Kris Kolman

Edmunds Insideline had some interesting numbers in their story http://www.insideline.com/ford/c-max-hybrid/2013/2013-ford-c-max-hybrid-outsells-toyota-prius-v-in-october.html 3,182 C-Max sales compared to 2,769 Prius-v sales, but the "classic" Prius far outsells the -v. As such total Prius sales were 11,008... Which indicates that while the C-Max is an excellent replacement for the Escape hybrid the bulk of hybrid sales are in compact cars. As such I would think Ford wants to continue hybrid market penetration a Focus 5-door hybrid (regular and plug-in) to go along with the full electric model.

Understand that... Was just pointing out how well the T6 Ranger could fit as a Bronco platform/frame doner... And being a SUV/passenger vehicle it would be able to be imported without the chicken tax. Would still have to be federalized, and would have to have a far significant international following, but could work... maybe... In talking about the F150 you must remember that you are talking about a 2+2, which is more aligned to the SuperCab and its 133.3 in Wheelbase. But even so if you put the axle centerline to the rear of the SuperCab you are talking right on size of the '78-89 fullsized Bronco... ~104 in wheelbase. It all comes down to a question of easier to build, fullsized USA built, vs more targeted appeal, midsized import... Not sure which one I'd say would be more successful in terms of ROI.

Once again look at the specs, not off "feel".... The T6 frame could easily be the basis for a back-to-basics Bronco along the lines of the classic '66-77. T6 as currently made is long compared to a 2-door offroader like the Wrangler, but that can easily be corrected as the extra length is under the pickup bed. And the width is right in line with the Wrangler. '66-77 Bronco: 92 in Wheelbase and 71.6 in Width '72-83 Jeep CJ: 83.5 in Wheelbase and 68.5 in Width Current Wrangler 2-door: 95.4 in Wheelbase and 73.7 in Width Current Wrangler 4-door: 116 in Wheelbase and 73.9 in Width Current T6 Ranger: 127 in Wheelbase and 72.8 in Width The T6 Ranger wheelbase could be shortened a good 2-ft if it was made into a 2-door off-roader, wheel center under the rear seats. That would put right about the same size as the classic 2-door Wrangler. Of course I'm assuming the T6 frame and manufacturing was designed for multiple wheelbases... I'm guessing that is likely with strong rumors of a T6 based Everest (international traditional BOF SUV).

F-150 large engine is available in lower trim levels to support commercial buyers (work truck), and as such isn't applicable

There is talk of Ford working on a 2.3L 4-cyl EB and a 2.5L & 2.7L 6-cyl EB to close the gap you identified. In doing so Ford to move to a fully EB lineup: 1.0EB up thru 3.5EB.

The important part of that qoute is, "The company... views the challenges the industry faces as more structural than cyclical in nature." I'm certain others on this board has been seeing similar statements from Marchionne and others over the last year as the EU markets have suffered one body blow after another. I consider those earlier words the rapid pull back of water prior to the Tsunami coming to drowning you. Fords announcement is the glimmer of the large wave in the distance, and others will soon join it. This has been a couple years and I see VW and GM being alone in trying to "wait it out"... For example the Peugeot family has accepted a $14.9 bil government bailout of the family company, and the union has openly discussed a 10% cut to staff.

Word is that the three plant closure results in 18% reduction, increasing production efficiency from 65% to 80%... Sounds like Ford is expecting the EU market to remain stagnate, not drop further, or there would be more closures. http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/news/article.asp?docKey=600-201210250812APDIGITLFINANCE__EU_Britain_Ford-1&params=timestamp%7C%7C10/25/2012%208:12%20AM%20ET%7C%7Cheadline%7C%7CFord%20cutting%201%2C500%20UK%20jobs%20as%20Europe%20losses%20grow%7C%7CdocSource%7C%7CAP%20Digital%7C%7Cprovider%7C%7CACQUIREMEDIA%7C%7Cbridgesymbol%7C%7CUS;F&ticker=F

That is simplistic... Not all of Europe is equal. UK was smart enough to stay out of the whole Euro mess and maintain the pound. Also while under pressure due to its reliance on exports the UK economy has been on the better side when compared to other European nations. And I don't think you are recognizing Ford's gamble by closing its last remaining UK assembly plants. This could threaten Ford's largest EU market. If the UK market revolts Ford could find itself in a dragged down the hole of needing more and more closures. That will all drag on Ford as a whole as it takes 2-4 years to makeup for the costs to close a plant. Hopefully by keeping the engine plants and technical center that won't happen.

