This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Uh it's their trademarked brand name. Not sure how a company can exploit its own trademark. Per previous comments I've made on the merry-go-round of 250 threads, the Land Cruiser "brand" means very little to the vast majority of Americans anyway, and would be confused with a Land Rover (it's honestly Toyota doing the original exploitation of the British brand name....).
Perfect example, I’m at a loading dock right now waiting to pick up some stuff for work and the guy just asked me if I was in the silver 4Runner. Can’t believe he didn’t know I was actually in the almighty 200 series Land Cruiser. What audacity!
Something pretty strange culturally as an American - in Japan in one of the Toyota mini-museum displays it has a whole section on the Land Rover and basically how they did some really cool stuff in the camel trophy campaigns. It would be like Ford having a section of the museum about how great the corvette was. Very different view of competition.
The same way that Ford exploited the Bronco name with its Sport version. Really not that hard of a concept unless one puts effort into not understanding. Or doesn't understand the difference between disagreement and not understanding.
Strangely, I've never cared at all about what any of my vehicles were called.I happen to think it is silly to believe they didn't. We can agree to disagree there.My point is they could have done all of what you said slapping the Prado in the back and voila. All this "silly" comparison with the 200 would have never happened and this forum would have less 10 or so threads.
Exploitation: the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work
). The only thing they added was better execution and quality.
They would certainly sell in the US... it's just a matter of how many. I've "lived" out of one in the Australia too and I've owned 3 of them in the US. I would buy a new one and so would several thousand other folks.
Exploitation: the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work
I am having a hard time understanding how Toyota can exploit themselves when it is their name. You can certainly say "watered down" the brand or "riding on the name", which companies do all of the time, but that's certainly not exploitation as their is no other party who is being treated unfairly.
If we want to get in the weeds, the entire Land Cruiser brand is itself an exploitation. It's an American idea (a Jeep), a clear ripoff of a British brand name (Land Rover) with a metric copy of a Chevy engine. Very little original thought there from Toyota (just like the "T-150" that became the 1st gen Tundra
Since you are using Google to find the definition, scroll down a bit and you will find:Exploitation: the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work
I am having a hard time understanding how Toyota can exploit themselves when it is their name. You can certainly say "watered down" the brand or "riding on the name", which companies do all of the time, but that's certainly not exploitation as their is no other party who is being treated unfairly.
If we want to get in the weeds, the entire Land Cruiser brand is itself an exploitation. It's an American idea (a Jeep), a clear ripoff of a British brand name (Land Rover) with a metric copy of a Chevy engine. Very little original thought there from Toyota (just like the "T-150" that became the 1st gen Tundra
The 70 is back again in Japan, according to the article linked below. Toyota plans to sell only about 400 per year there.
"Exploitation" was being clearly being used by Phillyd2 in a negative context, as evidenced by his "whored out" statement in his last post.Since you are using Google to find the definition, scroll down a bit and you will find:
"the action of making use of and benefiting from resources."
That might make more sense as to why he is using the word "Exploitation".
.You sound fun at parties but yep, absolutely negative and stand by it."Exploitation" was being clearly being used by Phillyd2 in a negative context, as evidenced by his "whored out" statement in his last post.
The "action of making use of and benefiting from resources" definition that you provide (and I saw too) is clearly positive. You could say that Toyota having built 200 "exploited" their ability to construct a reliable SUV.
I maintain that exploitations in a negative manner requires two parties. Toyota can't negatively exploit themselves. The proposed "whored out" term is only requires one
I have been known to clearly let folks know when they are wrong. It's certainly fun for me
. 
They are exploiting a substantial demand in the market for a good looking, very offroad capable hybrid suv with modern electronics at a reasonably affordable price point. They are also exploiting the value of their own Land Cruiser mark. That is their business prerogative to do. It’s your prerogative as a consumer to decide whether to buy this vehicle.
It’s a Prado, not a 4Runner. Two very similar vehicles with different packaging. Always has been, nothing new to see other than that the Prado is now sold here where it wasn’t previously.
I have no dog in this fight and certainly won't assume what Plillyd2 meant to say. Exploitation, whore out, bash it...whatever you want to call it, IMO Toyota did it in a misleading and deceptive manner (as they have every right to do, since they own the name), which caused all the "comparisonmaggedon" with the 200."Exploitation" was being clearly being used by Phillyd2 in a negative context, as evidenced by his "whored out" statement in his last post.
The "action of making use of and benefiting from resources" definition that you provide (and I saw too) is clearly positive. You could say that Toyota having built 200 "exploited" their ability to construct a reliable SUV.
I maintain that exploitations in a negative manner requires two parties. Toyota can't negatively exploit themselves. The proposed "whored out" term is only requires one
You're really hung up on vehicle names, aren't you?
At the end of the day I just don't agree with pitting the two against each other when it's not an apples to apples comparison. It's like a bout between Mike Tyson and Floyd Mayweather. Both can scrap but one is obviously not built like the other. To the point it's not fair.
