On 03/15/2015 12:54 PM, trader_4 wrote:
That's certainly true in some cases. In some cases the "fix" could involve
hundreds of millions, for example recalling cars. In that case, I can
see motive to try to avoid a recall. But even that doesn't explain what
happened at GM, for example. They knew they had some kind of problem with
the ignition switches moving too easily to the off position. Your profit
explanation is a reasonable explanation of why they didn't do a recall
earlier. But it doesn't explain why they kept using the same switch for
many more years. The only thing that had to be done was have a pin that
was 1/8" longer in the switch. Certainly a profit motive doesn't explain
their failure to at least fix it moving forward.

It's not my intent to be insulting but apparently you have never worked
for a large corporation. If you had, you'd know why this scenario could
easily happen.

The Peter Principle is alive and well!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle