3 ms·

Also, the main assumption is that the consumer have been duped. Most of the people that I know that buy VW car ( which is a lot of them considering it is one of

by gutnor 11y ago

Also, the main assumption is that the consumer have been duped. Most of the people that I know that buy VW car ( which is a lot of them considering it is one of the most popular brand where I come from ) do it for reliability, consumption, price. i.e. running cost of the vehicule. The rest is also interested by performance, look, ... Pollution is only important because tax level of the car is directly related to the emission of the car. IMO that is highly unlikely that government will take action against car owner like retroactive taxation, so as far as customers are concerned, nothing has changed. As an illustration, I remember as a kid when VW turbo diesel became really performant. Since Diesel is much cheaper, diesel car became really popular. People were claiming that they did it for the environment as at the time, diesel was thought to be cleaner. A decade or more later, diesel was recognised as being more polluting but that did not change at all the diesel use in the country at all. ( Let's be realistic for a moment - Prius type car are popular but they would have stormed the market if pollution was a top concern for people. Instead, we got SUV taking the European market by storm - SUV !!! ) So yeah that will be rough time for VW, but the analysis in the document does not seem realistic at all.

aioprisan 11y ago
> Also, the main assumption is that the consumer have been duped. That main assumption is correct. When your car resale value tanks and you'll have to sell your car at a massive loss, you've been duped. When you've paid a massive premium for a more rapidly depreciating asset due to willfully deceptive marketing, you've been duped. When you can't re-register your car because it doesn't comply with emission standards in your state and you lose your economic livelihood, you've been duped.
- gutnor 11y ago
  To have a massive loss in resale value, it would need to affect the car reliability. Government action against car owners is unlikely for the very reason you list (i.e. it would only affect primarily the victim), and the yearly emission checks your car need to pass are way less restrictive than for new cars. I see what you are saying and agree that it is a possible scenario. But it does not match to the reality around me or even the trends like european fastest growing car segment being SUV and Crossovers. Pollution on its own merit and not simply as a tax artefact is just not something that people look for and the article fails to give any sort of metric to prove I'm wrong.
  - aioprisan 11y ago
    >To have a massive loss in resale value, it would need to affect the car reliability. No, it doesn't. To have a massive loss in resale value, other people contributing to the car sale/purchasing market need to be willing to pay less for that car. A car that now pollutes like a semi, will have worse fuel economy or handling after a fix, and has a tarnished image is likely to have a massive loss in resale value, when compared to others who do not have those values. And you better believe their competitors will take advantage of this problem and widen the gap even further.
DanBC 11y ago
> Pollution is only important because tax level of the car is directly related to the emission of the car. That ignores the thousands killed by pollution each year, and the increased spending of health services directly caused by pollution.
- gutnor 11y ago
  Well I agree with you but the market does not. Actually you would not need tax reduction if it did.

by gutnor 11y ago

aioprisan 11y ago

> Also, the main assumption is that the consumer have been duped. That main assumption is correct. When your car resale value tanks and you'll have to sell your car at a massive loss, you've been duped. When you've paid a massive premium for a more rapidly depreciating asset due to willfully deceptive marketing, you've been duped. When you can't re-register your car because it doesn't comply with emission standards in your state and you lose your economic livelihood, you've been duped.

gutnor 11y ago
To have a massive loss in resale value, it would need to affect the car reliability. Government action against car owners is unlikely for the very reason you list (i.e. it would only affect primarily the victim), and the yearly emission checks your car need to pass are way less restrictive than for new cars. I see what you are saying and agree that it is a possible scenario. But it does not match to the reality around me or even the trends like european fastest growing car segment being SUV and Crossovers. Pollution on its own merit and not simply as a tax artefact is just not something that people look for and the article fails to give any sort of metric to prove I'm wrong.
- aioprisan 11y ago
  >To have a massive loss in resale value, it would need to affect the car reliability. No, it doesn't. To have a massive loss in resale value, other people contributing to the car sale/purchasing market need to be willing to pay less for that car. A car that now pollutes like a semi, will have worse fuel economy or handling after a fix, and has a tarnished image is likely to have a massive loss in resale value, when compared to others who do not have those values. And you better believe their competitors will take advantage of this problem and widen the gap even further.

DanBC 11y ago

> Pollution is only important because tax level of the car is directly related to the emission of the car. That ignores the thousands killed by pollution each year, and the increased spending of health services directly caused by pollution.

gutnor 11y ago
Well I agree with you but the market does not. Actually you would not need tax reduction if it did.