twaldron

The same could be said for diamonds. They are inherently worthless, but
they have a HUGE perceived value, along with an artificial value set
forth and controlled by DeBeers and company.

The Rubicon is worth exactly what people will pay for it. I paid $100
over invoice for mine and was happy to do it. Sure, I'd like it for free
or for the $250 McFly paid for his rusty DJ Surry, but it works for me
and I plan on keeping it a LONG time.

TJim wrote:

> There may not be much of a *cost* difference in the way of materials, labor
> to assemble, etc, but there is certainly a *value* difference. There is not
> much *cost* difference between a Chevy and a Cadillac, either, but they are
> priced considerably different due to actual and perceived *value*. If you
> don't believe me, go ahead and buy a 4:1 xfer case, d44s with 4.11s and
> lockers and try to sell your 2.72 xfer case and open d30 and d35. I
> guarantee you won't come close to covering your costs. That's because, even
> though they might be close to the same *cost*, they have less *value* on the
> open market.
> If the rubi package isn't worth the price to you, don't buy it. Simple.
> That's how market price is determined in an open market. If people don't
> buy something, it's usually because the perceived value is less than the
> asking price.


--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________

Jeff Strickland

So, you are not saying the Rubicon sucks, as I pointed out earlier, you are
saying the marketing/pricing plan sucks. These are two completely different
things.

And, yes, I did read your entire post, and an entire reply before I even got
into the discussion, so I think I am pretty well caught up in what you have
to say. I think you said it poorly, and that has caused this thread to go on
and on.

As for the pricing, ALL automakers charge for upgrades that only represent
in incremental cost increase, but they get full retail for the upgrade AND
they get to sell the allocated stock parts on another vehicle or over the
parts counter. It doesn't really matter where the stock parts go, the point
is the upgrade parts only cost, say, $500 more than the original parts, yet
they sell the upgrades for full retail instead of only the cost up. You will
never escape this. You can beat it, partially, by performing the upgrades
yourself, then selling the take-offs on the aftermarket. But, most of us do
not have the skill set needed for these upgrades, nor the storage space
needed to carry the take-offs waiting for a buyer on eBay.



