Is the article essentially saying that Toyota has an unfair advantage with the prius because the japanese government had a hand in funding it and thus they can afford to sell it at below cost in the US and not take much of a hit?

Perhaps if the US wasn't so busy spending billions (trillions?) on an illegal war going nowhere, they could afford to fund domestic technologies as well.

 

No. The US is not funding or conducting research for the express gain of US companies like the Japanese government is. Under the World Trade Organization it is illegal to partake in dumping which is one of the main points of this article. If the US did fund battery development for just GM/Ford/Chrysler and then these companies sold cars at cut rates in other countries, it would be illegal too.

Why must people bring up ignorance on a war that has nothing to do with this? By the way, what is your definition of "nowhere"? Free elections, education for all (females too), etc is nowhere? Keep your politics in political discussions and not in car forums.

 

The US gov't accuses Canadian sawmills of dumping softwood on the US market and installs massive tariffs bankrupting all but the largest mills yet will never accuse any Asian nation of dumping any product. Go figure. **** your neighbor and biggest trading partner but heaven forbid you ruffle feathers over in Asia, cause you might not get cheap shoes and jeans.

 

The US gov't accuses Canadian sawmills of dumping softwood on the US market and installs massive tariffs bankrupting all but the largest mills yet will never accuse any Asian nation of dumping any product. Go figure. **** your neighbor and biggest trading partner but heaven forbid you ruffle feathers over in Asia, cause you might not get cheap shoes and jeans.

Thanks for writing the only sane, BS-free post in this whole thread :clap: :yup:

 

Regarding the war: Wars advance technology.

Regarding what's relevant to this thread: What I find to be so egregious about the Prius is that Toyota completely ignores the damage done to the environment just to make the batteries. Of course, the press seems to ignore this as well.

 

Never saw cheap shoes or jeans from Japan.

 

There was a time I remember back in the 70's when we would buy stuff and look at it, even trinket toys or cheap dinnerware, and it said 'Made in Japan' and we used to laugh.

In the 80's, this seemed to move to 'Made in Taiwan'. And the 90's thru now, everything says 'Made in China'. We all laughed at this stuff at first.

Now, it seems, the only thing that's laughed at is 'Made in America'.

True story...sadly...

 

America 123 - A most notable effort for a new thread.
Just look at all the half-baked sideways-slanted non-related chatter in this thread.
With a few worthwhile posts as leaven.

If the United States took the same attitude as China and Japan, Detroit would not be what it is today.

I saw a figure today that indicated that there are between 7 and 8 MILLION H1B visa holders in the United States. Yeah, that's a great way to encourage people to go into engineering by pushing down wages.

Just thinking about all the things that I used to buy that were labeled "Made in USA" and "Made in Canada". I feel for the people whose lives were torn asunder because our government seemingly will not stand up for the common man and woman.

 

America 123 -
Just look at all the half-baked sideways-slanted non-related chatter in this thread.
With a few worthwhile posts as leaven.

If the United States took the same attitude as China and Japan, Detroit would not be what it is today.

I saw a figure today that indicated that there are between 7 and 8 MILLION H1B visa holders in the United States. Yeah, that's a great way to encourage people to go into engineering by pushing down wages.

Just thinking about all the things that I used to buy that were labeled "Made in USA" and "Made in Canada". I feel for the people whose lives were torn asunder because our government seemingly will not stand up for the common man and woman.

Thanks plane.

Its deliberate - that means many things as a reply to your post - as I know you know.

As usual, good points all on your part.

Sometimes you just go numb in light of whats happening 'round here, there, and everywhere.

That first one, the second one, and especially that last one (of yours) can really get the juices goin'.

 

Well, ( reading between the lines a bit ) - speaking of Toyota and dirty plays check this one out.


Shipping Shortage Wearing on Automakers
May 13, 2008
By Bill Visnic
and Michelle Krebs

If an eroding U.S. economy and commensurately sliding auto sales aren't enough to worry about, several < notice - not all > global automakers can add a new worry for 2008: a vexing lack of ships to carry vehicles from port to port and skyrocketing increases in the cost of shipping vehicles.
A General Motors executive called the issue "a matter of global strategic importance," warranting attention from the highest levels at the automaker, and a major issue facing all manufacturers.
The Asia-to-U.S. Run
Sources at several Japanese automakers -- particularly the smaller, second-tier brands -- say the situation has started to affect supply of certain popular models to the point it is directly affecting nationwide supply.

