What's Wrong With This Picture: Tsunami In A Teapot Edition

Three companies, each alike in dignity. Or not. Don’t look at the numbers just yet. Instead, consider the following. One of these companies is Japan’s largest automaker and relies heavily on that country for its production and its profit. Another one, although Japanese, produces the bulk of its vehicles overseas. The third company is American and relies very little on Japan for production.

Baseline their stock at Jan 1, 2011. When an earthquake, a tsunami, and an authentic nuclear disaster strike, which of the three end up with the same stock price as the baseline afterwards, and which take a big dive?

You cheated, didn’t you? You looked at the graph and realized that, against all logic and reason, it’s Toyota which has effectively taken no hit to its stock price since January 1. Honda, which is far less reliant on Japan for production of both automobiles and unique parts, is almost fifteen percent down from that base point. Meanwhile, Ford, which competes more effectively against the Japanese in their core areas (small cars, Camcords) than either GM or Chrysler, is also down.

What possible mindset could Wall Street have to believe that Honda has had more bad news this year than Toyota, or that Ford’s had more bad news than either? I’m hoping that some of TTAC’s financial wizards can provide an answer, because the only one I can come up with is that Wall Street believes in some sort of racist theory which describes Japanese people as inscrutable, invicible worker bees who don’t suffer or make mistakes like the rest of us. This would explain why Toyota’s inability to build cars, find parts, or power its plants is seen as a minor bobble while Ford’s so far successful “war on debt” is apparently a big issue. Thoughts?