A company that deserves HATE

[tw]

{Warning: this contains much history and current news - it will be about 190 lines):

Michelin is an American patriotic company - even though this French company was not doing buiness in the US when it advanced mankind. They developed the radial tire in 1948 - a major example of what defines an Amerian patriot.

But anti-Americans ran all major American tire companies. Anti-Americans fear increase costs of innovation - and the radial tire - because of their business school training. A traditional bias belted tire lasted 10,000 miles whereas radials would exceed 40,000 miles. This was blasphemy, according to neoclassical economists, to sell a product that lasted longer. That would only lower profits. So Firestone, America's largest tire manufacturer, and all other American tire companies, ran to Congress for protection - to install large tarrifs on imported tires. They intentionly and blatantly kept the radial tire out of America for over 25 years.

The purpose of a business is to take a profit - not to advance the world with better products. We also call this the 'status quo'. Business school mentality, a fundamental concept found even in the mafia, is still stupidly entrenched in too many teenagers and twenty somethings even though history has long demonstrated the evils of such thinking. Anti-Americans believe a business's primary object is to take a profit - the world be damned. Below is an example of how evil that MBA school concept is - the idea that a murder can be called an accident. The idea that people should be killed to protect profits. The idea that there is plenty of blame to go around. The fear of this biblical commandment - 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management.

Note what a buisness school mentality does after innovation was stifled. They blame everyone else, then run to government for protection. In those days, we were all so anti-American that we believed lies about lower wage earners taking American jobs. Today we know that if a lower wage earner takes an American job, then that American company was anti-American - had so stifled innnovation that the job should not exist in America. Where American industries are not productive, the best thing for America is to let those anti-innovation companies go bankrupt - or remove the reason for those problems - top management. Either way, patriotic Americans believe in free markets - they always purchase innovative products from better run companies - no matter where in the world that company is located. Patriotic Americans solve the problem - they vote against the anti-American management by purchasing elsewhere.

However we did not do that in the 1940/50s. We encouraged Congress to protect anti-Americans - anti-innovators - in all major American tire companies. This continued until 1975 when Michelin opened plants in Nova Scotia and Georgia - plants that circumvented those anti-American tarrifs. By 1960, the radial tire was everywhere in the world - except America. Sears sold the first radials in American in 1975 - 27 years after the innovation was created.

Suddenly MBA American tire companies had to do something. They all rushed forward with ill conceived radial tire designs - combined with a 27 year universal ignorance of how radials worked. And so we have the famous Firestone 500 - a tire that was creating paraplegics and quadraplegics throughout America for over four years. Firestone settled quietly out of court with thousands of Firestone created cripples if they did not reveal the details of the settlement. I personally met one who told me the story from his hospital bed in 1978. It is why I became so sensitive to the story and began noticing how many cars around me had prematurely failing tires. You could see the tire tread weaving full inches back and forth as the tire prepared to disintegrate - and the owner was not aware.

By the late 1970s, the NHTSB had so many complaints of tire failure that they did a study - and discovered premature American radial tire failures were greater than 60%! It was (and still remains) the largest tire recall in the country. But not after these anti-American tire companies still banded together to sue the government in quashing the NHTSB report. Instead, the report mysteriously fell into the hands of Time Magazine - and was reported there before 1980. The lawsuit quietly ended. Lawsuit? Yes, just another tool so excessively used by MBA trained, anti-American management.

To solve their public relations problem, Firestone quickly began a series of TV commercials promoting its replacement tire - where a young, quirky genius is credited with developing this new tire - the 721. Too little too late. Firestone was bankrupt (good) - because American patriots stopped buying from an anti-American company. For example, American Patriots purchased French Michelin tires. Firestone, once the world's largest tire manufacturer, was sold to a much smaller company called Bridgestone. This is what happened to all major American tire manufacturers except Goodyear. Since they all were anti-innovation, then they either had to be bankrupted or sold to foreign competition. The Italians, French, Japanese, etc all purchased these failed American companies for percentage of their former value.

Some claimed that foreigner paid too much for these anti-American tire companies that were purchased much above book value. But product oriented management realized how much more these companies were worth if they only had a standard technology product to sell. MBAs looked at the book value. Product oriented management saw the real value was in manufactureing innovative products.

