Sure, the technology exists... HOWEVER, would YOU buy one? It would cost a
great deal, after all, this is only one of two-three cars that you'll ever
HAVE TO buy, so the car will cost more, because of materials and design, and
because the manufacturer will lose many repeat customers. Further,
Gustavo:
I think the technology is available to make cars last longer and that
manufacturers do not make them last longer because they would make lower
profits. Who would want a car that would last 20 years? Long before it
wore out, various components in it would be obsolete or out of
Pinczewski-Lee, Joe (LRC) wrote:
. . . look at the car styles of the 1980's, do you want to be
driving a Yugo or a Cabriolet now? Think of the styles of the
1950's would you have wanted to drive one in the 1970's? . . .
That strikes me as a bit circular. The more ephemeral a product is,
the
Gustavo wrote Let's assume for a minute that: (A1) It costs the
manufacturer the same $8 000 to produce 1 long-lived car as it costs
them to produce 1 short-lived car.
(A2)...Since the manufacturers' profit per unit is more or less
proportional to the
cost of production (call this
--- Gustavo Lacerda (from work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By (P1), producing long-lived cars could result in smaller profits (this
would happen in the form of fewer sales).
Thus the interests of the manufacturer could be in opposition to the
interests of the consumer (this reluctance to
Is there any link between aircraft manufacturing and car manufacturing concerning the life of the product.? Cars and aircraft can be made to last 20 or more years, but they require constant repairs. Any car can last 20 or more years, you just have to repair those parts that break. A car that has
I suspect the problem is a market externality taken advantage of by advertisers. Fashionable identification increasing status. When cars are sold as sexy an old one just says dirty old man. This was most clearly seen in cigarettes. I have frequently overheard people judging others by the brand
