Slashdot Mirror
Car Makers Used Software To Raise Spare Parts Prices (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Ever had the nagging suspicion that your car's manufacturer was charging outrageous prices for parts simply because it could? Software might be to blame. Reuters has obtained documents from a lawsuit indicating that Jaguar Land Rover, Peugeot, Renault and other automakers have been using Accenture software (Partneo) that recommended price increases for spare parts based on "perceived value." If a brand badge or other component looked expensive, Partneo would suggest raising the price up to a level that drivers would still be willing to pay. It would even distinguish parts based on whether or not there was "pricing supervision" over certain parts (say, from insurance companies or focused publications) to avoid sparking an outcry.
I work in Operations Research, and am still very often surprised at how often people DON'T think about things like this. To me, it makes perfect sense...but then again, maybe that's why I'm in the field.
Damn those silly algorithms and expressions organizing themselves in a way to make extra money for a completely uninvolved party who happened to deploy them. The nerve of them!
The practice may be automated now, but it's been going on for literally decades. Even as far back as the 1980s and 1970s, you could swap parts between Corvettes and other cars. The part numbers would be different, but the equipment itself would be functionally identical. Funny how the part for the Corvette always cost several times as much; I'm sure it's purely because there were fewer Corvettes on the road (than, say, Citations or Skylarks), so the manufacturing costs were higher, right? Riiiiiiight
The price of a thing is always cost plus, where "plus" is defined by what the market will endure. If you can keep the cost hidden (see also: US healthcare) or obscure the availability of a thing (nearly-identical parts with different labels, with only one label approved for your application), the market will endure a hell of a shafting until the house of cards comes down.
Pining for the days when The Glorious MEEPT!!! graced SlapDash with his wisdom.
A while back, Toyota claimed I needed a new exhaust pipe for my Echo - $2,900 for the part alone. Quote from a reputable 3rd party repair shop: $400 including labour. It was just a bent pipe after all.
Final cost? Free. I took it into a repair shop and he just welded over the holes, used old wire hangers. It took him so little time he didn't bother charging me.
I understand supply and demand, and pricing for profitability. There is branding, and market positioning.
My long experience owning a lot of cars and restoring 90% of them as both a hobby and side-money, is that I walk away from the Accenture-like pricing brands completely. If the aftermarket or a boneyard can't supply a part that allows me a profit, I walk from that brand.
Brands that have a good aftermarket supply chain: GM, Ford, Ford Truck, Chrysler mini vans
Brands that I won't touch that I used to do: Jaguar, MG, Rover, Austin, Mini, Subaru, Fiat, Peugot diesels
Brands that I'll currently do: Honda, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, pre-1998 VW, certain Audis.
My goal is not to lose money, and make sure a vehicle isn't coming back from a dissatisfied customer. I outsource body/interior work.
Some vehicles have a strong enough statistical presence to force down prices. I go to dealers only as a last resort, and dealer parts networks are wickedly un-coordinated. Looking at you, Honda. Over the years, I've done plenty. Plainly, some brands are insane (looking at you, Mini). Consumers suffer. But I believe that the market place should decide, and let the assholes that over-price themselves get a bad rep, then crater. So long as the governments don't bail out the losers, I'm fine with watching brands disappear like Saab did.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Are Honda's expensive to maintain?
As a general proposition they're generally pretty affordable to maintain. They're generally pretty high on the reliability charts and speaking from first hand experience the maintenance on them is generally pretty reasonable in comparison to other makes. I've got a Honda with around 180K miles on it and I expect to get to 250K baring something odd happening.
The harness is easier to install during production if it has as few connectors as possible.
Speaking as someone who makes harnesses for OEMs, minimizing the number and variety of connectors does not appear to be a substantial concern of the automakers. You would not believe how fragmented the wire harness industry is.