What is Digg?52 Comments
- Pseudorious, on 10/11/2007, -10/+62"Land Rover may donate money or the use of its vehicles to aid disaster relief efforts as a result of this marketing campaign, but that bad taste in our mouth comes from the fact that it likely wouldn't do those things if a camera weren't there to capture it."
So you're against relationships where everyone benefits?
In other shocking news, Christians may "do good" just to get into heaven. More at 11. - pogfreak, on 10/11/2007, -2/+39BREAKING NEWS: AUTOBLOG.COM HAS ADVERTISEMENTS ONLY BECAUSE THEY ARE PAID TO DISPLAY THEM - SICKENING!!!
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+23Not sure why you're being dugg down.
This is standard company practice, you could call it "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours"
People get the use of the cars, company get the PR they want. - rudy23, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18who cares. as long as some good is coming out of it.
- OverThere, on 10/11/2007, -5/+19Mechanics love idiots that own Land Rovers... and Jaguars.
- RealmDown, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16Hey, they've made progress. Land Rovers get BOTH miles to the gallon now....
- threepio, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8My dad owned a '97 Disco - It was a bit of a pig on gas but that vehicle went anywhere. Can't say we had any complaints.
We also rebuilt an old 70's era Series III. The damn things are unkillable. While you folks may have had trouble with yours, we haven't had anything but enjoyment out of ours. - DAaaMan64, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10Can I ask why you bought a second one!?
- theoallardyce, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7"the fact that it likely wouldn't do those things"
What the hell does that mean? Is it a fact that they dont, or is it just likely that they dont? - Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7You know, my wife often says that I only tell her she's beautiful because I'm biased. She doesn't always accept what may be true, simply because it comes from a potentially slanted source.
Land Rover would be doing good by donating these vehicles. And yet, because there isn't a purely altruistic motive, it seems people want to throw it in their face. What is the matter with the company wanting something out of it? It still benefits people who need help. - SPECOPS, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Why do you buy more milk when the one you have spoils? Come-on, average car failure rates are about 6% - just because you have a 'lemon' doesn't mean all of them are. Don't get me wrong, I've never owned a Land Rover, nor do I plan to. But I do know people who own Hondas, BMWs, Porches, GMCs, Fords, and Chevys - they ALL have failures.
- bcorsi, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7So what?
buried - Aleman360, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Pretty much the main idea behind capitalism, isn't it? Seeking profit leads to good being done.
- JESUSREAM, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Unless they are running over homeless people this cant be hurting those areas in anyway so who cares?
- break99, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I for one can appreciate the good taste here.
Use our vehicles in disaster areas and we'll take pictures. What's the problem here? - Waterispoison, on 10/11/2007, -10/+14Land Rover's are quite possibly the worst made cars ever. I've owned two Discoverys in the past two years. The first one (a 2000 model) qualified for the lemon law in Virginia after having the piston heads rebuilt twice within the first 18 months of ownership, it was a new car. My second one hasn't been much better, more engine issues with the new car (2003 model). The extended warranty is a rip off as well. I highly recommend you stay away from these piece of ***** cars.
- Slovenian6474, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4At least they don't create disasters to film in.
- insomniac8400, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I'm surprised they are donating anything. Especially if the car handles the crappy areas well, it's a damn good marketing campaign. Usually you just get those dumb off road commercials with "simulated course" or something dumb in the fine print because the vehicle can't really handle off road.
- Incom, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6yea, guess you didnt catch on the first time, wouldnt buy one anyways.
- smackhero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@aidenuncle48: do you understand what a page anchor is?
people, stop linking to comments on the page you're trying to submit. if you see a pound sign (#) in the URL, then that means that you're linking to an anchor on that page, and when people click on the link they'll be directed there instead of the top of the page. - Aaronontheweb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"Besides, corporations, by law, are not allowed to be philanthropic." - Absolutely untrue; couldn't be more blatantly false, inaccurate, or ignorant. Corporations make donations all the time to charities and other non-profit efforts. Many times those efforts can provide the corporations with economic benefits (such as good PR among a community of customers) that cannot be measured by dollars and cents. Giving bottles of water to katrina victims would, in effect, provide benefits to Walmart by virtue of reinforcing Walmart's status as a vital member of the afflicted communities. In addition, Shareholders don't get to micromanage a company, especially if they're a piss ant minority share holder (vast majority of them) who doesn't have voting options in the company.
- TheFraser, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Reason they suck: in 2000 Landrover was bought by Ford from BMW. As with any car (Volvo, jaguar & Landrover), once ford takes over manufacturing and design the quality takes a nose dive.
- alabamasucks, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4sean penn did the samething after Katrina
- slapthemonkey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Look at the positive side, they are doing something good.
- VeganG, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I hate the philosophy that you should drive an obscenely-large car "just in case."
I'm tired of hearing of people who just bought an SUV "for safety, so I don't get killed in an accident." Well, guess what: if there weren't so many Monster Trucks on the road, driving in a car that could practically be run OVER by another car wouldn't be such a large possibility.
