Indeed. Perfection doesn't exist. And as you correctly indicate, quality is not static either. The best I can describe it is: quality is an ongoing race with winners and losers. No one expects FCA to be the winner every time, but certainly not the loser every time, either. Quality studies give shoppers a measure of risk in the way of a probability of having problems during their future ownership. We on this forum are heavily biased towards FCA, its brands and its products, which can make it difficult to view FCA as the world at large sees it. To give us a sense of how the outside world views FCA, below are the typical results of various auto brands as reported by a representative sample of 1,600 new-vehicle purchase intenders in the US. These numbers move very slowly. These in particular were collected in Q3. Customers don't specify whether their willingness or unwillingness to recommend is due to product quality, performance or customer service. But the fact that this metric is strongly correlated to quality gives us an indication; and it shows major influence on purchase intention, which in turn impacts sales and profits. These results show that neither Toyota nor Honda are perfect; only 1 out of 2 existing owners would recommend those brands. But everything is relative: Jeep, arguably FCA's most promising brand, gets recommended at half that rate. Only 1 in 4 Jeep owners are willing to recommended their brand, the same rate as the Koreans, and well below other domestics. This unwillingness to recommend Jeep, in turn, results in lower customer retention and higher incentives needed to sustain sales. Whenever Marchionne brings up margins, he is talking primarily about manufacturing costs, which normally ignores this side of the business.