Good point… choose your battles wisely. This discussion started with a comment concerning WebCams and an example when companies do dumb things. A person stated that the dumb thing was in fact not the computer programming instead related to floor mats. (Something of the originator: it has been a passion of his to get manufacturing to do the right thing and save lives and this was not going to do unchallenged). The originator countered and said it had to do the ECU. The person wouldn’t budge and didn’t offer anything to support his claim. The originator offered one, just one, link out of many. The jury 's findings supported the claim that the ECU was the issue and that Toyota was at fault. The person continued to split hairs. Now the person points to an explanation of," Companies often settle out of court…" A far cry from floor mats.
Let’s be clear… with *Toyota’s resources, they could have battled it to the end. Instead, they cut their losses to keep the stockholders happy and brand name shiny. They were cutting their losses and saving face. but the savvy people know exactly what it meant. (whilst performing work on floor mats during recalls, the ECU firmware was updated.) (not being familiar with the car and where the brake was located?.. why just certain Toyota models with the same ECU. Why no other car manufacturer?) (Brakes never used according to the ECU stored data. The ECU?)
For Toyota, the ECU fiasco was dumb… much like VW’s emission screw-ups/cover-ups, but to cut their losses was the smart thing to do.
Which brings us back to the WebCam. There are smart ways to do things that will not rub the buyer the wrong way. There are smart ways that will make the buyer feel they have a deal. And then there’s the dumb way that alienates some (not sure how many but a number has shown up here) and that is the last thing you want to do in marketing.