More and more often I'll be trying to turn left at an intersection and I can't even see if there's oncoming traffic because some behemoth is in the opposite left-turn lane, blocking my view.
/andyrooney - Ibanezfoo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Uh oh, here come the morality and ethics police.
- alpha94, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Disco's were well known by anyone that bothered to look it up before buying that they were horrible vehicles. That doesn't say anything about the range rover models though. Disco's were for people that couldn't afford the real land rovers. Hopefully the LR2 will be a nice ride. I'm waiting to get one based on how well it does on reports after awhile.
- Aaronontheweb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Jaguars are solid cars, in terms of performance and reliability. Don't know why that one guy randomly ripped on them. My father's owned four of them and has had no complaints.
Off Topic: I personally drive a new Toyota 4Runner SR5 V6, which kicks ass. The 4Runner comes with this sick new technology called VVT-i (Variable Valve Timing with Intelligence) which uses machine learning techniques to memorize your driving patterns and adjust the electronic fuel injection accordingly to make it as efficient as possible. When I bought my 4Runner off the lot a month and a half ago it had 4 miles on the odometer and was doing about 15-16 mpg; it now has 4000 miles on it and gets 21mpg.
I'm all for capitalism. If Land Rover wants to use disaster sites to use as advertisements for their cars, they have every right to. - armour, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Humm and this is some how worse the the news media flocking to these areas and giving nothing to the disaster relief ?
- erikfotherland0, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1How horrible it is that a company puts money into a struggling local economy, what's worse is it doesn't fit neatly into my "capitalism is evil" ideology.
- Waterispoison, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Land Rover gave me a pretty nice discount on a new one and I didn't feel like spending more money on an equivalent type SUV, besides I thought it was only a single issue. Now I know better.
- cd6020, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, wont get fooled again - Gryffydd, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It's sad to see the difference between what Land Rovers were and still are in places like Africa and the Outback where the ancient ones are still going strong, and their reliability in their soccer-mom SUV form.
- burndive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The invisible hand strikes again.
- DAaaMan64, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1specops:
No kidding, but milk is a very small investment. This is a very expensive investment, I don't think I would risk it on the same brand name again regardless. Unless maybe I am absolutely obsessed with the brand. - Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I heard a SUV driver one day say that if someone drives a small car, and died in an accident with a SUV, it was their own fault. I told them that I know what they mean. Why, if they get into an accident in their SUV with a semi truck and their whole family dies, it's their fault for not driving something bigger.
- laterallateral, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I NOEZ!
4REALZ DOOD!
HAJAHAJSJAH!11!!!1 - computergeek23, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I guess this would be a cool car to have you know?!?!
- edebolt, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0ford acquiring Volvo has not seemed to damage that car maker. LR's have been famous for electrical problems and expensive parts for decades. if you want to buy a cheap car look for an early 90's LR. Some of the hydraulic parts are so expensive to replace that they functionally totaled and owners will sell them for next to nothing.
- mt066, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1...no? It was betrayed by Toyota Camry Judas. Anyone??
- Jerk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Sorry, but they had issues well before the acquisition. I may pick up an older Disco someday, but I'm well aware of the problems and it'll be a toy car anyways.
- bcorsi, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5too bad you didnt take your own advice and bought a second one.
fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me - drey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0.. and how is the story of 4Runner (great car, btw!) is related to the Land Rover ad? Two totally unrelated topics =)
- mt066, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2This isn't as bad as the Scion campaign where they crucified a Scion xB to make it look more like Jesus.
- gak001, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Besides, corporations, by law, are not allowed to be philanthropic. Remember seeing Wal-Mart employees handing out bottled water after Katrina, etc. If they aren't doing that in order to increase their bottom line by increasing "good will," then the stock holders can sue for misappropriation of funds.
- scottmillerinva, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0remember shawn penn with his shotgun, sinking boat, and camera crew! lets just make it harder to help people in a disaster area by putting a bunch of jerks with cameras there. That benefits everyone alright... Unless you're the one dying because they have to rescue shawn from his boat or a camera crew in a land rover.
- FortyCaliber, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Land Rover's are a death sentence...
Not for you, but for Ford.
Ford is currently trying to dump its Land Rover line, it's Jaguar line, to Jacques Nasser, and it's Aston line to someone for $848m. This is the first time Aston has turned a profit in over 40 years.
Land Rover sucks... seriously though. - houndeyex, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0Will it blend?
- RealmDown, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1Opportunistic profit under the guise of philanthropy is what is wrong.
I hope you were being sarcastic. - SoireeLaura, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2Yep, ditto on the terrible reliability! We had a 2003 which died at the end of 2005 and we could barely get it started to take it back to the dealer. Had to call AAA 4 times in a week and a half. We're extremely happy with our Xterra now!
I can't believe they're focusing their marketing efforts on actual real natural disasters.....
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is