Ford Inside News banner

Ford and GM: Is Their Rivalry Getting Nastier?

23K views 102 replies 16 participants last post by  All-Or-Nothing 
#1 ·
Blog: The Wall Street Journal, Nov-23-2011 – DETROIT-Jim Farley, the head of marketing at Ford Motor Co., has lately been telling his young son that there is a very scary person living in their neighborhood-a man who works for General Motors Co.


The neighbor, he has explained, is a "bad man" who works for the "wrong company," Mr. Farley recalled at a recent gathering of bloggers, according to a video of the event that was posted on YouTube.


On Halloween, the father and son trick-or-treated at the man's house, and the boy took candy and then announced, "'Chevy is for losers,'" Mr. Farley told the bloggers. "I've never been more proud of my son," he added.


The U.S. has plenty of great corporate rivalries: Apple vs. Microsoft, Visa vs. MasterCard, Coke vs. Pepsi. But few are as close and personal as the battle between Detroit's two giant auto makers.


Ford, which was founded in 1903, and GM, founded five years later, have been going at each other for more than a century. The bitterness is heightened by proximity: Ford's Dearborn, Mich., headquarters is 11 miles from GM's in downtown Detroit.


In the last decade, the GM-Ford sparring took a back seat as trouble mounted for both and Toyota and Honda emerged as threats to both. In 2008, Ford Chief Executive Alan Mulally went to Washington to help plead for a bailout for GM and Chrysler Group LLC, the smaller member of the Detroit three. For a time, Ford's biggest worry about GM was that its rival would collapse, taking down important parts suppliers with it.


But now that GM is back on its feet, it's proving to be as tough a competitor as ever for Ford. So far this year, GM has boosted its U.S. market share by eight-tenths of a point to 19.8%, while Ford's is up only one-tenth, to 16.8%. And in the first three quarters of the year,


The resumption of hostilities comes amid a key opportunity for both companies. Toyota and Honda are slumping, hurt by vehicle shortages, natural disasters and some quality missteps. Both U.S. companies see an opening to grab share in their home market, and once again the biggest obstacle is the guy across town.


Earlier this year, GM Chief Executive Dan Akerson was asked by a Detroit newspaper about Ford's Lincoln brand, whose sales have flagged for years. He didn't hold back.


"They are trying like **** to resurrect Lincoln. Well, I might as well tell you, you might as well sprinkle holy water. It's over," Mr. Akerson said.


Two years ago, the weekly meetings Mr. Mulally holds with his top lieutenants often focused on Toyota as the key competitor to watch, a person who has attended the meetings said. Now Ford executives are again targeting GM, the person said.


It's a critical time for the companies because legions of car buyers are up for grabs. The auto industry is rebounding after a slump that lasted nearly five years. Meantime, customers long loyal to Asian auto makers are taking a new look at other brands. At a time when Ford and GM are becoming comparable in terms of vehicle quality, cost and offerings, the image of each company stands to play an influential role in consumers' decisions.
 
See less See more
#52 ·
Well, I am thoroughly chastised. However, I will comment that you kind of supplied my rebuttal. Yes, all of those GM execs were making a lot of money while GM ran aground They all walked away quite wealthy with their future needs taken care of. Obviously, they lost some money in the bankruptcy; i.e. stock options gone, etc., but they aren't hurting today I'm sure. If Ford hadn't turned it around, then Mulally goes to another big corporation and makes more big bucks. The only thing he really risked was how big a payoff he got. Obviously, he has worked hard to get Ford along the right path. I hope he succeeds further. As someone said, his success is many others' success. Personally, I think all it took was to have the corporate culture let all of those engineers, designers, and middle managers do the jobs they were capable of without all the arrogant higher-up executives interference. I think they are the ones who saved Ford.
 
#53 ·
I clearly remember Bill Jr. taking the helm from tha loser Nassar, who had distracted an entire corporation with his silly e-commerce goals and angry management style that made everyone look over each others shoulder. I don't think you will see a time when Ford (can't speak for anyone else) runs it's company like they did when money was pouring in, during the heydays of large SUV profits and cheap gas. Were mistakes made? **** yes. Everyone did them. Fat cats were everywhere and we now clearly see how not to run a company. We all need to be humbled from time to time, and it was our turn.

Guess who is next to be humbled?
VW
 
#54 ·
What I question is what is wrong with the auto industry that it got so bad that this occurred...
I love how people blame the Detroit automakers as being arrogant and pooly run when things got toughest, completely ignoring the REAL factors, like massive legacy costs and aging factories (both something the transplants did not have to contend with), major competition coming from everywhere, outdated UAW contracts and of course an economy that fell on it's face. They were all good solid companies that were forced to try and become great companies to survive. No easy task. So stop the ignorant cliche's please. Nobody believes them.
Carfan
PLEASE keep posting your thoughts, opinions, beliefs.
Imho that's the basis for conversation = why we're here.

now mine:
imho it's helpful to consider the BIG picture.
Politics(global) and the unFair Trade policies practiced in the U.S. and abroad - our beloved leaders (sarcasm) have been doing a good job of giving away our country while pursuing THEIR nasty-rivalry.
American Business, based in part on the Robber Barons of the 19th century is doing its darnedest to recreate slavery to serve the super-rich (imho).
• Imho the auto business isn't easy: selling "the second biggest purchase a consumer makes" and auto BRANDS are major marketing, though Homes, the biggest purchase, Have NO Brands. So in this sense, auto mfgs are unique but have been treated like any other large business = hasn't worked very well.
Legacy-Mistakes are a major way Business-As-Usual contributed to their problems But all they ever had was bad/inappropriate advice from various experts who didn't see their uniqueness. I'm amazed 3 on them managed to survive At ALL.
But there's no denying they've been "arrogant and poorly run"! imho...just like many other businesses.

continued...
And Ford would have been fine without Alan. We were in the middle of a massive turn around, starting first with quality training and product ressurection that dates back years before Alan got there, and of course all the consolidation with global products was not his idea. He was a fresh thinker and stole the show, but contrary to what some think, Ford would not have sunk without him. Perhaps ford's turn around would not have been as good as it was, perhaps delayed even, but it was coming, make no mistake. I remember being very excited for Ford's future, through future product info, long before he joined.
• 'Focusing' in on Ford. Yes-imho, Uncle Bill got the product renaissance rolling before Mr. M. was hired; and the LOAN TOO (imho2), and 3 - Bill Ford Jr. is still the 'head architect' of what gets built, ie sets the Goal.
Mr. M. is the general contractor & 'System(s) Lord', ie HOW things get done. If Mr. M. wasn't hired, Fomoco would NOT be surviving without someone ELSE filling his role of Captain of the Team + Coach + rule maker + cheerleader ...+ ...+ ...+
One Ford is in its first "Ver.#". Imho there have been & will be mistakes BUT imho2 there is NOT one right way of doing it. Imho3 the test will be if its flexible enough to learn from mistakes.

[ pause rant ]
 
#55 ·
We are all certainly entitled to our opinions and the most informed they are the better . . . for a great account on everything that transpired during the auto debacle of 2008-09, including "dates" and very insightful interviews with Bill Ford, Allan Mulally, Mark Fields, Rick Wagoner, Fritz Henderson, Bob Nardelli, Jason Vines and many other I highly recommend "Once Upon a Car" by Detroit News' and The New York Times' Bill Vlasic.

Its a very good and well documented read and priceless to decide (well we don't really decide facts, do we?) who did what and when . . .
 
#56 ·
We are all certainly entitled to our opinions and the most informed they are the better . . . for a great account on everything that transpired during the auto debacle of 2008-09, including "dates" and very insightful interviews with Bill Ford, Allan Mulally, Mark Fields, Rick Wagoner, Fritz Henderson, Bob Nardelli, Jason Vines and many other I highly recommend "Once Upon a Car" by Detroit News' and The New York Times' Bill Vlasic.

Its a very good and well documented read and priceless to decide (well we don't really decide facts, do we?) who did what and when . . .
Indeed, we are all certainly entitled to our opinion, and although a bit harsh with my remark about "ignorant cliche's" toward carfan, it was intended as a reference to the sources that have repeated them so often.
It is clearly a sensitive spot with me, having been in the trenches of the worst of times with Detroit automakers, all of them, and the effects on my home town and family and friends and coworkers. Truly devasting.
So when I hear it repeated for the millionth time, in all it's falseness and complete unsagaciousness....I get a bit animated.

So, to carfan, no hard feelings, and indeed, keep your opinions coming....as I too will comment as I see fit.
 
#57 ·
Indeed, we are all certainly entitled to our opinion, and although a bit harsh with my remark about "ignorant cliche's" toward carfan, it was intended as a reference to the sources that have repeated them so often.
It is clearly a sensitive spot with me, having been in the trenches of the worst of times with Detroit automakers, all of them, and the effects on my home town and family and friends and coworkers. Truly devasting.
So when I hear it repeated for the millionth time, in all it's falseness and complete unsagaciousness....I get a bit animated.

So, to carfan, no hard feelings, and indeed, keep your opinions coming....as I too will comment as I see fit.
When I wrote my comment I was thinking about the fuzzy recollection of recent events. But I kind of am with you in your original comment.

The real reason of the downfall of Detroit is beyond the facts because like you, I think that it was a giant cocktail of factors . . . it is the recipe in which we all here seem to have disagreements. There were the appalling legacy costs, the crazy concessions to unions, the unfair trade practices and zero reciprocity to America in foreign lands but also there were crazy expending on non automotive enterprises, mediocre product (late 70s, 80s and early 90s), complacency and arrogance (an Old GM trademark) and absolute contempt for the foreign competitors.

It was a humbling experience but we will all have better products in our garages and the country will have an auto industry it can be proud of again. And today like in 1903, the one that lead the way to prosperity was Ford and only Ford and if anyone wants to feel bitter about that . . . be my guest there is no rewriting this history.
 
#58 ·
continued...
'Focusing' in on Ford. Yes-imho, Uncle Bill got the product renaissance rolling before Mr. M. was hired; and the LOAN TOO (imho2), and 3 - Bill Ford Jr. is still the 'head architect' of what gets built, ie sets the Goal.
Mr. M. is the general contractor & 'System(s) Lord', ie HOW things get done. If Mr. M. wasn't hired, Fomoco would NOT be surviving without someone ELSE filling his role of Captain of the Team + Coach + rule maker + cheerleader ...+ ...+ ...+
One Ford is in its first "Ver.#". Imho there have been & will be mistakes BUT imho2 there is NOT one right way of doing it. Imho3 the test will be if its flexible enough to learn from mistakes.

[ pause rant ]
Indeed, Uncle Bill began the momentum, but Bill Jr. was the biggest catalyst and cheerleader toward the greening of Ford, from factory to product, while perpetuating the vision further....and had always intended to be an interim replacement only, after outing Nassar.
He was looking for someone to replace himself from the start, so yes someone would have succeeded him, and IMHO, it would have been hard to find ANYONE bad enough to screw up the momentum that was started, immediately afterwards. Heck, it took Nassar many years to really take things downward. I guess that minimalizes the positives Alan created, but I recall the cheerleading of Alan and the nonstop praising, only months after taking the helm. Sorry, but the legions of workers (myself included) who tirelessly gave to the company for nearly a decade prior, was just then showing as quality improvement & positive product rollouts, were the hero deserving all that credit -- not the new guy.

But I digress.
I am but a worker bee who should stand in awe of our leader (strong sarcasm intended).
 
#60 ·
When I wrote my comment I was thinking about the fuzzy recollection of recent events. But I kind of am with you in your original comment.

The real reason of the downfall of Detroit is beyond the facts because like you, I think that it was a giant cocktail of factors . . . it is the recipe in which we all here seem to have disagreements. There were the appalling legacy costs, the crazy concessions to unions, the unfair trade practices and zero reciprocity to America in foreign lands but also there were crazy expending on non automotive enterprises, mediocre product (late 70s, 80s and early 90s), complacency and arrogance (an Old GM trademark) and absolute contempt for the foreign competitors.

It was a humbling experience but we will all have better products in our garages and the country will have an auto industry it can be proud of again. And today like in 1903, the one that lead the way to prosperity was Ford and only Ford and if anyone wants to feel bitter about that . . . be my guest there is no rewriting this history.

