You have absolutely no way of predicting MS or anybody's advertising unless you head the MS advertising department.
More Teckstud FAIL! It's called Windows 7, and it comes out pretty much in the middle of the second half of 2009. That fact alone means there's no way they will spend dramatically less on advertising in the second half of 2009 than they did in the 1st half.
Pardon me for not reading all responses so if someone mentions this already, sorry.
I don't mind the "I'm a PC" ads though have you noticed that they all take place in Best Buy?
Best Buy always has last generation Macs in comparison to the Apple Store and at the full prices the last generation had when those Macs were introduced.
Pardon me for not reading all responses so if someone mentions this already, sorry.
I don't mind the "I'm a PC" ads though have you noticed that they all take place in Best Buy?
Best Buy always has last generation Macs in comparison to the Apple Store and at the full prices the last generation had when those Macs were introduced.
And all their MacBooks(Pros) are scratched and dented.
That's why the new HP ad with her in it doesn't show her head.
Actually, maybe it's because they had to hide all the bruises and abrasions on her forehead from slamming it against the nearest wall for each time Vista crashed.
People have been burned by low priced/low quality PC's with a inferior security operating system called Windows that requires the help of a local geek and expensive, processor hogging anti-malware which doesn't completely do the job (because it can't detect new malware) for many years now.
Jeeez, mate... your introduction sounds a bit propagandish
There are many decent free anti-malware products out there, and they receive updates daily. Sure once in a while new threat will slip through undetected for a while, but all in all there is no much drama there any more. Anti-mallware will take some processor time, but if you can get high end quad core PC system for the price of dual core Mac, you are not so worried about a few CPU beats.
Quote:
People realize that for their own personal use, they don't want the headaches associated with Windows, they don't want to use the same dam thing they use at the office where the local IT guy fixes everything.
That is so freakin' individual. I still have to find a friend or at least acquaintance who has realized that and purchased Mac, and I know for fact that many of my acquaintances - starting with me - have spent more than enough money on their gear to be able to get very decent Mac gear... so obviously, they decided to stay with PC "headaches" rather than swapping that for brand new Mac "headache". With all the polish and user friendliness Mac has, it all goes down the drain if it doesn't do what you need.
Quote:
Consumers have chosen Mac's because if they need to they can run Windows via Bootcamp and keep from using it online except for updates.
Still much more consumers choose PC. Heck, even Mac users with bootcamp choose PC, in a way - obviously they can't live with Mac only
Well, he may not technically be "stupid", but I don't think he's "super smart" either. Most of his success, and fortune, is due to the fact that he was BG's college buddy, and little else. But for that lucky circumstance, he probably wouldn't be flipping burgers, but he wouldn't be running a mega-corporation, either.
But, I definitely think MS should keep him at the helm for as long as he wants to stay.
LOL I can't argue with that!
While I have some sympathy for Balmer - he is very entertaining in a clownish way - he is definitely not the man for the top position in MS. An over-enthusiastic car seller, yes. CEO of the biggest software company in the world - Hell NO.
From the other point of view, whoever replaces Mr. B simply has to be better than him, so this is probably the lowest MS will go. Considering that, they are not doing so bad.
What if they used the laptop hunter concept to sell cars?
Imagine this:
"Hi, I'm Doug. And I want to buy a car. Okay. Let's see. It has to have four wheels. It must have a steering wheel. Definitely a radio. And I want leather. To get the hotties.
Let's check the BMW's. Oh no, heavens, they're way too expensive!
What about the Toyotas? Maybe. Hm.
Oh look here's a Kia. It has everything I want for less. Cool! I even saved $12,000. I'm a Kia.
Um, hotties? Where are you?"
(Add SFX of crickets chirping).
The BMW/APPLE in this case runs better, does more, and crashes less...
Hilarious and so true! Girls do dig guys with Macs! Its a given!
Causing your opponent to complain because you have made a mistake in an ad... is not effective.
Except that MS didn't make mistake - when add was launched, price was as stated in the add. And simple fact that Apple found it important to make MS change their add makes it effective.
Quote:
Telling ordinary folk that they can buy a PC for $700 instead of $1000.... might be effective but for HP and Dell etc....its not effective.
Telling some clueless parents that their kids can do their study related work on cheaper PC notebook instead of desirable but expensive Mac can be effective, specially in this economy. Of course, we'll never know if and how many more Macs would have been sold otherwise.
Quote:
Apple still being able to still increase their sales, during a massive recession... doesn't seem to be.... effective.
I believe past MS adds were more of damage control strategy, in waiting of Windows 7. It is really hard to know how effective they were as we can't repeat whole script without MS adds and see if Mac sales would be any better or not.
I personally believe some results are achieved, maybe not huge but then again, we are talking about handful of very cheap and short adds. I don't think MS has spend $300M on those adds - in fact, I believe majority of that budget will go into Windows 7 adds.
Beside reducing damage, past adds also gave MS advertising agency some time to work out strategy for further advertising, while instantly rising MS brand's media presence that might be useful for launching new products.
Quote:
For every Mac switcher apple gains an average of $1400 in revenue.
For every switcher that Microsoft manages to stop they get a revenue of around $45. (est OEM Windows licence)
$300 million dollars would need about 7 million NON-switchers to pay for the campaigns.
It's really simple. Microsoft's BEST strategy would be to make a better product. Windows 7 appears to be better than Vista, and the Zune HD appears to be better than every other Zune that came before it. I am certain that the next $300 million Microsoft spends on advertising will likely be more... effective.
How did you get to those numbers? Of course Apple makes more money for selling someone Mac with OSX than MS selling someone new copy of Windows, but then again it costs almost nothing to make new copy of Windows (as in to print DVD and put it in box) compared to making new computer. Additionally Windows is not the only product MS is selling.
Rest, I agree. MS needs better and more desirable products. But having them and letting them pass unnoticed is almost as bad as not having them at all.
...Consumers have chosen Mac's because if they need to they can run Windows via Bootcamp and keep from using it online except for updates.
I'm sure you mean that only some consumers have chosen Mac for this reason.
Most people I know personally who've chosen Apple products have done so because they're 'cool', fashionable or just good-looking; few care about the actual usability or merits of the OS etc.
OT, I'd love to know what percentage of MS Windows running on Apple hardware was properly licensed.
The Microsoft ad campaign was a series of major blunders. In fact, the NY Times article which gushes over the MS ads shows that Apple's market share dipped only slightly and quickly recovered - which (since the ads are still running) suggests that the ads didn't do anything. From a business management perspective and based on years of marketing education and experience, there are quite a few MAJOR blunders to the ads:
1. MS is the market leader and Apple is trying to gain credibility. Before MS ran the ads, it was easy for people to say "no one uses Macs" or "they're not worth considering because they're too nonstandard" or any of the other silly complaints people have made. Now, Microsoft comes along with an ad saying "We, Microsoft, the biggest OS vendor in the market, think Macs are good enough to consider as an alternative to Windows and we'll do a comparison". They handed Apple the credibility issue on a platter ('if Macs are important enough for Microsoft to look at them, perhaps I should, too'). They're also suggesting that people should go into the Mac section to check it out - and many of those people would never have gone their otherwise. If the Apple salesmen grab even a small percentage, it's completely free business for Apple.
2. The premise is foolish. Is there anyone who needs to be told that you can buy a cheaper PC than a Mac? While, in reality, Macs can be competitive on the high end, clearly a price-driven customer wouldn't be buying a Mac. But Microsoft just sent the message that perhaps the prices are close enough that one needs to have a look. Again, price sensitive people wouldn't have considered a Mac, anyway, so why give them the idea? Some percentage will be high end users who realize that those bargain basement PCs that MS is pushing are junk and maybe look at Macs.
3. Perhaps the biggest blunder is the entire premise of the ads - that price is all that matters.
3a. By sending the message that price is all that matters (or, at least, the most important thing), MS opens themselves up to Linux systems which are less expensive (no Windows licensing fee). That's not much of a problem today, but when Google releases its ChromeOS, it could be serious. Google has the clout to finally make Linux a player - and MIcrosoft just handed them their weapon. "If Microsoft says I should choose my computer on the basis of price, maybe I SHOULD choose this cheaper ChromeOS computer".
3b. It's bad practice to focus on price when you're vulnerable. Vista was junk and everyone knows it was junk. Even people who haven't used it or wouldn't know an OS if it bit them in the butt have gotten the message that Vista is junk. In that scenario, you don't come out "But we're cheap!" It merely reinforces the message that it's junk. Rather, their focus should have been on their DEFENSIBLE strengths - application availability, ubiquity, widespread support options, etc., etc., etc.). They could have fought back against Apple using a strength that doesn't scream "sure, we're junk, but at least we're cheap".
