posted 02-12-2009 11:35 AM ET (US)        

Engines: Evinrude E-TEC and Honda only 1 point apart on customer satisfaction results. Each engine won in their respective class. Mercury was last in both 2 stroke and 4 stroke and stern drive categories.

http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pdf/2009023.pdf

Boats: Unfortunately, Boston Whaler finsished second behind Grady White.

http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pdf/2009022.pdf

posted 02-12-2009 12:16 PM ET (US)            

If this were coming from consumer reports, I would think it would mean something scientifically and therefore quantifiable/measurable. Coming from JD Powers, it means that Evinrude (and others) paid JD Powers for some kind of service....which introduced bias in the rankings.

It would be interesting to note if Mercury paid JD Powers and still received a low ranking.

THAT would mean something. For now, it indicates to me that Mercury has resumed their practice of not participating in this survey (financially) and therefore has resumed their low rankings. When they participated in the survey recently, their VERADO motors won very high "honors" from JD Powers. Has the quality gone that far downhill? Have the others increased their quality that much?

posted 02-12-2009 12:29 PM ET (US)            

The Evinrude E-TEC score this year is a record high for a two stroke outboard.

Evinrude has won 3 times already. One was a winning tie with Mercury a couple of years ago.

You might want to search the archives here for how the JD Power Satisfaction Award works.

Do you honestly believe that Mercury paid JD Powers to finish dead last in every year for the last 8 years in the 4-stroke outboad category?

posted 02-12-2009 12:56 PM ET (US)            

However, it would be nice to get some confirmation that this is exactly how it works.

posted 02-12-2009 10:08 PM ET (US)            

Not necessarily unfortunate unless one is selling a late model BW.

Doesn't say BW and GW quality is any better or worse than last years survey.

The plus side...possibly BW and the othe boat builders will work even harder.

posted 02-13-2009 09:28 AM ET (US)            

Which medical study are you going to give more weight to: one that was funded by the National Institutes of Health and received oversight from NIH personnel, or one that was funded by Pfizer and overseen by R&D personnel at Pfizer?

I'm not sour grapes on this. I love E-Tec motors (I have two). I'm asking a philosophical question about what these results actually mean, and what degree of confidence can we have about the veracity/accuracy or applicability of these results.

Larry, you are right. In my business I approach and am approached by many groups that want to do a "statistically accurate" poll or survey or analysis for X. They want funding from a customer and then include the customer in those results.

Why would a marketing manager divert funds to such a survey?

..at least with the R&D department at Pfizer, the money comes from R&D personnel and budgets - meaning that there is a M.D. or a Ph.D. running the show and directing dollars. But his or her paycheck is still signed by the guy in charge. Guess which department he was promoted from? Marketing/Sales.

And Larry -

Now that we're on the same side in terms of "interests" in results of survey/studies...let's talk about marketing information from Mercury; Magazine Shootouts, etc.

They area all pretty non-scientific and have serious, serious biases built in. In fact....JD Power is MUCH more scientific and reliable/plausible than either of those.

I still maintain that JD Power awards are a marketing tool, accessed, paid for and leveraged by marketing budgets/departments and therefore provide biased information that may be a good indicator of consumer sentiment for a particular item; but show us very little else in the way of reliable information that is actionable.

Well, okay - it's actionable . . . for the marketing and sales organizations that leverage the results to promote their product.

posted 02-13-2009 09:31 AM ET (US)            

Believe me. I sat in a cube next to a research coordinator who worked in a sister organization's R&D department and had the regrettable habit of talking to site researchers/coordinators on speaker phone. I've heard the cajoling that goes on and the arguements over interpretation of results....

...he who has the gold makes the rules. The money-holder always wins.

posted 02-13-2009 09:46 AM ET (US)         

As for 4-strokes, I'm also glad to see that "high decible running sound" and "slow acceleration" are also important to "high Customer Satisfaction".

posted 02-13-2009 10:20 AM ET (US)            

Ever.

I said that the financial transactions that take place in the development and publishing and subsequent marketing of these ratings introduce a bias which skews the results and is cause for pause when one tries to interpret how they should apply this information.

There is a very important difference.

posted 02-13-2009 08:39 PM ET (US)            

With Evinrude and their E-TEC rated highest in customer satisfaction, this spells the end for J. D. Power. It is widely known that these E-TEC engines are inferior in all regards to other motors, and by allowing Bombardier to purchase their first-place standing, J. D. Power has exceeded the reasonable person's expectations of the anticipated results. It is one thing when the Mercury OptiMax wins. People can understand that. It is one thing when a Yamaha wins; people expect that. But when the E-TEC wins, the outcome is so preposterous that even the most naive boater can see that this survey is hopelessly flawed, their results inconsequential, and the outcome determined simply by corporate checkbooks. What boater really thinks anyone would prefer an E-TEC to an Optimax or HPDI? Why settle for a compact, light weight, ultra-low emission, quiet, low-maintenance motor with outstanding power, acceleration, and torque? The nerve of these J. D. Power people trying to fool us, the experienced boaters!

posted 02-13-2009 11:04 PM ET (US)            

Or, to continue with the notion that the J. D. Power study reports accurately the satisfaction of new outboard motor buyers, the buyers of Evinrude were more satisfied than the buyers who bought Mercury motors.

To understand what changed, you have to first decide which school of thought you are adopting. For the charade crowd, it is a matter of corporate budgets. We even see a new interpretation in which losing in J. D. Power is now viewed as a good move because it shows wisdom from the brand who lost in not paying for the false endorsement. That has to be one of the best rationalizations I have ever heard.

For the crowd that accepts the results as valid, the change in rankings is likely due to changes in product performance.

posted 02-14-2009 11:17 AM ET (US)            

The thing to remember is that manufacturers do not pay for the survey, JD Power foots the bill for that. They do sell the results to companies that want to see the results of the detailed findings, plus the winner in each category has the option to pay for use of the award logo. No company is under any obiligation to purchase anything.

I filled out a JD Power form some years back after buying a new Pontiac. It was about 5 pages long, very detailed, and were basic questions, no misleading "political type survey" wording anywhere in the form.

Back in 2002, the director of marine practices at JD Power answered questions about the program. The following are two of his responses to posters.

-------------------

1.
Thanks to all of you for your interest in the J.D. Power and Associates marine study. I’ll answer a few of your questions, in the general order in which they appear in the string.
1.) We take a similar “snapshot”, sample-size-wise, of all the boatbuilders in a segment. That means we survey (send out questionnaires to) about the same number of owners per brand per segment. For instance, we don’t send surveys to 3,000 Bayliner owners and 300 Cobalt owners; once you get to a certain number of returns, adding sample size is going to have little if any impact on the overall results. We make sure we’re at that baseline level before we include a brand in any of our syndicated studies.

2.) We find that the very happy and very upset owners, as well as those in the middle of the road, tend to balance each other out, producing consistent results among the brands.

3.) The questions are designed to be as neutral as possible, so we don’t “lead the witness”, or try to produce one result rather than another.

4.) We’ve found that there was surprisingly little difference, statistically, between the responses of owners who’d owned their boats for shorter or longer periods of time.

5.) We are careful to prevent any “gaming” (for instance, a manufacturer withholding the names of dissatisfied customers would be gaming) in the study. As an auditing step, we either get or verify all of our boat owners’ names from an independent, 3rd-party source which has access to HIN data on nearly all boats sold in the country. If we can’t verify the validity of name source, it isn’t included in the study.

6.) There is really no merit to the notion that larger builders somehow score better. See the 2001 public rankings at www.jdpower.com for the evidence.

7.) Regarding perception, which is part of what we measure and report on, the customers’ collective perception is the boatbuilder’s (and engine manufacturer’s) reality.

Eric Sorensen
Director, Marine Practice
J.D. Power and Associates

------------------------

2.
posted May 06, 2002 02:05 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello boaters. I am the director of the J. D. Power and Associates Marine Study, and I'd be happy to discuss how our program works with anyone who's interested. There was quite a string of emails in March regarding Bryant's subscribing to the study. I'll address a few of the misconceptions about J.D. Power, and I look forward to hearing from anyone and everyone about what we're up to.
We are surveying some 50,000 owners of boats in six segments this year, with our 2002 report due out in August. Bass boats, Coastal Fishing (17-28 feet), Runabouts (16-19 and 20-29 feet), Pontoons, Ski/Wakeboard and Coastal Cruisers (24-33 feet) are being covered this year, and an engine report will also be produced covering outboards, sterndrives and inboards by brand and model.

Manufacturers are included in the study based on how many owners we can mail out to. We like to have 150 returns per brand per segment for statistical validity, so with a 28% response rate, we generally look for manufacturers who produce 450 or more boats per year. We will include smaller builders under certain circumstances. This year we have 70 boat brands represented, so we're covering the great majority of the units sold in each of these six segments.

So whether Bryant or anyone else buys, or subscribes to, our study, if they’re big enough to qualify, we still survey their owners. That's what gives our study so much value to our subscribers, in fact; all that competitive data is used by builders to improve their own product and service.

What we report is not our own analysis or opinion, but the voice of the consumer. The art here is knowing what questions to ask to elicit information that is actionable for the boatbuilder. Companies buy our reports because they contain useful data. Boatbuilders can use the info to see where their own product comes up short and needs fixing, what not to fix (since is isn't broken), and precisely where and how the competition is doing a better job.

Whether you are a newcomer to boating or an old salt, you may well have no clue about how well a manufacturer's dealer sales and service network takes care of its owners. You can own a great boat, with superb construction, a wonderful hull form and smooth-as-silk propulsion, but if the warranty service or parts availability is lacking, you won't enjoy the experience of owning the boat as much as you should. These reports tell us who's who in the industry, and they're based entirely on survey results from owners like you.

