[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by David Inc.

Okay I'm not sure what you're arguing.

That has become abundantly clear.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

I was commenting on another post that said "The most important thing is profitability, and the best way to get that is under/cheap staff and cheapest cost for anything that's going to be sold or turned into something that'll be sold."

That's always been the case.

No, it has not. This appears to be the part you do not understand.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

What manufacturer of the past was buying or making more expensive stuff than they needed because they wanted to have the best product, regardless of whether or not they made money selling it? That sort of thinking rings of nostalgia for yesteryear more than reality.

Uh, no, this is not some sort of misty eyed, rose colored glasses nostalgia. This absolutely was the reality in much of (if not most) the manufacturing world at one time. While no one goes into business to lose money, profit expectations were wildly different in the not too distant past. Many were happy to make enough money to make a comfortable living while at the same time "pursuing excellence" in whatever endeavor they chose. I've tried to explain this to you. This concept appears totally lost on you, so you deny it ever existed. I lived and worked it, as mentioned earlier. I wish you could have experienced this at some point during your career. It was wonderful.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

Edit: If I'm to expand on this--the market allows for some manufacturers to make "the best" product because people with means can afford it and want something of a higher grade never mind the price, but anything mass market has to be value-focused.

Today, yes. In the not too distant past, this was absolutely not the case. Even the most mundane daily items were once built to a standard, not to a price. Just because you never experienced this does not mean it was never that way.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

Have economic realities shifted drastically such that people can extract even more wealth from companies than they could have in the past? Yes.

No. It's not "economic realities", it's "business ethics". No one cares about the long-term viability of the company they lead. They all want to extract as much as possible as quickly as possible and leave the company in shambles if need be. There is no longer any thought towards any sort of a "legacy" or "reputation". Rape, pillage, and burn. Then get the hell out with a sweetheart severance package.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

Is a focus on profitability the same as it ever was? Yes.

No. See above.

Originally Posted by David Inc.

Hell, auto manufacturers fought the requirement for seat belts tooth and nail. Seat belts! Too expensive!

Edit: I work for a global, publicly traded automotive process supplier. We're an industry leader developing the cutting edge of technology in ways that most other suppliers only copy.

We constantly lose projects because manufacturers decide they can get it cheaper from China and customers can't tell the difference between products that were made with old technology vs. new technology. They only look at additional capital expense vs. energy and material savings from improved technology. The cutting edge stuff gets saved for high-end manufacturers that want the higher grade product (usually). This is the aspect of "same as it ever was" that I'm talking about.

And that is where you are dead wrong. It may be all you have ever experienced, but it is absolutely not the "same as it ever was". Not even close.

I've tried to explain the differences between "then" and "now", as have others. It appears as though you have not understood a word of it.