Which is the best car reservation?

[jlewisinsyr]

Where do I stand? Ahhhh, that article is 2 years old and EHI obviously answered where they stood on the issue and what they did about it.

Your sarcasm is not necessary and not appreciated. I told you where I got my information and frankly, I do trust my managers and my own eyes that tell me that the safety equipment is there, or, are you going to imply that the side airbag tag is only there for decoration?

If you wish to rely on historical articles, go for it, I deal in the here and now.

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was being direct and to the point. You obviously have a conflict of interest based on your employment.

The fact remains that the ERAC group did order vehicles specifically without equipment that would have been considered standard to a consumer in the fairly recent past (and it's possible some vehicles are still in the fleets, although unlikely). Whether ERAC has changed is yet to be seen and whether they proceed to do similar actions in the future will be seen. Considering the amount of money the ERAC group saved by intentionally eliminating what they deemed as non-value added safety features, I would guess they would do it again, although they will be sure to point this out in future sales after the vehicles are retired from their fleets. Note ERAC never really accepted responsibility for intentionally removing a valued standard safety feature, rather they only apologized for not making sure customers purchasing the vehicle knew they did.

 

[Dan Murphy]

Where do I stand? Ahhhh, that article is 2 years old and EHI obviously answered where they stood on the issue and what they did about it.

Your sarcasm is not necessary and not appreciated. I told you where I got my information and frankly, I do trust my managers and my own eyes that tell me that the safety equipment is there, or, are you going to imply that the side airbag tag is only there for decoration?

If you wish to rely on historical articles, go for it, I deal in the here and now.

Somebody has to say it, well said, gmeh1.

 

[gmeh1]

Somebody has to say it, well said, gmeh1.

Thank you Dan.

 

[gmeh1]

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was being direct and to the point. You obviously have a conflict of interest based on your employment.

The fact remains that the ERAC group did order vehicles specifically without equipment that would have been considered standard to a consumer in the fairly recent past (and it's possible some vehicles are still in the fleets, although unlikely). Whether ERAC has changed is yet to be seen and whether they proceed to do similar actions in the future will be seen. Considering the amount of money the ERAC group saved by intentionally eliminating what they deemed as non-value added safety features, I would guess they would do it again, although they will be sure to point this out in future sales after the vehicles are retired from their fleets. Note ERAC never really accepted responsibility for intentionally removing a valued standard safety feature, rather they only apologized for not making sure customers purchasing the vehicle knew they did.

I am not going to discuss this further with you. You obviously have your opinion and dont believe what is observed every day I work. Yes, I am biased, and I am absolutely loyal to my company and to date, they have done nothing to make me question my loyalty. In reality, who's word (or supposition to something in the future) do you think I am going to take? Yours, an unknown, an old article, or someone I work with on a daily basis or, my own eyes. Hmmmmmm, I think the answer to that should be clear to you.

 

[gmeh1]

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was being direct and to the point. You obviously have a conflict of interest based on your employment.

The fact remains that the ERAC group did order vehicles specifically without equipment that would have been considered standard to a consumer in the fairly recent past (and it's possible some vehicles are still in the fleets, although unlikely). Whether ERAC has changed is yet to be seen and whether they proceed to do similar actions in the future will be seen. Considering the amount of money the ERAC group saved by intentionally eliminating what they deemed as non-value added safety features, I would guess they would do it again, although they will be sure to point this out in future sales after the vehicles are retired from their fleets. Note ERAC never really accepted responsibility for intentionally removing a valued standard safety feature, rather they only apologized for not making sure customers purchasing the vehicle knew they did.

PS, no conflict of interest at all. I do not bad mouth any other company, nor do I push people to rent from the company I work for. If I did those things, then it would be a conflict of interest.

 

[madaboutMickey]

PS, no conflict of interest at all. I do not bad mouth any other company, nor do I push people to rent from the company I work for. If I did those things, then it would be a conflict of interest.

I'll second this. You have never been anything but helpful in answering question.