Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement |  |  |
Expect the best, and accept no substitute. |
Products for your Boxster, Cayman and Carrera. |
 | |
| Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement Bob G - Monday, 18 November, 2013, at 5:43:49 pm |
Dear Pedro, after the disappointing terms of the IMS Class Action settlement were made public, I was curious what role PCA had played as an advocate for its members who are affected by the issue. It would seem to me that one of the most important functions of an organization like PCA is to go to bat for its membership when something important to many members is on the line.
By way of answer, I am told that PCA was not involved in the course of the proceeding, but "watched its progress."
I thought that was quite interesting, and imagine that you and others will too.
My '08 987 is probably less susceptible to IMS bearing failure than cars of 2001-05 vintage, but failure remains a possibility. Alternatively, a reliable aftermarket "fix" is available, but of course at my expense.
Perhaps I was foolish in believing my 27-year membership promised support in a time of need. Perhaps it only brings me the right to genuflect.
By way of answer, I am told that PCA was not involved in the course of the proceeding, but "watched its progress."
I thought that was quite interesting, and imagine that you and others will too.
My '08 987 is probably less susceptible to IMS bearing failure than cars of 2001-05 vintage, but failure remains a possibility. Alternatively, a reliable aftermarket "fix" is available, but of course at my expense.
Perhaps I was foolish in believing my 27-year membership promised support in a time of need. Perhaps it only brings me the right to genuflect.
| If you were running a large enthiusiast organization.... grant - Monday, 18 November, 2013, at 6:13:04 pm |
| Re: If you were running a large enthiusiast organization.... Bob G - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 12:45:09 am |
It would have been very easy for PCA to survey the membership and gather information on just how many members have encountered the IMS bearing problem. This would have been a great help to the class action plaintiffs' case. But PCA did nothing. And a lot of 9x6 owners are excluded from the settlement, left to pony up big money to repair what should have been designed properly in the first place.
I believe a club like PCA has a responsibility to its members to act in their behalf when issues arise. A club like this with a huge membership has tremendous muscle -- should it choose to use it. But apparently the leadership believes it must make nice and never utter a critical word, or Porsche will get angry, and . . . no soup for you!.
By comparison, Mercedes-Benz Club of America got on MBUSA's case big time during a spate of reliability problems a few years ago. Officials promised to do better things, and have delivered. Now that's advocacy!
No wonder Porsche loves PCA. It's an admiration society. Guess I'd better practice my genuflecting before the next Parade. .
I believe a club like PCA has a responsibility to its members to act in their behalf when issues arise. A club like this with a huge membership has tremendous muscle -- should it choose to use it. But apparently the leadership believes it must make nice and never utter a critical word, or Porsche will get angry, and . . . no soup for you!.
By comparison, Mercedes-Benz Club of America got on MBUSA's case big time during a spate of reliability problems a few years ago. Officials promised to do better things, and have delivered. Now that's advocacy!
No wonder Porsche loves PCA. It's an admiration society. Guess I'd better practice my genuflecting before the next Parade. .
| You're upset at the wrong group of people.... Pedro (Odessa, FL) - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 7:49:29 am |
PCA has no culpability in any of this.
You need to be upset with Porsche as the manufacturer and with the lawyers who put together the suit.
The reason the majority of the 9x6s were excluded from the Class Action Lawsuit is because the lawyers wanted a sure win and a quick buck.
They went with a small subset of the cars that would almost assure a settlement.
Going with the whole lot of M96/M97 cars would have been a massive and riskier undertaking.
If I was a PCA officer I would have recommended the same as what they did:
Don't get involved but inform the membership.
Happy Porscheing
Pedro
Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"
"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna
You need to be upset with Porsche as the manufacturer and with the lawyers who put together the suit.
The reason the majority of the 9x6s were excluded from the Class Action Lawsuit is because the lawyers wanted a sure win and a quick buck.
They went with a small subset of the cars that would almost assure a settlement.
Going with the whole lot of M96/M97 cars would have been a massive and riskier undertaking.
If I was a PCA officer I would have recommended the same as what they did:
Don't get involved but inform the membership.
Happy Porscheing
Pedro
Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"
"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna
| Re: You're upset at the wrong group of people.... Bob G - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 8:31:55 am |
I blame Porsche too, Pedro.
Obviously, you and I disagree on a car club's responsibility to its members. I respect that, but continue to feel that there have been numerous occasions over the past 50-some years when PCA could have been of service to the membership by offering constructive criticism to Porsche AG, but have elected instead to remain an admiration society.
Inform the membership? How? I've corresponded with Pete Stout, but asking him to publish a letter in Pano would be unfair to him. Besides that, a "dirty laundry" letter in a club organ would be inappropriate. Of course, if Pete wanted to bring up the issue, perhaps in a more general, philosophical manner in an editorial, that would be different. But I won't ask him to do so.
Obviously, you and I disagree on a car club's responsibility to its members. I respect that, but continue to feel that there have been numerous occasions over the past 50-some years when PCA could have been of service to the membership by offering constructive criticism to Porsche AG, but have elected instead to remain an admiration society.
Inform the membership? How? I've corresponded with Pete Stout, but asking him to publish a letter in Pano would be unfair to him. Besides that, a "dirty laundry" letter in a club organ would be inappropriate. Of course, if Pete wanted to bring up the issue, perhaps in a more general, philosophical manner in an editorial, that would be different. But I won't ask him to do so.
| Another misguided attack on the lawyers Roger987 - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 5:29:24 pm |
quoting Pedro:
"You need to be upset with Porsche as the manufacturer and with the lawyers who put together the suit.
The reason the majority of the 9x6s were excluded from the Class Action Lawsuit is because the lawyers wanted a sure win and a quick buck."
If other people (those who were 'excluded' from the class action suit) want to bring his own suit, they can give it a shot.
"They went with a small subset of the cars that would almost assure a settlement."