"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
news:vkl8lj8noog51b@corp.supernews.com...
> You're not catching on yet and it's clear you responded before you read
what
> I had to say:
>
> Again, the thing is only an UPGRADE of standard spec items, the
collective,
> incremental cost of which is marginal to DC, and yes, they frankly could
> just up the spec on all of them to Rubicon level, raise the price
marginally
> and sell a jillion of them. But they won't, 'cuz they're greedy,
> short-sighted, bean-counting bastards.
>
> The cost difference between a D44 & a D30 or D35 is negligible, not even a
> fraction of the $600 they charge for the rear axle upgrade on a std TJ.
The
> cost diff between the std wheels & tires and the Rubicon's 16" Goodyear
MTRs
> is also negligible at the mfr level, and there is NO cost difference
between
> 3.07 gears and 4.10s. There's virtually no cost difference between a 2.72
> NV231 and the Rubicon's 4.1 box, etc. The only real incremental cost
> increase to DC is for the lockers & its control unit. In short, paying
$5k+
> for the cost of the Rubicon's upgrades....IS A RIP!
>
> << Actually what you have to (sic) of is the relative value placed upon
> these accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> right, it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as
> well stop making the other packages because everybody would want the
Rubicon
> instead of any other package. >>
>
> ....and thus many of those who are buying them in large measure pay the
> ridiculous premium, not to use the stuff, but because the rig is "hip"
right
> now and looks cool cruising. This is why veteran Jeepers think .....dare
I
> say it again, ..... it SUCKS!!!!
>
> See, I'd love to be able to order a std 4.0 TJ with the 4.10 D44's at both
> ends (actually, I'd prefer high pinions and a Rock D60 out back, but stay
> with me) the lockers and the 4.1 xfer case...and that's it. Best premium I
> should have to pay is, oh $2k, tops. I wouldn't even have to have the
> metallic pee-yellow paint or the decals on the hood. (See all the money DC
> could save?) But, they won't be this practical because they want to HOSE
> everyone that considers themselves enthusiast enough to want one, and we
> think (...... dare I say it AGAIN????) that SUCKS!!!!!
>
> Look, I'll take my $30 and build a custom rock CJ that I'll treasure
forever
> before I'll give DC an equivalent amount for this kind of nonsense. DC
ought
> to be worried about that, 'cuz I own, not only 3 Jeeps, but an MB as well.
> They just might want me to buy another one, don't you think?
>
>
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vkl6im3rhqefd6@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> > news:vkl16s3idpg7a5@corp.supernews.com...
> > > I didn't say the Rubicon sucked at all, quite the contrary. I said it
> was
> > a
> > > great product, but that the mfr/dealer equation overpriced a simple
set
> of
> > > upgrade options to the degree that the vehicle won't get bought or
used
> by
> > > enthusiast Jeepers in a way it was intended.
> > >
> >
> > Actually, you said it twice that I noticed, here is one instance,
> >
> > "Frankly, there's getting to be a school of thought among veteran
Jeepers
> > that the Rubicon simply SUCKS, mostly due to its owners. There must have
> > been 500 of the things at Moab last year and eventually everyone avoided
> > them like the plague. This months JP mag lists them among the 10 Jeeps
> they
> > wouldn't own.
> >
> > Not that it's a bad rig out of the box, mind you, but Jeep FU'd the
entire
> > deal by pricing it so high that posers bought most of them, then the
> dealers
> > screwed it up even further by ordering them loaded to the max with
stupid
> > options like power mirrors, A/C, etc., driving the price to $30k plus.
> > That's right, $30k, and now I suppose you're going to take it out on the
> > rocks? RIGHT!!!!!"
> >
> >
> > And, being a veteran Jeeper, I take offense that you might suggest that
I
> > think it sucks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Look, the lockers are the only feature of the Rubicon's spec that are
> > > ADDITIONAL to a base TJ.
> >
> > That, and the D44s that are an option in the back of a base (Sport
> actually)
> > and not even available on the front on any other TJ. Then, there is the
> tire
> > package that delivers (are they 32s?) a tire option that is not
availabvle
> > on any other Jeep product. We already mentioned the lockers. Did you
> forget
> > the 4:1 transfer case? Yes, you forgot all about that. Let's see, there
> are
> > 4.10 gears that are not available on any other model except the base
model
> 4
> > banger. You can't even get 4.10 gears on anything but a 4 cyl motor, no
> > mater what the trim level is.
> >
> >
> >
> > That is, all TJs are 4wd, with xfer cases. Having
> > > worked over 25 years for auto mfrs I can say with authority there's
only
> a
> > > minute, marginal cost difference between a D44 and either the D30 or
35,
> > and
> > > the 4.1 xfer case isn't much more costly than a base NV231 either. The
> > only
> > > real added cost to the mfr is the locker/compressor combo, and that's
> not
> > > worth $5k.
> > > (You have to think in terms of what a manufacturer pays for
components,
> > not
> > > what the consumer pays. The difference is enormous.)
> > >
> >
> > Actually what you have to of is the relative value placed upon these
> > accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> right,
> > it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as well
> stop
> > making the other packages because everybody would want the Rubicon
instead
> > of any other package.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Dealers get into the act when they tart up the things with
> non-performance
> > > related "cruising" options (cd players, A/C, etc.) that cost the
> consumer
> > a
> > > bundle and are virtually worthless the minute the thing rolls off the
> lot,
> > > and add on another $2k for "additional dealer profit" and the goose is
> > > cooked..
> > >
> >
> > I agree, but you made the specific statement, twice, that the Rubicon
> > "SUCKS" (you even used all caps as if to make a particular point), but
the
> > only thing you have said that even remotely sucks is that it costs more
> than
> > you are willing to pay, and you can't buy a stripped Rubicon in an
attempt
> > to avoid costly options that you don't want.
> >
> > It takes more than a stupid pricing plan to make a vehicle "SUCK".
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Jeff Strickland

So, you are not saying the Rubicon sucks, as I pointed out earlier, you are
saying the marketing/pricing plan sucks. These are two completely different
things.

And, yes, I did read your entire post, and an entire reply before I even got
into the discussion, so I think I am pretty well caught up in what you have
to say. I think you said it poorly, and that has caused this thread to go on
and on.

As for the pricing, ALL automakers charge for upgrades that only represent
in incremental cost increase, but they get full retail for the upgrade AND
they get to sell the allocated stock parts on another vehicle or over the
parts counter. It doesn't really matter where the stock parts go, the point
is the upgrade parts only cost, say, $500 more than the original parts, yet
they sell the upgrades for full retail instead of only the cost up. You will
never escape this. You can beat it, partially, by performing the upgrades
yourself, then selling the take-offs on the aftermarket. But, most of us do
not have the skill set needed for these upgrades, nor the storage space
needed to carry the take-offs waiting for a buyer on eBay.