3c. It's really bad practice for someone who offers the low priced product to try to use price against a premium, elite product. That would be like Chevy using price against BMW. Duh. All it does is further differentiate you from the high quality, premium brand. It basically increases the prestige value of the premium brand - and sends the message "we know we'll never be as good as Apple, but at least we're cheap".
With their money, Microsoft should have done better. I have to conclude that the ad agency's hands were tied by poor management decisions. Properly done, they could have fought back by building on their strengths. For example, they might focus on ease of use - and pull out fluff like "not that long ago, people were using arcane commands like del c://**.* to control their computers. Thanks to Windows, 2 billion computer users can now do things visually without remembering a single command" or something like that. SOME people will realize that Apple led the way and Microsoft followed, but it doesn't matter - MS is the one who brought it to 95% of those billions of people. Others (probably the majority) will not realize that Windows is a cheap copy of Mac OS, so they'll be appreciative of what Microsoft has done.
But what about when the Mercedes has the same engine, the same transmission, the same wheels as the Kia? Then you are paying for the brand and sporty look. At least in the PPC days, Apple had that argument, but now all you pay for is a slick case and the OS. The computer hardware is the same.
(I constantly get flack for this argument. Mind you, I hate Windows, especially Vista, and I am running Linux these days. My Quad Core desktop, with screen and Mac OS X only cost 800 bucks. Works just like a real mac does... so why pay the extra 300 bucks for an inferior machine?)
Good point! In your case you added the value by adding the VALUE. Your probably pretty good at hardware repairs so AppleCare and it's One-One didn't appeal to you. Nothing wrong with that but the commercials for PC's MISS that extra tid-bit. For you, and I, it's a moot point. We could repair and be going in no time but for the remaining 99% of the world it's not the case. So you pay more, you get WAY more than just hardware.
On paper they seem similar but I can't find a Laptop, PC Variant, with a 1066mhz BUS speed and DDR3 memory for less than $1400, I CAN however find a PC with those specs for a lot less but it comes with a picture of an Apple on it... And someone took a bite out of it.
The desktop you built is something Apple doesn't. And like you I've gone that route... Once. I decided the New Mini was a perfect replacement for my old aging mini's and replaced them all and turned the Hackintosh back into a PC, Ubuntu PC mind you.
But you do bring up a valid point in that what you wanted in the form factor you wanted it in they didn't make. You have the Mini with a more pricey laptop components and then the MacPro with the pricey server internals. But I think Apple would get slammed to build a middle-road Mac, it should be priced at $999 (Desktop form factor) but they can't justify the price because the cost of the parts would be less than or equal to the Mini due to less expensive desktop parts thus tossing the Mini into the archives and it doesn't deserve that. It's a great computer that sips power and pounds through work like a champ. It's a great little server and a fantastic home theater system.
On a side note I drive a Suzuki. I do because a few years ago I was stranded at 8pm on a major highway in my then 2yr old Suzuki. Still under warranty. I called Roadside Assist. Rather than tell me, like Honda did to my wife on the same year, your Roadside has expired sorry here's a number... The guy on the phone (In Cali), got ahold of the nearest dealer, got a hold of a towing company they work with. In 20 mins me, my wife and 8 month old son were picked up in a new Suzuki XL7 (we were in an XL7) following mine on a flat bed back to the dealer. My powertrain warranty was still good and the repair was covered. The dealer told us this is normal in the event an owner breaks down within 45 miles of a dealer. We were told to call back on Monday for an ETA and if need be the dealer would drive our truck to our house and swap with the new XL7 we were being lent. If we had been farther away they would have sent Enterprise. My wife had a honda and was told to pound sand. She was given a number and a nice good-bye. For that reason, I drive Suzuki. For the same reason I own a Mac even if I run Windows. Has this been PC Company & Microsoft I'd still be on the highway, on hold waiting to be transfered to another rep who could help me. This is my 6th Suzuki and I'm on my... 20th Mac? I've only had a Suzuki break down once, Mac zero.
Comments
You have absolutely no way of predicting MS or anybody's advertising unless you head the MS advertising department.
More Teckstud FAIL! It's called Windows 7, and it comes out pretty much in the middle of the second half of 2009. That fact alone means there's no way they will spend dramatically less on advertising in the second half of 2009 than they did in the 1st half.
And that would mean 2 years not one. Simple math- try it.
Good grief! Why do you persist with this rubbish?
And don't lecture me on simple math(s) because 2008 plus "the first 6 months" of 2009 does NOT equal 2 years.