Bridgestone had a problem. Firestone was massive whereas Bridgestone was but a percentage the size. Bridgestone had to teach MBA trained mentalities how to run a business - and did not have sufficient management to do so. They tried to explain, by fax, how to restructure operations. Classic example is quality as taught to Japan by the famous American W. E. Deming. Deming was so important that the Japanese highest award - the Japanese equivalent to the Congressional Metal of Honor - is named the Deming Award - in honor of an American - not a Japanese. But Americans worshipped business school concepts that destroy innovation. Ironic that American business - and still most American today - don't know who William Edward Deming is.

When a door arrives in Toyota, is goes immediately to production line without delay to be installed on a car. There is no time for Quality Control inspections. The door is inspected when it is installed by the installer. American business school mentalities cringe because if the door is defective, then the car will be assembled onto the defective part. But these are business school trained Americans. That door never arrives with a defect. How can this be - there is always a percentage of defects? Yes, if the supplier is also trained in an American business school. But since the manufacturer spent 10 years earning the 'right' to be a Toyota supplier - since he does not get the right to provide that door on lower cost - then Toyota never gets a single defective door. Patriotic suppliers use product people - not accountants - to design and manufacturer the door. Instead of trying to lower costs, a patriotic manufacturer concentrates on making every door accurately. Ironically both manufacturer and supplier have lower costs because they don't try to lower costs. Instead they concentrate on the product. Toyota has the legendary Toyota quality because of this American developed concept, brought to Japan by W. E. Deming, and ignored by Harvard Buisness School trained mentalities.

Most important, Toyota has no quality control inspectors. Any company, even today, that has a quality control inspector has no quality products. That is another commandment to replace those obsolete concepts of the bible. Higher quality means no quality control inspectors.

Firestone management was so MBA brainwashed as to not comprehend the Toyota examples. In response to the fax, Firestone local officials hired 300 more quality control inspectors. This was a painful time for Bridgestone - trying to break American managers of their MBA brainwashing.

Flash ahead to the 1990s. Bridgestone Firestone was developing a new tire for S/UVs. To cut costs, they no longer installed a belt between the steel belt and tread. Also if the tread was not installed immediately, a solvent would be required resoften the glue. This seemed to work - except if the tire was exposed to prolong temperature. Six years ago, this design was failing so prematurely in South America that Firestone ordered a recall. It is not clear if Ford World Wide operations was fully aware of the reasons for the recall. Apparently they thought it was only a bad batch of tires - not a totally defective design. But when this tire fails on S/UVs, such as Explorer, the consequences are catastrophic. One in four serious crashes of S/UVs cause turnovers. One in four turnovers kill humans. But since S/UVs were trucks, then this was acceptable.

Of course the public used emotion rather than fact to decide. The Explorer looks tough - therefore it must be safer. Damn the facts and make that emotional conclusion. S/UVs are inheritanty more dangerous to both occupants and all other vehicles. Firestone hope to count on a public that concludes without using logic.

Maybe the problem was or was not known to Ford. But when Ford did acknowledge the problem, they addressed it full force in joint cooperation with their 100 year partner, Firestone. But Ford did not understand that Firestone still was dominated by an anti-American MBA mentality. Firestone knew far more about these tire failures than they admitted and were not willing to admit that the tires were defective - by "design". Instead, in classic MBA style, Firestone wanted to share blame onto everyone else.

Bridgestone Firestone blamed owners for not inflating their tires to proper pressure - even though vehicle owners do that same thing on all other tires without tire disintegration. They blamed the vehicle - even though other manufacturer tires don't fail on Explorer. They obfuscate the issue by comparing tire failures on Explorer vs Ranger - forgetting to mention that those failures don't occur on either vehicle when they are non-Firestone tires. They blame the Decatur IL plant for the defects (the classic MBA technique of blaming Union labor) even though those S American tires, and probably many other premature tires came from other plants.

Most damning is last summer's USA Today report where pictures of documents reporting on the tire failure over 4 years ago had the initials of the Firestone president - who insisted he knew nothing of the problem until year 2000. Classic example of MBA trained corporate management. Deny. Deny. Deny. And made more striking by Ford's patriot attitude of solving the problem full force - even at the expense of profits.

Ford all but dragged Firestone, kicking and screaming, into a 6.5 million tire recall. Ford, without Firestone's cooperation, got other tire manufacturers to supply products to expedite the recall. Ford discovered that Firestone continued to withhold statistical information. (Is penis loving Ken Starr a Firestone lawyer? This is classic Ken Starr tactics.) Ford executives even visited victims of tire failure even after Firestone refused to send their corporate executives. Firestone only apologized after Ford's apologies made Firestone look bad. Looking bad might hurt profits - the victims be damned. Classic comparison of a product oriented vs MBA trained management teams.

