Ford Inside News banner

21 - 36 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
It is quite possible that Ford did **** up, I have said this before. Time will tell for sure, and killing the cars thing was a cat that got out of the bag, not exactly something they announced internally. But I happen to agree that if they kept on the same path without a bit of radical change, then no change would come and shareholder value needle would not budge much, if at all. This same path would assume that pumping millions into making the Fiesta and Focus the best products in the world, yet margins remain exactly where they are, all while volumes continue to drop. Where is the logic in that? Gone today is the thinking that you offer them a cheap product, and keep them coming back with bigger, higher margin products as they grow families, etc. People switch brands like underwear. So again, that argument is up in smoke too. And let's not forget how consumers today have so many transportation options, to where kids don't even hurry to get their drivers licence - especially if they have an Uber app that takes them where they want to go with no investment. And finally, and this IMHO is the biggest factor that is already transforming Ford internally - electrification and autonomy. A complete upheaval is beginning to take place internally, driven by what our showroom will look like in just a few years from now.

Anyway, I have no problem calling out Ford when they **** up. I do think that Fusion should remain a bit longer than planned, and not including Focus Active was a mistake.....but these again are just opinions. WTF do I know? Ford clearly looks at the long game, where I don't, so there is that too.

meh, we are all just prognosticating here, I respect everyone's opinion who takes the time to share it, but I do have mine too.
The use of "white space" vehicles at the initial unveiling of the program both intrigued and annoyed me, the longer that went on the more I suspects it was Ford's Fall back plan for Focus and Fusion after everything else was in place, the kind of C2 add ins possible once places like Hermosillo and Cuautitlan have the majority of their production space allocated to new Utilities and hybrid/EVs.


The stupid part with cancelling Ford's cars is that they set them up for the chop by doing rather poor/economical refreshes that couldn't hold buyer attention and once the Titanium buyers fled, Ford began to panic because the equally old Utilities weren't growing sales as quickly as expected, sure they held their own and covered most of the lost car sales but It gets me that the deal breaker for Ford was not enough production space for Utes and cars....a situation created by cancelling San Louis Potosi.


I think that there's room for all vehicles but Jim Hackett was waiting until fresh designs could be done more efficiently and more quicklu than previously. I hope whatever they came up with is more effective in the market place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,940 Posts
Spending millions if not billions on keeping their older sedan platforms fresher would have helped the sales needle move, sure, but not the margin needle. And ROI would suck even worse. I don't know, I think they know they made mistakes trying to predict the market, and they are now just trying to really make a big change going forward. And let's face it, nothing is final forever, as trends come and go. I still have hopes they will bring out a very sedan-ish profile BEV in the coming years, if not beyond, on an all new platform that can support it without investment in past history ICE platforms. I am by nature, optimistic that way. It is just a better way to live and feel, then negativity that stems from uncertainty.

Happy Easter everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
... I still have hopes they will bring out a very sedan-ish profile BEV in the coming years, if not beyond, on an all new platform that can support it without investment in past history ICE platforms. I am by nature, optimistic that way. It is just a better way to live and feel, then negativity that stems from uncertainty.

Happy Easter everyone.
I believe that Ford can produce a sedan-ish high-battery-range PHEV with CD6 in the interim without waiting for a new dedicated BEV platform. If they make it a Lincoln, make it BIG, make it stunning and make it luxurious, Ford could give us a high-margin car sooner without waiting for its BEV.

I'm optimistic by nature also. I believe that compelling product can build - even jump-start - a brand's reputation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,700 Posts
If Ford sold their low-margin cars at sufficient sales volumes they would not have been axed. People vote with their dollars.
Pretty much what the Japanese brands are doing.

Having sub-$20K Ford models would get more people into the brand early (first car). If the product is good they'll probably upgrade to another model within the Ford family.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Having sub-$20K Ford models would get more people into the brand early (first car). If the product is good they'll probably upgrade to another model within the Ford family.[/QUOTE]

This is a good example of "Loss Leader" strategy. This lower prices gets the consumer in the door, then they usually buy additional, or higher cost items. Grocery stores do this on a weekly basis. Many car buyers are price sensitive. If they feel that they can only afford a certain amount, then that's what they shop for. Once you get the customer in the door, they usually end up buying higher than they originally intended, with the benifits of creative financing. Ford can do this with just one vehicle priced below $20K and even if they don't make a profit on that vehicle, they will make it up on the other vehicles. And hopefully you get a Ford customer for life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,674 Posts
IMO, Ford, affordable, & quick to showroom floor makes me think of the cheap-ass junk they offered back in the eighties. It is exactly what I expected to start happening again under the Hatchet man. When the new CEO does not speak about being best in class in anything except "Smart vehicles" it will not be any surprise to me that this "affordable" whatever it is will be a beauty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
In the end, this announcement makes little sense just as the previous announcement did. It's as if Ford is saying "Lazarus, arise," only moments after pulling the knife out of his ribs.

