jlsoaz
Well-known member
I suggest:
1. Cease and desist (listening to the lawyers quite so much):
I guess normally I wouldn't suggest this but after listening to Andy Palmer's inadequate response on the information consent reminder, I cannot help it. It may be in the letter of the law, but it is not in the spirit of the car, nor is it consistent with fighting (truly and not just for show) for a good customer experience, nor is it competitive (given the extent to which competitors have solved this problem, and I doubt they are ignoring their lawyers).
2. Aside from the area of the information consent reminder, Nissan's response to the severe degradation issues doesn't exactly seem to be a case of listening too much to its lawyers as being very stubborn about its engineering. I suggest more humility and acknowledging that there are issues with design here (inadequate TMS) for some climates. How about a model with more kWh (30 or 35 or so) and less arguing with customers?
1. Cease and desist (listening to the lawyers quite so much):
I guess normally I wouldn't suggest this but after listening to Andy Palmer's inadequate response on the information consent reminder, I cannot help it. It may be in the letter of the law, but it is not in the spirit of the car, nor is it consistent with fighting (truly and not just for show) for a good customer experience, nor is it competitive (given the extent to which competitors have solved this problem, and I doubt they are ignoring their lawyers).
2. Aside from the area of the information consent reminder, Nissan's response to the severe degradation issues doesn't exactly seem to be a case of listening too much to its lawyers as being very stubborn about its engineering. I suggest more humility and acknowledging that there are issues with design here (inadequate TMS) for some climates. How about a model with more kWh (30 or 35 or so) and less arguing with customers?