"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
news:vkl8lj8noog51b@corp.supernews.com...
> You're not catching on yet and it's clear you responded before you read
what
> I had to say:
>
> Again, the thing is only an UPGRADE of standard spec items, the
collective,
> incremental cost of which is marginal to DC, and yes, they frankly could
> just up the spec on all of them to Rubicon level, raise the price
marginally
> and sell a jillion of them. But they won't, 'cuz they're greedy,
> short-sighted, bean-counting bastards.
>
> The cost difference between a D44 & a D30 or D35 is negligible, not even a
> fraction of the $600 they charge for the rear axle upgrade on a std TJ.
The
> cost diff between the std wheels & tires and the Rubicon's 16" Goodyear
MTRs
> is also negligible at the mfr level, and there is NO cost difference
between
> 3.07 gears and 4.10s. There's virtually no cost difference between a 2.72
> NV231 and the Rubicon's 4.1 box, etc. The only real incremental cost
> increase to DC is for the lockers & its control unit. In short, paying
$5k+
> for the cost of the Rubicon's upgrades....IS A RIP!
>
> << Actually what you have to (sic) of is the relative value placed upon
> these accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> right, it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as
> well stop making the other packages because everybody would want the
Rubicon
> instead of any other package. >>
>
> ....and thus many of those who are buying them in large measure pay the
> ridiculous premium, not to use the stuff, but because the rig is "hip"
right
> now and looks cool cruising. This is why veteran Jeepers think .....dare
I
> say it again, ..... it SUCKS!!!!
>
> See, I'd love to be able to order a std 4.0 TJ with the 4.10 D44's at both
> ends (actually, I'd prefer high pinions and a Rock D60 out back, but stay
> with me) the lockers and the 4.1 xfer case...and that's it. Best premium I
> should have to pay is, oh $2k, tops. I wouldn't even have to have the
> metallic pee-yellow paint or the decals on the hood. (See all the money DC
> could save?) But, they won't be this practical because they want to HOSE
> everyone that considers themselves enthusiast enough to want one, and we
> think (...... dare I say it AGAIN????) that SUCKS!!!!!
>
> Look, I'll take my $30 and build a custom rock CJ that I'll treasure
forever
> before I'll give DC an equivalent amount for this kind of nonsense. DC
ought
> to be worried about that, 'cuz I own, not only 3 Jeeps, but an MB as well.
> They just might want me to buy another one, don't you think?
>
>
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:vkl6im3rhqefd6@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> > news:vkl16s3idpg7a5@corp.supernews.com...
> > > I didn't say the Rubicon sucked at all, quite the contrary. I said it
> was
> > a
> > > great product, but that the mfr/dealer equation overpriced a simple
set
> of
> > > upgrade options to the degree that the vehicle won't get bought or
used
> by
> > > enthusiast Jeepers in a way it was intended.
> > >
> >
> > Actually, you said it twice that I noticed, here is one instance,
> >
> > "Frankly, there's getting to be a school of thought among veteran
Jeepers
> > that the Rubicon simply SUCKS, mostly due to its owners. There must have
> > been 500 of the things at Moab last year and eventually everyone avoided
> > them like the plague. This months JP mag lists them among the 10 Jeeps
> they
> > wouldn't own.
> >
> > Not that it's a bad rig out of the box, mind you, but Jeep FU'd the
entire
> > deal by pricing it so high that posers bought most of them, then the
> dealers
> > screwed it up even further by ordering them loaded to the max with
stupid
> > options like power mirrors, A/C, etc., driving the price to $30k plus.
> > That's right, $30k, and now I suppose you're going to take it out on the
> > rocks? RIGHT!!!!!"
> >
> >
> > And, being a veteran Jeeper, I take offense that you might suggest that
I
> > think it sucks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Look, the lockers are the only feature of the Rubicon's spec that are
> > > ADDITIONAL to a base TJ.
> >
> > That, and the D44s that are an option in the back of a base (Sport
> actually)
> > and not even available on the front on any other TJ. Then, there is the
> tire
> > package that delivers (are they 32s?) a tire option that is not
availabvle
> > on any other Jeep product. We already mentioned the lockers. Did you
> forget
> > the 4:1 transfer case? Yes, you forgot all about that. Let's see, there
> are
> > 4.10 gears that are not available on any other model except the base
model
> 4
> > banger. You can't even get 4.10 gears on anything but a 4 cyl motor, no
> > mater what the trim level is.
> >
> >
> >
> > That is, all TJs are 4wd, with xfer cases. Having
> > > worked over 25 years for auto mfrs I can say with authority there's
only
> a
> > > minute, marginal cost difference between a D44 and either the D30 or
35,
> > and
> > > the 4.1 xfer case isn't much more costly than a base NV231 either. The
> > only
> > > real added cost to the mfr is the locker/compressor combo, and that's
> not
> > > worth $5k.
> > > (You have to think in terms of what a manufacturer pays for
components,
> > not
> > > what the consumer pays. The difference is enormous.)
> > >
> >
> > Actually what you have to of is the relative value placed upon these
> > accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> right,
> > it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as well
> stop
> > making the other packages because everybody would want the Rubicon
instead
> > of any other package.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Dealers get into the act when they tart up the things with
> non-performance
> > > related "cruising" options (cd players, A/C, etc.) that cost the
> consumer
> > a
> > > bundle and are virtually worthless the minute the thing rolls off the
> lot,
> > > and add on another $2k for "additional dealer profit" and the goose is
> > > cooked..
> > >
> >
> > I agree, but you made the specific statement, twice, that the Rubicon
> > "SUCKS" (you even used all caps as if to make a particular point), but
the
> > only thing you have said that even remotely sucks is that it costs more
> than
> > you are willing to pay, and you can't buy a stripped Rubicon in an
attempt
> > to avoid costly options that you don't want.
> >
> > It takes more than a stupid pricing plan to make a vehicle "SUCK".
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Nathan W. Collier

