1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

***TOYOTA vs. FORD CANOE RACE!!!

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by Bob Schultz, Dec 10, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob Schultz

    Bob Schultz Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,749
    Location:
    Tuxedo NC
    A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

    On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.

    The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.

    Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 7 people steering and 2 people rowing.

    Feeling a deeper study was in order; American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

    They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

    Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 2 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager.

    They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 2 people rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rowers. There was discussion of getting new paddles,20canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The pension program was trimmed to 'equal the competition' and some of the resultant savings were channeled into morale boosting programs and teamwork posters.

    The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

    Humiliated, the American management laid-off one rower, halted development of a new canoe, sold all the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses.

    The next year, try as he might, the lone designated rower was unable to even finish the race (having no paddles,) so he was laid off for unacceptable performance, all canoe equipment was sold and the next year's racing team was out-sourced to India .

    Sadly, the End.

    Here's something else to think about: Ford has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages.

    TOYOTA has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US. The last quarter's results:

    TOYOTA makes 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses.

    Ford folks are still scratching their heads, and collecting bonuses... and now wants the Government to 'bail them out'.

    IF THIS WEREN'T SO TRUE IT MIGHT BE FUNNY
     
  2. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    How sad, but how true ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  3. WNCRob

    WNCRob Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    594
    Guess what? Compared to GM & Chrysler, Ford is doing rather well. They aren't projected to go belly-up 'til 2009! Wow. Someone has their act together, huh? Actually, this is really a travesty given that the US has one of the most pproductive workforces in the world. Where does the blame reside? And who is making the case for the bailout? Talk about a credibility gap.

    WNCRob
     
  4. Luckyman

    Luckyman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,035
    This is a great analogy! Sad but true!!!
     
  5. trapshooter1981682

    trapshooter1981682 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    Just a question here. I have so many mixed feelings on all this bailout issue. My question is when you speak of Toyota making $4 Billion in profits, is that profit staying in the USA or is that going back to their "homeland"???? From what i hear Honda & Toyota's profits go back to Japan. Granted they employ a lot of Americans, and somewhat improve the communities around them, but are the actual profits staying here where they should be or going back???
     
  6. Bob Schultz

    Bob Schultz Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,749
    Location:
    Tuxedo NC
    Trapshooter1981612,

    A significant part of Toyota's profits stay in the USA as many stockholders live here as well as money spent on capital improvements and taxes ... yes they pay taxes on their profits. So some of their tax dollars will go go help out the competition ... I don't think they are happy about that either.

    EE,

    What still mystifies me is why they bought Chrysler from Daimler in the first place. It was a cash "black hole" then and Daimler's execs must still be celebrating getting rid of it!

    Why help them out you ask? Beats the heck out of me. If my business is on the ropes guess who bails me out ... NOBODY.

    I would like to see a form of bankruptcy allowing some serious management and labor renegotiations. I'm questioning the viability of the products to the consumer if they do this though. Will we buy cars from companies that are financially insolvent...good question. All things are born and all things die, possibly its time for our grossly mismanaged auto industry to die.

    Bob
     
  7. alf72

    alf72 TS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    86
    Back in the 70s 90% of auto builders in the U S were american, now in the U S it is less than 50%. what is wrong with this picture! the big 3 does build a quality product now,so we can't use that excuse anymore.if the over seas car companys were not building in the U S there would be a bigger demand for american cars and the jobs would still be here .
    Its very hard to fix our mistakes and its not a tomorrow fix,but we have to start somewhere.very easy to look in the past but we all need to look in our future. buy AMERICAN !
    P.S. american guns too!!
     
  8. pendennis

    pendennis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    Southeast Michigan - O/S Detroit
    Bob, this is the fourth time in two weeks that someone has posted this OLD canard. It was first started in the 1960's, and IBM was the butt of the joke.

    Just an FYI -

    Ford leads the entire pack in vehicle safety with FIFTEEN vehicles. More than any other vehicle manufacturer, and that includes the imports.

    Ford's overall quality is statistically equal to Honda and Toyota.

    Ford is not included in the bills before Congress now.

    Dennis
     
  9. Bob Schultz

    Bob Schultz Well-Known Member Supporting Vendor

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,749
    Location:
    Tuxedo NC
    Dennis,

    Ok, Substitute GM for Ford...same story. I have no issue with quality. I have a wonderful Ford truck. Mismanagement and negligence are the issue. (Read above post.) You can build the best car on the planet and if the corporate pinheads screw up the company...you are still broke.

    Merry Christmas!

    Bob
     
  10. daddiooo

    daddiooo TS Supporters TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,004
    Location:
    GEORGIA
    Bob,

    Couldn't agree with you more. Bankruptcy is the only way the auto makers are going to be able to get rid of that 900 ib gorilla on their back. (UAW) Until Ron Give'emthefinger at UAW gets over himself and realizes that the business as usual approach means certain destruction of all involved it isn't going anywhere but down the drain.


    1. File chapters


    2. Declare all contracts with UAW null and void.


    3. Renegotiate labor agreements using Toyota's as a guide.


    4. Manufacture vehicles that run 200,000 miles like the jap cars do.


    NO BAILOUT! Hell, us taxpayers are broke too.


    LOL Dave
     
  11. SF SGM

    SF SGM Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Messages:
    561
    Location:
    Palm Coast, Florida
    Maybe this is a "stupid" question but everytime this thread is brought up about Toyota "Profits" going back to Japan and American auto companies "profits" stay in the good old U.S.A. if they U.S. auto maker's "profits" stay in the U.S. why are they going bankrupt? Profit to me means many made after expenses, so, it appears they have no profits to put back into the U.S. economy, only the money the use here to make their autos.

