Comments on: Mazda begins destroying 4,703 vehicles from Cougar Ace accident

By: AMGoff

AMGoff — Sat, 03 May 2008 16:00:44 +0000

All Mazda would have had to do was shuffle the titles around, sell them as an “as-is,” used car and be completely up front with why they are selling them at hugely discounted prices… if such a waiver were worded properly and legally binding, then there could be no possible recourse against Mazda… Now, if someone bought one of the damaged goods at a huge mark-down and then turned around and tried to sell the car to an unsuspecting person near retail – there could be some legal ramifications… but again, not on Mazda.

Even still… I can’t understand why they would completely destroy the vehicles… Mazda must be doing really well to be so blatantly wasteful, because there’s no reason why they couldn’t try to salvage as many parts and components as possible- even if it was nothing more than a sun-visor, or a doorhandle, or a radio button.. there are hundreds of thousands of components there that could have been easily rescued and reused.

Either way… just like Jordan said, I’d be more than happy to take one of each off of Mazda’s hands… it will cost money to scrap them, so they’d come out ahead by doing so… I’d even drive out to the left coast to pick one up so they wouldn’t even worry about having to ship it.

By: Veda

Veda — Fri, 02 May 2008 07:35:45 +0000

Might as well claim the insurance rather than getting headaches from unknown future problems.

By: Get Real

Get Real — Thu, 01 May 2008 16:20:18 +0000

A faster death the junkyard Mazda’s belong in.

By: sharpie

sharpie — Thu, 01 May 2008 05:32:17 +0000

You can sign whatever, but some types of product liability always come with selling the cars. Mazda is waste to crush them to avoid expensive litigation down the road. Even if you sign a waiver, you can always try to argue that whatever injury you suffer is not because the car was damaged on Cougar Ace, but that it was manufactured with poor quality. I can think of a dozen more legal theories that anyone can assert. These are are nothing less than 4,703 ticking time bombs.

Certainly it is a waste, but blame it on you suing happy culture in the USA, don’t blame Mazda for it.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Thu, 01 May 2008 02:53:39 +0000

i’ll take one off your hands for free, mazda, and save you the cost of destroying it. i won’t complain if problems come up. i’ll even pay the shipping costs for you to send it to me.

By: olds307

olds307 — Thu, 01 May 2008 02:44:10 +0000

“Sounds like toyota needs to do the same to ALL of their vehicles.”

Well said HEMI.

By: 56oval

56oval — Thu, 01 May 2008 00:43:31 +0000

“The Cougar Ace also contained about 100 Isuzu vehicles, but no one really noticed.”

By: stick2clutch

stick2clutch — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:04:14 +0000

Thats crazy. There are still many parts that can be used such as tires and wheels. If they don’t send them to the U.S. I can think of a **** load of countries that would snatch up the parts at a discount.

By: 1c3d0g

1c3d0g — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:41:31 +0000

HemiRoadRunner: fully agreed! Now that is an EGGcellent idea!

By: nowei

nowei — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:11:31 +0000

My brother’s high school teacher lost a Boxster when the ship carrying it sank. Not really relevant, but slightly related and amusing.

By: bigp

bigp — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:10:58 +0000

damn i wish i could just get one i wont tell a soul zoomzoom

By: johnnycanuck

johnnycanuck — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:45:54 +0000

It is sad that in the lawsuit driven world we live in there was not another solution. Everything today revolves around CYA.

By: eliteski2

eliteski2 — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:43:51 +0000

They should’ve just donated all of the cars to be blown up and crashed in movies. The sequels for Transformers will need plenty more cars to destroy. Nothing beats a good movie with lots of explosions and car chases.

By: xyunya

xyunya — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:54:08 +0000

HemiRetardRUnner has problems with reading comprehension: GM is making money everywhere, but in US. Meaning cars and trucks made by GM don’t sell all that well here. And those that sell are made somewhere else: Europe and Korea. They are shipped here. Furthermore, US made cars are often shipped by water: the most inexpensive mode of transportation. The good news he learned the word “statistics” albeit with absolutely no idea what it means. Next step – dictionary.

By: Fletch

Fletch — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:22:52 +0000

Ambulance chasers would be the first in line to buy one of these and then file suit and wait for a settlement. Plus, Mazda can’t sell them at discount because it will cannabilize sales.

Seems like they could have sold them at a heavy discount to India or an African nation or something.

Such a waste, what a shame.

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:10:00 +0000

Hmmmmmmmm, maybe it’s called “statistics”. Meaning, GM sells the majority of their cars here in the U.S. so the odds of a ship going down and destroying a cargo hold of cars isn’t as likely as, hmmmm, let’s say mazfa that exports cars over the high seas of the mighty Pacific Ocean daily. Arggghhhh matey.

By: tripleonefive

tripleonefive — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:06:56 +0000

Why couldnt that happen to GM If it did GM would just sell the vehicles anyway

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:55:48 +0000

Man over board!!!

By: FordTaurusForever

FordTaurusForever — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:52:00 +0000

No actually if any of the cars suffered from incident whether visible or not-it may be pretty hard to tell.

And in some cases not show up. for a year,six months of never. But If Mazda name is on the line why ruin your repuatation.

Owners would be PO’ed at Mazada for ever selling them a car in the first place that was involved in a sea accident.
They would be a huge outcry at Mazda if they sold these cars and then people associate poor quality issues with a Mazda when in fact they we damaged and that is what the owners would be dealing with. But they would call it a Quality issue or worse sue Mazda for selling them Faulty cars. So Mazda is doing the right thing.
So while it may look like an Insurance issue at first it really boils down to a saying your brand name from being tarished and losing sales.

I am sure all the Automakers who face recall would like to have fixed it the first time. Because its expensive when a recall needs to be done.

By: shaver

shaver — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:29:41 +0000

Insurance at its best. Paying for undamaged cars to protect image.
This is really a travesty, in terms of waste. Despicable.

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:28:14 +0000

Because they’re greeeeeeeedy

By: rsg

rsg — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:22:43 +0000

How ridiculous. Here’s an idea. “These cars were involved in an incident at sea. Although we don’t believe there is any damage, sign this waiver and we’ll include a $2500 rebate.” Or something along those lines. People would snap them up. Or donate them to underfunded organizations. Why destroy perfectly good cars?

By: LaCaLover

LaCaLover — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:13:56 +0000

^^^^Change the record YAWN

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:10:17 +0000

Sounds like toyota needs to do the same to ALL of their vehicles.

By: F451

F451 — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:04:17 +0000

What an incredible waste of resources, so what if your Mazda crabs sideways as you drive down the road!