In a quality organization, the supplier routinely shares confidential information with the manufacturer. Firestone was not doing that. Ford started doing a confidential statistical study that was only recently completed. Ford was shocked how much worse the tire problem was. But Firestone heard about the study and demanded access to the information. Why? Firestone had stonewalled Ford. The only reason Firestone would want that documentation - so that they could deflect blame on anyone else. Ford, in retaliation (and good for them), stonewalled Firestone's phone calls. Do you see what the devil is called - Bridgesone Firestone - management from the MBA schools.

In response to new facts, Ford ordered another 13 million Explorer tires recalled - as any patriotic company would do. Firestone now completely blames the Explorer for all tire failures, and decided to stop selling tires to Ford - an end of a 100 year relationship dating back to when Henry Ford met Harvey Firestone to make Firestone the only tire on Fords. You should be doing same. Openly confront anyone who would purchase from the devil - Bridgestone Firestone - a company that may have killed more Americans than a communist Kremlin.

Look at how patriotic Ford is being. They are paying for the entire recall themselves without the cooperation or reinbursement from a bloody thirsty, profiteering Firestone. $2billion are GM's profits in a good year. Ford will spend $2.1billion just on this latest 13 million tire recall. Furthermore Ford will take additional loses as they shutdown all related assembly plants for at least 2 weeks to address Firestone tire problems in current production lines.

But this is even more revealing. Firestone said the problem was only with 15 inch tires. Only 15 inch tires were recalled the first time. Ford has discovered the problem exists in 15, 16, and 17 inch tires - and must recall all three sizes! No, this is not an isolated problem. Firestone by design, made defective tires and Firstone MBAs would kill Americans, in order to not admit guilt. You would be logical to emotionally advocate prision for all top Firestone executives. They killed more people than Timothy McVeigh. That emotion is based upon logical conclusions - Firestone designed a defective tire, knew the tire was defective, continued to manufacturer and the defective tires, and then deny, deny, deny - just like the Firestone 500.

History repeats itself?

How anti-American can Bridgestone Firestone be? They replaced their MBA trained top executive. The new guy is featured in TV commercials talking about how important a customer is to Firestone. And now we learn that the new guy is also hiding facts - while blaming the Explorer for tire failures - in classic MBA school tradition. It is as if Firestone was throwing tires over the wall and only just recently discovered that Ford was putting them on Explorers. Bull. A responsible supplier to a quality oriented company (Quality is Job 1) is fully informed as to how the product will be used - so that there is no need for quality control inspectors. Firestone is a classic example of a Company every reader should DESPISE. Do you hate all the world - like Milosevik or dichead Ariel Sharon? Then buy Firestone tires and remain quiet when you neighbor also buys advocates MBA school philosophies. We are talking about a company with an MBA mentality - that would create genocide if it meant higher profits. Firestone is THE company you HATE.

BTW who still makes superior tires? Remember that partiotic company at the start of this long story? Michelin. Michelin has been continuously developing new tire processes including one that makes new tired (not recaps) from old tires. Innovators are what we call partriotic American companies - the reason you purchase their products and not the products of MBA school graduates.


[Edited by tw on 05-22-2001 at 06:55 PM]

[jaguar]

How very true, but I will say a few things.
First is that I find it hard to believe Ford did not know what was going on, in fact I find it impossible, they just are better at PR and know that by admitting guilt and doing the recall etc they'd move most of the blame to Firestone, who I will admit deserve it, but Ford are still guilt of not doing anything about it.

ALL major companies today seem to take an attitude of screw the customer, we see thousands of examples of this, they think they are big enough to tell people what they want, and on what terms they get it.

I hope in the end those that listen to the consumer will win but I still fear, from wonderful 'innovations' like content controlled monitors accounted recently, to plans of placing GPS trackers in consumer good so they only work in the country they were bought, companies have proven all they care about is their bottom line, and this is why I have a BIG problem with these companies have such a large role in politics, particularly in America with huge campaign donations.

There are many example of companies putting safety second, or third, recently in Australia there have been numerous incidents involving grounded aircraft, forced landings and even an entire fleet grounded due to them not being airworthy, in all cases this has been traced back to cost-cutting for maintenance, it was merely luck none of these resulted in a major air disaster.