Pedro, there is rarely (never, in my experience) such a thing as a 'sure win'. In fact, most that might appear to be at the outset, turn out to be anything but.
The lawyers who took on the claim undoubtedly devoted their time, effort and money to it. If they managed to generate some income for themselves, great - they get to live to another day and advance future clients' interests.
"Going with the whole lot of M96/M97 cars would have been a massive and riskier undertaking."
And the lawyers should take on that claim out of the kindness of their hearts???
Interestingly, I've not had any mechanics approach me and offer to do a free IMS replacement, or even offer a free IMS bearing, or DOF parts. Indeed, the inventor of the DOF has gone so far as to obtain a patent, to protect his financial interests. And that's fine with me - it's called capitalism, and (are you sitting down, Pedro?), it's the same context in which lawyers work.
There's no suggestion the lawyers who conducted the class action suit did anything unprofessional or unethical. They (may have) made some money. Good for them.
And, Pedro, if you make money from the ingenuity of your DOF, and the time and effort you devoted to it, from beginning to end, good for you. I won't begrudge you a cent of it. Indeed, I'll likely contribute to your coffers.
"You need to be upset with Porsche as the manufacturer and with the lawyers who put together the suit.
The reason the majority of the 9x6s were excluded from the Class Action Lawsuit is because the lawyers wanted a sure win and a quick buck."
If other people (those who were 'excluded' from the class action suit) want to bring his own suit, they can give it a shot.
"They went with a small subset of the cars that would almost assure a settlement."
Pedro, there is rarely (never, in my experience) such a thing as a 'sure win'. In fact, most that might appear to be at the outset, turn out to be anything but.
The lawyers who took on the claim undoubtedly devoted their time, effort and money to it. If they managed to generate some income for themselves, great - they get to live to another day and advance future clients' interests.
"Going with the whole lot of M96/M97 cars would have been a massive and riskier undertaking."
And the lawyers should take on that claim out of the kindness of their hearts???
Interestingly, I've not had any mechanics approach me and offer to do a free IMS replacement, or even offer a free IMS bearing, or DOF parts. Indeed, the inventor of the DOF has gone so far as to obtain a patent, to protect his financial interests. And that's fine with me - it's called capitalism, and (are you sitting down, Pedro?), it's the same context in which lawyers work.
There's no suggestion the lawyers who conducted the class action suit did anything unprofessional or unethical. They (may have) made some money. Good for them.
And, Pedro, if you make money from the ingenuity of your DOF, and the time and effort you devoted to it, from beginning to end, good for you. I won't begrudge you a cent of it. Indeed, I'll likely contribute to your coffers.
| Re: Another misguided attack on the lawyers Pedro (Odessa, FL) - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 9:35:06 pm |
Quote
Roger987
There's no suggestion the lawyers who conducted the class action suit did anything unprofessional or unethical. They (may have) made some money.
Roger, where in my post do I make such a suggestion?
I'm not attacking all lawyers either, not even these lawyers.
I'm just stating some facts, responding to the OP who is upset at PCA, and in my opinion shouldn't be.
Happy Porsche'ing
Pedro
Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"
"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2013 10:42PM by Pedro (Weston, FL). (view changes)
| Re: Another misguided attack on the lawyers Roger987 - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 11:37:27 pm |
"Roger, where in my post do I make such a suggestion?"
You didn't, explicitly. But, your suggestion that the OP should be upset with the lawyers would lead a reasonable person to infer you feel the lawyers did something bad/wrong/inappropriate. If not, why should he be upset with them?. And your reference to making a 'quick buck' might be reasonably construed as pejorative.
"I'm not attacking all lawyers either, not even these lawyers."
Good.
You didn't, explicitly. But, your suggestion that the OP should be upset with the lawyers would lead a reasonable person to infer you feel the lawyers did something bad/wrong/inappropriate. If not, why should he be upset with them?. And your reference to making a 'quick buck' might be reasonably construed as pejorative.
"I'm not attacking all lawyers either, not even these lawyers."
Good.
 What do you do for a living?  Gary in SoFL - Wednesday, 20 November, 2013, at 1:37:22 pm |
| Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement Guenter in Ontario - Monday, 18 November, 2013, at 8:00:52 pm |
I think we have to remember that PCA - Porsche Club of America, is not a union to help its members with legal matters. It was formed to help people meet other Porsche owners and help them get the most out of their cars through activities like social gatherings, Parade, Fun Runs, racing, technical sessions and information.
To keep us informed about what was happening with the IMS Class Action Settlement, is certainly part of what the PCA mission statement is all about.
From the PCA website, here is their mission statement. To see what PCA is all about, you can visit this page: [www.pca.org]
The Porsche has no equal, and since 1955, the Porsche Club of America has catered to the particular needs and interests of the Porsche owner. Our main mission is to heighten the Porsche owning and driving experience, which we accomplish by meeting a number of objectives:
To promote the highest standards of courtesy and safety on the roads.
To enjoy and share good will and fellowship engendered by owning a Porsche.
To maintain the highest standards of operation and performance of the marque.
To establish mutually beneficial relationships with the Porsche factory, dealers and other service sources.
To exchange ideas with other Porsche Clubs throughout the world.
To establish mutually cooperative relationships with other sports car clubs.
To keep us informed about what was happening with the IMS Class Action Settlement, is certainly part of what the PCA mission statement is all about.
From the PCA website, here is their mission statement. To see what PCA is all about, you can visit this page: [www.pca.org]
The Porsche has no equal, and since 1955, the Porsche Club of America has catered to the particular needs and interests of the Porsche owner. Our main mission is to heighten the Porsche owning and driving experience, which we accomplish by meeting a number of objectives:
To promote the highest standards of courtesy and safety on the roads.
To enjoy and share good will and fellowship engendered by owning a Porsche.
To maintain the highest standards of operation and performance of the marque.