"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
news:vkn3igmlrrit13@corp.supernews.com...
> this character is totally BS'ing
> us when he says he paid $100 over invoice for a Rubicon.

youre talking about a very well respected, long time member of this
newsgroup that has contributed far more than "rubicons suck".

i swear, if it werent for people like jeff strickland who use supernews (and
others like teranews, altopia.....the services where all the troublemakers
seem to come from) i would filter out those services entirely. if i do a
google on "gerald g. mcgeorge" will i find any history beyond your intial
"rubicons suck" post?

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Nathan W. Collier

"Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
news:vkn3igmlrrit13@corp.supernews.com...
> this character is totally BS'ing
> us when he says he paid $100 over invoice for a Rubicon.

youre talking about a very well respected, long time member of this
newsgroup that has contributed far more than "rubicons suck".

i swear, if it werent for people like jeff strickland who use supernews (and
others like teranews, altopia.....the services where all the troublemakers
seem to come from) i would filter out those services entirely. if i do a
google on "gerald g. mcgeorge" will i find any history beyond your intial
"rubicons suck" post?

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com

Gerald G. McGeorge

Now you're catching on.

Because they all price gouge on upgrades & options DOES NOT make it right,
but does make it....dare I say it again.....SUCK!!

Look, the VERY GOOD NEWS about the Rubicon is that it shows Jeep is not only
aware of what the Jeep brand values encompass, they are in tune with the
desires of many enthusiasts and better yet, willing to follow through with a
truly great product. I shows courage and good awareness of the brands core
values at the highest levels of DC. And, don't be fooled, there are bound to
be a bunch of corporate curmudgeons at DC hoping the Rubicon would flop, and
it clearly didn't.

Having worked for a DC competitor I know the legal & cost hurdles what the
team that pushed this product through had to overcome. I think we can credit
the Daimler-Benz ownership for making this happen, as we know the
Detroit-based morons who run the US auto industry are a bunch of bean
counting cowards when it comes to making true "performance" vehicles.