[tw]

Originally posted by jaguar
How very true, but I will say a few things.
First is that I find it hard to believe Ford did not know what was going on, in fact I find it impossible, they just are better at PR and know that by admitting guilt and doing the recall etc they'd move most of the blame to Firestone, who I will admit deserve it, but Ford are still guilt of not doing anything about it.

You are assuming that Ford monitors all the Lisa Thomas Laurie car crash reports throughout the world. The number of tread separation crashes was quite limited - on the order of 100 deaths - compared to 20,000 other car deaths per year just in America. How, from those 100,000 crashes, does one see a trend when only 100 die over many years? Point 1: Ford cannot be expected to have seen the trend.

Furthermore, why would Ford ever be told by crash investigators? If the crash occurs because of tire tread separation, then the 'powers that be' would only be telling Firestone - not Ford. We now know that Bridgestone Firestone routinely quashed that information - much like Mitsubishi did with their failure reports. Point 2: a second reason why Ford would have not known.

It appears that Ford only began suspecting something when casual conversations with dealers kept bringing up this rare crash, limited mostly to TX and FL. From the definition of quality, Ford would have asked their trusted supplier, Firestone. We know that Firestone repeatedly assured Ford that these failures were isolated events - not a design problem. Point 3: in quality oriented companies - where both manufacturer and supplier share confidential information - those reassurances would have been enough. Ford failed to understand that Firestone was now an 'MBA mentality' company - worried only in profits rather than the product. Firestone was violating the basic principals of quality.

Ford had every reason to believe what Firestone said was correct. Ford is probably furious after conducting a secret study - but in the principals of quality will not openly sue Firestone. Ford has every good reason to sue Firestone big time. Ford discovered even after the last recall, that Firestone had lied to Ford both previously and now AGAIN! Ford discovered that it was not just 6.5 million 15" tires that were at fault. Ford discovered, by doing their own private and secret survey, that all 15", 16" and 17" tires are failing prematurely AND that the 15" tire problems were worse than Firestone had reported. That's two openly, blantant lies by Firestone at the highest levels - lies even by their new "customer oriented" management.

No wonder Firestone was so upset that Ford did statistial analysis without Firestone's knowledge. Firestone was caught in but another lie - because profits were more importanat than the product - a fundamental violation of the principals of quality. Thanks to Ford, we can now rank Firestone up there with gangs and terrorists.

Ford's mistake is that they did as required in a "Quality is Job 1" system. After becoming suspicious too late, we all now know how evil is Bridgestone Firestone - where deaths are 100% attributed to Firestone management decisions and coverup. These managers are so evil as to even blame the union workers in Decatuer IL! Even before making more bad tires - and trying to blame others, Firestone must have known that all 18.5 million tires were defective by design - and lied even to trusted partner Ford.

Thank god that Ford is a classic example of a patriotic American operation. Although all the facts are not public, we can rightly suspect that Firestone in 1996, as in the 1975-1980 Firestone 500 murders, was making defective tires, knew it, and did nothing during production or after those tires were killing humans. Ford's mistake was probably and simply that they trusted Firestone.

How evil is Firestone? Once Ford told Firestone that ALL tires would be recalled, then Firestone decided to stop all future business with Ford. Why? CNN says it best. ***This demonstrates the evil in Firestone***. Firestone would not have to participate in the 13million, $2.1billion recall if they stopped all future business with Ford. Read that last sentence!!!!!!!!! Again - just another reason to campaign loud and openly for the bankrupcy of Firestone - a company that operates on principals of the mafia.

Where is Timothy McVeigh when we really need to advance mankind? And you thought China was a threat to human life? Do you think Firestone will now tell me any truths?


[Edited by tw on 05-23-2001 at 02:10 AM]

[jaguar]

Hmm, ok, I just wonder if there was any previous conversation between firestone and Ford that we don't know about, I would suspect there is, but I’m sure by now those documents have been shredded.

With danger of being overly cynical I find all the patriotic American stuff a bit funny, in a country that seem to worship all almighty buck over everything else I would have thought making as much money as possible was about as patriotic as you could get I know there still are allot of good Americans, its just hard to find them.

And yes, they are indirectly responsible for those deaths, but when it comes to negligence, they don't stand alone.
Although the fact I can directly compare corrupt Chinese officials making fireworks in dangerous conditions in schools to major American corporations makes me kinda sick.

[tw]

Most Philly readers have seen the building adjacent to the PA Turnpike in the Fort Washington Industrial Park - located just east of CD-Now. That was Beechnut. They intentionally sold baby formula overseas that was only powder - no nutrition. But Consumers Reports then told the story of apple juice.