This is impressive as the Flex isn't marketed as a high volume vehicle... It is marketed around its quirkiness and high equipment. Earlier I got convinced of the value of the Flex in the lineup, and those who did so are right. Although it sounds weird the Flex can be thought along the same liens as a "halo-car"... Not in the traditional sense, but a car with lots of good word of mouth that helps shape a good opinion of the Ford brand as a whole. And the high ATPs allow it to do this while still being a low volume seller. In this regard I got to wonder if Ford should think about continuing it... Unlike rumor that it is will soon be discontinued. Could the next Flex continue on as a exclusive top hat on the upcoming S-Max MPV? S-Max is practically the same type of vehicle, minivan and utility alternative, and the Fusion/Monedo based powertrain options would emphasize its mpg advantages. Wasn't the Flex originally supposed to be ont he old Fusion/Edge platform, but there were some issues that drove it to D3?

Ok, that makes sense... If we are talking PI and PIU moving to a new platform on 7-8 year centers I don't see any issues the fleet buyer. I was thinking 4-5 years, which would be a problem as the government patrol fleets invest a heck of a lot of money into specialized and maintenance equipment. And with current budget woes for all government agencies Ford would risk being turned into a scapegoat if those with the purse strings feel jerked around. On the other point... I guess I got confused about where the Flex and MKT are produced. I could see the 40k in Flex and MKT production volume being taken up somewhat by increased Edge exports (i.e. recent Europe announcement). That still leaves Chicago and "Aviator" sales needing to make up 80k in Taurus and MKS sales. If the Edge and MKX sales ratio holds that is going to be difficult as that would indicate a 30k ceiling.

Call me confused about how Ford does this and keeps enough D3/D4 volume on PI and PIU alone. The totality of the patrol cars sold in NA are around 70k, and Ford doesn't have nearly the market domination they had with the CV. So either they are going to jerk around and potentially upset police agencies by changing to a new platform, or other products need to remain on D3/D4. In order to make the PI and PIU business case healthy the Explorer as the platform volume leader at a minimum needs to stay. Even then it will be a struggle for Chicago and D3/D4 to remove the ~120k sales per year that represent the Taurus, MKS, Flex, and MKT. As for those that think the new for '11 Explorer is old in the tooth... Have you compared the rest of the market: Dodge Durango reintroduced in '11, along side the Explorer Volkswagen Touareg introduced in '04, updated in '11 Toyota Highlander introduced in '01, updated in '08 GMC Acadia introduced in '07, and little changed Honda Pilot introduced in '03, updated in '09

Wondered if this was all a marketing move, but a business move... By splitting off Lincoln as a subsidiary would Ford have business advantages with its international push? Perhaps to untangle Lincoln from any fixed agreements the Ford brand has in certain markets. The subsidiary doesn't have to be any more than the marketing and selling side of the house, with the product development and manufacturing remaining "in-house".

Exactly... The budget/value car is for emerging markets, not NA or Europe. Remember Ford is a global company and some of the products out there won't see the light of day outside South America, Africa, India, and China.

There was word earlier from Ford that they were working to develop a One-Ford value platform... My guess is that the Figo is part of that plan by adding production to Brazil and creating a sedan version.

4 new vehicles... MKZ was the first from the team... Announced compact concept for LA is obviously the second... Leaving? Explorer and Escape based SUVs?

Obviously no one who wrote this ever worked with cryogenics... Liquid nitrogen continues to boil and as such doesn't stick around for long (even in vacuum jacketed tanks) and if leaked onto non-heated steel will break the steel (due to thermal stress concentrations). Let alone the issues of needing specialized mechanical and electrical systems to work in the super cold environment. Stored energy might be similar, but the collateral impacts make it impracticable.