HOWEVER, all that aside, price gouging isn't an acceptable trade-off in my
book. The auto industry ranks about one notch above lawyers and child
molesters in the eyes of the public for this very reason.
"Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vkn3pcm2o37363@corp.supernews.com...
> So, you are not saying the Rubicon sucks, as I pointed out earlier, you
are
> saying the marketing/pricing plan sucks. These are two completely
different
> things.
>
> And, yes, I did read your entire post, and an entire reply before I even
got
> into the discussion, so I think I am pretty well caught up in what you
have
> to say. I think you said it poorly, and that has caused this thread to go
on
> and on.
>
> As for the pricing, ALL automakers charge for upgrades that only represent
> in incremental cost increase, but they get full retail for the upgrade AND
> they get to sell the allocated stock parts on another vehicle or over the
> parts counter. It doesn't really matter where the stock parts go, the
point
> is the upgrade parts only cost, say, $500 more than the original parts,
yet
> they sell the upgrades for full retail instead of only the cost up. You
will
> never escape this. You can beat it, partially, by performing the upgrades
> yourself, then selling the take-offs on the aftermarket. But, most of us
do
> not have the skill set needed for these upgrades, nor the storage space
> needed to carry the take-offs waiting for a buyer on eBay.
>
>
>
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:vkl8lj8noog51b@corp.supernews.com...
> > You're not catching on yet and it's clear you responded before you read
> what
> > I had to say:
> >
> > Again, the thing is only an UPGRADE of standard spec items, the
> collective,
> > incremental cost of which is marginal to DC, and yes, they frankly could
> > just up the spec on all of them to Rubicon level, raise the price
> marginally
> > and sell a jillion of them. But they won't, 'cuz they're greedy,
> > short-sighted, bean-counting bastards.
> >
> > The cost difference between a D44 & a D30 or D35 is negligible, not even
a
> > fraction of the $600 they charge for the rear axle upgrade on a std TJ.
> The
> > cost diff between the std wheels & tires and the Rubicon's 16" Goodyear
> MTRs
> > is also negligible at the mfr level, and there is NO cost difference
> between
> > 3.07 gears and 4.10s. There's virtually no cost difference between a
2.72
> > NV231 and the Rubicon's 4.1 box, etc. The only real incremental cost
> > increase to DC is for the lockers & its control unit. In short, paying
> $5k+
> > for the cost of the Rubicon's upgrades....IS A RIP!
> >
> > << Actually what you have to (sic) of is the relative value placed upon
> > these accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you
are
> > right, it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as
> > well stop making the other packages because everybody would want the
> Rubicon
> > instead of any other package. >>
> >
> > ....and thus many of those who are buying them in large measure pay the
> > ridiculous premium, not to use the stuff, but because the rig is "hip"
> right
> > now and looks cool cruising. This is why veteran Jeepers think
......dare
> I
> > say it again, ..... it SUCKS!!!!
> >
> > See, I'd love to be able to order a std 4.0 TJ with the 4.10 D44's at
both
> > ends (actually, I'd prefer high pinions and a Rock D60 out back, but
stay
> > with me) the lockers and the 4.1 xfer case...and that's it. Best premium
I
> > should have to pay is, oh $2k, tops. I wouldn't even have to have the
> > metallic pee-yellow paint or the decals on the hood. (See all the money
DC
> > could save?) But, they won't be this practical because they want to HOSE
> > everyone that considers themselves enthusiast enough to want one, and we
> > think (...... dare I say it AGAIN????) that SUCKS!!!!!
> >
> > Look, I'll take my $30 and build a custom rock CJ that I'll treasure
> forever
> > before I'll give DC an equivalent amount for this kind of nonsense. DC
> ought
> > to be worried about that, 'cuz I own, not only 3 Jeeps, but an MB as
well.
> > They just might want me to buy another one, don't you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > "Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:vkl6im3rhqefd6@corp.supernews.com...
> > >
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> > > news:vkl16s3idpg7a5@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > I didn't say the Rubicon sucked at all, quite the contrary. I said
it
> > was
> > > a
> > > > great product, but that the mfr/dealer equation overpriced a simple
> set
> > of
> > > > upgrade options to the degree that the vehicle won't get bought or
> used
> > by
> > > > enthusiast Jeepers in a way it was intended.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Actually, you said it twice that I noticed, here is one instance,
> > >
> > > "Frankly, there's getting to be a school of thought among veteran
> Jeepers
> > > that the Rubicon simply SUCKS, mostly due to its owners. There must ha
ve
> > > been 500 of the things at Moab last year and eventually everyone
avoided
> > > them like the plague. This months JP mag lists them among the 10 Jeeps
> > they
> > > wouldn't own.
> > >
> > > Not that it's a bad rig out of the box, mind you, but Jeep FU'd the
> entire
> > > deal by pricing it so high that posers bought most of them, then the
> > dealers
> > > screwed it up even further by ordering them loaded to the max with
> stupid
> > > options like power mirrors, A/C, etc., driving the price to $30k plus.
> > > That's right, $30k, and now I suppose you're going to take it out on
the
> > > rocks? RIGHT!!!!!"
> > >
> > >
> > > And, being a veteran Jeeper, I take offense that you might suggest
that
> I
> > > think it sucks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Look, the lockers are the only feature of the Rubicon's spec that
are
> > > > ADDITIONAL to a base TJ.
> > >
> > > That, and the D44s that are an option in the back of a base (Sport
> > actually)
> > > and not even available on the front on any other TJ. Then, there is
the
> > tire
> > > package that delivers (are they 32s?) a tire option that is not
> availabvle
> > > on any other Jeep product. We already mentioned the lockers. Did you
> > forget
> > > the 4:1 transfer case? Yes, you forgot all about that. Let's see,
there
> > are
> > > 4.10 gears that are not available on any other model except the base
> model
> > 4
> > > banger. You can't even get 4.10 gears on anything but a 4 cyl motor,
no
> > > mater what the trim level is.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That is, all TJs are 4wd, with xfer cases. Having
> > > > worked over 25 years for auto mfrs I can say with authority there's
> only
> > a
> > > > minute, marginal cost difference between a D44 and either the D30 or
> 35,
> > > and
> > > > the 4.1 xfer case isn't much more costly than a base NV231 either.
The
> > > only
> > > > real added cost to the mfr is the locker/compressor combo, and
that's
> > not
> > > > worth $5k.
> > > > (You have to think in terms of what a manufacturer pays for
> components,
> > > not
> > > > what the consumer pays. The difference is enormous.)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Actually what you have to of is the relative value placed upon these
> > > accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> > right,
> > > it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as well
> > stop
> > > making the other packages because everybody would want the Rubicon
> instead
> > > of any other package.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dealers get into the act when they tart up the things with
> > non-performance
> > > > related "cruising" options (cd players, A/C, etc.) that cost the
> > consumer
> > > a
> > > > bundle and are virtually worthless the minute the thing rolls off
the
> > lot,
> > > > and add on another $2k for "additional dealer profit" and the goose
is
> > > > cooked..
> > > >
> > >
> > > I agree, but you made the specific statement, twice, that the Rubicon
> > > "SUCKS" (you even used all caps as if to make a particular point), but
> the
> > > only thing you have said that even remotely sucks is that it costs
more
> > than
> > > you are willing to pay, and you can't buy a stripped Rubicon in an
> attempt
> > > to avoid costly options that you don't want.
> > >
> > > It takes more than a stupid pricing plan to make a vehicle "SUCK".
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Gerald G. McGeorge