To establish mutually beneficial relationships with the Porsche factory, dealers and other service sources.
To exchange ideas with other Porsche Clubs throughout the world.
To establish mutually cooperative relationships with other sports car clubs.
| Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement jlegelis - Monday, 18 November, 2013, at 8:27:14 pm |
Well put, Guenther. While I too wish for far more transparency on the IMS 'issue' (yes, deliberate quotes in the absence of public data, not to gainsay IMS experience here and other places), I think PCA is very wise to keep an arms length, lest it bites the hand that feeds it. Frustrating I'm sure to some, but it would be a very slippery slope indeed if PCA started down that road. I'm happy to leave this one for the lawyers...
| Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement chris & 987 - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 3:59:46 pm |
A lot of people are giving porsche and pca a pass here. Are you intimidated ?
If you answer yes- then you may be admitting that the porsche brand, and it's un-assailable high engineering standards (fallen idol) are now tainted and flawed by the ims issue
If no, then your exhibiting and emulating their behavoir. In other words ignoring or poo-poo the issue (because I can afford to buy another one approach) and hope it goes away.
If you answer yes- then you may be admitting that the porsche brand, and it's un-assailable high engineering standards (fallen idol) are now tainted and flawed by the ims issue
If no, then your exhibiting and emulating their behavoir. In other words ignoring or poo-poo the issue (because I can afford to buy another one approach) and hope it goes away.
| Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement chris & 987 - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 3:44:09 pm |
Quote
Guenter in Ontario
I think we have to remember that PCA - Porsche Club of America, is not a union to help its members with legal matters. It was formed to help people meet other Porsche owners and help them get the most out of their cars through activities like social gatherings, Parade, Fun Runs, racing, technical sessions and information.
To keep us informed about what was happening with the IMS Class Action Settlement, is certainly part of what the PCA mission statement is all about.
From the PCA website, here is their mission statement. To see what PCA is all about, you can visit this page: [www.pca.org]
The Porsche has no equal, and since 1955, the Porsche Club of America has catered to the particular needs and interests of the Porsche owner. Our main mission is to heighten the Porsche owning and driving experience, which we accomplish by meeting a number of objectives:
To promote the highest standards of courtesy and safety on the roads.
To enjoy and share good will and fellowship engendered by owning a Porsche.
To maintain the highest standards of operation and performance of the marque.
To establish mutually beneficial relationships with the Porsche factory, dealers and other service sources.
To exchange ideas with other Porsche Clubs throughout the world.
To establish mutually cooperative relationships with other sports car clubs.
I have to chime in here that I agree with Bob's position about PCA and their perceived position between the end user and maunfacturer as he stated " I was curious what role PCA had played as an advocate for its members who are affected by the issue. It would seem to me that one of the most important functions of an organization like PCA is to go to bat for its membership when something important to many members is on the line."
In fact their mission stated as pointed out earlier SHOULD lead one to believe the same based on the language in their mission statement: to wit items such as:
1. main mission- heighten the Porsche owning and driving experience - the assumption here is that you are driving a safe car that wont blow the IMS at any given point.
2. promote the highest standards of courtesy and safety on the roads.- P Cars are sold at a premium price (new and used)for a reason- they are expected to be top performers w/minimal issues.
3. To maintain the highest standards of operation and performance of the marque.- Doesnt this lend itself to near zero defect workmanship? where is PCS advocacy position on this? Is it all just bluster? If yes, they should say so.
Using Bob;s case and situation I would have to ask of PCA the following? Are you an advocate for porsche and the end users yes or no? To skew the answer I would ask..Would PCA need for the IMS to go thru someones brain and kill them before they would be an advocate of safety related to the ims?: of course not but where do they draw this line?
bottom line is porsche has a defect, and pca has acknowledge it, as well as our p-forums and porsche has taken minimal steps to correct the issue and protect our investments, fiscal, social, and any other qualities you may want to include. bear in mind some of these investments are lifetime investments!
By not supporting their own membership and by porsche not correcting the defect - in the ims issue - they, PCA, become complicit by virtue of taking no stand at all!
excuse the typos and grammar and respond to the argument w/o ad hominem and porsche bias. Like our homes, boats, cars, businesses these p-cars are protected assets. That fact cannot be diminished by PCAs or Porsche's uneasy, standoff-ish, position (legal or otherwise) when it comes to under-engineering a defective component that could cause a deadline fault of the car and any activity it may be engaged in at the time.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2013 03:46PM by chris & 987. (view changes)
| PCA gets some funding directly from Porsche & Let's be smarter consumers of myth Bruce In Philly (2000 S Boxster, now '09 C2S) - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 9:07:23 am |
I remember reading in their financial statements in Panorama a few years ago that the club is partially funded directly from Porsche. Anyone have a Panorama handy to obtain the numbers?
That fuding is OK by me. Unfortunately this whole class action suite is a lawyer thing and not a group of good folks dealing with their partner, the company. Porsche has hid this and denied it.. No, they are not bad people or evil or whatever, they are a business driving profits for their shareholders and executives and that is totally fine.. I doubt the voices of a club would have changed anything. BMW had engine problems and they sent notices to their customers extending their warranties to 100K miles. Why Porsche did not do something similar is surprising to me, but they didn't and now they are breaking sales records. These are business decisions not the moral ones of a married couple. I really doubt the club could have done anything.
