both are the same. Neither GM nor Mits can move most of their cars without them. So the pot calling the kettle black stuff is not a viable point number five.
You have no other response because you know its true. Gm can't move iron without insane gimmicks either. So its simply not fair to rip on anyone for that. Be it Ford, Mits, VW, whoever. And that's ALL I'm pointing out, is that its hypocritical to say it, even though its true.
Mazda's incentives are actually some of the highest right now. Your average Mazda 6 has about 6 grand in total discounts on the hood right now. Mazda is incentivizing leases on RX-8's so they can persuade anyone to take em for 200 bucks a month.
The failure of the Mits zero zero zero program was very real, but it was because their lame ass customers couldn't afford to make payments on their cars. From a marketing aspect, their sales went up like 43% in two years. The fault was poor finance screening, not the cars. It wasn't the maker's fault.
Your point number 5 was just a potshot and nothing else. Even if it were Ford or whatever, I would have to call 'you' on the carpet for it, even if it wasn't you. It's insane for a die hard GM fan to make a point of saying 'x' and 'x' has to resort to incentives to move cars. I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy in that statement, if it were anyone else ripping on any other competitor, your point #5 is just inherently hypocritical.
whatever. You can say its not related. Its the same thing.
one advantage a Raider has over a Dakota is a better warranty.