I don't mind the "I'm a PC" ads though have you noticed that they all take place in Best Buy?
Best Buy always has last generation Macs in comparison to the Apple Store and at the full prices the last generation had when those Macs were introduced.
Wrong - they were only misrepresenting Apple's price$ after Apple responded by lopping $100 off Macs.
Please stick to facts no matter how much it hurts you to.
May MS continue with these ads- I personally wouldn't mind another $100 markdown as I'm in the market to buy this fall .
Dude! you should get a dell!
She's the hottest thing since Ellen Feiss.
Why doesn't Apple resurrect her?
cos she's in rehab?
i kid.. i kid...
Thanks for explaining - but if your joke needs that much explaining perhaps it ain't worth telling. Still, I guess you laughed out loud.
No offence, but what country and/or grade are you from/in that you need that joke explained to you?!
I suggest you learn how to write if you ever want to be taken seriously.
sorry i was rushed with the kiddies i will re write it .
again sorry
Pardon me for not reading all responses so if someone mentions this already, sorry.
I don't mind the "I'm a PC" ads though have you noticed that they all take place in Best Buy?
Best Buy always has last generation Macs in comparison to the Apple Store and at the full prices the last generation had when those Macs were introduced.
And all their MacBooks(Pros) are scratched and dented.
Dude! you should get a dell!
Eeeeewwwww- now that's the biggest insult to ever be unleashed upon me!
That's why the new HP ad with her in it doesn't show her head.
Actually, maybe it's because they had to hide all the bruises and abrasions on her forehead from slamming it against the nearest wall for each time Vista crashed.
People have been burned by low priced/low quality PC's with a inferior security operating system called Windows that requires the help of a local geek and expensive, processor hogging anti-malware which doesn't completely do the job (because it can't detect new malware) for many years now.
Jeeez, mate... your introduction sounds a bit propagandish
There are many decent free anti-malware products out there, and they receive updates daily. Sure once in a while new threat will slip through undetected for a while, but all in all there is no much drama there any more. Anti-mallware will take some processor time, but if you can get high end quad core PC system for the price of dual core Mac, you are not so worried about a few CPU beats.
People realize that for their own personal use, they don't want the headaches associated with Windows, they don't want to use the same dam thing they use at the office where the local IT guy fixes everything.
That is so freakin' individual. I still have to find a friend or at least acquaintance who has realized that and purchased Mac, and I know for fact that many of my acquaintances - starting with me - have spent more than enough money on their gear to be able to get very decent Mac gear... so obviously, they decided to stay with PC "headaches" rather than swapping that for brand new Mac "headache". With all the polish and user friendliness Mac has, it all goes down the drain if it doesn't do what you need.
Consumers have chosen Mac's because if they need to they can run Windows via Bootcamp and keep from using it online except for updates.
Still much more consumers choose PC. Heck, even Mac users with bootcamp choose PC, in a way - obviously they can't live with Mac only
Well, he may not technically be "stupid", but I don't think he's "super smart" either. Most of his success, and fortune, is due to the fact that he was BG's college buddy, and little else. But for that lucky circumstance, he probably wouldn't be flipping burgers, but he wouldn't be running a mega-corporation, either.
But, I definitely think MS should keep him at the helm for as long as he wants to stay.
LOL I can't argue with that!
While I have some sympathy for Balmer - he is very entertaining in a clownish way - he is definitely not the man for the top position in MS. An over-enthusiastic car seller, yes. CEO of the biggest software company in the world - Hell NO.
From the other point of view, whoever replaces Mr. B simply has to be better than him, so this is probably the lowest MS will go. Considering that, they are not doing so bad.
What if they used the laptop hunter concept to sell cars?
Imagine this:
"Hi, I'm Doug. And I want to buy a car. Okay. Let's see. It has to have four wheels. It must have a steering wheel. Definitely a radio. And I want leather. To get the hotties.
Let's check the BMW's. Oh no, heavens, they're way too expensive!
What about the Toyotas? Maybe. Hm.
Oh look here's a Kia. It has everything I want for less. Cool! I even saved $12,000. I'm a Kia.
Um, hotties? Where are you?"
(Add SFX of crickets chirping).
The BMW/APPLE in this case runs better, does more, and crashes less...
Hilarious and so true! Girls do dig guys with Macs! Its a given!
Causing your opponent to complain because you have made a mistake in an ad... is not effective.
