Recreational Boat Building Industry
Discussion of April 6 1997 Ft. Lauderdale boating accident
Discussion of Nov 21 Dateline Airing of Ft. Lauderdale boating accident
Another round of discussion about Toyota's new ski boat and its potential power package from the rec.sport.waterski newsgroup.
Some good comments about horsepower, performance, and speed concerning MerCruiser's Black Scorpion and others.
"The Ultimate Propulsion Plant" 19 Sept 1996 (11 messages)
A little editorial statement: Manufacturers, such as Mercury and OMC, have a great opportunity to gain respect for themselves and confidence in their two stroke oil products. They could provide information and test results as to why their specific oil is needed, why it is better than the others for their specific applications, and defend its premium price. It is time "to poop or get off the pot." Many end users do not feel they are getting "value" for their dollar(s) in oil purchases. They think manufacturer's are trapping them into buying "their" oil at near outrageous prices and that the product is not significantly different from other much lower cost oils. It is not good to have your customer feel he or she is being "ripped off."
OEM's need to prove their oil is superior to lower priced alternatives, that it is needed, and provide this information to the end user. Once product superiority is proven and the need for this superior product is proven - then pricing could be defended. Price could be defended as production costs, packaging costs, marketing costs, distribution costs, and as reasonable profit for them and the dealer. Manufacturers could point out they need to make a profit on each drive which is the profit on original sale (warranty costs are usually built into this profit) plus profit on parts and service for the drive. Manufacturers could have lower service parts and oil costs if they charged more for the unit up front, but that might make the end user shop elsewhere.
Internet web sites would be an excellent place for manufacturers to post the information needed and to defend their oils and pricing structure.
Message number 27 of the 17 December 1996 thread shows how one individual has carefully studied the materials from the manufacturer, read about 100 messages on the topic, and is still not sure he is receiving a superior product for the premium price. The information to make good purchasing decisions on premium products from how they stack up against the competition in terms of performance should be readily available and not "smoke and mirrors". Slick 50, 90+ octane gas, high speed tires, and turtle wax are examples of others who have tried to demonstrate their superiority. My personal favorite - Prolong's million dollar challenge to their competitors. Your oil additive beats theirs (without infringing on the Prolong patent) and they give a million $ to a charity of your choice. I also like their running cars around the race track without oil in them and dumping sand on the top of the engines. Do today's marine OEM's lack the ability to dream up some of the performance stunts Kiekhaefer used to run?? Do they need to reread the "Iron Fist"?? Carl would put an end to this dribble! RBBI would be very happy to post test data supplied by the manufacturers comparing the performance of OMC and Merc TCWIII oils vs. the lower cost alternatives.