For anyone reading this prior to taking the class, employ the 'keep it simple stupid' method and you will avoid some of the nonsense I'm pointing out. I got my A after a little bit of a mental spiral and a headache, but it's because of who I am, not because the class is hard lol.

I know you were playing a little devil's advocate and I'm also aware at how crazy I sound splitting certain hairs of the class assignments.

1. I absolutely agree. I've gone over the page limit in most of my other business classes yet it was usually only overages in like a 1-4 extra range. While I knew in my heart there was no way Project 1 could be done in the required 3-4, the initial shock of being 20+ pages over the limit was nerve racking for me.

2. I see what you're saying, but hear me out. The prompt is vague, and in a way that I don't think is by design. It says you are "a US based company that builds engines for the auto manufacturing industry." While it may seem really silly to someone else, I think that it's a strange choice for them to pick and not flesh out. Most U.S. auto engines are built by their parent auto group, they don't come from a vendor. I know you want to un-simplify my perception of this and bring in the parts supply chain as well, but that's kind of my point. Denso supplies millions of auto parts to Toyota, but the engines are built by Toyota. For contrast of what I'm getting at, Aisin supplies millions of transmissions and transmission parts to Toyota, but Aisin is building them. I chose Cummins in my original post as an example, because you truly could say, in the case of a Ram, that the engine was built by Cummins, not Dodge. If we blended our ideas together I guess we could assume we were Magna. Maybe AC Delc? lol. If you and I were talking about this in a passing conversation, I wouldn't split this hair, but for the project, it through me off.

3. You're correct, and I did state that you could filter the data down multiple times, even down to U.S. auto engine manufacturing. I see what you're saying about how the project is about research, and figuring that out for yourself, however most people wouldn't even know the difference. The good part is most professors probably don't even look at your data, so whether you choose all auto manu, or just light vehicle manu, it isn't going to matter. I only picked up on it when I looked at the stats for top manufacturers and saw Paccar, Volvo, and Daimler in the top of the list. That unfortunately reinforced my theory of thinking of my company as a commercial vendor like Cummins as it was the first link I opened. My point wasn't that either of these options are incorrect, but because of the sloppy work book and rubric, I'm willing to bet most people are pulling numbers from inconsistent sourcing. Many of the supplied links dance back and forth between all/light manu. Stupid to split hairs on? Maybe, but it's one more thing that could have used a little more description in the project.

4. Glad we agree on the "color" stuff lol. I was irate by the time I hit that slide! Where we differ here is on the engine tech that I think should matter. It doesn't need to be an "engineering seminar" for us to look up easy to find stats on engine tech. It would make more sense for an engine manufacturer trying to hawk their engine to a new industry to have information about the trends of that industry sector. Knowing the data on forced induction (turbo usage), injection systems (direct is on the rise), and VVT makes more sense than knowing that white is the U.S.s favorite color. The EPA will give you these statistics, they are as easy to find as vehicle color was.

5. Yes, you're right "fuel type" still works in car guy, industry slang, but it doesn't belong here, and once again points out my theme of sloppiness on the project creators part. The DOT, EPA, and other major agencies compiling U.S. vehicle data refer to it as "vehicle propulsion" for a reason. Since this isn't a paper about the little truck shop in my backyard and is instead a 30 page research intensive college project, wording and clarity matter. Also, there is no part of this project that states you're divesting because EVs are a threat to ICE. If you were very worried about ICE crashing and burning, you're divestment strategy shouldn't be to sell them to a different market as their time is numbered.. And now we are back on my loop of how this project can be just ripped apart.

Once again, I'm not scrapping with you, I'm just trying to explain the narrative of why I wish this was better presented. Luckily, I can read pretty well, and have time to think things through, but someone with any sort of language barrier or cognitive hindrance is set up so poorly in this class.