You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Export thread
ANOTHER TAKEOVER
#1
Boobala
Boobala
More companies are merging ............ What do YOU think .....???
Generac buys DR Power Equipment | TodaysMower.com
Generac buys DR Power Equipment | TodaysMower.com
#2
M
motoman
M
motoman
Don't worry. Uncle Sam will finally allow at least two companies to remain so that you may have competitive pricing.:laughing:
#3
Homer1
Homer1
Well, I like Generac, I've never owned a DR. Sounds like a good merger to me. Dunno
#4
javjacob
javjacob
There have been a lot of equipment manufactures getting bought out lately it seems. Hope we don't end up with a bunch of greedy monopolies. I guess if that happens I will only buy used which is usually what I do anyway.
#5
P
possum
P
possum
Sounds like they want that name to brand some of their generators and pressure washers with as well as put their Chinese Honda clone engines on the lawn and chore stuff.
#6
S
Shughes717
Sorry, I can't help myself here. The sentence " Hope we don't end up with a bunch of greedy monopolies" cracked me up. :laughing: Have you thought about that sentence since you posted it? I thought monopoly meant single, or one. How is it possible to have a bunch of them? I do get the point you are trying to make though. I just thought it was pretty funny.
S
Shughes717
There have been a lot of equipment manufactures getting bought out lately it seems. Hope we don't end up with a bunch of greedy monopolies. I guess if that happens I will only buy used which is usually what I do anyway.
Sorry, I can't help myself here. The sentence " Hope we don't end up with a bunch of greedy monopolies" cracked me up. :laughing: Have you thought about that sentence since you posted it? I thought monopoly meant single, or one. How is it possible to have a bunch of them? I do get the point you are trying to make though. I just thought it was pretty funny.
#7
javjacob
I guess I didn't think that through. I meant 1 monopoly for lawn mowers and another for chainsaws and another for string trimmers and another for generators ...ect. :thumbsup: Then maybe Wal-Mart will buy them all out? :laughing: Then we will all be going to the Wal-Mart dealership/supercenter :thumbdown:
javjacob
Sorry, I can't help myself here. The sentence " Hope we don't end up with a bunch of greedy monopolies" cracked me up. :laughing: Have you thought about that sentence since you posted it? I thought monopoly meant single, or one. How is it possible to have a bunch of them? I do get the point you are trying to make though. I just thought it was pretty funny.
I guess I didn't think that through. I meant 1 monopoly for lawn mowers and another for chainsaws and another for string trimmers and another for generators ...ect. :thumbsup: Then maybe Wal-Mart will buy them all out? :laughing: Then we will all be going to the Wal-Mart dealership/supercenter :thumbdown:
#8
B
bertsmobile1
B
bertsmobile1
Well we will end up with a greedy monolopy because we are, ,, greedy.
There are few in rich countries like the USA or Australia that can not afford to pay a fair and proper price for the goods we consume.
But by far the majority refuse to do so and go for the cheapest possible alternative so garbage merchants like Wally Mart & Harbour Freight can desimate the entire nations economy by forcing local manufacturers to the wall by flooding the market with artificially underpriced subsidised inferior products from China , India, South Africa , Brazil etc,etc,etc,etc.
And I am not trying to take the piss out of Americans we are just as bad down here.
We used to be a major exporter of inovative high quality push mowers.
But we just had to have cheaper and cheaper ones till there was no profit left in making mowers locally so now we are one of the largest importers of push mowers and even worse most are plain garbage but because they are cheap garbage we just can not get enough of them.
Sales of cheap Chineese unbranded chainsaws has become so competative that you can now buy a complete 100cc saw cheaper that I can buy reasonable quality 20" bar chain loop let alone a genuine Oregon bar & chain combo which these saws supposedly have fitted.
There are few in rich countries like the USA or Australia that can not afford to pay a fair and proper price for the goods we consume.
But by far the majority refuse to do so and go for the cheapest possible alternative so garbage merchants like Wally Mart & Harbour Freight can desimate the entire nations economy by forcing local manufacturers to the wall by flooding the market with artificially underpriced subsidised inferior products from China , India, South Africa , Brazil etc,etc,etc,etc.
And I am not trying to take the piss out of Americans we are just as bad down here.
We used to be a major exporter of inovative high quality push mowers.
But we just had to have cheaper and cheaper ones till there was no profit left in making mowers locally so now we are one of the largest importers of push mowers and even worse most are plain garbage but because they are cheap garbage we just can not get enough of them.
Sales of cheap Chineese unbranded chainsaws has become so competative that you can now buy a complete 100cc saw cheaper that I can buy reasonable quality 20" bar chain loop let alone a genuine Oregon bar & chain combo which these saws supposedly have fitted.
#9
S
Shughes717
It gave me a good laugh. I get tickled at some of the sayings out there. One of my favorites is " They need to dig themselves out of the hole they dug themselves into". :laughing: I laugh every time I hear a sports announcer say it. It makes no sense to me. If they dug themselves into a hole, wouldn't more digging get them deeper in the hole instead of out of it?
Back to the issue. DR equipment may be available to areas that they were not previously available now that generac owns them. It does seem as though many companies are merging these days. It's the same way with farm equipment. Case purchased IH in the 80s, and has since purchased new holland and ford. Now the only farm equipment available in my area is john Deere or case IH. Larger companies purchase smaller companies to get their technology and consumer base. There may not ever be a monopoly, but the fewer companies there are competing for customers the higher they can run the prices up.
S
Shughes717
I guess I didn't think that through. I meant 1 monopoly for lawn mowers and another for chainsaws and another for string trimmers and another for generators ...ect. :thumbsup: Then maybe Wal-Mart will buy them all out? :laughing: Then we will all be going to the Wal-Mart dealership/supercenter :thumbdown:
It gave me a good laugh. I get tickled at some of the sayings out there. One of my favorites is " They need to dig themselves out of the hole they dug themselves into". :laughing: I laugh every time I hear a sports announcer say it. It makes no sense to me. If they dug themselves into a hole, wouldn't more digging get them deeper in the hole instead of out of it?
Back to the issue. DR equipment may be available to areas that they were not previously available now that generac owns them. It does seem as though many companies are merging these days. It's the same way with farm equipment. Case purchased IH in the 80s, and has since purchased new holland and ford. Now the only farm equipment available in my area is john Deere or case IH. Larger companies purchase smaller companies to get their technology and consumer base. There may not ever be a monopoly, but the fewer companies there are competing for customers the higher they can run the prices up.
#10
cpurvis
cpurvis
'Oligopoly' is the situation where there are few suppliers in a market, such as the auto or airline industry. In some ways it's good for the consumer. Think of the problem of replacement parts if there were 10,000 auto brands.
Being able to afford to pay more for goods does not mean that one should, simply because they can 'afford' it. Every dollar spent unnecessarily on one good, is a dollar that can't be spent elsewhere. If acting in one's own financial self-interest is greed, then everybody is guilty of it, from the wealthiest person on the planet to the lowest bum in the gutter.
Every financial transaction transaction that takes place between two parties in a free market is a win/win for both. Both have decided they can do without whatever it is they're trading more than what they're getting in return, or the deal would not take place. The buyer decides he would rather have the seller's goods than his money; the seller decides he would rather have the buyer's money instead of his goods. Whether they 'like' the deal they made is irrelevant; they still voluntarily made it.
Take note that when the government forces its citizens to buy something, that is not a free-market transaction.
Being able to afford to pay more for goods does not mean that one should, simply because they can 'afford' it. Every dollar spent unnecessarily on one good, is a dollar that can't be spent elsewhere. If acting in one's own financial self-interest is greed, then everybody is guilty of it, from the wealthiest person on the planet to the lowest bum in the gutter.
Every financial transaction transaction that takes place between two parties in a free market is a win/win for both. Both have decided they can do without whatever it is they're trading more than what they're getting in return, or the deal would not take place. The buyer decides he would rather have the seller's goods than his money; the seller decides he would rather have the buyer's money instead of his goods. Whether they 'like' the deal they made is irrelevant; they still voluntarily made it.
Take note that when the government forces its citizens to buy something, that is not a free-market transaction.
#11
B
bertsmobile1
And so is the inverse, if an external entity prevents you from performing the transaction. So nothing should be banned.
However as with all economic theories there are a lot of assumption applied to simplify the situation.