At www.jdpower.com, you can see the Power Circle rankings of the three boat segments we surveyed last year. These website rankings are high-level; the detailed, actionable info is reserved for the manufacturers who pay to put it to work for them. These rankings are based solely on customer input, and have nothing to do with who did or didn't buy the reports from us.

Those manufacturers who win in each segment also have the option of paying for the use of the J.D. Power name in their advertising. When you see a Cobalt, Grady White or Ranger (or Lexus) ad with the J.D. Power name and trophy, they purchased the right to use it.

We hope and expect that the public spotlight provided by J.D. Power's entry into the marine industry results in improved levels of quality and customer satisfaction across the board. That's certainly been the case in automotive and other industries, and we look forward to it happening in marine as well.

--------------------
Eric Sorensen
Director, Marine Practice
J.D. Power and Associates

posted 02-16-2009 01:16 PM ET (US)            

For me to take the JD Powers survey as “Gospel” would require that they extricate themselves from financial ties to the industry.

It is these financial ties to (any) industries that make me highly skeptical of many published reports, including boating magazine tests and comparisons (methodology also suffers here) and the latest “findings” presented at medical meetings which do not include “head to head” studies (one of the strongest indicators that the research was financed, at least in part, by a drug maker).

Is there valuable information present in all of these items? Sure, but I don’t think there is rock-solid evidence provided to make accurate comparisons. Even worse are “polls” where people self-select to respond. Their self-selection in and of itself biases the results.

Consumer Reports is standing on “much higher ground” than JD Power when it comes to this.

So while JimH, as usual, writes an eloquent post on a position taken to extreme (above), I stand firm, because in this instance especially, I can say that I AM A HUGE FAN OF E-TEC MOTORS. I voted with my wallet and bought two of them and love them to this day. Some would say I’m a brand disciple. So, my criticism is of JD Power, NOT E-TEC, which won high honors in this year’s survey.

Also note, I am not a huge fan of OPTIMAX motors, but I stand by my opinion that is critical of the survey and the bias built in by financial interest – regardless of which brand wins or loses from year to year. Incidentally, it is this huge swing that sometimes occurs from year to year which also makes me critical of the results.

JD Power doesn’t deny this financial tie to industry. They are selling. They are marketing. End of story. That is all you need to know to determine if there is a bias somewhere – just understand the reason behind the survey. Is it to inform boaters, or was it some very smart business person who discovered another product to sell?

I maintain it was the latter – and applaud them for doing so. But I don’t walk around with my eyes shut and my ears plugged just because I don’t like to think that my data is biased. I apply that filter to the information consumed.

There is a bias. It is born from financial interest. No amount of reasoning is going to change my opinion on the subject.

I find value in this information, but still wrestle with “what it actually means” and how trustworthy it is because of the bias built in. Same for reports on medications you hear about on the news each week. Same for a lot of things in this world.

posted 02-18-2009 11:08 AM ET (US)            

quote:

---

"How in the world did Mercury go from first to last in a single year when no major innovation or technology was introduced in it or any of the competitors?"

---

The people who bought Evinrudes and Hondas liked their motors better than the people who bought Mercurys. That is all that the survey says. It is not an award for the most inovative or technologically advanced motor.

quote:

---

What we report is not our own analysis or opinion, but the voice of the consumer.

---

posted 02-18-2009 12:53 PM ET (US)            

....which makes the results of JD Power survey's anecdotal?!

There are a lot of people enthused about a great many things in this world...but that does not mean it has any real meaning for me.

Just because a lot of people like Eminem and buy his albums does not mean that others (say, JimH for example) will be enthusiastic about his art.

So...we've reduced the JD Powers survey to a market research tool - like an old-fashioned advisory board - for which the results are made public and the notes and video taken during the session are sold for a price?

posted 02-18-2009 01:37 PM ET (US)            

I do not believe that there is any mens rea in J. D. Power's work. It is a an opinion survey. It has a rather well established reputation in many product areas, and for a decade or so it has been publishing data on marine products.

If each year's winner and J. D. Power cozy up for a bit of a marketing blitz, that may raise a few eyebrows, but I don't think it renders the whole concept of a customer satisfaction survey to be meaningless.

posted 02-18-2009 01:48 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

....which makes the results of JD Power survey's anecdotal?!

---

Yep, so you've got to take it for what it's worth. That said, if an overwhelming number of those surveyed indicated they didn't like the product, wouldn't that give you some pause, and at least make you take a closer look?

posted 02-18-2009 05:25 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

That said, if an overwhelming number of those surveyed indicated they didn't like the product, wouldn't that give you some pause, and at least make you take a closer look?

---

And on the other hand you have a product such as the Honda outboard motor. It is a perennial winner of the JD Powers award; wouldn't this lead you to believe that consumers like the product?

posted 02-18-2009 07:25 PM ET (US)            

quote:

---

And on the other hand you have a product such as the Honda outboard motor. It is a perennial winner of the JD Powers award; wouldn't this lead you to believe that consumers like the product?

---

posted 02-24-2009 09:27 AM ET (US)            

I still can believe that Mercury's MerCruiser sterndrives are rated 2nd