It really was the perfect storm to hurt Detroit so much.

I think toyota is experiencing a similar one right now, with everything from Tsunami's and run away car images, to competition that came on strong. And although there were some bad management decisions in the past, including coverups....to hear someone lazily call Toyota's fall from grace as simply bad managment....is......well....ignorant.

Sorry, but I am ignorant about a lot of things, medicine, law, sewing, etc. Nothing wrong with the fact that we simply can't know all things about everything.
I take ZERO umbrage at someone declaring that fact to me.
Crazy business we are in.
 
#62 ·
#63 ·
It really was the perfect storm to hurt Detroit so much.

I think toyota is experiencing a similar one right now, with everything from Tsunami's and run away car images, to competition that came on strong. And although there were some bad management decisions in the past, including coverups....to hear someone lazily call Toyota's fall from grace as simply bad managment....is......well....ignorant.

Sorry, but I am ignorant about a lot of things, medicine, law, sewing, etc. Nothing wrong with the fact that we simply can't know all things about everything.
I take ZERO umbrage at someone declaring that fact to me.
Crazy business we are in.
Count me in, I am not going to argue any of that.
Bill Ford Sr.
He gave up his seat in 2005.
Oh, see? I had no idea he had any instrumental part in the drafting of Ford's recovery plan
 
#64 ·
^ Not only was I there for that 17K employee reveal of the future of Ford, but I think I spot myself in the crowd :)

I vividly recall this video, when Alan was only with the company a few months. It was a reveal of years of hard work, and I recall the anticipation for all these hot new products and recognition for growing quality, and I also recall Alan getting praised for it shortly after.

Sorry, but he did NOTHING to deserve that praise. The stuff he had his hand in back then, is only now getting revealed. Except for maybe renaming the Taurus. Big whoop.

But, that said, I still think he is doing a great job.
 
#65 ·
^ Not only was I there for that 17K employee reveal of the future of Ford, but I think I spot myself in the crowd :)

I vividly recall this video, when Alan was only with the company a few months. It was a reveal of years of hard work, and I recall the anticipation for all these hot new products and recognition for growing quality, and I also recall Alan getting praised for it shortly after.

Sorry, but he did NOTHING to deserve that praise. The stuff he had his hand in back then, is only now getting revealed. Except for maybe renaming the Taurus. Big whoop.

But, that said, I still think he is doing a great job.
What about the Focus?
 
#68 ·
...Yes-imho, Uncle Bill got the product renaissance rolling before Mr. M. was hired; and the LOAN TOO...
Who's uncle Bill?
"Uncle Bill" is a term of endearment I use for Bill Ford Jr.
His father's tenure leading Fomoco is a bit before my time - in the sense of when I starting following Fomoco on the web as opposed to 'just' liking their products' DNA the best.
And I didn't intend any confusion - thought it was clear by the "and the LOAN TOO" which was finalized VERY shortly after Mr. M. joined the company - ie. imho it was in the works Before Mr. M. was hired.

... Bill Jr. ... was looking for someone to replace himself from the start, so yes someone would have succeeded him, and IMHO, it would have been hard to find ANYONE bad enough to screw up the momentum that was started, immediately afterwards... I guess that minimalizes the positives Alan created
imho, quote:
...and 3 - Bill Ford Jr. is still the 'head architect' of what gets built, ie sets the Goal.
Mr. M. is the general contractor & 'System(s) Lord', ie HOW things get done. If Mr. M. wasn't hired, Fomoco would NOT be surviving without someone ELSE filling his role of Captain of the Team + Coach + rule maker + cheerleader ...+ ...+ ...+
does not minimalize Mr. M's role. Changing the WAY a large corp. does business is a HUGE undertaking imho. In fact, what I wrote was meant to indicate that Mr. M. is imho very likely the Best at what he does - - I just don't go along with the/some claims that he's the sole/main reason for Fomoco's turn around.
My affection and admiration for Bill Jr. feels that HE is routinely minimalized just because he doesn't have Mr. M's skill-set in addition to his own.