Except that MS didn't make mistake - when add was launched, price was as stated in the add. And simple fact that Apple found it important to make MS change their add makes it effective.
Telling ordinary folk that they can buy a PC for $700 instead of $1000.... might be effective but for HP and Dell etc....its not effective.
Telling some clueless parents that their kids can do their study related work on cheaper PC notebook instead of desirable but expensive Mac can be effective, specially in this economy. Of course, we'll never know if and how many more Macs would have been sold otherwise.
Apple still being able to still increase their sales, during a massive recession... doesn't seem to be.... effective.
I believe past MS adds were more of damage control strategy, in waiting of Windows 7. It is really hard to know how effective they were as we can't repeat whole script without MS adds and see if Mac sales would be any better or not.
I personally believe some results are achieved, maybe not huge but then again, we are talking about handful of very cheap and short adds. I don't think MS has spend $300M on those adds - in fact, I believe majority of that budget will go into Windows 7 adds.
Beside reducing damage, past adds also gave MS advertising agency some time to work out strategy for further advertising, while instantly rising MS brand's media presence that might be useful for launching new products.
For every Mac switcher apple gains an average of $1400 in revenue.
For every switcher that Microsoft manages to stop they get a revenue of around $45. (est OEM Windows licence)
$300 million dollars would need about 7 million NON-switchers to pay for the campaigns.
It's really simple. Microsoft's BEST strategy would be to make a better product. Windows 7 appears to be better than Vista, and the Zune HD appears to be better than every other Zune that came before it. I am certain that the next $300 million Microsoft spends on advertising will likely be more... effective.
How did you get to those numbers? Of course Apple makes more money for selling someone Mac with OSX than MS selling someone new copy of Windows, but then again it costs almost nothing to make new copy of Windows (as in to print DVD and put it in box) compared to making new computer. Additionally Windows is not the only product MS is selling.
Rest, I agree. MS needs better and more desirable products. But having them and letting them pass unnoticed is almost as bad as not having them at all.
...Consumers have chosen Mac's because if they need to they can run Windows via Bootcamp and keep from using it online except for updates.
I'm sure you mean that only some consumers have chosen Mac for this reason.
Most people I know personally who've chosen Apple products have done so because they're 'cool', fashionable or just good-looking; few care about the actual usability or merits of the OS etc.
OT, I'd love to know what percentage of MS Windows running on Apple hardware was properly licensed.
1. MS is the market leader and Apple is trying to gain credibility. Before MS ran the ads, it was easy for people to say "no one uses Macs" or "they're not worth considering because they're too nonstandard" or any of the other silly complaints people have made. Now, Microsoft comes along with an ad saying "We, Microsoft, the biggest OS vendor in the market, think Macs are good enough to consider as an alternative to Windows and we'll do a comparison". They handed Apple the credibility issue on a platter ('if Macs are important enough for Microsoft to look at them, perhaps I should, too'). They're also suggesting that people should go into the Mac section to check it out - and many of those people would never have gone their otherwise. If the Apple salesmen grab even a small percentage, it's completely free business for Apple.
2. The premise is foolish. Is there anyone who needs to be told that you can buy a cheaper PC than a Mac? While, in reality, Macs can be competitive on the high end, clearly a price-driven customer wouldn't be buying a Mac. But Microsoft just sent the message that perhaps the prices are close enough that one needs to have a look. Again, price sensitive people wouldn't have considered a Mac, anyway, so why give them the idea? Some percentage will be high end users who realize that those bargain basement PCs that MS is pushing are junk and maybe look at Macs.
3. Perhaps the biggest blunder is the entire premise of the ads - that price is all that matters.
3a. By sending the message that price is all that matters (or, at least, the most important thing), MS opens themselves up to Linux systems which are less expensive (no Windows licensing fee). That's not much of a problem today, but when Google releases its ChromeOS, it could be serious. Google has the clout to finally make Linux a player - and MIcrosoft just handed them their weapon. "If Microsoft says I should choose my computer on the basis of price, maybe I SHOULD choose this cheaper ChromeOS computer".
3b. It's bad practice to focus on price when you're vulnerable. Vista was junk and everyone knows it was junk. Even people who haven't used it or wouldn't know an OS if it bit them in the butt have gotten the message that Vista is junk. In that scenario, you don't come out "But we're cheap!" It merely reinforces the message that it's junk. Rather, their focus should have been on their DEFENSIBLE strengths - application availability, ubiquity, widespread support options, etc., etc., etc.). They could have fought back against Apple using a strength that doesn't scream "sure, we're junk, but at least we're cheap".