The power to drive change is in the market's hands... you and me. What did I do after two engine failures? I purchased another one, albeit with the redesigned engine. Go figure. I guess they are smarter than all of us. I think we consumers make a fundamental error in judgement when we see a product that we like.... we put emotions into the equation and that clouds our judgement of the seller. We think Porsche is our buddy. Just like we think champion ice skaters are wonderful "Ice Princesses", or great baseball players have special wisdom for success in life, or great artists have special insight into human nature, or politicians really care about us...... etc etc etc ad nauseum...... Ever hear the phrase Caveat Emptor? I think our free enterprise system is fantastic and I am no way calling for government to fix anything... but, we need to be just a bit smart about all of it. Don't like it? Buy something else.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
That fuding is OK by me. Unfortunately this whole class action suite is a lawyer thing and not a group of good folks dealing with their partner, the company. Porsche has hid this and denied it.. No, they are not bad people or evil or whatever, they are a business driving profits for their shareholders and executives and that is totally fine.. I doubt the voices of a club would have changed anything. BMW had engine problems and they sent notices to their customers extending their warranties to 100K miles. Why Porsche did not do something similar is surprising to me, but they didn't and now they are breaking sales records. These are business decisions not the moral ones of a married couple. I really doubt the club could have done anything.
The power to drive change is in the market's hands... you and me. What did I do after two engine failures? I purchased another one, albeit with the redesigned engine. Go figure. I guess they are smarter than all of us. I think we consumers make a fundamental error in judgement when we see a product that we like.... we put emotions into the equation and that clouds our judgement of the seller. We think Porsche is our buddy. Just like we think champion ice skaters are wonderful "Ice Princesses", or great baseball players have special wisdom for success in life, or great artists have special insight into human nature, or politicians really care about us...... etc etc etc ad nauseum...... Ever hear the phrase Caveat Emptor? I think our free enterprise system is fantastic and I am no way calling for government to fix anything... but, we need to be just a bit smart about all of it. Don't like it? Buy something else.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
| Re: PCA gets some funding directly from Porsche & Let's be smarter consumers of myth SteveJ (2010 987 base, manual trans) - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 9:38:26 am |
I completely agree, Bruce. I would add that the members of this forum represent a small subset of Porsche customers. I thank PPBB and now Pedro's Board for educating me on the possibilities of engine failure on 986 and early 987 Boxsters. I waited until I could buy a car with the new engine before making a purchase. There have been reports of failures unrelated to IMS on the earlier motors, so the issue is a bit more complicated than one might think at first.
MikenOH - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 10:59:36 am |
As far as raising the role of PCA on this IMS issue, if you go through the tech session discussions in the Pano archives, the various problems with this motor--IMS/slipped sleeves--have be discussed in detail and the tech writers didn't come off as apologists IIRC.Short of raising the issue with their members in as factual a way as they can, I'm not sure what else they could have done. As Grant mentioned, Porsche had the numbers on failures and I don't think they made them public until the class action attorneys got involved. Speaking of attorneys, Pedro--do know how much the class action attorneys got paid on this? % of settlement?
Bruce-you are dead on regarding the analogy with the BMW engine problems, IIRC, which involved early E46 M3 motors grenading.
They tried to blow off the problem initially, but soon realized it was their problem and it affected a lot of people. The extended warranty was the solution to protect their name and their customers investment in the cars; MB also did this in the same time frame on a different engine issue.
Porsche chose not to go down that road for their own reasons, going the class action route which I think mitigated their potential expenses on making the problem go away. Good for Porsche, no so good if you're an owner that got stuck paying for this out of your own pocket or have an model with the design that hasn't failed but may have lost significant resale value.
I think Porsche has read their market well and knows what the hot button is for their current and potential buyers;that knowledge keeps the faithful coming back, while bringing in new aficionados pursuing the same dream.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2013 11:01AM by MikenOH. (view changes)
Bruce-you are dead on regarding the analogy with the BMW engine problems, IIRC, which involved early E46 M3 motors grenading.
They tried to blow off the problem initially, but soon realized it was their problem and it affected a lot of people. The extended warranty was the solution to protect their name and their customers investment in the cars; MB also did this in the same time frame on a different engine issue.
Porsche chose not to go down that road for their own reasons, going the class action route which I think mitigated their potential expenses on making the problem go away. Good for Porsche, no so good if you're an owner that got stuck paying for this out of your own pocket or have an model with the design that hasn't failed but may have lost significant resale value.
I think Porsche has read their market well and knows what the hot button is for their current and potential buyers;that knowledge keeps the faithful coming back, while bringing in new aficionados pursuing the same dream.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2013 11:01AM by MikenOH. (view changes)
| A contrasting view mikefocke, '01S Sanford, NC - Tuesday, 19 November, 2013, at 9:20:31 pm |
of how a manufacturer views its responsibility to its customers and how valuable it considers its reputation is in the letter Tesla just sent to its owners in response to the firestorm over 3 car fires.
The letter made several points, two I think are important.
You are 4-5 times more likely to have a fine in a gas powered car after an accident than in an electric car based on independently gathered statistics.
If your car burns up or has a battery fire for any reason including an accident and you did nothing to make it happen, Tesla will make the car owner whole. If any cause is found, they will apply the fix to any Tesla of any vintage free of charge.
They go on to say they have asked for an independent investigation by IIHS. And that either they are right and it will cost them a trivial amount or, if they are wrong, they should make it right. And they don't want their customers suffering undue depreciation or increased insurance rates.
A management/owner with a long term view of the value of a customer.
The letter made several points, two I think are important.
You are 4-5 times more likely to have a fine in a gas powered car after an accident than in an electric car based on independently gathered statistics.
If your car burns up or has a battery fire for any reason including an accident and you did nothing to make it happen, Tesla will make the car owner whole. If any cause is found, they will apply the fix to any Tesla of any vintage free of charge.
They go on to say they have asked for an independent investigation by IIHS. And that either they are right and it will cost them a trivial amount or, if they are wrong, they should make it right. And they don't want their customers suffering undue depreciation or increased insurance rates.
A management/owner with a long term view of the value of a customer.
| Re: A contrasting view chris & 987 - Wednesday, 20 November, 2013, at 7:17:01 pm |
If your car burns up or has a battery fire for any reason including an accident and you did nothing to make it happen, Tesla will make the car owner whole
^^^ Assuming that the driver/owner survived the fire, they will make them "whole". WTH does that mean? ^^^^
Just another car manufacturer ensuring they have some wiggle room for their defects.