Notice, just as Mazda 'heats up'.....

"This has actually been an issue for a number of years -- the last two or three specifically," said Jeremy Barnes, director of corporate & product communications for Mazda North American Operations.

So here's the situation....

Vehicles typically are shipped on two types of vessels: container ships that handle all manner of cargo, or so-called "roll-on/roll-off" vessels designed specifically to enable vehicles to be driven directly into and out of the cargo holds. Automakers tend to prefer the "Ro-Ro" ships because they almost invariably minimize handling damage often incurred in the loading and unloading process.
But ongoing macroeconomic factors < including others willing to pay more > in the shipping industry have limited the amount of capacity -- both of standard cargo ships and the Ro-Ros -- available for auto transportation, and the shipping-capacity shortage, which has been worsening for years, is starting to hurt.

There are several <additional> factors that could be causing the shortage -- < including ones not mentioned here >
-- Another issue: Where once ships may have sailed with less than full cargo loads, mounting costs dictate that the shipper must wait to fill the ship to capacity, causing some smaller cargo parcels -- perhaps a relatively small lot of vehicles, for example -- to experience longer-than-normal delays, or be booted entirely for a cargo that will account for more of the ship's unused capacity.
Mazda's Barnes says for smaller automakers, the situation can be a double-edged sword.--

-- "Additionally," Barnes adds, "Mazda Motor Corporation has done a great job working with the shipping lines, and it's generally improved our access to open spaces on ships. All that said, though, it is still difficult to get enough access -- especially when we want it, versus when it's simply available."

Wait for it...... now here comes the 'Toyota' 'factor'.....

Another automaker executive says some in the industry believe the situation has led shippers to cozier relationships with the larger Japanese players, particularly Toyota Motor Corp. He believes Toyota's size and dominant industry role have caused smaller competitors to lose out to Toyota in what he calls "the shipping competition," as shipping lines favor the probably more consistent and larger-capacity orders of Toyota, and to a lesser extent, Honda and Nissan.

Smaller Japanese players aren't the only entities suffering from the shipping shortage. Another story at the Web site says many Chinese automakers are experiencing problems exporting their vehicles, citing the worldwide paucity of Ro-Ro vessels, although several Chinese shipbuilders were slated to deliver several new Ro-Ro ships last year.

This, is almost for certain an 'interesting' story in its own right.

A remarkable statistic cited in the Web site's story claims that 1,175 different companies exported vehicles from China in 2006. Of that number, 650 exported fewer than 10 vehicles and 160 companies exported just one vehicle.

Emerging Markets = Emerging Logistical Headaches
The problem, however, isn't limited to the Asia-U.S. run for ships. Emerging markets resent a whole other set of logistical headaches, said Michael Grimaldi, General Motors head of Korean operations. --

-- GM also has experienced the shortage of ships and shipping containers,-

-- Beyond the ships and shipping containers, ports in emerging markets present another set of challenges, Grimaldi said. The boom in imports, especially vehicles, to Russia has those ports clogged with ships in waiting. "We have faced tremendous delays there," he said. "There are ships waiting to get into port and once they get there, there's sometimes a wait to unload the containers."
Once the vehicles are unloaded, they have to be shipped within the country by rail or trucks. "Many countries are not up to the same level as Western Europe," he said. GM has been like a modern-day explorer looking for the best route by land and sea -- shipping via ocean from Korea all around the Black Sea to Russia, crossing Siberian railroads. "But it is a struggle," admits Grimaldi.

Geeez, cars, trucks, batteries, ships and shipping - whats next - trains and planes ????

Wait...... you said ...... what???? ....... Toyota and Mitsubishi have been preparing ( for years )...... to....... building......... aircraft ............... together ?????

Gee, I thought the only big thing they did together was ' the 'ole disappearing billions / Yakuza in the room' banking scandal trick - oops I mean 'project' ............

 

Well, ( reading between the lines a bit ) - speaking of Toyota and dirty plays check this one out.


Shipping Shortage Wearing on Automakers
May 13, 2008
By Bill Visnic and Michelle Krebs


Notice, just as Mazda 'heats up'.....
So here's the situation....Wait for it...... now here comes the 'Toyota' 'factor'..... This, is almost for certain an 'interesting' story in its own right.
Geeez, cars, trucks, batteries, ships and shipping - whats next - trains and planes ????

