Ford Drama

[mstar]

Hello,

I'm just a little sad because of all the stuff that is going on by Ford. Years ago I thought Ford was the best company to buy a brand, because they develop the brands like they should. A Jaguar looked like a Jaguar etc. They formed for every brand a strong design and everything. Mazda was never as beautiful as now, also Aston Martin, Jaguar, Land Rover and Volvo. But now it seems like the ship is sinking, and Ford may lose all brands. The weirdest thing I've read was, that Ford should buy the rest of Mazda, take over it and close it, to use their vehicles as Fords, because their program is better. That's ridiculous. Mercury and Lincoln could be shuttered. I can understand Mercury though.

But the funny thing is, that the company needs to get rid of it's weakest part, and (forget about Mercury) I think the weakest part in the whole brand is Ford itself. Ford should get rid of Ford.
If they weren't so static they could do so much. When they can't sell their big SUV's and trucks anymore, why don't bring smaller cars from Europe to North America, like the Fiesta, the Ka and the Euro Focus?

I hope that Ford gets help and none of the brands need to be closed. It would be too sad to lose them.

[cfesmire]

Static hasn't hurt the F150 pickup much.

[BillC]

Sadly, Chester, that's not quite true. Sales of the F-Series are off 12.7% this year. It may not sound like much, but the F-Series is not only the cornerstone of the Ford line, it is the source of much of the profit. In addition, there are likely more problems ahead because GM will be releasing its new GMT900-series pickups soon and these will likely take sales from the F-Series simply because they are newer.

Equally worrisome is the probability the new Expedition will not meet sales projections because of shifts in consumer preferences and the massive head start given to the revamped Tahoe and Yukon.

Of course, it is easy to sit back and say Bill Ford should have done this or that. And, as a Monday-morning quarterback myself, I think the big thing the Ford family should have done is fire Jac Nasser a lot earlier than they did. Then they should have given Nick Scheele a gold watch, a nice dinner and a comfortable pension instead of putting him in charge. Ford's problem continues to be a lack of compelling product in the areas they are needed: mass-market cars, crossovers, etc., all things that needed the development money and direction that was lacking from the time Nasser took over.

[stanhas87]

billc said:

Ford's problem continues to be a lack of compelling product in the areas they are needed: mass-market cars, crossovers, etc., all things that needed the development money and direction that was lacking from the time Nasser took over.

Dear All:

It reminds me of the 1980's,when Ford was on a similar situation.After,who would appreciate the Fairmont,the early 1980's Thunderbird? The Mustang II had ended,but their products were not that compeling them,as is happening now.

[BillC]

Ford surprised a lot of people by naming Alan Mulally, who headed up Boeing's passenger jet divisions, as the company's new president and CEO today. Bill Ford will drop back to being executive chairman.

[skunk]

I don't know if more non-car executives has really proven a good idea for the American automotive industry thus far. And no, I am not looking for a self-professed "car guy" like that one GM is saddled with, but perhaps someone who will let designers and car guys do their thing.

I think that a main problem for the US car industry is a thirty-year history of ignoring its customers. Nowadays not very many would buy an American car for its desirability (possibly excluding Corvettes and Mustangs) but only because they're American. Most buyers don't exactly feel like valued customers by US car brands - even if, say, the Honda Fit had been a GM product I don't think anyone would have bought it. As a Honda it's saleable, but with a Ford badge it is not.

So, the big three are stuck with largely deplorable products that mainly sell through heavy discounts, with all the profit being made from trucks that are quickly going out of style, and with a customer base which has been long treated as a burden rather than an asset. GM is in the worst spot, Ford seems to be worse off than I had thought, Chrysler seems much better off. At least Chrysler was smart enough to lose Eagle and Plymouth and stop this senseless proliferation of brands.

I fail to see the reason for Mercury's existence. Buick also seems like a waste of marketing capital. And does anyone really care whether their truck carries a bowtie or a GMC logo?

Maybe if Ford follows Toyota's lead and brings over some desirable product from overseas. I dont know how well the Yaris is selling in the rest of the country, but here in NYC they're everywhere (as are Honda Fits). The Ford Fiesta (it may have to be renamed) might help, with the right marketing campaign - or the Brasilian Ford EcoSport.