&
...Sorry, but the legions of workers (myself included) who tirelessly gave to the company for nearly a decade prior, was just then showing as quality improvement & positive product rollouts, were the hero deserving all that credit -- not the new guy.

But I digress.
I am but a worker bee who should stand in awe of our leader (strong sarcasm intended).
I certainly didn't mean to minimalize the enormous contributions of the workers, The TEAM.
Apologies if somehow it came across that way thru omission.
 
#70 ·
Great discussion. Wingsnut, I understand your passion for Ford as you were one of the many who worked to get them back to prominence with their cars. As an outsider, I'm sure I don't even have a clue of what it took to turn that corner. I benefit from having higher quality of domestic cars to choose from.
Personally, Lincolns are out of my price range, although I hope for great success for the MKZ. The Fusion unveiling, however, is very much an anticipated event. Let's hope that 5 years from now, or sooner, that Lincoln is a major player and can match cars with anyone.
 
#71 ·
Thanks carfan, indeed it was a difficult time, but worth it in the end.

New fusion looks great. Imagine the evos concept in front with lts of mondeo in the back.
I am most excited about next edge, which IMHO is the hottest style coming from ford.
Yeah, we have come a long way, but I bet we are not half way there.

Stay tuned.
 
#72 ·
I found a quote to start me off on a return to the GM side of the original topic
in the BusinessWeek article MKII posted
Earl Hesterberg, former marketing chief at both Ford Europe and Ford North America and now CEO of auto retailer Group 1 Automotive, says: "Turning it over to an outsider and getting a fresh perspective are both good things. An outsider may have more success in aggressive cost cutting, but at the end of the day, Ford needs to revitalize its product offering and brand image."​
imho here's a strong contrast between Mr. M's Fomoco and Bob Lutz's GM (if not Ackerman's, dunno) in how I would phrase the new product+image part as "At the end of the day" what really counts is being able to do it over and Over and OVER ...imho.

IIRC pre-MB Chrysler was said to be very good at 'hail mary' saves but just weren't capable of consistently excellent product development
&
this is where the new organization at Fomoco has a much better chance of a "Science" of replicating results leading to sustained success
than having to rely on Lutz-GM's vagaries (& Luck) of "Art" ...imho
 
#75 ·
I might be a little behind in the conversation because I was too busy at work today to respond during lunch. So anyway, here we go....

The best revenge in the FoMoCo v GM battle is "actions speak louder than words". Meaning do whatever it takes to make Lincoln not only better than Cadillac but exceed in everything as well. If it means offering a special tuned EcoBoost H.O or whatever, just do it. This will send the message load and clear. Also Keep in mind that Cadillac wasn't abused to the point that Lincoln has been over the past 11 years or so when Ford owned PAG. With all that behind us Lincoln is starting from the bottom and working its way back to the top.(look at what the Ford division had 5 years ago vs now as an example) Yes we want a V-8. Yes we want RWD. Yes we want something to blow the V-Series away. Yes we want a stunning coupe. Yes we want a world-class big sedan/coupe to take on, well the world. I agree 1000 % on all the above. Just thinking but is the soon to be released "Z" platform able to spin off something to compete with the ATS or would Mustang make a better donor being a C sedan isn't going to happen?

Back in the the 1970's and 1980's didn't Ford offer vehicles in the "inbetween" size that offers a little more room/ comfort/options standard than the competition? I don't know if this would work today being model availability is more limited than way back. These days we only have the choice of a few sedans and SUV's and not the full mix across the board. I guess that's where the MKS and LWB MKS could come into play. The same could work with the Z to reach a wider group of buyers.
 
#76 ·
guilty


tho my puter hasn't gotten used to their new software yet :yikes:
what's your username over there, LincolnFanFl?

edit
actually there's a few of us there like Andrew L & BORG & of course nsap...
It's CaddyFanFL - I know, I'm not very creative....but both user-names tell the truth. There are some nice cars out there from both companies..;)

What I noticed on the GM-board is that the atmosphere seems to be a bit more hostile towards anything in relation to Ford than it is towards GM on this forum. That is quite interesting. The discussion over here seems less emotional and more based on facts which I certainly prefer.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top