Ford of India is getting ready to introduce a refreshed Figo with an emphasis of increasing quality of their value car. http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2012/10/15/ford-launches-face-lifted-figo-in-india/

Your showing a misunderstanding of the government customer. Agencies buying PIs are also buying a series of communications and computer equipment for each car. This equipment in some federal applications can be as expensive as the car itself. They also run their own maintenance shops and no doubt needed to invest into new equipment unique to the PI. These agencies aren't about buying the newest and coolest thing out there. For Ford to change a handful of years after they made such a investment you will see a lot of them dropping Ford the next go around. The government customer is a lot different different than you or I. When they invest in a certain direction they expect that company to support them for the long haul. Which means a far slower development cycle than the retail segment.

One has to consider lots of factors when looking at the engine lineup... Yes an EB4 could come close to the NA V6, and what it won't make up in power will make it up in lower front end weight. But will the EB4 come in at a higher cost than the NA V6? If so will Ford sell the NA V6 as the entry model, and the EB4 as a fuel efficiency cost+ option. Now we all have confidence that the V8 will stay around, and as such many are saying "why then install a EB6?". The reason is that in international markets the turbo-6 will have much, much large market appeal. I only look at Australia where the Falcon V8 is still there for traditional buyers, but the turbo-6 has eclipsed it. I see the same dynamics begin in place and as such maybe Ford should sell both the turbo-6 and the V8? These decisions aren't about how much power one mill can get or that, but marketing dynamics. As such I'm throwing a towel over all of it: EB4, NA V6, EB6, and V8... But could see one or two not happen. What do you think becomes of the limited high end engine? EcoBoost Coyote maybe?

It will be interesting to see where Lincoln goes with the design language when it comes to SUVs. I haven't like the bow wave look when applied to the MKT... Too ponderous and will only get worse for the more upright MK-Explorer and Navigator. But then I really like the Aviator Concept and first look MKX with its 1961 Continental inspired design language.

If a badge engineering job along the lines as the current Navigator, then yes it is cheep... But does that makes sense in the future Lincoln lineup. And if not do the economics support more extensive modifications? I too would love to see a Range Rover type vehicle in the Ford/Lincoln lineup, but I also see it as far away as a BMW 3-Series competitor. The Range Rover Sport is actually a midsized vehicle similar in size to the Grand Cherokee (based on a shrunken Discovery). The Navigator is a much larger vehicle and I don't see in the same mold.

No so sure about those power numbers first, and lack of a V6 second... I've been expecting the following: 2.0L EB ~260 hp 3.7L V6 ~320 hp 3.7L EB ~380 hp 5.0L V8 ~400 hp

I'm with you there... I would not put a compact MPV in the mold of the C-Max high on the list either. Was only countering that it would provide value... Not as high up on a compact Escape based SUV... For me I would put the lack of a legitimate large SUV as the most critical situation with Lincoln... A true SUV based off the Explorer to replace the MKT outright has to be number one on Lincoln's priority list right now. I would actually look at a single vehicle to replace both the MKT and the Navigator in the lineup as the days of a old-school half-ton luxury SUV seem in the past. Instead of continuing to chase the dwindling old-school sales with the Navigator an Explorer based MKT could rebrand the model to take on the Audi Q7, Infiniti JX, and Mercedes GL directly. I would let the black taxi market be served by a D3 based MKS... While I know many are wishing for a change in tact I worry about the business case for PI only D3 production. Seems to me there is too much production moving off the Chicago line and Ford is going to find itself quickly in a poor position just as it makes a large commitment to D3 thru the PI. Maybe a short and long wheelbase MKS should be retained to avoid that situation. A long wheelbase MKS could be a good black taxi and could have some traction in China.

It will be a good day for the area when Ford is able to sell off the land for redevelopment as it was for Atlanta when the retired plant there was turned into Porsche's headquarters. There are too many abandoned facilities nationwide that become eye-sores... Please no more Packard Plants.

Primary market... Its their only real market (yes I know they sell in the middle east but that doesn't count). Perhaps the isolation is the problem... Lack of a international market results in lack of imagination. And to suggest that Lincoln simply airdrop the NA market internationally doesn't seem wise. Its my belief that for Lincoln to make this move internationally successful they need to consider these markets in their entire product plan. The question is could a MK-CMax be part a valuable item in the international product line? I contend that when considering those markets just such a vehicle would make sense... And I go back to the examples out there from established luxury makes that Lincoln will be competing with. And would be a fairly easy vehicle to make happen due to significant parts sharing with the MK-Escape.