BruceP

Nice speech, but again entirely beside the point, not to mention littered with dramatic calculated fictions of what I've been saying to you.

For the millionth f-ing time, I DON'T OBJECT TO YOU RUNNING A BUSINESS OR TO YOU SEEKING USER GENERATED CONTENT FOR THAT BUSINESS. I OBJECT TO YOU NOT BEING TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT AND MISREPRESENTING THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT.

You're a very slippery fellow, Mr. Karesh. I started out this dialogue with the simple intention of giving you some feedback about how what you're doing looks. That's what marketing is all about in the modern age. From observing your wildly inconsistent and emotional reaction, I now think you're simply a fraud.

See you on Twitter.

mkaresh

So you've progressed from calling me a liar to calling me a fraud, again with no basis? And I'm the one supposedly engaging in dramatic fictions?

I have directly responded to you point by point, the very opposite of slippery. My reactions have been neither emotional nor inconsistent. But even if they had been, I fail to see how this would be evidence of fraud. It's simply more evidence that you'll resort to baseless accusations--and fraud is a very serious accusation, people go to jail for it--in order to make your point. Though I also fail to see how this might make your point.

You claim that you have an issue with my transparency. As I've said before, and consistently, I have gone well beyond typical levels of transparency. I clearly identify myself as the owner of the site. The site is clearly commercial. There's no mystery here.

What I'm receiving from you is that I should explicitly state that I'm conducting this survey primarily for business reasons. But this is rarely if ever done even when it is the case. And in this case it would be a lie.

Finally, how have I misrepresented the quality of my product? I have never, here or elsewhere, claimed that the results are highly precise. But the survey results do not have to be highly precise to be valid and useful.

I have made two major claims consistently, from the beginning five years ago, for my survey results:

1. They are much more up-to-date than the information provided by Consumer Reports and J.D. Power. The latest results cover through the end of March 2010. CR's current results and J.D. Power's current IQS are about a year behind.

2. They provide numerical repair frequencies, not just the vague dots provided by CR and J.D. Power, for individual models.

Both claims are clearly true, and are major advantages. This is the sort of reliability information I wanted. I started the survey because neither CR nor J.D. Power wanted to provide it. Sometimes if you want something done you've got to do it yourself.

Divot

Uh, this thread delivers. (But not in the good, sexy, UPS girl kind of way)

mkaresh

If UPS delivered like that to my house, maybe my wife would order fewer things?

theporscheguy

If UPS delivered that way to my house I would order something every day

Sneaky Pete

This thread delivers in the "is the herpes ever going to heal?" way.

It healed a few weeks ago but the blister re-appeared.........

mkaresh

Sorry, Pete. If this thread stresses you out, consider how it makes me feel. It certainly isn't the thread I wanted, it's just the one I have to work with.

Sneaky Pete

Hey Pal.......I'm not going to get sucked into this......it has gotten to the point where I do not want to log on here for fear of seeing your clueless responses. We all get it......you do not. No more posts from me on this one.

Steve2112

I've been a user on Mike's site with my last 4 new cars (except for the pcar) - 99 Civic Si, 05 WRX STi, 08 Infiniti G37S, and now my 04 911. If anything, I hope to gain more info about the cars I own. I am happy to participate in this symbiotic relationship. It's too bad this flame war has to go back and forth.

/Rodney King Mode - can't we................

Pac996

What? Pay to find something to wonder if I'm having fun in the 996? hahahaha

supark

Good stuff Mkaresh - I don't get why people are getting their panties in a bunch over this. Though I'm not a statistician, I do realize that the survey itself is somewhat flawed in terms of methodology, and of course that's important to note, but it's still an interesting endeavor and has some value. I think this is a situation where you're just not gonna win - damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Some of the more colorful posters in this thread such as Bruce and Dell - I get your point and you've said your piece, but you've repeated it and thrown in so much invective along the way that it's getting a little tiresome. No offense intended and I hope you don't take it that way - and I completely get what you're trying to say, and for the most part I agree with your general points around the fact that something like this should be approached with transparency and making clear of the methodology - I however have not gotten a sense reading through all 8 pages of this thread that Mkaresh has been trying to "pull the wool over our eyes". Is the survey flawed? Yes - but at the same time, there's a certain amount of self-selection that occurs with surveys that's unavoidable and some of the suggestions such as going door to door to shops and dealerships to make this more robust isn't realistic. Is it flawed to the point where it has absolutely no value? No - and I plan on logging my 996 as soon as I pick it up

btw - I'm not some random shill, I'm very active over at bimmerforums under the same board handle. Lastly, I mean if those opposed to this endeavor just want it to die, just don't bump the thread repeating things that have beaten to death

LVDell

If it gets tiresome then quit reading. And by the way, when you say "no offense" it doesn't clear you of offended. What are you Ricky Bobby?

No offense here, so no worries.

lml999

Bob,

This is a noble effort, but because the survey methodology is deficient, you won't be able to prove anything, except to say that a bunch of people who felt strongly about their cars took the time to fill out a survey.

For this to be valid, you'd need to sample a statistically valid cross-section of the ownership. With self-directed participation, you're not getting a representative cross-section. You're just getting a handful of people who feel strongly, making the results absolutely meaningless.

Lee

BruceP

If you're going to judge me, you could at least show the courtesy of reading the entire exchange, and the one that preceded it. You might be surprised how rare it is for me to transform myself into a ***** with no provocation and for absolutely no good reason.

But gosh, thanks so much for resurrecting the thread.

supark

wow touchy touchy - a little defensive? I did read the entire thread, and I get your point and agree with some aspects of it - I just think you guys are beating a dead horse.