^^^ Assuming that the driver/owner survived the fire, they will make them "whole". WTH does that mean? ^^^^
Just another car manufacturer ensuring they have some wiggle room for their defects.
| Re: A contrasting view mikefocke, '01S Sanford, NC - Wednesday, 20 November, 2013, at 9:00:58 pm |
"Third, to reinforce how strongly we feel about the low risk of fire in our cars, we will be amending our warranty policy to cover damage due to a fire, even if due to driver error. Unless a Model S owner actively tries to destroy the car, they are covered. Our goal here is to eliminate any concern about the cost of such an event and ensure that over time the Model S has the lowest insurance cost of any car at our price point. Either our belief in the safety of our car is correct and this is a minor cost or we are wrong, in which case the right thing is for Tesla to bear the cost rather than the car buyer."
Sounds like an owner speaking plainly, not wiggling.
Sounds like an owner speaking plainly, not wiggling.
| Re: A contrasting view chris & 987 - Thursday, 21 November, 2013, at 12:44:52 am |
| Re: A contrasting view paulwdenton - Thursday, 21 November, 2013, at 2:18:28 pm |
To make someone "whole" means to restore them to the situation they were in before the incident; i.e., Tesla will either repair or replace the car with one that is equivalent, and I'm sure they will take mileage and depreciation into account when they do so, which is completely appropriate. What else do you think they mean? Besides, to publicly promise to make someone "whole" would open them up to all kinds of bad publicity if an owner-victim wasn't happy with Tesla's resolution. Regardless of your view, almost any publicly-announced policy to do right by one's customers is a damn sight better than some unadvertised and randomly applied "goodwill" that you get if and when Porsche feels like it and the dealer decides that you are worthy.
| Re: A contrasting view Roger987 - Thursday, 21 November, 2013, at 7:46:52 pm |
| Re: A contrasting view chris & 987 - Thursday, 21 November, 2013, at 9:22:03 pm |
well said. tesla will make you whole if your car catches on fire. porsche wont care if your car's ims blows.
the argument at some point earlier was do you believe that PCA, who proclaims to be an advocate for porsche owners, mission statement is in this thread somewhere, is taking an appropriate position, by not taking a position at all, other than passing along readily available information, or whether they should be expected, by card carrying, lifetime members, to do more in regards to siding with porsche owners who have been operating a known defect.
IMHO I dont give a damn about either manufacturers comments, making me whole or gestures of goodwill. I dont cater to either one: nor would i expect them to do anything In my favor without me compelling them to do so. But I am happy that you are passoniate about tesla. from a marketing perspective.. they are on fire!
the argument at some point earlier was do you believe that PCA, who proclaims to be an advocate for porsche owners, mission statement is in this thread somewhere, is taking an appropriate position, by not taking a position at all, other than passing along readily available information, or whether they should be expected, by card carrying, lifetime members, to do more in regards to siding with porsche owners who have been operating a known defect.
IMHO I dont give a damn about either manufacturers comments, making me whole or gestures of goodwill. I dont cater to either one: nor would i expect them to do anything In my favor without me compelling them to do so. But I am happy that you are passoniate about tesla. from a marketing perspective.. they are on fire!
| Not pasionate about Tesla mikefocke, '01S Sanford, NC - Saturday, 23 November, 2013, at 9:27:18 pm |
Beyond their doing what I've wished Porsche would have done all along and that is take the financially responsible long term view that your current customer is valuable to you as a brand and is the cheapest future customer you'll ever get. Your current customer will also tell all who ask and some who don't about how they feel about the brand. And people buy on the recommendations of their friends far more often than because of expensive ads. Most people don't want to feel like a bozo who drives a car their friends don't admire.
Imagine if the forums were full of stories about how Joe brought his car in for service and camshaft deviation was checked and the car needed to be held a day or two longer so Porsche could fit a new improved part even out of warranty. Lowered depreciation due to brand confidence would help current/former customers into a new Porsche and not away from the brand. Dealers would gain from increased service loyalty and the labor hours they would be billing. PCA would gain new members. Porsche would gain but only by taking a multi-year view and not a quarter to quarter view. So everyone could have won.
But it is over now, the cars are so old it doesn't make as much financial sense as it did 4 or so years ago. The brand damage is done.
PCA is dependent on Porsche advertising, car samples, etc. They would have to have a big set of b...s to go publicly against Porsche. But I would have expected some quiet whispering to the bigwigs saying things like "this is turning away many of your loyal customers, you really need to put some words in the parent company to do something".
Imagine if the forums were full of stories about how Joe brought his car in for service and camshaft deviation was checked and the car needed to be held a day or two longer so Porsche could fit a new improved part even out of warranty. Lowered depreciation due to brand confidence would help current/former customers into a new Porsche and not away from the brand. Dealers would gain from increased service loyalty and the labor hours they would be billing. PCA would gain new members. Porsche would gain but only by taking a multi-year view and not a quarter to quarter view. So everyone could have won.
But it is over now, the cars are so old it doesn't make as much financial sense as it did 4 or so years ago. The brand damage is done.
PCA is dependent on Porsche advertising, car samples, etc. They would have to have a big set of b...s to go publicly against Porsche. But I would have expected some quiet whispering to the bigwigs saying things like "this is turning away many of your loyal customers, you really need to put some words in the parent company to do something".
| Re: Not pasionate about Tesla chris & 987 - Sunday, 24 November, 2013, at 12:18:05 pm |
MikenOH - Sunday, 24 November, 2013, at 9:44:43 pm |
Quote
mikefocke, '01S Sanford, NC
Beyond their doing what I've wished Porsche would have done all along and that is take the financially responsible long term view that your current customer is valuable to you as a brand and is the cheapest future customer you'll ever get. Your current customer will also tell all who ask and some who don't about how they feel about the brand. And people buy on the recommendations of their friends far more often than because of expensive ads. Most people don't want to feel like a bozo who drives a car their friends don't admire.