It convienently assumes there are no consequences external to the transaction
It assumes that both parties are fully aware and there is a level playing field that is not being artificially skewed in order for you to favour one transaction over another similar or equal transaction.
So it is a fantasy situation with little to no resembelance to reality. The FREE MARKET is a myth.
The dollar you do not spend on the locally made product is a dollar that is not available to support the thousands of people who produce the things you consume and a dollar that exits your local economy.
Just as a dollar introduced into a community has a multiplier effect and becomes hundreds of dollars, so to the dollar you export is removed from the local community and has multiplying effect.
And yes that dollar now goes to a different community where it will have the same multiplier effect as it would have had on your community but it is of no value to you and the people who depend upon you for their existence.
Every one remembers the most powerful force in economics, Compound Interest.
But every one conveniently ignores the second most powerful force in economics , the Internal Dollar.
And my favourite example;-
The drug addicted prostitute who sell you sexual pleasure and leaves you with a STD is a loose : loose transaction.:confused2:
B
bertsmobile1
'Oligopoly' is the situation where there are few suppliers in a market, such as the auto or airline industry. In some ways it's good for the consumer. Think of the problem of replacement parts if there were 10,000 auto brands.
Being able to afford to pay more for goods does not mean that one should, simply because they can 'afford' it. Every dollar spent unnecessarily on one good, is a dollar that can't be spent elsewhere. If acting in one's own financial self-interest is greed, then everybody is guilty of it, from the wealthiest person on the planet to the lowest bum in the gutter.
Every financial transaction transaction that takes place between two parties in a free market is a win/win for both. Both have decided they can do without whatever it is they're trading more than what they're getting in return, or the deal would not take place. The buyer decides he would rather have the seller's goods than his money; the seller decides he would rather have the buyer's money instead of his goods. Whether they 'like' the deal they made is irrelevant; they still voluntarily made it.
Take note that when the government forces its citizens to buy something, that is not a free-market transaction.
And so is the inverse, if an external entity prevents you from performing the transaction. So nothing should be banned.
However as with all economic theories there are a lot of assumption applied to simplify the situation.
It convienently assumes there are no consequences external to the transaction
It assumes that both parties are fully aware and there is a level playing field that is not being artificially skewed in order for you to favour one transaction over another similar or equal transaction.
So it is a fantasy situation with little to no resembelance to reality. The FREE MARKET is a myth.
The dollar you do not spend on the locally made product is a dollar that is not available to support the thousands of people who produce the things you consume and a dollar that exits your local economy.
Just as a dollar introduced into a community has a multiplier effect and becomes hundreds of dollars, so to the dollar you export is removed from the local community and has multiplying effect.
And yes that dollar now goes to a different community where it will have the same multiplier effect as it would have had on your community but it is of no value to you and the people who depend upon you for their existence.
Every one remembers the most powerful force in economics, Compound Interest.
But every one conveniently ignores the second most powerful force in economics , the Internal Dollar.
And my favourite example;-
The drug addicted prostitute who sell you sexual pleasure and leaves you with a STD is a loose : loose transaction.:confused2:
#12
cpurvis
cpurvis
The Free Market may very well be a myth in Australia; I wouldn't know.
But here in the States, with the exception of our health care system, it is alive and well, in spite of those who try to stop it.
But here in the States, with the exception of our health care system, it is alive and well, in spite of those who try to stop it.
#13
reynoldston
Yes the prescription drug market the government has their fingers into big time.
reynoldston
The Free Market may very well be a myth in Australia; I wouldn't know.
But here in the States, with the exception of our health care system, it is alive and well, in spite of those who try to stop it.
Yes the prescription drug market the government has their fingers into big time.
#14
B
bertsmobile1
B
bertsmobile1
So the Iowa corn farmers get no money from the government which would artificially alter the price of corn ?
And this money that the government does not give to the farmers did not come from taxes which did not alter the price or availability of some commodity or benifit to some other sector of the community ?
The new casting plant being built in Mitichigan for GM funded by a "loan" from the Obarma government $4.3 billion from memory but I would have to go through some back issues of the Americian Foundryman to check the actual number as it was 6 years ago the story broke.
So the USA allows any product to be imported without Free Market skewing import duties being applied ?