Now you're catching on.

Because they all price gouge on upgrades & options DOES NOT make it right,
but does make it....dare I say it again.....SUCK!!

Look, the VERY GOOD NEWS about the Rubicon is that it shows Jeep is not only
aware of what the Jeep brand values encompass, they are in tune with the
desires of many enthusiasts and better yet, willing to follow through with a
truly great product. I shows courage and good awareness of the brands core
values at the highest levels of DC. And, don't be fooled, there are bound to
be a bunch of corporate curmudgeons at DC hoping the Rubicon would flop, and
it clearly didn't.

Having worked for a DC competitor I know the legal & cost hurdles what the
team that pushed this product through had to overcome. I think we can credit
the Daimler-Benz ownership for making this happen, as we know the
Detroit-based morons who run the US auto industry are a bunch of bean
counting cowards when it comes to making true "performance" vehicles.

HOWEVER, all that aside, price gouging isn't an acceptable trade-off in my
book. The auto industry ranks about one notch above lawyers and child
molesters in the eyes of the public for this very reason.
"Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vkn3pcm2o37363@corp.supernews.com...
> So, you are not saying the Rubicon sucks, as I pointed out earlier, you
are
> saying the marketing/pricing plan sucks. These are two completely
different
> things.
>
> And, yes, I did read your entire post, and an entire reply before I even
got
> into the discussion, so I think I am pretty well caught up in what you
have
> to say. I think you said it poorly, and that has caused this thread to go
on
> and on.
>
> As for the pricing, ALL automakers charge for upgrades that only represent
> in incremental cost increase, but they get full retail for the upgrade AND
> they get to sell the allocated stock parts on another vehicle or over the
> parts counter. It doesn't really matter where the stock parts go, the
point
> is the upgrade parts only cost, say, $500 more than the original parts,
yet
> they sell the upgrades for full retail instead of only the cost up. You
will
> never escape this. You can beat it, partially, by performing the upgrades
> yourself, then selling the take-offs on the aftermarket. But, most of us
do
> not have the skill set needed for these upgrades, nor the storage space
> needed to carry the take-offs waiting for a buyer on eBay.
>
>
>
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:vkl8lj8noog51b@corp.supernews.com...
> > You're not catching on yet and it's clear you responded before you read
> what
> > I had to say:
> >
> > Again, the thing is only an UPGRADE of standard spec items, the
> collective,
> > incremental cost of which is marginal to DC, and yes, they frankly could
> > just up the spec on all of them to Rubicon level, raise the price
> marginally
> > and sell a jillion of them. But they won't, 'cuz they're greedy,
> > short-sighted, bean-counting bastards.
> >
> > The cost difference between a D44 & a D30 or D35 is negligible, not even
a
> > fraction of the $600 they charge for the rear axle upgrade on a std TJ.
> The
> > cost diff between the std wheels & tires and the Rubicon's 16" Goodyear
> MTRs
> > is also negligible at the mfr level, and there is NO cost difference
> between
> > 3.07 gears and 4.10s. There's virtually no cost difference between a
2.72
> > NV231 and the Rubicon's 4.1 box, etc. The only real incremental cost
> > increase to DC is for the lockers & its control unit. In short, paying
> $5k+
> > for the cost of the Rubicon's upgrades....IS A RIP!
> >
> > << Actually what you have to (sic) of is the relative value placed upon
> > these accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you
are
> > right, it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as
> > well stop making the other packages because everybody would want the
> Rubicon
> > instead of any other package. >>
> >
> > ....and thus many of those who are buying them in large measure pay the
> > ridiculous premium, not to use the stuff, but because the rig is "hip"
> right
> > now and looks cool cruising. This is why veteran Jeepers think
......dare
> I
> > say it again, ..... it SUCKS!!!!
> >
> > See, I'd love to be able to order a std 4.0 TJ with the 4.10 D44's at
both
> > ends (actually, I'd prefer high pinions and a Rock D60 out back, but
stay
> > with me) the lockers and the 4.1 xfer case...and that's it. Best premium
I
> > should have to pay is, oh $2k, tops. I wouldn't even have to have the
> > metallic pee-yellow paint or the decals on the hood. (See all the money
DC
> > could save?) But, they won't be this practical because they want to HOSE
> > everyone that considers themselves enthusiast enough to want one, and we