Wait...... you said ...... what???? ....... Toyota and Mitsubishi have been preparing ( for years )...... to....... building......... aircraft ............... together ?????

Gee, I thought the only big thing they did together was ' the 'ole disappearing billions / Yakuza in the room' banking scandal - oops I mean 'project' ............

This is the stuff dreams are made of, particularly GMI wet-dreams!

 

Is Toyota's Prius Being Dumped On The US Market?

After reviewing the facts presented, my answer to this question is YES

 

Toyota: Reconditioning Can Extend Hybrid Battery Life

Toyota Prius NI-MH Battery
​

The replacement module must be harvested from a battery pack out of a vehicle of about the same age and mileage.
Long before the first Prius left the showroom more than a decade ago, Toyota developed a detailed procedure for recycling hybrid vehicles' nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) batteries. In the years since, Toyota also has developed a way to postpone recycling by keeping hybrid batteries in service longer.
To the consumer, recycling the battery from a Toyota hybrid is totally invisible: Owners don't have to take any action or pay anything. For hybrids that wind up in a scrap yard, there's a toll-free number on the battery pack: Callers learn they'll get a $150 reward for bringing the unit to a Toyota or Lexus dealer. Toyota then ships the battery pack to a single recycling center. Every component-from plastic to precious metal-is recyclable. With nickel prices near all-time highs, it's likely a large portion of recycled batteries will quickly become part of other products.
Toyota batteries are designed to last a long time. It appears this goal is being achieved: www.hybridexperience.ca reports that two '01 Prius taxis Human each accumulated more than 200,000 miles. That's more than double the warranty, which is eight years or 100,000 miles (or 10 years or 150,000 miles for states that follow California regulations).
When the rare issue occurs, packs that are still under warranty are replaced with all-new units. According to Jim Gatzke of Toyota's National Alternative Fuel Vehicle Service and Support group, the problem is usually with only one of the 28 modules that comprise the battery pack. For vehicles no longer under warranty, Gatzke's team has developed a process to recondition battery packs for maximum life.
“The module must be replaced with one that matches the chemistry of the other 27 modules,” says Gatzke. To match the chemistry of the battery pack being reconditioned, the replacement module must be harvested from a battery pack out of a vehicle of about the same age and mileage. With the module replaced, the battery pack should last another half-dozen or more years, Gatzke says.
While Toyota Hybrid batteries are expected to last the entire life of a vehicle, a reconditioned pack costs about a fourth as much as an all-new unit, which should make Toyota hybrids attractive to used-car buyers, according to Gatzke.

 

Another look at one part of it.

Well thought out and written.

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-ne...m/cars/car-news/-did-the-japanese-government-fund-the-toyota-prius-ar54974.html

Did the Japanese Government Fund the Toyota Prius?

Posted on 04.2.2008 14:18 by Ralph Kalal

Toyota, rather adamantly says “no.” At least, that word is used in their statement.

But someone who should know says, equally adamantly, “yes.”

That someone is none other than James Press (pictured), now the vice-chairman and president of Chrysler. But, before that job, he spent 37 years at Toyota, and ended up running their United States operations and sitting on the Japanese car maker’s board of directors.

According to comments made by Press to Business Week magazine, the Prius development costs were paid for by the Japanese government, in their entirety.

Press is quoted by BW as saying,
“The Japanese government paid for 100 percent of the development of the battery and hybrid system that went into the Toyota Pirus.”

Toyota’s response?
“I can say 100 percent that Toyota received absolutely no support – no money, no grants – from the Japanese government for the development of the Prius.” That’s the word from Paul Nolasco, a Toyota spokesman.

So, who’s telling the truth?

Maybe both.

Toyota’s comments referred to “development of the Prius.”

Press referred to “development of the battery and hybrid system that went into the Prius.”

There is a difference between those two statements, one that’s subtle but substantial.

Moreover, Toyota’s comments do not exclude the very real possibility that money was funneled to another company working in partnership with Toyota. (For example, Toyota’s apparently failed lithium ion battery package was being developed for them by Panasonic.)

Links between Japanese industry, government, and banking are long-standing and tight. Interlocking ownership, in which ostensibly rival companies own shares of their competitors and banks also hold ownership interests in competitor companies and lending institutions, are part of the Japanese corporate structure.

Even World War Two’s defeat didn’t fundamentally alter that reality. Moreover, the Japanese government has consistently sought to shore up Japanese industrial companies, frequently through monetary policies designed to allow banks to inflate the actual value of their assets.