Don't tell that to the Cuban cigar makers.
And of course there is no such thing as advertising trying to pevert your values or alter your perception of what you buy is worth ?
and of course in a "Free Market" both parties are fully aware.
Did all the people who bought the Ford (Pintara ?) with the plastic fuel tank which split and incinerated a few hundred families know about the fuel tank before they made the decision to buy that particular car ?
There is no such thing as a "Free Market" anywhere in the world in any product between any two people.
It is a myth simplified so that the basics of economic theory can be taught to 15 year old economics & commerce students as happend to myself.
However by the time I was 18 my teachers had also shown us that a truly "Free Market" did not exist but it was the best tool available to try & understand what was happening.
However if you really want to religiously believe that you have a "Free Market Economy" then you will hear no more about it from me as I never attempt to alter some ones religious beliefs.
And this money that the government does not give to the farmers did not come from taxes which did not alter the price or availability of some commodity or benifit to some other sector of the community ?
The new casting plant being built in Mitichigan for GM funded by a "loan" from the Obarma government $4.3 billion from memory but I would have to go through some back issues of the Americian Foundryman to check the actual number as it was 6 years ago the story broke.
So the USA allows any product to be imported without Free Market skewing import duties being applied ?
Don't tell that to the Cuban cigar makers.
And of course there is no such thing as advertising trying to pevert your values or alter your perception of what you buy is worth ?
and of course in a "Free Market" both parties are fully aware.
Did all the people who bought the Ford (Pintara ?) with the plastic fuel tank which split and incinerated a few hundred families know about the fuel tank before they made the decision to buy that particular car ?
There is no such thing as a "Free Market" anywhere in the world in any product between any two people.
It is a myth simplified so that the basics of economic theory can be taught to 15 year old economics & commerce students as happend to myself.
However by the time I was 18 my teachers had also shown us that a truly "Free Market" did not exist but it was the best tool available to try & understand what was happening.
However if you really want to religiously believe that you have a "Free Market Economy" then you will hear no more about it from me as I never attempt to alter some ones religious beliefs.
#15
cpurvis
cpurvis
Sorry to burst your bubble, but just yesterday I bought a serpentine belt for a Dodge diesel pickup and a slab of ribs for lunch. Both were, in fact, free market exchanges.
Thanks for having no more to say on the subject.
Thanks for having no more to say on the subject.
#16
reynoldston
reynoldston
Look at the forum rules, no political or religious topics. Could this post be starting to look like that????
#17
cpurvis
cpurvis
Economics is neither religious nor political. But if someone is offended by that, go ahead and delete my posts.
#18
S
Shughes717
I think you are confused. The pintara was a Nissan automobile (built in Australia by the way). Don't see how an Australian built Nissan car has anything to do with the U.S. Market. I would also like to know what money the government gives farmers for corn, as my whole family has farmed for generations and have not received their money. I can tell you that the price of grain, cotton, cattle, etc is influenced by supply and demand. When the supply exceeds the demand the price is low. When the demand exceeds the supply the price goes up.
Btw, if you are talking about the Ford pinto the number of deaths from rear end collisions that caused the fuel tank neck to break and cause a fire was actually 27 not hundreds (3,000,000 pintos manufactured). That was proved to be no more than any other comparable car in the 70s. Get your facts straight before pretending to be so well informed on U.S. History.
S
Shughes717
So the Iowa corn farmers get no money from the government which would artificially alter the price of corn ?
And this money that the government does not give to the farmers did not come from taxes which did not alter the price or availability of some commodity or benifit to some other sector of the community ?
The new casting plant being built in Mitichigan for GM funded by a "loan" from the Obarma government $4.3 billion from memory but I would have to go through some back issues of the Americian Foundryman to check the actual number as it was 6 years ago the story broke.
So the USA allows any product to be imported without Free Market skewing import duties being applied ?
Don't tell that to the Cuban cigar makers.
And of course there is no such thing as advertising trying to pevert your values or alter your perception of what you buy is worth ?
and of course in a "Free Market" both parties are fully aware.
Did all the people who bought the Ford (Pintara ?) with the plastic fuel tank which split and incinerated a few hundred families know about the fuel tank before they made the decision to buy that particular car ?
There is no such thing as a "Free Market" anywhere in the world in any product between any two people.
It is a myth simplified so that the basics of economic theory can be taught to 15 year old economics & commerce students as happend to myself.
However by the time I was 18 my teachers had also shown us that a truly "Free Market" did not exist but it was the best tool available to try & understand what was happening.
However if you really want to religiously believe that you have a "Free Market Economy" then you will hear no more about it from me as I never attempt to alter some ones religious beliefs.
I think you are confused. The pintara was a Nissan automobile (built in Australia by the way). Don't see how an Australian built Nissan car has anything to do with the U.S. Market. I would also like to know what money the government gives farmers for corn, as my whole family has farmed for generations and have not received their money. I can tell you that the price of grain, cotton, cattle, etc is influenced by supply and demand. When the supply exceeds the demand the price is low. When the demand exceeds the supply the price goes up.
Btw, if you are talking about the Ford pinto the number of deaths from rear end collisions that caused the fuel tank neck to break and cause a fire was actually 27 not hundreds (3,000,000 pintos manufactured). That was proved to be no more than any other comparable car in the 70s. Get your facts straight before pretending to be so well informed on U.S. History.
#19
ILENGINE
ILENGINE
According to what I found with a little searching there was $84 billion in corn subsidies and $12 billion in direct payments to farmers from 1995-2012. That doesn't include other subsides such as cotton.
One farmer that I had found had received $3.6 million is government subsidies from 1995-2012
One farmer that I had found had received $3.6 million is government subsidies from 1995-2012
#20
reynoldston
Sorry but it wasn't your post that I was talking about but I will keep names out of it, keep it coming I am on your side you had a very good comebacks.
reynoldston
Economics is neither religious nor political. But if someone is offended by that, go ahead and delete my posts.
Sorry but it wasn't your post that I was talking about but I will keep names out of it, keep it coming I am on your side you had a very good comebacks.
#21
M
motoman
M
motoman
Well, boobala , you really know how to push buttons. Doesn't this belong on the "front porch" section. At least the responders are putting a little glitter into the "dismal science." :smile:
#22
S
Shughes717
As I have said, my entire family has farmed for generations. Never received any money from the government. Only money paid was for the crops we harvested. There are some tax breaks for items purchased for farm purchases, but other than that I don't recall my grand father, father, uncles, or brother ever receiving a check from the government. My great grandfather was retired by the time I was old enough to work on the farm, so I can't say about him.
I do understand that subsidies are out there, but not all farmers get them. As a matter of fact the vast majority of farmers don't receive them. The subsidies are there to encourage farmers to grow crops by guaranteeing a price floor on the crop.
S
Shughes717
According to what I found with a little searching there was $84 billion in corn subsidies and $12 billion in direct payments to farmers from 1995-2012. That doesn't include other subsides such as cotton.
One farmer that I had found had received $3.6 million is government subsidies from 1995-2012
As I have said, my entire family has farmed for generations. Never received any money from the government. Only money paid was for the crops we harvested. There are some tax breaks for items purchased for farm purchases, but other than that I don't recall my grand father, father, uncles, or brother ever receiving a check from the government. My great grandfather was retired by the time I was old enough to work on the farm, so I can't say about him.
I do understand that subsidies are out there, but not all farmers get them. As a matter of fact the vast majority of farmers don't receive them. The subsidies are there to encourage farmers to grow crops by guaranteeing a price floor on the crop.
#23
L
Lohman446
I'm suspicious of just how true that statement is. Adam Smith in originally discussing the principles of a free market argued that a market would regulate itself when both the seller and buyer could enter and exit the market with minimum costs and interference. I do not think he could have imagined a market-place where the cost of entry (both financial and in terms of regulation) was as high for the seller as many of the markets today (it's not likely that I can compete with the Briggs and Stratton group by making zero-turn mowers in my garage to sell). I don't mean to advocate for something else but the statement that the US operates in a truly free-market is highly suspect.
L
Lohman446
The Free Market may very well be a myth in Australia; I wouldn't know.
But here in the States, with the exception of our health care system, it is alive and well, in spite of those who try to stop it.