A Beechnut senoir researcher had determined that a Brooklyn supplier of this apple juice was only filling with colored sugar water. It is difficult to chemically differentiate between both. This researcher went to corporate officers who said they would look into it. Nothing happened. But at a corporate social function, the researcher overheard some corporate officers joking how they were making big profits by selling sugar water as apple juice for babies.

The researcher went to the FDA that determined that was exactly what Beechnut was doing. It is detailed in a Consumer Report article - was that well known. How many here know the story? Joan Lunden remained a spokesperson for this company?

Public image, not the facts, are what determine a corporate image when too many people read fiction. In a society that was concerned for public safety - instead of hype - Beechnut products would have been avoided by all. Gerber, BTW, has a long reputation as being a responsible company.

The Beechnut company no longer is HQed in Fort Washington PA. The building eventually was stripped all the way down to its I-beams - and rebuilt. But again - Beechnut would be bankrupt if people - especially young mothers - would learn facts and ignore hype.

Having said all that, I grew up from income based upon that hype. My father was a copyrighter who did many of those hypes. Crest toothpaste and the 40% fewer cavities - a teammate and close friend was featured in those commercials. After quiting, one day he noted the FTA took the fun out of the business - they required that commercials tell the truth. Well.... yeah - half truths.

[elSicomoro]

Yeah, we know that Firestone more than likely bears the brunt of responsibility for this debacle. I'll buy a Western Auto tire over a Firestone. (As a rule, I generally buy Goodyears.)

But realistically, I can't help but point the finger at Ford to a degree. The balance of weight in an SUV is at a different center than that of a standard passenger car, which gives them more a chance of tipping over. (Remember the original SUV tipover? The Suzuki Samurai?) I believe the SUV to be a flawed vehicle to begin with (minus the old Chevy Blazers, Jeep Wagoneers, and Suburbans--they seem more sturdy IMO). Adding some shitty Firestone tires made poorly in Decatur, Illinois was the death blow.

The SUV is the Gremlin or Corvair of our time. It is a gas guzzler, not very sturdy, intimidating on small streets in large cities, a poor parker, and gives some folks the ultimate delusion of being a badass. I don't want to take away from responsible SUV drivers...but most SUVs serve absolutely no point other than being big.

[tw]

Originally posted by sycamore
But realistically, I can't help but point the finger at Ford to a degree. The balance of weight in an SUV is at a different center than that of a standard passenger car, which gives them more a chance of tipping over. (Remember the original SUV tipover? The Suzuki Samurai?) I believe the SUV to be a flawed vehicle to begin with (minus the old Chevy Blazers, Jeep Wagoneers, and Suburbans--they seem more sturdy IMO).

SUV turnover study, pioneered by a Villanova professor, listed Explorer, in particular, and Fords, in general, as a more stable S/UV. The complete list is 2 or 3 Aug 2000 in USA Today, I believe. Fords are the safer S/UVs - BTW along with a Honda - I don't think Toyota was tested.

Blazers have had a long reputation for instablity (not as bad as GM's partner Suzuki), and for higher failure rates (such as 4 wheel drives with axles not bolted down) and higher passenger fatality rates. Chevy Suburbans suffer higher driver loss of control so often that a safety study recommended special training for those larger vehicles. To blame Explorer, especially compared to the more dangerous GM and Suzuki vehicles, is just wrong.

Firestone's 1.5 failures per million makes Ford appear to be wrong - but that is based only on appearance; not fact. Faced with a trusted partner that was criminally negligent and that openly lied, Ford then did well beyond what any responsible company must do - $2.1+billion worth of honesty - a voluntary massive recall of all those tires. Firestone then responded (as noted by CNN) by a "screw America, we will not recall" response AND by blaming Ford - so that *you* might also blame Ford. Next Firestone will blame the victim for being inside a Firestone equipped vehicle? When does this 'blame everyone else' reasoning end? Only Firestone is playing that card game. Blame goes to the original source of every of 12 problems - Firestone management - both the old and new management - once one is educated in the fundamental concepts of quality.

Firestone is apparently 100% criminally negligent - regardless of what you think of anyone else - including the Federal government for permitting S/UVs on the road.

Even if at fault, Ford took responsibility despite a lying, MBA dominated, criminally negligence Firestone - who also has history of doing this exact same crime 25 years before. What did Firestone do this time?

