we are comparing a Ford F350 to a Ram 3500. They are both relatively equal in price. Therefore you absolutely can make the argument that based upon people in the market for a 1 ton truck, Ford is the better product, based upon the number of sales.
Can you argue that a Ford F350 is better than a top of the line Kenworth? No... that is comparing McDonalds to the Fleurburger.
Personally, I like the Ram the best of the Big 3 trucks right now. That is my PERSONAL opinion. Sales, however, prove that the Ford is the BEST (synonyms include LEADING, FIRST, SECOND TO NONE, PEERLESS, UNSURPASSED) truck on the market right now.
Just like sales prove that the McDonalds burger is the BEST amongst $1 hamburgers.
Please, stop using this dated and incorrect statement. That's like the rioters in Baltimore still screaming "Hands up, don't shoot" when it has been PROVEN that wasn't the case in Ferguson. You just look silly repeating dumb statements like that...
Spoon I think you are missing Ricochet's point.
His point is you can't ever, ever, ever tell the quality of a product by sales figures.
Case in point:
The 6.0 Ford diesel.
Back in 2004 Ford absolutely dominated the diesel market. They had the 7.3 to thank for that. GREAT engine!! The Ford sold for much the same price as the GM Duramax or the Dodge Cummins.
Why did the majority of the people buy the 6.0 diesel when there were far better products on the market for about the same price?
#1. The gross majority of the people are ignorant when it comes to the power trains of their vehicles. I would wager to guess 80+ of the general public has no clue what size engines is sitting in front of them. They are far more concerned if it has a butt warmer or the latest phone link or whatever.
#2. The fan club as I call it. "If daddy bought it in the past, son is going to buy it in the future." Most of the time it works out because most of the time companies turn out good products. Sometimes the 6.0 phenomena rears it's ugly head the people get burned BIG time.
#3. Advertisement. Ford has the best advertisement in the business. BAR NONE!!!! They are the best!! No one is even close. If it say's built Ford tough, it must be the best; after all, they say so!
So as you can see; just because someone sells the most, it says nothing of how good the produce is. It just means they sold the most.
BTW great post jtallon. :)
larry barnhart wrote:
the dumbing down of America that started in 2008 has now reached rv.net.
chevman
spoon059 wrote:45Ricochet wrote:itguy08 wrote:
There's a reason
In this case, we are comparing a Ford F350 to a Ram 3500. They are both relatively equal in price. Therefore you absolutely can make the argument that based upon people in the market for a 1 ton truck, Ford is the better product, based upon the number of sales.
Can you argue that a Ford F350 is better than a top of the line Kenworth? No... that is comparing McDonalds to the Fleurburger.
Personally, I like the Ram the best of the Big 3 trucks right now. That is my PERSONAL opinion. Sales, however, prove that the Ford is the BEST (synonyms include LEADING, FIRST, SECOND TO NONE, PEERLESS, UNSURPASSED) truck on the market right now.
Just like sales prove that the McDonalds burger is the BEST amongst $1 hamburgers.
Please, stop using this dated and incorrect statement. That's like the rioters in Baltimore still screaming "Hands up, don't shoot" when it has been PROVEN that wasn't the case in Ferguson. You just look silly repeating dumb statements like that...
Determining which vehicle is "best" based on sales numbers is flawed for many reasons including:
Buyer's perceptions of quality are very slow to change.
A lot of heavy duty trucks are purchased under long term contracts (company agrees to buy 200 trucks a year for five years).
Brand inertia - People buy brand X because they bought brand X last time and it was good enough.
Manufacturing lead times - Even if one brand was ten times better than the other ones in a given year, doubling production to meet demand is virtually impossible. Lead times on the capital equipment and plants for new production is measured in years at least. And all it takes is a couple of outside suppliers to have bottlenecks and you are toast. That is often why the deals are so good at the end of the year, it was cheaper to build too many of a model and discount the hell out of them than it is to bring in all of the outside parts that they have purchased and have them sit and possibly obsolete. This is one of the big reasons good forecasting makes or breaks companies.
jtallon wrote:spoon059 wrote:
Such a played out statement. McDonalds sells the most hamburgers at that price point, therefore you can absolutely make the argument that in the $1 hamburger market, McDonalds is clearly the best.