I'm suspicious of just how true that statement is. Adam Smith in originally discussing the principles of a free market argued that a market would regulate itself when both the seller and buyer could enter and exit the market with minimum costs and interference. I do not think he could have imagined a market-place where the cost of entry (both financial and in terms of regulation) was as high for the seller as many of the markets today (it's not likely that I can compete with the Briggs and Stratton group by making zero-turn mowers in my garage to sell). I don't mean to advocate for something else but the statement that the US operates in a truly free-market is highly suspect.
#24
cpurvis
Have you not made any free market purchases lately? Have you not bought or sold a good or service from someone off of, say, craigslist, in which you two arrived at a mutually agreed upon price?
What kind of market is that, if not free?
I'm not getting the connection that, because you personally can't open up a business that will be competitive with Briggs and Stratton, that the market is 'rigged.' Nowhere in any economics book will you find a definition of 'Free Market' which insists that any person, no matter how poor, should be able to open a business and compete with all businesses in that field, no matter what size those businesses may be. But there are examples of it happening if you care to look. Southwest Airlines, Apple, Microsoft and Walmart come to mind.
You're right in that government interference is a factor. But the market forces are alive and well and many startups succeed in spite of the government. Government interference rarely affects personal transactions which is where a HUGE portion of the economy takes place.
cpurvis
I'm suspicious of just how true that statement is. Adam Smith in originally discussing the principles of a free market argued that a market would regulate itself when both the seller and buyer could enter and exit the market with minimum costs and interference. I do not think he could have imagined a market-place where the cost of entry (both financial and in terms of regulation) was as high for the seller as many of the markets today (it's not likely that I can compete with the Briggs and Stratton group by making zero-turn mowers in my garage to sell). I don't mean to advocate for something else but the statement that the US operates in a truly free-market is highly suspect.
Have you not made any free market purchases lately? Have you not bought or sold a good or service from someone off of, say, craigslist, in which you two arrived at a mutually agreed upon price?
What kind of market is that, if not free?
I'm not getting the connection that, because you personally can't open up a business that will be competitive with Briggs and Stratton, that the market is 'rigged.' Nowhere in any economics book will you find a definition of 'Free Market' which insists that any person, no matter how poor, should be able to open a business and compete with all businesses in that field, no matter what size those businesses may be. But there are examples of it happening if you care to look. Southwest Airlines, Apple, Microsoft and Walmart come to mind.
You're right in that government interference is a factor. But the market forces are alive and well and many startups succeed in spite of the government. Government interference rarely affects personal transactions which is where a HUGE portion of the economy takes place.
#25
L
Lohman446
Perhaps the market is, to some degree, free. The argument is that for the market to self regulate (the term I should have used) that the costs to enter, or exit, have to be relatively minimal. If the barriers to new sellers entering the market are too high (and that includes financial barriers) than the market will not regulate because those who would increase the supply do not have the resources to enter the marketplace. My argument is that the free market system described my Adam Smith did not account for massive players that could use financial resources (either resources they had or an extremely high entrance cost for the sellers) to keep other players from entering the market.
/I'm new here and likely finding the edge of the allowance in the rules for lack of political discussion. I have tried to keep the discussion about historical references to how a free market works in comparison to today's marketplace (driven largely by an increase in technology which is useful). It is not my intent to take any political stance on the subject other than to note that what we perceive as a self regulating free market may not be to the degree we think it is.
L
Lohman446
Have you not made any free market purchases lately? Have you not bought or sold a good or service from someone off of, say, craigslist, in which you two arrived at a mutually agreed upon price?
What kind of market is that, if not free?
I'm not getting the connection that, because you personally can't open up a business that will be competitive with Briggs and Stratton, that the market is 'rigged.' Nowhere in any economics book will you find a definition of 'Free Market' which insists that any person, no matter how poor, should be able to open a business and compete with all businesses in that field, no matter what size those businesses may be. But there are examples of it happening if you care to look. Southwest Airlines, Apple, Microsoft and Walmart come to mind.
You're right in that government interference is a factor. But the market forces are alive and well and many startups succeed in spite of the government. Government interference rarely affects personal transactions which is where a HUGE portion of the economy takes place.
Perhaps the market is, to some degree, free. The argument is that for the market to self regulate (the term I should have used) that the costs to enter, or exit, have to be relatively minimal. If the barriers to new sellers entering the market are too high (and that includes financial barriers) than the market will not regulate because those who would increase the supply do not have the resources to enter the marketplace. My argument is that the free market system described my Adam Smith did not account for massive players that could use financial resources (either resources they had or an extremely high entrance cost for the sellers) to keep other players from entering the market.
/I'm new here and likely finding the edge of the allowance in the rules for lack of political discussion. I have tried to keep the discussion about historical references to how a free market works in comparison to today's marketplace (driven largely by an increase in technology which is useful). It is not my intent to take any political stance on the subject other than to note that what we perceive as a self regulating free market may not be to the degree we think it is.
#26
cpurvis
cpurvis
In every example I cited above, there were massive players who could have (and some tried) to keep others out of their field.
#27
K
Kial
K
Kial
It's probably not a bad idea. I think more and more companies like these are being driven towards mergers to try and remain competitive. I know people assume that there will be less competitive pricing because of it but the reality is that getting products from China is easier than ever so these local companies still need to sharpen their pencils if they want to make sales.
#28
willys55
willys55
I never buy anything that is made in china, I only buy USA, Germany and England...in that order. I believe in quality not quantity and I never buy from companies who only focus on profits above consumer.
#29
C
cashman
C
cashman
One way the big guys run the smaller guys out is through Government safety and emission regulations. You go back thirty or forty years ago there are a small percentage of manufacturers now as then.
#30
primerbulb120
primerbulb120
My mowers are made in the US, my trimmer and one blower are made in Sweden, edger made in Germany, hedge trimmer in Japan and chainsaw in Mexico.
I buy lots of parts from China though.
I buy lots of parts from China though.
#31
BlazNT
I wish that was true. Not a single car in America is without a large percentage of parts from china or other countries. We are a global economy and nothing can be done to change that.
BlazNT
I never buy anything that is made in china, I only buy USA, Germany and England...in that order. I believe in quality not quantity and I never buy from companies who only focus on profits above consumer.
I wish that was true. Not a single car in America is without a large percentage of parts from china or other countries. We are a global economy and nothing can be done to change that.
#32
willys55
willys55
my cars are just about 20 years old on average, and with the exception the the jag, all american
#33
willys55
willys55
oops, almost forgot, the beetle is Mexican.....:laughing:
#36
B
bertsmobile1
B
bertsmobile1
the wiring looms on most cars have been made in Asia for decades
Phillipines then Thiland then China
Phillipines then Thiland then China
#37
reynoldston
reynoldston
I have a older car with over 200,000 miles on it that I drive everyday. I don't like spending money on repairs but a car what is 18 years old with that many miles has its problems. When ever I need parts for it I find that the Chinese parts are a lot cheaper. To my surprise I find then of very high quality and last as long as the more expensive parts. I also find salvage yard pick and pull parts is a good source of cheap parts.
#38
cpurvis
I've been doing some of that myself. If you can't find what you're looking for locally, here's a good online source: car-part.com
I was able to get a discontinued $650 ECU for a Ford Ranger on there for $50.
cpurvis
I have a older car with over 200,000 miles on it that I drive everyday. I don't like spending money on repairs but a car what is 18 years old with that many miles has its problems. When ever I need parts for it I find that the Chinese parts are a lot cheaper. To my surprise I find then of very high quality and last as long as the more expensive parts. I also find salvage yard pick and pull parts is a good source of cheap parts.
I've been doing some of that myself. If you can't find what you're looking for locally, here's a good online source: car-part.com
I was able to get a discontinued $650 ECU for a Ford Ranger on there for $50.
#39
B
bertsmobile1
Why should that surprise you ?
Chinese factories have the capacity to make parts from NASA space grade right through to Walmart grade.
They make the quality that they are asked to make.
Because their economy has evolved from a communist background they are yet to develop 20 levels of parrasitic executives + thieving boards of directors and CEO with serious God complexes or hedge fund shareholders.
Take them pit of what is made locally and the price of USA made goods will drop about 75%.
Like Japan the future executives are not heraditry so the idot bastard sons of the wealthy do not get to become the CEO's of successful companies so you end up with management by merit, not semen.
The CEO of Ford still takes home more than the entire board & CEO of Toyota.