3c. It's really bad practice for someone who offers the low priced product to try to use price against a premium, elite product. That would be like Chevy using price against BMW. Duh. All it does is further differentiate you from the high quality, premium brand. It basically increases the prestige value of the premium brand - and sends the message "we know we'll never be as good as Apple, but at least we're cheap".
With their money, Microsoft should have done better. I have to conclude that the ad agency's hands were tied by poor management decisions. Properly done, they could have fought back by building on their strengths. For example, they might focus on ease of use - and pull out fluff like "not that long ago, people were using arcane commands like del c://**.* to control their computers. Thanks to Windows, 2 billion computer users can now do things visually without remembering a single command" or something like that. SOME people will realize that Apple led the way and Microsoft followed, but it doesn't matter - MS is the one who brought it to 95% of those billions of people. Others (probably the majority) will not realize that Windows is a cheap copy of Mac OS, so they'll be appreciative of what Microsoft has done.
THAT is how it should be done.
Most people I know personally who've chosen Apple products have done so because they're 'cool', fashionable or just good-looking;
That's not true. Some of us are ALL THREE. (you left out charming, intelligent, rich, and sexy, though).
But what about when the Mercedes has the same engine, the same transmission, the same wheels as the Kia? Then you are paying for the brand and sporty look. At least in the PPC days, Apple had that argument, but now all you pay for is a slick case and the OS. The computer hardware is the same.
(I constantly get flack for this argument. Mind you, I hate Windows, especially Vista, and I am running Linux these days. My Quad Core desktop, with screen and Mac OS X only cost 800 bucks. Works just like a real mac does... so why pay the extra 300 bucks for an inferior machine?)
Good point! In your case you added the value by adding the VALUE. Your probably pretty good at hardware repairs so AppleCare and it's One-One didn't appeal to you. Nothing wrong with that but the commercials for PC's MISS that extra tid-bit. For you, and I, it's a moot point. We could repair and be going in no time but for the remaining 99% of the world it's not the case. So you pay more, you get WAY more than just hardware.
On paper they seem similar but I can't find a Laptop, PC Variant, with a 1066mhz BUS speed and DDR3 memory for less than $1400, I CAN however find a PC with those specs for a lot less but it comes with a picture of an Apple on it... And someone took a bite out of it.
The desktop you built is something Apple doesn't. And like you I've gone that route... Once. I decided the New Mini was a perfect replacement for my old aging mini's and replaced them all and turned the Hackintosh back into a PC, Ubuntu PC mind you.
But you do bring up a valid point in that what you wanted in the form factor you wanted it in they didn't make. You have the Mini with a more pricey laptop components and then the MacPro with the pricey server internals. But I think Apple would get slammed to build a middle-road Mac, it should be priced at $999 (Desktop form factor) but they can't justify the price because the cost of the parts would be less than or equal to the Mini due to less expensive desktop parts thus tossing the Mini into the archives and it doesn't deserve that. It's a great computer that sips power and pounds through work like a champ. It's a great little server and a fantastic home theater system.
On a side note I drive a Suzuki. I do because a few years ago I was stranded at 8pm on a major highway in my then 2yr old Suzuki. Still under warranty. I called Roadside Assist. Rather than tell me, like Honda did to my wife on the same year, your Roadside has expired sorry here's a number... The guy on the phone (In Cali), got ahold of the nearest dealer, got a hold of a towing company they work with. In 20 mins me, my wife and 8 month old son were picked up in a new Suzuki XL7 (we were in an XL7) following mine on a flat bed back to the dealer. My powertrain warranty was still good and the repair was covered. The dealer told us this is normal in the event an owner breaks down within 45 miles of a dealer. We were told to call back on Monday for an ETA and if need be the dealer would drive our truck to our house and swap with the new XL7 we were being lent. If we had been farther away they would have sent Enterprise. My wife had a honda and was told to pound sand. She was given a number and a nice good-bye. For that reason, I drive Suzuki. For the same reason I own a Mac even if I run Windows. Has this been PC Company & Microsoft I'd still be on the highway, on hold waiting to be transfered to another rep who could help me. This is my 6th Suzuki and I'm on my... 20th Mac? I've only had a Suzuki break down once, Mac zero.
sorry i was rushed with the kiddies i will re write it .
again sorry
s'okay, bruce. I kinda like your animated style.