[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Audi #3 in JD Powers Survey!

In a message dated 97-03-26 12:38:46 EST, MSV96@aol.com writes:

<< I feel that Audi deserves
 kudos for this rise in percepted quality!!!  >>

The Vehicle Durability Index study is not a measure of "perceived" quality,
rather, it is a measure of real "things gone wrong."  Same applies with the
"Consumer Reports" TGW summaries in their extremely useful April auto issue.

However, you have reasonable justification to be a bit sceptical of this
particular J.D. Power study (Vehicle Durability Index). The statistical basis
is rather small, especially for manufacturers like Audi.  However, anybody
who impugns the validity of the "Consumer Reports" reliability data (the red
dot/black dot summaries) simply has not done their homework.  The data and
sample size of the CU study is better quality and broader based than anything
commercially available.  And that's the rub.  CU doesn't sell their data --
to anybody.  On the other hand, one might say that J.D. Power exists ONLY to
sell data ... and follow-up studies ... and special consulting services ...
and syndicated research ... and....

So, do you smell a personal bias here?  I'll fess up.  I respect "Consumer
Reports" data gathering and analysis capability.  I don't always agree with
the conclusions _as_they_ apply_to_ my_unique_circumstances.  That's the
distinction.  I see a lotof what I consider mindless bashing of CU, but I see
very little criticism of the data, methodology, results, etc.  In my opinion,
it's good policy to never ignore facts, just come to your own conclusions.
 (The above is definitely my opinion - everybody should have one -- but
represents no vested interests)