The Chinese government provides most of the developement capital for totally Chinese enerprises and the foreign investors stump up the money if it is a joint developement.
Eventually their system will become just as corrupted as the rest of the Western World but for now enjoy the cheaper prices while you can.
B
bertsmobile1
I have a older car with over 200,000 miles on it that I drive everyday. I don't like spending money on repairs but a car what is 18 years old with that many miles has its problems. When ever I need parts for it I find that the Chinese parts are a lot cheaper. To my surprise I find then of very high quality and last as long as the more expensive parts. I also find salvage yard pick and pull parts is a good source of cheap parts.
Why should that surprise you ?
Chinese factories have the capacity to make parts from NASA space grade right through to Walmart grade.
They make the quality that they are asked to make.
Because their economy has evolved from a communist background they are yet to develop 20 levels of parrasitic executives + thieving boards of directors and CEO with serious God complexes or hedge fund shareholders.
Take them pit of what is made locally and the price of USA made goods will drop about 75%.
Like Japan the future executives are not heraditry so the idot bastard sons of the wealthy do not get to become the CEO's of successful companies so you end up with management by merit, not semen.
The CEO of Ford still takes home more than the entire board & CEO of Toyota.
The Chinese government provides most of the developement capital for totally Chinese enerprises and the foreign investors stump up the money if it is a joint developement.
Eventually their system will become just as corrupted as the rest of the Western World but for now enjoy the cheaper prices while you can.
#40
jekjr
jekjr
True Capitalism would be an incredible thing. However we are not at the point that there are so many government rules regulations taxes and fees that it no longer exists. More rules and regulations run the smaller guys out or stop upstarts and new comers to compete. Government has destroyed so many things. Look at gas cans for instance. The idiots who made the laws concerning gas cans should have to drive a gas guzzler car from New York to Los Angeles and have to fill it with a one gallon gas can every time it needs gas. The levels of stupidity is incredible. Of course every law they pass is for "Your Protection."
#41
B
bertsmobile1
B
bertsmobile1
True capatilism has never exists and never will.
The instant a few operators become dominant in any field, they form group to manipulate the market to their own advantage, be it a chamber of Commerce , a trade union ,an oil cartel , a college of shipping lines , a society of merchant bankers or even drug smugglers.
Next the laws are not written for the benefit of the masses they are written to protect the property & power of the wealthy, from the masses, which should be no surprise because they are written by the wealthy & powerful in the first place.
Finally, no business can survive without things like law & order, unless you think you should be providing your own shotgun weilding body & business guards, driving on the roads you built to your customers properties.
If people are spending all their spare money on educating their kids or looking after their health then they have no money left over to buy whatever it is you are trying to sell them.
Even good old Henry Ford realised that if he wanted people to buy his cheap cars he needed to pay his workers more so they could afford his cars.
The instant a few operators become dominant in any field, they form group to manipulate the market to their own advantage, be it a chamber of Commerce , a trade union ,an oil cartel , a college of shipping lines , a society of merchant bankers or even drug smugglers.
Next the laws are not written for the benefit of the masses they are written to protect the property & power of the wealthy, from the masses, which should be no surprise because they are written by the wealthy & powerful in the first place.
Finally, no business can survive without things like law & order, unless you think you should be providing your own shotgun weilding body & business guards, driving on the roads you built to your customers properties.
If people are spending all their spare money on educating their kids or looking after their health then they have no money left over to buy whatever it is you are trying to sell them.
Even good old Henry Ford realised that if he wanted people to buy his cheap cars he needed to pay his workers more so they could afford his cars.
#42
Flintmotorsports
Flintmotorsports
i deal directly with both companies and i think nothing has changed the quality of dr is still the same.
#43
S
SidecarFlip
Geberac is a wholly owned sub of Honeywell Corporation.
S
SidecarFlip
More companies are merging ............ What do YOU think .....???
Generac buys DR Power Equipment | TodaysMower.com
Geberac is a wholly owned sub of Honeywell Corporation.
#44
Flintmotorsports
i think both brands are good and i do warranty repairs on both and they treat there customers good as well.
Flintmotorsports
Geberac is a wholly owned sub of Honeywell Corporation.
i think both brands are good and i do warranty repairs on both and they treat there customers good as well.