> > think (...... dare I say it AGAIN????) that SUCKS!!!!!
> >
> > Look, I'll take my $30 and build a custom rock CJ that I'll treasure
> forever
> > before I'll give DC an equivalent amount for this kind of nonsense. DC
> ought
> > to be worried about that, 'cuz I own, not only 3 Jeeps, but an MB as
well.
> > They just might want me to buy another one, don't you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > "Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:vkl6im3rhqefd6@corp.supernews.com...
> > >
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> > > news:vkl16s3idpg7a5@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > I didn't say the Rubicon sucked at all, quite the contrary. I said
it
> > was
> > > a
> > > > great product, but that the mfr/dealer equation overpriced a simple
> set
> > of
> > > > upgrade options to the degree that the vehicle won't get bought or
> used
> > by
> > > > enthusiast Jeepers in a way it was intended.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Actually, you said it twice that I noticed, here is one instance,
> > >
> > > "Frankly, there's getting to be a school of thought among veteran
> Jeepers
> > > that the Rubicon simply SUCKS, mostly due to its owners. There must ha
ve
> > > been 500 of the things at Moab last year and eventually everyone
avoided
> > > them like the plague. This months JP mag lists them among the 10 Jeeps
> > they
> > > wouldn't own.
> > >
> > > Not that it's a bad rig out of the box, mind you, but Jeep FU'd the
> entire
> > > deal by pricing it so high that posers bought most of them, then the
> > dealers
> > > screwed it up even further by ordering them loaded to the max with
> stupid
> > > options like power mirrors, A/C, etc., driving the price to $30k plus.
> > > That's right, $30k, and now I suppose you're going to take it out on
the
> > > rocks? RIGHT!!!!!"
> > >
> > >
> > > And, being a veteran Jeeper, I take offense that you might suggest
that
> I
> > > think it sucks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Look, the lockers are the only feature of the Rubicon's spec that
are
> > > > ADDITIONAL to a base TJ.
> > >
> > > That, and the D44s that are an option in the back of a base (Sport
> > actually)
> > > and not even available on the front on any other TJ. Then, there is
the
> > tire
> > > package that delivers (are they 32s?) a tire option that is not
> availabvle
> > > on any other Jeep product. We already mentioned the lockers. Did you
> > forget
> > > the 4:1 transfer case? Yes, you forgot all about that. Let's see,
there
> > are
> > > 4.10 gears that are not available on any other model except the base
> model
> > 4
> > > banger. You can't even get 4.10 gears on anything but a 4 cyl motor,
no
> > > mater what the trim level is.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That is, all TJs are 4wd, with xfer cases. Having
> > > > worked over 25 years for auto mfrs I can say with authority there's
> only
> > a
> > > > minute, marginal cost difference between a D44 and either the D30 or
> 35,
> > > and
> > > > the 4.1 xfer case isn't much more costly than a base NV231 either.
The
> > > only
> > > > real added cost to the mfr is the locker/compressor combo, and
that's
> > not
> > > > worth $5k.
> > > > (You have to think in terms of what a manufacturer pays for
> components,
> > > not
> > > > what the consumer pays. The difference is enormous.)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Actually what you have to of is the relative value placed upon these
> > > accessories by the expected customer base. I happen to think you are
> > right,
> > > it is a pricey option package, but if it was cheap, they might as well
> > stop
> > > making the other packages because everybody would want the Rubicon
> instead
> > > of any other package.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dealers get into the act when they tart up the things with
> > non-performance
> > > > related "cruising" options (cd players, A/C, etc.) that cost the
> > consumer
> > > a
> > > > bundle and are virtually worthless the minute the thing rolls off
the
> > lot,
> > > > and add on another $2k for "additional dealer profit" and the goose
is
> > > > cooked..
> > > >
> > >
> > > I agree, but you made the specific statement, twice, that the Rubicon
> > > "SUCKS" (you even used all caps as if to make a particular point), but
> the
> > > only thing you have said that even remotely sucks is that it costs
more
> > than
> > > you are willing to pay, and you can't buy a stripped Rubicon in an
> attempt
> > > to avoid costly options that you don't want.
> > >
> > > It takes more than a stupid pricing plan to make a vehicle "SUCK".
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Gerald G. McGeorge