Implicit in this announcement is that Ford is going to fund a new affordable platform, a strategy that is questionable for ROI. New platforms, what Ford should have initiated more than a decade ago, might have prevented this mess. If Ford intends the new affordable vehicles will rest on the heavy, antiquated CD4 (Oh noooooo!), then the jury might wish to stay out. It's going to be really interesting to see what comes out of this initiative.

In the end, this much is true for me; I have little to no confidence in the leadership of Bill Ford and Jim Hackett. You can throw in Jim Farley also. These guys are flying on instruments without a rating. The real heroes at Ford are the hard working car-guys & gals who are holding strong in design, engineering, production and distribution. I - a potential customer for a vehicle that Ford hasn't made for decades - salute you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
IMO, Ford, affordable, & quick to showroom floor makes me think of the cheap-ass junk they offered back in the eighties. It is exactly what I expected to start happening again under the Hatchet man. When the new CEO does not speak about being best in class in anything except "Smart vehicles" it will not be any surprise to me that this "affordable" whatever it is will be a beauty.
Thank you! I hear the irony in the word "beauty."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
I have beaten up Jim from the start, and will continue until I see real fruit. But Bill Jr. has my loyalty and always will.
But once again, they seek real change, which requires drastic change. Only a fool believes you can keep doing what you did and expect real change.
That is true. Change means taking calculated risks. My only concern is the track record of the persons who decide what those risks will be. IMO, Bill Ford has make only two decisions that could be called hits. He fired himself as CEO and he hired Alan Mulally. Every other decision has resulted in put-outs (No, Bill Ford cannot take credit for F-150 and Mustang success.). The theme of this thread is just the latest decision.

Now Ford is investing heavily in autonomous vehicles and BEVs. Those are certainly risks and risks whose outcomes are not assured. I applaud them for that. R&D are necessary costs of doing business. As Ford finally discovered, appeasing financial stakeholders by dialing back R&D wasn't working. Ford still has a current business to take care of; they still sell ICE vehicles as their bread and butter. It's great that Ford is really good at engine technology but its their product decisions that have been questionable.

Computer tech businesses know that the competition is aggressive and disruptive. Making vehicles is a tech business and always has been. R&D is key to keeping up and one-upping the competition; F-150 is proof of that. It was Bill Ford's decisions that led to establishing Ford's reputation of offering too little, too late when it comes to the rest of its lineup. I'm sorry but that is their reputation.

The current ICE pipeline looks OK but this see-saw over affordability is a real palm-plant. I truly hope that Ford can find a winning streak somewhere outside of big trucks. And yes, I would like to hear aspirations to be "best in class" from the top brass.

I'm hopeful but that's short of optimistic. Let's see what 2022 brings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,940 Posts
Bill Jr. is responsible for just about anything related to greening of the company, including factories, introducing hybrids, promoting low emissions beyond what even CAFE demanded, etc. He is genuine and cares about the planet and his employees -- enough where I saw real tears in his eyes when lives were lost. Can't think of any auto CEO's I can say all that for. Nobody can. I can find fault in ANY CEO anywhere. He is not perfect, but has done nothing to deserve negativity.

Alan was hired to fulfill Bill Jr's plan he architected, but more importantly, to cut jobs and close factories, because Bill did not have the heart..... and boy oh boy did Alan do that. He quickly took his payout and split. **** him. Cutting your way back to profit is hardly worth the praise he got.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
I know plenty of really nice guys who I wouldn't support for CEO or chairman. Bill the MBA really is a nice guy with a good heart but he's tasked with running an auto manufacturing business not managing his cousins' shareholder stakes. Product has to come first or customers will vote with their dollars.

Cutting back for profit is Bill Ford's strategy and you're right, Alan did what he was asked to do. But that strategy didn't change when Alan left. And the customers voted. They're not going to buy warmed-over sedan/hatches when other automakers are innovating. That's why these reactionary, ping-pong announcements are so disheartening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
First you say you will
And then you won't.

Then you say you do
And then you don't.

You're undecided now
So what are you gonna do?


Music maestro!
 
21 - 36 of 36 Posts
Top