My only real fear is what might happen to Aston Martin, but then again, Aston Martin's new hyper-efficient over-marketed cars don't really hold the same charm for me as the old ones did.

I really am glad I don't have to be responsible for the well-being of one of these sickly dinosaurs, but I guess the pay more than makes up for it.

[skunk]

Oh, and if GM hadn't done such a bad job with the Holden "GTO" I might have thought it a good idea to bring over the Aussie Ford Falcon. RWD and powerful engines, and don't worry about expensive interior make-overs that don't improve anything whatsoever. Use all that wasted development money to improve the basic platform for Australia as well. And offer a sedan. And not at a premium price. Imagine if GM had been wise enough to bring in a bunch of different RWD Holdens, replacing all those useless clunker Impalas and Malibus. Perhaps the Falcon could compete with the Chrysler 300: faster, not as handsome, but cheaper.

[stanhas87]

Dear All:

What I see is a longer life for the Vic/Marquis now (at least beyond 2010). I do not agree to drop Mercury as well of Buick,neither the outcasting of Plymouth,but this is me.

I do not know what Ford could bring -as a non-SUV - that may catch the public's desire,but hope that they do and as soon as possible.I am sick of hearing 'Toyota this' or 'Honda that'.

If GM had adopted the rwd Holden Sedan as the new Impala,I am very sure that this bad boy would had been a good seller.This Platform is sold as Chevrolet in other markets and it is a Buick in China,and is the most liked GM brand in that country.

[cfesmire]

I'm a bit surprised that this discussion has revolved around management and makes of models with no mention of alternative fuel vehicles. Tax incentives and sales seem to point to them being attractive to the buyer and the manufacturer as well.
Bill, what I meant was, the long run of the F150's success was partly because buyers could depend on not seeing a lot of changes in what has (in the past) been a pretty darn good truck. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[stanhas87]

cfesmire said:

I'm a bit surprised that this discussion has revolved around management and makes of models with no mention of alternative fuel vehicles. Tax incentives and sales seem to point to them being attractive to the buyer and the manufacturer as well.
Bill, what I meant was, the long run of the F150's success was partly because buyers could depend on not seeing a lot of changes in what has (in the past) been a pretty darn good truck. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Dear All:

I agree with that statement,and bold enough to state that Ford has three butter and bread models:the F-150,Vic and Gran Marquis (and perhaps the Mustang).Now,what has to do is to make the other car (not SUV) lines more atractive.
I do not know about altrnative fuels,but the F150 and Vic are offered with this choice.

[cfesmire]

The F150, Crown Vic and Grand Marquis are offered with the FFV package (flexible fuel vehicle) as well as the Lincoln Town car from Ford. This allows the use of E85 ethanol fuel mixture which is a questionable alternative fuel at best. One of the major concerns is that E85 is only offered by 800 of the almost 180,000 gas stations in the U.S.. CAFE credits and fuel economy credits may have something to do with the current trend to want to produce cars with the FFV option as well as the fact that the technology is cheaper to put into a vehicle than hybridizing (is that a word?) Well anyway, in the words of GM "Live green, go yellow"!

[superba]

RIP Ford Taurus. Ford produced the last one last week. I thought Ford killed it over two years. It must have been sold only for fleet sales. I rented a new 2006 at Hertz about a month ago. I had know idea they were still made.

[stanhas87]

superba said:

RIP Ford Taurus. Ford produced the last one last week. I thought Ford killed it over two years. It must have been sold only for fleet sales. I rented a new 2006 at Hertz about a month ago. I had know idea they were still made.

Dear All:

R.I.P.,indeed.Thing is,Bill C's charts of car sales for 2005 stated that the Taurus was on 11ths place as far as sales were concerned.So,the question is: will the Fusion - supposdely,its replacaement - will live to expectations? Is known that the 500 is not.

[BillC]

The Fusion is 14th among passenger cars, well behind the Taurus which is 8th. The Focus and Mustang both outsell the Fusion which is only about 5,000 sales ahead of the Chrysler 300C. The Chevrolet Cobalt, Impala and Malibu also outsell the Fusion, as does the Pontiac G6.

[skunk]

Of course sales aren't everything, profit margins are just as important. Anyhow, bye-bye Taurus, I won't miss you a bit.