Imagine if the forums were full of stories about how Joe brought his car in for service and camshaft deviation was checked and the car needed to be held a day or two longer so Porsche could fit a new improved part even out of warranty. Lowered depreciation due to brand confidence would help current/former customers into a new Porsche and not away from the brand. Dealers would gain from increased service loyalty and the labor hours they would be billing. PCA would gain new members. Porsche would gain but only by taking a multi-year view and not a quarter to quarter view. So everyone could have won.
But it is over now, the cars are so old it doesn't make as much financial sense as it did 4 or so years ago. The brand damage is done.
PCA is dependent on Porsche advertising, car samples, etc. They would have to have a big set of b...s to go publicly against Porsche. But I would have expected some quiet whispering to the bigwigs saying things like "this is turning away many of your loyal customers, you really need to put some words in the parent company to do something".
MikenOH - Sunday, 24 November, 2013, at 10:32:18 pm |
Without a doubt, the whole IMS issue has not been one of Porsche's sterling moments with regards to looking out for the best interests of their customers. They essentially replaced engines of original owners that failed under warranty--as they should have, had partial reimbursements for with failures just out of warranty and left others with no cover if they reached some sort of mileage/years in service threshold that Porsche determined to be outside of their responsibility. Second owners of cars with IMS failures were covered if there was an original or CPO warranty, but from reports I've seen have not faired well with a failure out of warranty.
Having said all that, at least with the 981 models, it seems PCNA has done a lot to help customers that have had problems with their new cars--as in throwing freebies at them to make up for their inconvenience--some totaling several thousand dollars:
[www.planet-9.com]
I saw a similar post on rennlist where a guy had a motor replaced on a 981 had got similar freebies.
Obviously, it would be better if the problems didn't exist, but having been on various Boxster forums for the past 14 years that I've owned various versions of the car, I don't recall PCNA throwing goodies at customers with problems to make them whole. I hope, at the least, it is a sign that they know owners remember significant car problems and that is is an attempt to buy some goodwill.
Having said all that, at least with the 981 models, it seems PCNA has done a lot to help customers that have had problems with their new cars--as in throwing freebies at them to make up for their inconvenience--some totaling several thousand dollars:
[www.planet-9.com]
I saw a similar post on rennlist where a guy had a motor replaced on a 981 had got similar freebies.
Obviously, it would be better if the problems didn't exist, but having been on various Boxster forums for the past 14 years that I've owned various versions of the car, I don't recall PCNA throwing goodies at customers with problems to make them whole. I hope, at the least, it is a sign that they know owners remember significant car problems and that is is an attempt to buy some goodwill.
| Re: Porsche Club of America on IMS Class Action Settlement Manny Alban - Tuesday, 26 November, 2013, at 10:47:05 am |
Hi everyone
My name is Manny Alban and I'm the current National President of PCA. Someone forwarded me a link to your discussion and I thought I would clear up some misinformation about PCA.
#1. PCA is not funded, owned or run by Porsche. It is a completely independent of PCNA and Porsche AG. Period. In fact, Porsche is not the largest when it comes to revenue from an advertiser/sponsor. Look at Pano closely, our #1 source of revenue is membership dues. Always has been, always will. It's required to remain a non-profit. Furthermore, the club's bylaws are being updated and within them will be a poison pill of sorts that will ensure that the club will always remain independent. Simply put. We're not for sale.
#2. Our Panorama Editor has a tremendous amount of editorial freedom. My only request was that he not print something that would land the club in court. Other than that, we told him to feel free to criticize, admonish or compliment. If you read Pano since January 2013, you will know that he's called Porsche out on different things in both his Editor's Column and features that he's written. Last I checked, Porsche did not put him on any blacklist for those comments. We don't micromanage Panorama. Much like the majority of leadership PCA, I'm simply a volunteer. I have a real 60 hour/week job. I have a hard enough time running the club much less trying to run the magazine.
#3. Do you think IMS is the only issue Porsche is having??? Try center lock wheels, coolant hoses on GT3 and GT2, etc. All issues we bring to Porsches attention in a strong, but professional manner. Yes, we do it privately. We would rather work with them than against them. Mind you, we don't deal that way with Porsche only. There have been advertisers and sponsors who were told we would not continue our relationship with them due to unresolved complaints from members. Did we place a big ad in Pano stating that so and so was banned from doing business with PCA? No.
#4. Does Porsche love PCA? Absolutely. What car manufacturer wouldn't want to love a group of 110K enthusiastic owners? We are the largest single marque club in the world and within the Porsche Clubs, PCA accounts for 110 of 190K members worldwide. Consequently, they involve us in many of their initiatives. They encourage all dealers to buy memberships for new Porsche buyers as well as to support and partner with their local region. Are they doing this out of goodwill or because they want to sell cars? I'd like to think a little of both but I'm not naive. I realize they are a business and their business is selling cars. Consequently, I would say that PCA also loves Porsche. I hope so, it's why I'm in the club. Disney World is the second happiest place on earth, the drivers seat of Porsche is #1. Am I happy that we have such a good relationship with the manufacturer? Absolutely. After meeting with other clubs executive leadership teams, they are amazed at how much Porsche supports PCA.
#5. PCA is not PCNA customer service. While we forward any complaints members have with Porsche, their dealers, service, etc. to our liaison, we do not become involved with how they handle it. Would slow our club down to a halt. Consequently, when owners complain to Porsche about PCA, they also forward it to us. Our paid staff at the National staff keeps quite busy handling concerns, questions, and request from our membership.
