Re: U.S. rules

[MAXLTV@domain.elided]

In a message dated 8/3/99 22:15:03 EST, owner-alfa-digest@domain.elided writes:

<< 
 US markets may be relatively open, but that doesn't mean they aren't
 protected.  If it was an open market, you would be able to import and run
 new  Alfa (or Lotus or whatever).  You cannot do this legally because the
 market is not open.>>

No, you cannot do this because certain standards apply for the design of 
products due to legislation and social policy. Perhaps you would advocate the 
selling of apricot pits as a cancer cure, so we can enjoy an "open market." 

When the rules were written for low emissions, crashworthiness, air bags, 
etc., I can guarantee no U.S. legislator or trade wonk wrung his hands saying 
"Ah Hah! That should fix the threat of the Lotus 7!!"  We do have standards 
for cars, and so do others. Before the EC, there were so many regulations in 
individual European countries, it drove the manufacturers nuts. Now, no more 
yellow headlights in France. But guess what? They complied. If I follow your 
logic, when the Big Three struggled to make decent engines that would pass 
new emissions regs in the 70s, a case could be made that the U.S. government 
was trying to restrict the sale of domestic cars, since the Japanese had no 
problem meeting those same regs.        

  << The US government is also totally ruthless when it
 comes to trade sanctions against overseas industries when US pressure
 groups get their way.  At present, the Scottish angora wool (cottage)
 industry is being killed because US banana traders don't like EC policy.
 The US government has just imposed sanctions on Australian lamb imports, an
 area where there is no significant domestic production.  A few years ago
 the Japanese were forced to import large numbers of (unsaleable) American
 cars in order to avoid sanctions. >> 

In light of twenty years of massive trade deficits, your complaint rings 
hollow. We are not  ruthless enough, in my book. It is normal for nations to 
retaliate on one commodity when they judge another one to be unfairly dumped 
or priced lower here than they are in their country of manufacture or 
production. This has nothing to do with FIAT, s.p.a., pulling out. As far as 
the Japanese are concerned, no amount of ramming our products down their 
throats will ever make up for decades of the most picayune, asinine, cleverly 
written regulations specifically designed to protect their manufacturing, 
banking and retail operations. Even their distribution systems are a closed 
shop. We finally have the means to bust this system up. 
 
 <> 


Again, if what you were saying is true, Maserati would not be coming back 
next year, Aston Martin would not be here, nor Ferrari. It may be expensive 
to homologate a car to U.S. standards in some respects, but European and 
American regulations are merging, and this is pin money compared to the 
opportunity of selling in the world's largest and richest automotive market. 
In the final year of Alfa's availability, the Ferrari 348 outsold the 164LS. 
They tried, they failed, and that's a good enough reason to split. BTW, I 
predict Maserati will also fail. If you want to send that twin turbo pelican 
up against the XK8, lots of luck. 
   
 <<They build cars which don't appeal to most American buyers.  Which
 particular class of buyers should they design their products to appeal to?
 Hyundai Excel, Honda Accord or F100?  IMO they left the US market because
 they couldn't make enough profit on their sale volumes to justify the
 risks.>>

Precisely. Because they were building cars that didn't appeal to U.S. buyers! 
BMW, Mercedes, Audi and a host of others are building sport sedans and 
convertibles that are selling like hot cakes, and (gasp!) even have resale 
value. They even have built factories here. Some closed market! By your 
logic, since we have not adopted European standards by diktat, we are being 
protectionist.

<<  But they can make useful profits in other low volume markets (e.g.
 Australia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Malaysia, most of the rest of the
 world........).>>

No doubt, because the EC regulations on safety and emissions probably exceed 
that of the nations you mentioned, indeed, if they have any standards at all. 
 And I can guarantee that genuinely high tariff charges apply to most of the 
countries you mentioned, even without their having a domestic industry. 

You may not like the regulations or the results, but to claim this is an 
instrument of import control on this particular commodity, positing a 
sinister cabal to protect the Ford Motor Company from Alfa Romeo, Lotus and 
Skoda, is patently ridiculous. 


  

------------------------------