type 44 syndrome, but no Audi content

[Michael L. Riebs]

I would not be caught dead in a Daewoo! Ever! If one were donated to me, I'd
sell it, or otherwise get rid of it. If I had the choice between a Daewoo
and a bicycle, I'd choose the bike!

Michael L. Riebs
Grand Rapids, MI

'90 V8Q
'98 A6QA

www.1stchoicegranite.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Arman" <armanmik at n-jcenter.com>
To: <quattro at audifans.com>
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 9:13 AM
Subject: type 44 syndrome, but no Audi content


>
>
> What is type 44 syndrome?
>
> We have a group of people who have formed an attachment for a car which
> *economically* (in the view of most people) makes no sense.
>
> Here's why - parts and service are very expensive (by retail standards),
> the car has a reputation for being finicky and needing quite a bit of
> fairly exotic (hence skilled and expensive) maintenance, and these cars
are
> NOT supported in any meaningful way by the dealer network or the
> manufacturer. They are also getting OLD - mine are almost old enough to
> vote, and cars that old are downright un-American!
>
> And in fact, for most people, owning a type 44 is a SERIOUS mistake - you
> better know what you are getting in to, because you will sure find out.
> This list (Thank you Dan!!!!) makes type 44 ownership a (more) reasonable
> proposition.
>
> Note that comments like "It's a great car!", etc., while true, do not
> affect the economics of the vehicle . . . and yes, I own one and plan to
> keep it. (Two, actually!)
>
>
> Our cars have problems in the "automotive world" as follows - insurance
> companies don't think they are worth much, so often they are totalled from
> a fairly minor accident, dealers don't want to see them come in as trades,
> so resale value tends to be quite low, they are not "monkey-lad-proof"
like
> most Detroit iron - even Sears can sometimes change the oil sucessfully on
> those, but taking an Audi to Sears is an invitation to disaster.
>
> This does work in our favor, though. We are willing to fix and tinker and
> do a lot of our own work, and parts from the junkyard are CHEAP - I'm sure
> you've seen lots of automatic type 44s in junkyards - bad tranny - but
> almost everything else is good and can be re-used. As a result, we get OUR
> transportation at cut-rate prices, even after deducting for hand cleaner.
>
>
> Fast-forward to April 2002.
>
> General Motors just announced they are buying Daewoo for $400 million.
> Yawn. But they also just announced that the current 525 Daewoo dealers AND
> THEIR CUSTOMERS "are not part of the plan."
>
> This means that anyone who currently owns a pre-GM Daewoo is flat out of
> luck - which means everyone who currently owns a Daewoo - because GM does
> NOT intend to support these cars, or honor the remaining portion of the
> warranties, no parts, no service, nothing. (Can you see the coming
lawsuits?)
>
> Daewoo street prices will take a HUGE hit - no one will want an orphan
car,
> you won't be able to trade it in, it will be very hard to sell (does this
> sound familiar?) Sorry, no parts available, oh, you need a tail light
lens,
> can't get them, you'll have to junk it, sorry.
>
> Now this is pretty stupid of GM - how do you think the people who own
> current Daewoo cars will feel when the authorized Daewoo dealer tells them
> to get lost? Think they'll EVER buy any GM product ever again? (Kinda like
> me and Sears . . . another story). If GM was smart, they would take the
> current crop of orphaned Daewoo owners under their wing, help them keep
the
> cars running, supply parts, honor the warranties (even though strictly
> speaking, they don't have to), and earn their undying loyalty instead of
> undying hatred . . .
>
>
> What does this have to do with us?
>
> In a (very) few years, the you-pull-it yards will be full of pre-GM
> Daewoos, because no one will want them - excpet for a small group of
people
> who are willing to fix the cars themselves and scrounge parts, and
probably
> have an internet support group . . .
>
> And of course, you are thinking, so who wants one of these ****boxes,
> anyway? How *DARE* he compare a Daewoo to my revered Audi type 44????? The
> Daweoo is a much less expensive car - true, but it is 15 years newer, and
> part of the reason it is less expensive is that labor in Korea is MUCH
less
> expensive than labor in Germany - and the portion of the price that pays
> Hans und Fritz's retirement benefit (or pays team doorhandle) does NOT
make
> the car better - that is overhead! Also, the exchange rate is greatly in
> OUR favor with the Korean Won and generally not in our favor with the DM
or
> now the Euro - and you cannot tell me that a 10% price increase in the
cost
> of an Audi because of interntional currency fluctuations makes the car 10%
> better - it does NOT!
>
> Daewoo makes some large cars (not just econoboxes), and in three or four
> years we may find that the Daewoo Eleganza (or whatever) is available at a
> greatly depressed price, and you can get a lot of car for not much money,
> just like type 44 Audis were available after the 60 minutes debacle.
>
> Food for thought.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Arman
>
>