#6. Regarding the IMS issue. Porsche was fully aware of complaints from members. I'm sure they were getting an equal or greater share from non-members as well. Did we watch the progress of the lawsuit? Of course. Our General Counsel kept us informed whenever new information came out. Once the information was ready for public consumption, we notified the members through Panorama an PCA E-Brake news. We didn't do this once, but many times. However, we did not consult with the law firm or Porsche during the case or settlement.
#7 We have our own club lawyers. While I wish I could say what I wanted sometimes, the reality is that I represent our members. It would completely irresponsible of me to put the club in a position where it could be sued because of false statements that I made. Fortunately we can consult with our lawyers on how we approach certain situation so to ensure the club doesn't land in court.
Hopefully this sheds some light in how PCA operates. I think it's a great organization and I'm proud to be part of it.
My name is Manny Alban and I'm the current National President of PCA. Someone forwarded me a link to your discussion and I thought I would clear up some misinformation about PCA.
#1. PCA is not funded, owned or run by Porsche. It is a completely independent of PCNA and Porsche AG. Period. In fact, Porsche is not the largest when it comes to revenue from an advertiser/sponsor. Look at Pano closely, our #1 source of revenue is membership dues. Always has been, always will. It's required to remain a non-profit. Furthermore, the club's bylaws are being updated and within them will be a poison pill of sorts that will ensure that the club will always remain independent. Simply put. We're not for sale.
#2. Our Panorama Editor has a tremendous amount of editorial freedom. My only request was that he not print something that would land the club in court. Other than that, we told him to feel free to criticize, admonish or compliment. If you read Pano since January 2013, you will know that he's called Porsche out on different things in both his Editor's Column and features that he's written. Last I checked, Porsche did not put him on any blacklist for those comments. We don't micromanage Panorama. Much like the majority of leadership PCA, I'm simply a volunteer. I have a real 60 hour/week job. I have a hard enough time running the club much less trying to run the magazine.
#3. Do you think IMS is the only issue Porsche is having??? Try center lock wheels, coolant hoses on GT3 and GT2, etc. All issues we bring to Porsches attention in a strong, but professional manner. Yes, we do it privately. We would rather work with them than against them. Mind you, we don't deal that way with Porsche only. There have been advertisers and sponsors who were told we would not continue our relationship with them due to unresolved complaints from members. Did we place a big ad in Pano stating that so and so was banned from doing business with PCA? No.
#4. Does Porsche love PCA? Absolutely. What car manufacturer wouldn't want to love a group of 110K enthusiastic owners? We are the largest single marque club in the world and within the Porsche Clubs, PCA accounts for 110 of 190K members worldwide. Consequently, they involve us in many of their initiatives. They encourage all dealers to buy memberships for new Porsche buyers as well as to support and partner with their local region. Are they doing this out of goodwill or because they want to sell cars? I'd like to think a little of both but I'm not naive. I realize they are a business and their business is selling cars. Consequently, I would say that PCA also loves Porsche. I hope so, it's why I'm in the club. Disney World is the second happiest place on earth, the drivers seat of Porsche is #1. Am I happy that we have such a good relationship with the manufacturer? Absolutely. After meeting with other clubs executive leadership teams, they are amazed at how much Porsche supports PCA.
#5. PCA is not PCNA customer service. While we forward any complaints members have with Porsche, their dealers, service, etc. to our liaison, we do not become involved with how they handle it. Would slow our club down to a halt. Consequently, when owners complain to Porsche about PCA, they also forward it to us. Our paid staff at the National staff keeps quite busy handling concerns, questions, and request from our membership.
#6. Regarding the IMS issue. Porsche was fully aware of complaints from members. I'm sure they were getting an equal or greater share from non-members as well. Did we watch the progress of the lawsuit? Of course. Our General Counsel kept us informed whenever new information came out. Once the information was ready for public consumption, we notified the members through Panorama an PCA E-Brake news. We didn't do this once, but many times. However, we did not consult with the law firm or Porsche during the case or settlement.
#7 We have our own club lawyers. While I wish I could say what I wanted sometimes, the reality is that I represent our members. It would completely irresponsible of me to put the club in a position where it could be sued because of false statements that I made. Fortunately we can consult with our lawyers on how we approach certain situation so to ensure the club doesn't land in court.
Hopefully this sheds some light in how PCA operates. I think it's a great organization and I'm proud to be part of it.
| Manny ... Pedro (Odessa, FL) - Tuesday, 26 November, 2013, at 12:12:10 pm |
... on behalf of PedrosBoard and its members, thank you for clarifying PCA's position in this matter.
We appreciate your taking time to explain in such detail.
Please feel free to visit us regularly here at PedrosBoard to let us know what's going on at PCA.
Most of PB members are also PCA members.
See you at the 48 Hours in January.
Happy Porsche'ing,
Pedro
Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"
"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna
We appreciate your taking time to explain in such detail.
Please feel free to visit us regularly here at PedrosBoard to let us know what's going on at PCA.
Most of PB members are also PCA members.
See you at the 48 Hours in January.
Happy Porsche'ing,
Pedro
Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)
Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"
"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna
| Re: Manny ... Manny Alban - Wednesday, 27 November, 2013, at 10:03:37 am |
MikenOH - Tuesday, 26 November, 2013, at 12:25:27 pm |
 *NM* Gary in SoFL - Tuesday, 26 November, 2013, at 12:27:00 pm |
| Thank you for the reply, Manny Guenter in Ontario - Tuesday, 26 November, 2013, at 1:10:18 pm |
| Since I brought this up . . . Bob G - Wednesday, 27 November, 2013, at 1:41:27 pm |
Thanks for the reply, Manny.
After 27 years as a member I was aware that "PCA is not funded, owned or run by Porsche. Also that it's not "PCNA customer service."
