THE FORD PINTO CASE A Dangerous Product On 10 August 1978 Judy Ann Ulrich‚ eighteen‚ was driving a 1973 Ford Pinto to volley-ball practice in Goshen‚ Indiana. Inside the car with her were her sister Lynn Marie‚ sixteen‚ and their cousin Donna Ulrich‚ eighteen. As they were heading north on U.S. Route 33‚ their car was struck from behind by a 1972 Chevrolet van. The Pinto collapsed like an accordion; the fuel tank ruptured; and the car exploded in flames. Lynn Marie and Donna burned to death in
Premium Ford Motor Company English-language films Automobile
Dropbox 4 Business Ethics A Utilitarian Argument in the Ford Pinto Case In 1971 Ford Motor Company decided they wanted to create a compact car that could compete with the other Japanese manufactured cars. It rushed from its inception to its actual production. In the end‚ these cars proved to be one of the most dangerous ever produced because of their extreme flammability in instance of rear impact collision. The decision by Ford to not recall any of its cars‚ and not fix design flaws‚ conceal
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Utilitarianism
In 1968 Lee Iacocca and the Ford Motor Company wanted to produce a inexpensive vehicle to appeal to the first time buyers market. Mr. Iacocca philosophy was for consumers to remember Ford as the very first vehicle that they owned so that when it was time for them to invest in another vehicle it would be a Ford. But‚ in order for Ford to develop a inexpensive vehicle to fit the philosophy of Lee Iacocca‚ they had to cut corners. Unfortunately‚ the one corner they cut was the placement of the fuel
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Life
Cazul Ford Pinto Acesta caz s-a petrecut la sfarsitul anilor ’60‚ cand cererea pentru masini sub-compacte a fost in crestere pe piata. Specificatiile Iacocca pentru proiectarea masinii au fost fara compromisuri: "Pinto trebuia sa fie cu nici macar o uncie mai greu de 2.000 de pounds (aprox. 900 kg) si sa nu coste un cent peste 2.000 de dolari." In timpul proiectarii si productiei‚ totusi‚ testele de coliziune a relevat un defect serios la rezervorul de benzina. In accidente
Premium
Question 7: In our opinion‚ we think that Ford Company is morally wrong if the savings resulting from not improving the Pinto gas tank had been passed on to force’s customers. We will say is morally wrong because Pinto do not meet the safety standard propose by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The safety standard of NHTSA is to reduce fires from traffic collisions. This standard required that all new cars produced by 1972 should be able to withstand a rear-end impact
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Station wagon
1. Case Summaries and Guide Questions for Discussion: https://www2.bc.edu/~sannella/Case.htm SULLIVAN’S AUTO WORLD. The owner of a Ford car dealership dies unexpectedly. His 28-year ... Compare the sales and service departments at Auto World. What useful.... Provide supporting quantitative analysis where appropriate. What ... 2. term paper on Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis) www.termpapermasters.com/.../Analysis-of-the-Sullivan-Ford-Auto-... Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis)
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Case study
Dilemma in the Ford Pinto Case On August 10‚ 1978 three young girls died in a 1973 Ford Pinto after being stuck from the rear by a driver in a van. The Ford Pinto was completely engulfed in flames and the accident resulted in the death of the three young girls. Today‚ the debate continues regarding whether or not The Ford Motor Company was responsible for this case and many other cases involving the Pinto bursting into flames resulting in disfigurement or death. Ford has argued for
Premium Ford Motor Company Automotive industry Ford Pinto
Ford Pinto Case: The Invisible Corporate Human Pricetag In this essay‚ I will argue that Ford Motor Company’s business behavior was unethical as demonstrated in the Ford Pinto Case. Ford did not reveal all the facts to consumers about a harmful gas tank design in the Ford Pinto. They tried to justify their decision to sell an unsafe car by using a Cost-Benefit Analysis which determined it was cheaper to sell the cars without changing to a safer gas tank. The price of not fixing the gas tanks
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Automobile
Introduction In 1972 the national highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) put a price on life - $200 725 (adjusted for inflation). The Ford Motor Company used this data along with other statistical studies to determine the cost benefit of improving the safety of the Ford Pinto compared to the cost of loss of life. It was determined that the cost of the suggested improvements outweighed their benefits. This essay aims to address whether cost-benefit analysis is a legitimate tool and what
Premium Ford Pinto Cost-benefit analysis Cost
Case Study: Ford Pinto MGT/216 07/17/20 Case Study: Ford Pinto Abstract In 1971‚ Ford Motor Company (FMC)‚ on the advice of then vice-president Lee Iacocca‚ introduced the first subcompact vehicle‚ the Ford Pinto. After production had begun and the release of the Pinto in the United States‚ Ford discovered a defect in the design on the fuel system; the gas tank was placed in the rear of the vehicle. This error could cause the vehicle to explode on low speed rear end collisions due to a
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto