Another silly article that ignores reality.

Explain the difference between Ford and Toyota's Strategies for the last 15
years. Both have emphasized trucks and SUVs at the expense of passenger
cars. Both companies highest volume car line is an old lightly refreshed
design. So what makes Toyota so successful?

For the first time in 14 years, the Camry is actually different. Sure they
changed the sheet metal significantly once and had a couple of refreshes,
but from the early 90's till now, the differences were trivial. The Echo was
a bust. The Corolla is a dull over priced small car that is not as good as a
Focus and costs more. The Tundra is a second rate copy of the old generation
F150. The Sequoia isn't even as good as the previous generation Tahoe. The
new 4Runner is a good truck, but nothing special and ridiculously
overpriced. The Tacoma is also a nice truck, but, like the 4Runner, wildly
over-priced. The Prius is interesting, but plagued with glitches and over
hyped. The RAV4 is third or fourth best in class. I suppose the Highlander
is OK, but what makes it better than a Ford Freestyle? For sure the Sienna
is one of the best mini-vans, but how long did it take Toyota to get it
right (the old Toyota Previa mini-van was horrid, and the first generation
Sienna was non-competitive).

And yet, despite crashing customer satisfaction ratings and plunging
reliability ratings, people still overpay for second and third rate Toyota
products. Why?  Stupidity?

Ed