Try it and see. (You might want to try Jerry McGeorge)

"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathanis@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:hoM2b.26943$r15.1082402@twister.southeast.rr. com...
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:vkn3igmlrrit13@corp.supernews.com...
> > this character is totally BS'ing
> > us when he says he paid $100 over invoice for a Rubicon.
>
> youre talking about a very well respected, long time member of this
> newsgroup that has contributed far more than "rubicons suck".
>
> i swear, if it werent for people like jeff strickland who use supernews
(and
> others like teranews, altopia.....the services where all the troublemakers
> seem to come from) i would filter out those services entirely. if i do a
> google on "gerald g. mcgeorge" will i find any history beyond your intial
> "rubicons suck" post?
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>

Gerald G. McGeorge

Try it and see. (You might want to try Jerry McGeorge)

"Nathan W. Collier" <Nathanis@7SlotGrille.com> wrote in message
news:hoM2b.26943$r15.1082402@twister.southeast.rr. com...
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <gmcgeorge@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:vkn3igmlrrit13@corp.supernews.com...
> > this character is totally BS'ing
> > us when he says he paid $100 over invoice for a Rubicon.
>
> youre talking about a very well respected, long time member of this
> newsgroup that has contributed far more than "rubicons suck".
>
> i swear, if it werent for people like jeff strickland who use supernews
(and
> others like teranews, altopia.....the services where all the troublemakers
> seem to come from) i would filter out those services entirely. if i do a
> google on "gerald g. mcgeorge" will i find any history beyond your intial
> "rubicons suck" post?
>
> --
> Nathan W. Collier
> http://7SlotGrille.com
>
>
>

twaldron

Thanks Nathan!

McFly has been PLONKED so I don't get his posts but got part of this one
in your response. I've owned a lot of cars and you just have to know how
to buy them. I not only purchased my Rubi for $100 over, I ordered it in
Sept. when they were screaming hot. Some people bend over for the the
dealers I don't, and guess what? They all want my repeat business.

BTW, I think your assessment of McFly is pretty dead on.

Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> youre talking about a very well respected, long time member of this
> newsgroup that has contributed far more than "rubicons suck".
>
> i swear, if it werent for people like jeff strickland who use supernews (and
> others like teranews, altopia.....the services where all the troublemakers
> seem to come from) i would filter out those services entirely. if i do a
> google on "gerald g. mcgeorge" will i find any history beyond your intial
> "rubicons suck" post?
>

--
__________________________________________________ _________
tw
03 TJ Rubicon
01 XJ Sport

There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
-- Dave Barry

http://www.7slotgrille.com/jeepers/t...ron/index.html
(Please remove the OBVIOUS to reply by email)
__________________________________________________ _________