Firestone even has a previous history of murdering American by this same method of poor design and corporate management coverup. But still one would partially blame Ford for designing safer what other companies also sell? Why not blame all auto deaths on all car manufacturers because all victims were in dangerous cars? Why not blame government for building highways that people died on? Why not just blame a power plant because they may have created CO2 polluted air that might have hindered the driver's mental abilities?

Ford 1) is not criminally negligent, 2) has demonstrated in engineering facts that they are the more responsible of S/UV manufacturers, and 3) responded well beyond what was required by a $2.1billion response to a Firestone created problem. Firestone is accused in *12* counts of killing Americans - including an outright refusal to recall their now 'documented' defective products. Who documented it? A responsible Ford Motor. And yet you would partially blame Ford? Where is the logic?

1) Firestone did this same thing - including a previous management coverup - in the late 1970s - and therefore should have learned from their mistakes. But nnooo...
2) They created a defective design, missing that ply between belt and tread, knowing full well what the tire was intended for and how it would be used.
3) They covered up failure rates on 15" tires - even when asked by news reporters AND their trusted partner, Ford, for further information.
4) They blamed unions for defective tires in one factory when they knew problems existed in all these 15" tire factories.
5) They blamed owners for not properly inflating tires even though they admitted that underinflated tires operation is common on all vehicles.
6) They blamed Ford for recommending a lower tire pressure when they knew this problem was only unique to their tires. Knowning full well what Ford recommended, Firestone stayed silent.
7) They continued to manufacture defective tires after learning of the problem.
8) They refused to participate in a 6.5 million tire recall until dragged into it by Ford.
9) Lied to Ford about the full extent of the problem in other 15", 16" and 17" tires.
10) Accused Ford of violating a 'trust' relationship (can you believe Firestone even had to balls to say this!) by performing a analysis without Firestone's knowledge - a study that discovered the second Firestone lie.
11) Cancelled all future Ford contracts only to avoid any future tire recalls - because Firestone's MBA mentality (that make Pinochet of Chile look lilly clean) are only interested in short term profits even at the expense of human life.
12) Now change their tune and ONLY blame the Explorer for all problems even though their tire failures also appears on other vehicles - including Ranger.

Firestone does point 12 so that Sycamore, et al will at least partially blame Ford.

Any Three Points are damning. Those are ***12*** damning points all blaming Firestone!!!

Sycamore. I was raised on this propagand shit. To place any blame on Ford is to say that Bosnia concentration camp victims were responsible for their own starvation - because they should not have been there. A few OJ Simpson lawyers may want you in their jury. There are 12 points against Firestone and not one action (cooperatively) by Firestone to correct the problem. Ford OTOH had to force Firestone, kicking and screaming, to be partially responsible.

Considering the facts posted above, where is there any blame on Ford? To have put any blame on Ford, you must then blame all other S/UV manufacturers, all highways, all people who sit in S/UVs, all vehicle operators .... where does the blame sharing end? Exactly the kind of thinking that a criminal Firestone wants you to use.

Welcome to the world of quality. There is no blame sharing. The problems are directly traceable at the source - a concept that makes me a hard ass, no excuses, superior conservative to any purchased Republican Congressional leader. Even if others are partially to blame, 100% blame goes directly to the company accused of all 12 points.

Those are 12 damning points - and Firestone did not do one single thing to compensate for *any* of those problems. Instead they used OJ Simpson lawyer tactics to lay blame elsewhere. Is the LAPD also responsible for those Firestone deaths? Maybe it was racism - after all those tires were black. I wonder how many Republican's Firestone will bribe this year. Maybe Firestone will also be running some Phillip Morris 'we are responsible' TV commericals?

How many times can a Firestone executive lie before Congress? Only depends on how quickly those Firestone tires kill Congressmen - S/UVs being the vehicle of choice to Republicans who say we don't need conservation.

[jaguar]

Well, I can't find anything to argue with there, that’s a first

Though I must say the world would be a safer and cleaner place without SUV's altogether.
Here it I the same with 4Wheel Drives, these huge diesel belching motherfuckers, usually driven by one woman, in a car that could carry a ton of bricks, shits me up the wall. For a start, while you may be safer the chances are you will kill someone else, and yes, the belch out more crap than the liberal party in election week.

Time to change transport systems, at least inside cities RADICALLY

[jaguar]

I couldn'thelp adding (after my sleep-deprived brain had time to process everything) somthing.