As you know, historically there have been many issues involving Porsche ownership in North America, from 356s delivered to buyers with gearing not really right for our particular driving conditions, to the most recent IMS issues. As you also know, individual owners have a very hard time apprising the factory of such concerns in a format that a) is convincing b)reaches the right people and c) promises concrete action. But an organization representing many owners can conduct membership surveys to determine the prevalence of concerns, and armed with this information can present (to those who should know) the personal experiences of an entire bloc. There is no reason to assume that doing so will damage the relationship between the organization and the recipients of the group concern.
While I understand Porsche's natural desire to limit liability in product issues such as the IMS bearing failure, the fact remains that a company which has always presented itself as a paragon of superior engineering (and boasted of it in its advertising) has been caught in a clear case of under-engineering.
A few years ago members of the Mercedes-Benz Club of America voiced concerns about quality control and reliability issues. MBCA took this to MBUSA. A meeting between club officials and representatives of MBUSA and Mercedes-Benz resulted, and issues were discussed frankly. Factory representatives responded by outlining the steps being taken to correct problems. Reports of these proceedings were published for members' benefit in the club magazine. While I wouldn't assume that MBCA was the sole reason corrective actions were taken, there has been a marked decline in complaints coming to my attention, and a definite sense that the M-B factory has made a concerted effort to restore quality and reliability to previous standards.
That said,I must respectfully disagree with the notion that acting as a members' advocate would be inappropriate for PCA. I believe it would be the most valuable, and appreciated, role our club could fill. I have already perceived that at least a few posters here seem to agree with me.
Again, thank you for your comments.
After 27 years as a member I was aware that "PCA is not funded, owned or run by Porsche. Also that it's not "PCNA customer service."
As you know, historically there have been many issues involving Porsche ownership in North America, from 356s delivered to buyers with gearing not really right for our particular driving conditions, to the most recent IMS issues. As you also know, individual owners have a very hard time apprising the factory of such concerns in a format that a) is convincing b)reaches the right people and c) promises concrete action. But an organization representing many owners can conduct membership surveys to determine the prevalence of concerns, and armed with this information can present (to those who should know) the personal experiences of an entire bloc. There is no reason to assume that doing so will damage the relationship between the organization and the recipients of the group concern.
While I understand Porsche's natural desire to limit liability in product issues such as the IMS bearing failure, the fact remains that a company which has always presented itself as a paragon of superior engineering (and boasted of it in its advertising) has been caught in a clear case of under-engineering.
A few years ago members of the Mercedes-Benz Club of America voiced concerns about quality control and reliability issues. MBCA took this to MBUSA. A meeting between club officials and representatives of MBUSA and Mercedes-Benz resulted, and issues were discussed frankly. Factory representatives responded by outlining the steps being taken to correct problems. Reports of these proceedings were published for members' benefit in the club magazine. While I wouldn't assume that MBCA was the sole reason corrective actions were taken, there has been a marked decline in complaints coming to my attention, and a definite sense that the M-B factory has made a concerted effort to restore quality and reliability to previous standards.
That said,I must respectfully disagree with the notion that acting as a members' advocate would be inappropriate for PCA. I believe it would be the most valuable, and appreciated, role our club could fill. I have already perceived that at least a few posters here seem to agree with me.
Again, thank you for your comments.
| Re: Since I brought this up . . . Ed B - Thursday, 28 November, 2013, at 12:26:15 pm |
First, Thanks Manny.
An anti-friction bearing, (ball or roller), properly engineered , will perform well in the IMS application. All engineered products involve compromises. It's all in the details. Cost is always a factor.
In my 35 years as a product design engineer on devices such as fork lifts, snow mobiles, space satellites, jet engines, aircraft transmissions, etc. there have been some less than successful designs. It happens. Most don't make it into production.
Choosing a bearing falls into a couple of categories. Manufacturing may tell purchasing they need an "xxx" size bearing to fit in this space. The engineering department may select a bearing from a catalog based on known loads, speeds, lubrication and operating conditions, and may discuss the application with a bearing manufacturer before making a bearing choice. Purchasing will then buy the least expensive meeting the specs.
Bearing engineering is a very specialized discipline and few companies, with the exception of aerospace companies, have bearing engineers and the sophisticated computer programs needed to engineer a specialized bearing.
Aerospace companies employ bearing engineers who will provide complete designs to the bearing manufacturer. The bearing manufacturer will have some input but the design and specifications rest with the aerospace company.
Automotive ball and roller bearings are relatively low speed, low precision bearings and so an expensive, highly engineered bearing is not needed.
Considering the damage done by a failed IMS bearing, a little more thought should have gone into it's selection.
Happy Thanksgiving,
Ed B
The bearing guy
An anti-friction bearing, (ball or roller), properly engineered , will perform well in the IMS application. All engineered products involve compromises. It's all in the details. Cost is always a factor.
In my 35 years as a product design engineer on devices such as fork lifts, snow mobiles, space satellites, jet engines, aircraft transmissions, etc. there have been some less than successful designs. It happens. Most don't make it into production.
Choosing a bearing falls into a couple of categories. Manufacturing may tell purchasing they need an "xxx" size bearing to fit in this space. The engineering department may select a bearing from a catalog based on known loads, speeds, lubrication and operating conditions, and may discuss the application with a bearing manufacturer before making a bearing choice. Purchasing will then buy the least expensive meeting the specs.
Bearing engineering is a very specialized discipline and few companies, with the exception of aerospace companies, have bearing engineers and the sophisticated computer programs needed to engineer a specialized bearing.
Aerospace companies employ bearing engineers who will provide complete designs to the bearing manufacturer. The bearing manufacturer will have some input but the design and specifications rest with the aerospace company.
Automotive ball and roller bearings are relatively low speed, low precision bearings and so an expensive, highly engineered bearing is not needed.
Considering the damage done by a failed IMS bearing, a little more thought should have gone into it's selection.
Happy Thanksgiving,
Ed B
The bearing guy
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.