    Van
     
  12. pendennis

    pendennis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    Southeast Michigan - O/S Detroit
    SF_SGM - It's not a stupid question.

    Regardless the corporate identity of a foreign corporation (Toyota North America, etc.), the profits of that corporation are consolidated onto the books of account in the home country (Japan).

    As an example, let's say a Toyota Camry is sold for $20k. After expenses (dealer profit, assembly cost, transportation, etc.), any money remaining is transferred to Japan, and Toyota Motor Company, Ltd. Toyota then consolidates all their global income onto their books.

    This is somewhat over-simplified, but it's basis for how the profits are accounted.

    On the American side, let's say that Ford Motor Company sells cars for a profit in England. The reverse happens, and any profits are consolidated on the books of account for Ford.

    Right now, costs are exceeding income, and Ford, GM, and Chrysler are losing money at an alarming rate. These translated into losses for the Big Three. Most companies lose money at one time or another. It's a basic fact of business. Mom and Pop businesses frequently lose money at the outset, until sales volume can overcome fixed (capital, rent, utility, etc.) and variable (payroll, materials, taxes, etc.) costs.

    Taxes at the corporate level are a hodgepodge of laws, and companies most often get credit for foreign taxes paid, so they aren't taxed double in their home country.

    Where foreign companies have an edge, is that their governments frequently subisidize their exports, and penalize imports. Japan and Korea are two of the most cited. Originally, these tariffs were put in place to protect their fledgling industries, but those industries are now mature, and in no danger of going out of business. The U.S. continues to observe these tariffs, with no tit-for-tat.

    Sorry I can't get into more detail, but you would probably die from boredom. It's complicated.

    Best,
    Dennis
     
  13. gunner53

    gunner53 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    35
    Ok lets be realistic in looking at this: if the top lets say 20 execs would work for a reasonable pay and no bonus what would they save and lets say the workers worked for a reasonable pay lets say even $25/hour and they had a reasonable insurance program with a 401k that they contributed to instead of all the company putting the money in then maybe they would have been making money. NO million dollar bonuses No retiree ins No $50/hr janitors wow I bet alot of money could have been made and cars would be cheaper.
     
  14. pendennis

    pendennis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    Southeast Michigan - O/S Detroit
    Gunner53, this isn't just a phenomenom of the Big Three. It's become endemic in American corporations. Executive compensation at banks and brokerage firms is far beyond what some assume to be reasonable. Their bonuses are too frequently tied to short-term financial performance, and raising of the stock price. Both methods tend to get "shoot 'n' scoot" execs who move from company to company.

    I'm all for self-directed retirement accounts. However, there's a basic problem with it, and that's the general financial ignorance of a lot of workers. Defined benefit programs (pensions), if done properly, are a good way to go, and have been the savior of workers with no expertise in directing their own retirement savings.

    Defined contribution programs (401k) are good, as long as the investors have some financial savvy, are patient, and are dedicated not to withdraw money the first time they want the new Harley or jet-ski.

    The unions, which are socialist in their desires (e.g. equal pay for all jobs), create a huge disparity in market wages. At first and second tier automotive suppliers, wages are not equal to Big Three wages. However, the Big Three have managed to out-source some labor (janitorial, grounds maintenance, etc.) to avoid paying UAW-scale wages. These contracts are frequently let for administrative offices, but not in-plant services. The $50/hr janitor has his/her benefits included in that hourly wage number.

    The Big Three have been trying to get multiple-tier wage contracts since the 1970's. Whether people believe it or not, skills are learned on the assembly line; and even those jobs are getting more complicated. Few jobs are strictly "put on five lug nuts" jobs. However, the learned skills should have a different wage scale. It's still the same as a lot of skilled trades. Should the apprentice electrician be paid the same wage as a journeyman? Just in the last two contracts has the UAW ceded ground on two-tier wages. Does the assembler who needs computer skills earn more than the lug nut attacher? They don't today.

    The downside to this approach now, is the fact that the last hired workers are the first "fired" when layoffs come. It becomes self-defeating. However, the Big Three have offered a lot of buy-outs to get older workers out, and pay the younger ones the first tier wage.

    Another thing the Big Three have done, which lowers salaried (white collar) costs, has already been accomplished. Older workers (like me) have been pensioned out, and the pension funds will eventually dwindle, since new salaried workers are hired under 401k-type benefits, and not pensions. Ford has been that way since the early-1990's.

    One of the basic problems in your argument is the thought that somehow people will work at the executive level, without bonuses and other compensation. Even auto executive salaries are small compared to those in the financial and banking industries.

    This is not an "automotive thing", it's cultural. People who earn a lot of money at the top do so, because they are free to sell their labor at the best price they can get. Workers at the bottom with fewer marketable skills will never command that type of income.

    Ask youself this question - Why is Brad Pitt able to earn $25 million per picture? Is his labor worth any more than the guy who earns his bank several billions of dollars? Pitt's labor cost will be about 25% of a picture's gross. The banker's salary will never be 25% of the bank's gross income. Few, if any industries remaining in business very long, will allow a single laborer to bag 25% of the gross.

    Best,
    Dennis
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page
a japanese company toyota and an american company ford motors decided to have a canoe
,
ford and toyota canoe race
,

ford toyota canoe race

,
mom and pop canoe race vs corporation
,
toyota and ford canoe race