All media is biased, and i do mean all. Everything u read, in every paper has a slant, from the tabloid bullshit to the economist, and you must always intpret what you read, whcih sadly people don't do any more, they read the opinion sections in the paper and adapt them to themselves without much more thought, it is hard to find much debate about many topics any more, there isjsut so much apathy. Even in my own school, which is considered ot have slightly more inteligent students (enterance examination only entry) i find so many simply do not nwat to know' or do not care... If we do not critisise and watch the media, we are in danger of losing our biggest remaining regualter, for only the media will take the time, and have the power to bring the truth to light.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by tw
SUV turnover study, pioneered by a Villanova professor, listed Explorer, in particular, and Fords, in general, as a more stable S/UV. The complete list is 2 or 3 Aug 2000 in USA Today, I believe. Fords are the safer S/UVs - BTW along with a Honda - I don't think Toyota was tested.

Blazers have had a long reputation for instablity (not as bad as GM's partner Suzuki), and for higher failure rates (such as 4 wheel drives with axles not bolted down) and higher passenger fatality rates. Chevy Suburbans suffer higher driver loss of control so often that a safety study recommended special training for those larger vehicles. To blame Explorer, especially compared to the more dangerous GM and Suzuki vehicles, is just wrong.

I don't doubt your knowledge or facts on this, but I would still argue against the SUV as a whole. Personally, if you ain't going off roading, then you don't really need the damned thing. Buy a nice wagon or something. ;-)

Firestone's 1.5 failures per million makes Ford appear to be wrong - but that is based only on appearance; not fact. Faced with a trusted partner that was criminally negligent and that openly lied, Ford then did well beyond what any responsible company must do - $2.1+billion worth of honesty - a voluntary massive recall of all those tires.

But after how long? A year? Did Ford have to wait over a year to do "studies" before they reacted in this manner? I could understand the passing of SOME months...but if they were finding problems with other sizes of Firestones, then they should have been announced as they were being found.

Firestone then responded (as noted by CNN) by a "screw America, we will not recall" response AND by blaming Ford - so that *you* might also blame Ford. Next Firestone will blame the victim for being inside a Firestone equipped vehicle? When does this 'blame everyone else' reasoning end? Only Firestone is playing that card game. Blame goes to the original source of every of 12 problems - Firestone management - both the old and new management - once one is educated in the fundamental concepts of quality. Firestone is apparently 100% criminally negligent - regardless of what you think of anyone else - including the Federal government for permitting S/UVs on the road.

I don't mind giving Ford some credit for making this massive recall, as from what I see, it will effectively wipe out any profits for this year (and maybe longer). But Ford will most likely be found negligent along with Firestone at any trials that come up as a result of deaths. You make a compelling argument, but it still appears that Ford did some dragging of its feet, which makes it LOOK bad in the eyes of many.

[tw]

Originally posted by sycamore
I don't doubt your knowledge or facts on this, but I would still argue against the SUV as a whole. Personally, if you ain't going off roading, then you don't really need the damned thing. Buy a nice wagon or something. ;-)

Its worse than that. Even William Clay Ford back in Aug noted the S/UV is wastes too much energy, is too unsafe, and is environmentally unfriendly. He said that Ford will address those problems in future designs. However GM, in the same news report, instead insist that S/UVs will account for as much as 90% of future sales and GM will be selling many new models in the future. Previously, an auto spokesman (company not mentioned) is reported to say that the higher deaths in autos attributed to S/UVs should be solved by making cars heavier. S/UVs are not about need. And they even use obsolete tech 1960, low performance engines. They even have lower safety standards and lower MPG requirements - neither makes sense.

Having said this, we have an exception. The next year Chevy Envoy has a 60 Hp/liter engine - doing what Japanese S/UVs have also done in the past year - put an average performance engine in S/UVs. Keep your ears tuned. Every so often you will hear an average performance Japanese S/UV. That is progress - allbeit grossly too slow and argueably towards the wrong final objective.

But after how long? A year? Did Ford have to wait over a year to do "studies" before they reacted in this manner? I could understand the passing of SOME months...but if they were finding problems with other sizes of Firestones, then they should have been announced as they were being found.

Appreciate the fundamentals that make quality work. If you have tire problems, then your trusted supplier does the investigation. There are too many other things to study - especially when the failure rates were only 1.5 per million. If Ford only did a study after a year - then they were excessively fast. Again you must look at everything in perspective. Look at those numbers. It is why people make so many emotinal conclusions - they see trends but don't see numbers.

