Nels Nelson

From Bloomberg: Ford has reported monthly sales gains only three times this year, and analysts had expected an increase last month due to weak sales a year earlier. November's results probably ensured Ford's 11th consecutive annual decline in U.S. market share. ``I can't recall Chrysler ever outselling Ford,'' said Dennis Virag, president of Automotive Consulting Group in Ann Arbor, Michigan. ``It's very surprising and not good news for Ford.'' November was only the second month that Toyota, now third in the U.S. market, has outsold Ford. The sales report comes four days after Ford moved to bolster its finances, at least in part because it can no longer rely on increasing truck sales to drive profit. Ford said this week it's putting up most of its assets as collateral for $18 billion in new borrowings. The assets include everything from Ford's ``blue oval'' trademark to factories. The company said in a Nov. 29 regulatory filing that it expects to drain $17 billion of that over the next three years. ``Our focus is returning our business to profitability,'' Pipas said on the sales call. Sales rankings, he said, are ``not that important in the scheme of things.'' Company sales analyst George Pipas warned things may not get better next year. ``It'll be rare'' for Ford to post monthly sales gains in 2007, he said, citing the end of production of the Taurus sedan, which was bought by rental-car companies. ``We don't have anything that will make up for 175,000 fleet sales,'' he said. Ford, based in Dearborn, Michigan, deepened its fourth- quarter North American production cut to 22 percent and said it's slashing regional output by 14 percent in 2007's first quarter. Ford now plans to make 620,000 vehicles this quarter, 15,000 fewer than it estimated on Oct. 23 and compared with 793,000 a year earlier. Ford plans to build 750,000 cars and trucks in 2007's first quarter, a decline from 876,000 during the same period in 2006. The company previously estimated its North American output would be 8 percent to 12 percent lower in 2007's first half. Pipas said sales to rental-car companies and other fleet customers, which are generally less profitable than those to retail buyers, fell 17 percent. Sales to individuals slid 7 percent.

On the way to the Pure Stock Muscle Car Drags last month while driving past the Mercedes Benz Plant in Vance, Alabama where they assemble the ML and GL SUVs, I was passed by an M-Class badged as an ML 430CDI. Is this the same engine Dr. Z was touting as going in Jeeps and billed as the worlds cleanest burning diesel and if so will it go in other DCX products such as the Ram pickup?

The Mighty Mouse, H. Ross Perot, while on the board of GM refused to accept a company car. Instead he would go out and buy a car as any customer would by walking into a GM store. He would then report back to the board on his experiences. Apparently the board and Roger Smith didn't like what Ross was telling them. They found him irritating and bought him out to the tune of $700,000,000 in order to get rid of him.

Mike Shedlock at Global Economic Analysis does a brief financial analysis of Ford and concludes they are bankrupt. It may indeed be too late. http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

Good Doctor: Methinks you're the Speedzzter. The Walkabout gave you away. Good advice though and you have a knowledge of Ford much greater and deeper than most here. If I'm wrong, nevermind.

I first posted the same comment about the Edge/MKX back in April after checking them out at the New York Auto Show. The rear seat is uncomfortable for adults and here is the reason why. The Edge/MKX has a feature that allows you to fold down the rear seats from the rear hatch. There are two buttons on the rear quarter trim panel. The rear seat back is divided 60/40. By pushing these buttons, the seatbacks fold down creating a flat load floor. This is a nice feature in and of itself. But in order to create a flat load floor with the push of a button, they had to place the bottom seat cushion low to the floor. If the cushions were higher, the seat backs would stick up and would not lay flat. The rear seat is not uncomfortable if you’re short. If you’re tall, you’ll be uncomfortable as I was when I sat in the back. The back seat is more comfortable in the Escape/Mariner because the rear seat bottom is higher. In order to get a flat load floor in them you must fold the bottoms up against the front seats and then fold the seat back down. This process has more steps and takes more time but you have both a comfortable back seat and a flat load floor when the back seat is folded down. The rear seat comfort in the Edge/MKX was compromised in order to give them a pushbutton folding rear seat. Not a good compromise in my opinion. I would have preferred the Escape/Mariner method.

Interesting indeed and I agree for the most part. The CD3 cars may be selling well but the D3s are not. The D3s are selling at half of plant capacity and their sales are probably being stolen by the CD3s. Wasn't it Ford's strategy that these two products would replace the Taurus. At this point it would appear this strategy has been a failure. As for the Mustang, I find it ironic that some on this forum criticize those of us who feel that current Ford management lacks an appreciation for the company's history and heritage, particularly where Lincoln is concerned. But currently Ford's most successful car is its most "retro" car with a great heritage and displays the greatest appreciation for it.

Is the Edge going to sell for less than $23,000? That's what a Mazda dealer in my city is advertising CX-7s for.

The biggest complaint about the Edge and MKX will be the back seat which is uncomfortable for adults. It is too low to the floor. Anyone recall the what the biggest complaint about the Contour and Mystique was?