If the Japanese government really did fund the development of the nickel hydride battery and hybrid powertrain used in the Prius, it would raise some nasty questions, questions that the Detroit automakers probably would like to see addressed.

In the view of some industry observers, Toyota has a history of “dumping,” though it’s never been established that the company is guilty of doing it. “Dumping,” in international trade, is the practice of selling a product below cost in order to establish market share and crowd out competitors.

Some who have studied the entry of Lexus into the United States auto market firmly believe that Toyota dumped the brand in the U.S. for at least five years after its introduction.<YEP>

Dumping is, of course, a fairly safe offense, particularly with a product as complex as an automobile and an industrial systems as closed as that of Japan.

Since the predicate of the offense is selling below cost, the definition of cost is crucial. Anything that shifts some of the development expense away from the manufacturer allows it to maintain a lower cost. So, proof that the Japanese government, in effect, subsidized the development of the Prius could have serious political repercussions.

Oddly, Press’s remarks must be welcome news to Bob Lutz at General Motors. Last week, Lutz told reporters at the New York Auto Show that GM made a mistake when it didn’t introduce a hybrid vehicle at the time it had the technology to do so.
He blamed the company for failing to produce the car, even at a loss, and now having to play catch-up to the Prius in the market. He also offered that “mistake” as an excuse for producing the Chevy Volt at a loss to GM’s shareholders.

Press’s remarks make GM look better that Lutz’ own explanation. GM’s “mistake” may have been a calculation made in good faith, without a complete understanding of the financial support being provided by the Japanese government.

Had GM’s development costs been paid by the United States government, no doubt it would have viewed the profit potential for a marketable version of the EV1, for example, somewhat more positively.

Is Press telling the truth?

Bet on it.

 

Destination & Handling fee:

Infiniti G35 (Tochigi, Japan) - $765
Cadillac CTS (Lansing, Michigan) - $745

Hyundai Azera (Asan, South Korea) - $695
Chevrolet Impala (Oshawa, Canada) - $750

 

Now maybe we can figure out what this one was really all about.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8142612

Toyota boss fears backlash if GM, Ford falter

Chairman Okuda again suggests raising vehicle prices in U.S.

MSNBC staff and news service reports
updated 12:39 p.m. CT, Wed., June. 8, 2005

OSAKA, Japan - In the interest of preserving relations between Japan and the United States, the chairman of Toyota Motor Corp. Wednesday suggested his company might raise vehicle prices in America to support U.S. automakers.

Hiroshi Okuda said Wednesday he feared the possibility that U.S. policy could turn against Japanese auto makers if local giants such as GM and Ford were to collapse.

“Many people say the car industry wouldn’t revisit the kind of trade friction we saw in the past because Japanese auto makers are increasing local production in the United States, but I don’t think it’s that simple,”:yup: Okuda told a news conference.

“General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. are symbols of U.S. industry, and if they were to crumble it could fan nationalistic sentiment. I always have a fear that that in turn could manifest itself in policy decisions,” he said, speaking as the head of the nation’s biggest business lobby, the Japan Business Federation.

Okuda, who as chairman is removed from the auto maker’s day-to-day operations, raised eyebrows and invited criticism on both sides of the Pacific when he said two months ago that Toyota should think about ways in which it could aid U.S. auto makers — such as by raising product prices — as they reel under massive health-care costs and sliding sales. -

Sooooo - do you think he means if the Americans realized that things like Lexuses and Priuses had been 'dumped' and or subsidized ..............

 

I'm a little confused, can someone please tell me what "dumped" means?

 

dumping is defined as the act of a manufacturer in one country exporting a product to another country at a price which is either below the price it charges in its home market or is below its costs of production.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)

 

I love how in the United States we champion the free market economy, and we practice a fairly low level of protectionism, however no one else does and it just hurts our industries. its ridiculous. Toyota and JApan for that matter take full advantage of our stupid idealism. Toyota and dumping are to words that go together in any international affairs/econimics/business class.

It has been suspected for years that toyota takes a huge loss on every prius. As well as everyone knowing most of japanese industry is subsidized by the government. The United States and our industries play on an imaginary level playing field.

 

It has been suspected for years that toyota takes a huge loss on every prius. As well as everyone knowing most of japanese industry is subsidized by the government. The United States and our industries play on an imaginary level playing field.

Yes....but I prefer to think of it as them (the Japanese) taking advantage of our 'blissful ignorance'....