Can't believe I'm even going to jump in to this mess, but...
..you can make that argument, but sales numbers are a pretty lousy way to determine which product is "the best". The simple fact that we, as a nation, spent $180+ billion dollars last year on advertising means people are greatly swayed by factors other than which product is "the best".
People purchase a product for many reasons, including price, availability, familiarity, quality, perceived image/status, loyalty, taste/preference, reputation, or financial reasons. For burgers, you could add in the price or quality of other meal components (fries, combos, etc.) For things like clothing, you could add in fashion trends. Political/social statements sway decisions for some products. Pick any product and you'll find LOTS of reasons for the choices people make.
The logical, "best" ideal is only part of the overall decision, and often not the largest one. If it was, sex appeal wouldn't work so well in advertising. Putting a hot model in a Hardee's commercial doesn't do anything to improve the quality of their burgers, but it does improve the number of them that they sell. But surely, the more they sell, the better they must be, right?
Being the best seller means just one thing. You sold the most. It MAY mean you have the best product. It may also mean that you marketed it the best. Or you hit the best price point. Or became the darling of a trend. Or any of many other reasons.
For another comparison, take a look at music album sales, and tell me the top album sellers in 2014 were the best music released last year. Or tell me Obama was the best choice in the last presidential election because he got the most votes. Or that you picked your spouse based on how many people they had dated prior to meeting you. Surely popularity is a sign of quality?
Ford may be the best truck. It may sell the most because it's the best. But it's not the best because it sells the most. That's an important distinction.
And with that, I've said my piece.
spoon059 wrote:
All in how you define the word best. I offered several synonyms for best that prove my point.
Bottom line, I was trying to point out how stupid the "McDonalds Hamburger Argument" is. It seems that every thread about "which truck" ends with some ding dong talking about McDonalds hamburgers.
Pick the truck that works for you. Who cares what your neighbor drives? If we didn't have competition amongst manufacturers, we would be stuck with whatever technology the one provider gives us.
jtallon wrote:spoon059 wrote:
Such a played out statement. McDonalds sells the most hamburgers at that price point, therefore you can absolutely make the argument that in the $1 hamburger market, McDonalds is clearly the best.
Can't believe I'm even going to jump in to this mess, but...
..you can make that argument, but sales numbers are a pretty lousy way to determine which product is "the best". The simple fact that we, as a nation, spent $180+ billion dollars last year on advertising means people are greatly swayed by factors other than which product is "the best".
People purchase a product for many reasons, including price, availability, familiarity, quality, perceived image/status, loyalty, taste/preference, reputation, or financial reasons. For burgers, you could add in the price or quality of other meal components (fries, combos, etc.) For things like clothing, you could add in fashion trends. Political/social statements sway decisions for some products. Pick any product and you'll find LOTS of reasons for the choices people make.
The logical, "best" ideal is only part of the overall decision, and often not the largest one. If it was, sex appeal wouldn't work so well in advertising. Putting a hot model in a Hardee's commercial doesn't do anything to improve the quality of their burgers, but it does improve the number of them that they sell. But surely, the more they sell, the better they must be, right?
Being the best seller means just one thing. You sold the most. It MAY mean you have the best product. It may also mean that you marketed it the best. Or you hit the best price point. Or became the darling of a trend. Or any of many other reasons.
For another comparison, take a look at music album sales, and tell me the top album sellers in 2014 were the best music released last year. Or tell me Obama was the best choice in the last presidential election because he got the most votes. Or that you picked your spouse based on how many people they had dated prior to meeting you. Surely popularity is a sign of quality?
Ford may be the best truck. It may sell the most because it's the best. But it's not the best because it sells the most. That's an important distinction.
And with that, I've said my piece.
