http://www.auto.com/industry/iwird27_20020727.htm

Nissan having to pay out following a Maxima crash.

 

Good

 

I don't know about that. I haven't read any details on the case, but I think Nissan got screwed. How can you hold Nissan responsible for failing to install additional safety devices on cars? If they meet Federal regulations, then additional safety devices are optional and buyers can choose to buy cars which include or exclude extra safety. If there was no fault in manufacturing, I'm not sure I would support that decision given my limited knowledge of the case.

 

from what i have read about the case it looks like nissan got reamed with no lube.... isnt it the other drivers fault the guy is paralyzed??? what was nissan supposed to put in the car to prevent this from happening??

retarded


Adam

 

I agree. Juries can be very sympathetic towards injured parties, but if plaintifs cannot show that defects in the vehicle were a direct or a contributing factor to the injuries, then the manufacturer shouldn't be held liable. Now, if the vehicle was a Corvair...

Buzz

 

Perhaps we need a short lesson in business administration here. Nissan will never take that $14.4 million loss. All they will do is pass the expense on by raising the cost of their autos. That means, you, when you buy your next Maxima, will pay for that verdict. Most juries just don't understand this concept. In their zest to get the guy with deep pockets, they end up getting us, while making only the trial lawyers rich.

It's like trying to tax business, a favorite liberal activity. All the businesses will do is raise the price of their products to maintain the needed profit margin to stay in business. In essence, businesses are tax collectors, not tax payers. The consumer eventually pays.

 

gramp's is right. big tobacco is a perfect example.

 

If only Nissan had purchased some pre-paid legal...

 

sorry but both of you are wrong. taxes and other liability expenses are and can only be passed onto consumers when the product itself has an inelastic demand with an elastic supply. in this case nissan has too many competitors in the open market to pass this onto their consumers making the demand curve for their cars elastic. It will surely be thier loss and their loss alone. tobacco on the other hand is a product with an inelastic demand, allowing producers to pass on the tax to consumers. jack up the price to $7 a pack and you will still see a significant demand for them.

man what ec101 will teach you during the summer

 

what EC 101,102,201,and 202 covered (over 10 years ago when I took them) was that ALL assumptions of these economic models are just that...assumptions based on ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL.

Actually Economics is SOOOOO theoretical it cannot be used to model true dynamics in the marketplace.

For instance, with supply and demand of Nissan being elastic or not...it is not truly relevant since it is based on all things being equal...like price of cars and how they are made not changing.

Don't kid yourself for a minute that if Nissan can't recoup the loss from price increases, they will certainly do it by cutting back on either parts in the cars (i.e. the infamous fuel filler protector on ours, etc) or the quality of those parts. Supply of the cars and demand for them is not changed, yet the transfer of the expense has been accomplished.

 

im only saying passing this on to us will only hurt them in the long run. as long as the price of their vehicles keep climbing up or if the quality of their vehicles keep coming down. customers will seek other alternatives. im sure they'll be able to pass it on to us but not without some negative repercussion.

 

anyone know the details of this accidenT?

 

hehe, agreed.

 

You've assumed that only Nissan would get sued for a large amount. There's no real evidence of that. Ford and GM, for example, have been sued many times in similar cases. And just last year Toyota had to pay out millions to satisfy Jessie Jackson's allegations of racial discrimination. My sense is that all the auto makers get sued in a similar fashion with all of them passing on the costs to the consumer. This maintains the level playing field among the auto makers, with our scratching our heads at higher sticker prices, and the trial lawyers moving up to Rolls-Royces .

 

You guys all assume that Nissan won't appeal and will actually pay out 14.4 million.