Outrage would be properly cited when Ford had no quality - pre-1981 under Henry Ford. Back then they inspected everything and trusted no one. But quality is why Walmart eats Sears. Walmart never checks or even counts products that arrive on the shipping dock. Those products go right to the shelves, uncounted, unverified, and 'trusted'. Quality is trust of your trusted supplier. It is only recently that Ford finally decided that Firestone was not trusted - that the information that even government investigators also trusted was not accurate. So Ford did a major study - before the government even considered it. The study had to be quite large because of the numbers - 1.5 per million. As soon as Ford learned facts, then those facts were reported. One could argueably say that Ford trusted too long.

However fact remain that Firestone - just like GPU in 3 Mile Island - lied or stonewalled to everyone including the Feds. Only Firestone had sufficient information to see the problem. One might also conclude that government and the press trusted too long. This is a story that dates back to early 1990s. Why did the NHTSB and the press remain quiet so long? Were they also criminally negligent - or do those numbers - 1.5 per million - indicate that only Firestone could have seen the problem earlier?

I don't mind giving Ford some credit for making this massive recall, as from what I see, it will effectively wipe out any profits for this year (and maybe longer). But Ford will most likely be found negligent along with Firestone at any trials that come up as a result of deaths. You make a compelling argument, but it still appears that Ford did some dragging of its feet, which makes it LOOK bad in the eyes of many. [/b]

What you call foot dragging is normal procedure everywhere - especially when "look at the numbers - 1.5 failures per million". IOW we should also be blaming and suing the American and other S American government for having these numbers and remaining quiet? Why did they remain quiet? Were they also co-conspirators? Look at the numbers. This lookes like insignificant statistical anomolies attributed to many different sources - that was until we realized Firestone's response. Only Firestone could have known all crashes were attributed to one source - them. Those 1.5 per million failures, at first, did not all point directly to Firestone - at least not until other facts were known. And Firsteone hide those other facts - and did not fix the tire design.

Those 1.5 failures would each appear as from different possible sources - that was until someone finally was able to put together enough case studies to see a trend. Only then are 1.5 per million problems are coming from the same source.

This common source was not apparent until we starting hearing Firestone's response and learned, from leaks, that Firestones manufacturing process had flaws known to top Firestone management. Again - look at the numbers. 1.5 per million is a difficult failure rate to identify to only one source.

Unfortunately blame will fall on Ford - not because Ford is negligent - but because Ford has deep pockets. Honesty among lawyers? Why do you think GM hired Ken Starr to coverup murder - people burning to death in 1990s Chevy Malibus?

[adamzion]

<u>S</u>illy
<u>U</u>seless
<u>V</u>ehicle

Seriously, the closest the vast majority of these monsters get to ever going off-road is when people park them in driveways.

Bloody yuppiemobiles,
Z

[jaguar]

I couldn't help posting this very funny article about firestone off satirewire.
http://www.satirewire.com/news/0105/firestone.shtml

[Justin]

I was just browsing through and couldn't help but to address this topic of apathy that jaguar brought about.

"there isjsut so much apathy. Even in my own school, which is considered ot have slightly more inteligent students (enterance examination only entry) i find so many simply do not nwat to know' or do not care..."

It seems that apathy has very little to do with intelligence. I don't notice that very many people are too stupid to care. More often the case is that people are too nihilistic to care. These things go hand and hand, as is natural.

I would venture to say that for my generation, who has grown up with no cause to fight for, no religion to be saved by, and nothing that truely matters staring them in the face, nihilism is the most natural conclusion to reach.

You can all see the trends i'm sure. Teen suicide is on the rise i do believe (some don't even value their own existance). School shootings are creaping up in every portion of the united states (if you believe in nothing, why would you value someone elses life?). Drugs, hard drugs, are working their way into lifestyles as we seek meaning in anything we can.

Nietsche warned us of this. Nihilism is the destructor of society. It breeds chaos, apathy, cruelty, and greed.

What is the solution you say? There is none. Nihilism seems to be somewhat of a pandora's box. Our innocence can't be put back in again.

[Dagnabit]

Hi Justin, which generation are you in? Gen-X is roughly 1962-1982, Gen-Y or "Millenials" are born since 1982.

I am Gen X and I feel that we got the worst of it all, with the worst schools, the worst parenting approaches (for many, not for all), etc.

The attitude today is that "something must be done" but nobody knows what. Although this is way off topic. This is a recipe for massive change but also for massive pain and confusion.