Car Design News' take on the Edge: "Touted as the Next Big Thing, Edge is Ford's bid to lead the crossover sector. Essentially a low-fat SUV, Edge has a long cabin, short bonnet and wheels pushed to the corners. In a market whose domestic products often lack the variety found in other markets such as Europe, Edge will be an interesting new option for American car buyers keen to stay patriotic. The taut linear theme of the exterior gives the car solidity with a well-judged relationship between cabin and engine volumes, though remains very pre-Iosis. The DRG features a three-bar grille becoming increasingly familiar in Ford's American range, even if the lower half of the headlamps seem marginally pinched. At the back, the screen is raked to further distance itself from larger SUV's, with lights appearing similar to the Skoda Octavia. Conceived and priced for mass appeal, the cost-cutting is apparent inside with exposed screw-heads and low-quality plastics on the centre console. Though intended to lead this new market, the Ford Edge may find the biggest threat comes from its more expressive stablemate: the Mazda CX-7."

The September issue of Automobile Magazine picks the '40 & '41 Lincoln Continental and the '61 Lincoln Continental as among the 25 most beautiful cars ever. What magazine ever picked a Lincoln as among the 25 best performance cars ever?

KinneticBrian, I don't own a Lincoln and I've never owned a Lincoln but I do own a Continental, a '56 Mark II. It has a 368 CID Y-Block and a four barrel carburetor affectionately referred to as the "Towering Inferno". I'm also a member of the Lincoln and Continental Owners Club. The point of my posts are that Lincoln is not known for its performance. Lincoln is about style, American Style. And boy does the Mark II have style. People point, they stare, they stop and tell me it is the most beautiful car they've ever seen. My favorite reaction is from BMW owners who try to act like they don't see it. But how can one ignore such presence. The obsession with performance is overblown. It's all about style and that is something the MKS just doesn't have. The people running Lincoln now just don't get it.

The Lincolns had been equipped with the 430 CID MEL V-8 since 1958. Why would they put any other engine in the '61 Lincoln Continental. And if they wanted to make sure it had the power to match its elegant looks why did they only use a two barrel carburetor. Again demonstrating that Lincoln was not interested in best in class performance, only good enough. As an aside when asked what was his favorite Ford, Carroll Shelby said that out of the more than 100 cars he has, if he could keep only one, it would be his '67 Lincoln Convertible.

The MKS with a twin turbo V-6 is a mistake. It is another example demonstrating that Lincoln is directionless. Lincoln is not a performance brand. It hasn't been one since the '52, '53 and '54 Lincolns of Carrera Panamericana fame. KineticBrian keeps saying how the Lincolns of the sixties outperformed Cadillac and Imperial. A road test of the 1961 model year Lincoln, Cadillac and Imperial in Motor Trend had the Cadillac accelerating to 60mph in 10.4 seconds, the Imperial in 10.5 seconds and the Lincoln a distant third in 12.9 seconds. In a test of 1962 models, the larger Cadillac Fleetwood accelerated to 60 in 10.8 seconds, the Imperial in 11.0 seconds and the Lincoln was third again at 12.4 seconds. In 1970, '71 and '72 Motor trend held an annual "King of the Hill" test between the Marks and the Eldorado. The Eldorado consistently outperformed the Marks but they always picked the Marks because they were more luxurious than the Eldorado. Lincoln will always be an also ran as far as performance is concerned. Especially in comparison to the "Ultimate Driving Machine". So why not go where Wolfgang Reitzle wanted Lincoln: American Luxury. This means distinctly American styling as displayed in the '02 Continental concept along with refined, effortless performance. It should, as the British say, be able to waft. This will not be the case with the twin turbo V-6. I have a '96 SHO and have stated in previous posts my admiration for this engine. It is a jewel. The 4.4 liter Yamaha installed in a D3 would have at least given Lincoln a contemporary, competitive product. One final comment, Audi installed a twin turbo 2.7 liter V-6 in the S6 and Allroad. In 2000, it was picked as a Ward's Ten Best. It put out 250 horsepower. Ward's only complaint, it was a pig when it came to fuel consumption.

V-6 + AWD Luxury Car = Acura RL = Failure How is Lincoln going to change the outcome of their equation?

"Ford is very dependent on the F-Series and large swings in the market will hurt them the most. This was going to happen either way, that's why Ford is building its non-truck products to offset decline. " From the Wall Street Journal yesterday: "But Ford's problem isn't just that its SUVs and pickups aren't selling as they used to. It's that the cars and crossovers it sells aren't reaping competitive - or in some cases any - profits."

From the New York Times: "A Car-Sales Indicator Suggests a Recession Is Here or Already Near" http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/19/business/19charts.html

From the Wall Street Journal: "While Ford anticipated continued erosion in the SUV segment, Mr. Pipas said, falling demand in the large pickup truck segmant over the past four months has been a surprise. He said gasoline prices have led consumers away from Ford's best-selling pickup trucks, long a key source of profits for the auto maker, representing about 25% of Ford's global volume." "But Ford's problem isn't just that its SUVs and pickups aren't selling as they used to. It's that the cars and crossovers it sells aren't reaping competitive - or in some cases any - profits."

"Name one midsized body on frame SUV that is better then the Explorer...give us reasons why it is better. Better suspension? chassis? transmission? engine? rear seating? towing???" So what if the Explorer is best in class. From the wall Street Journal this morning: "We are trying to figure out how and how much to advertise new produsts (i.e. Expedition and Navigator) that are going into a segment that may be DOA, " said a ford manager familiar with the Way Forward plan. "We don't want to duplicate what happened with the Explorer." What happened to the Explorer? Even with a redesigned version sales are down 33%.

Ford sells its cars and trucks to its dealers. If Ford is cutting production, it must mean they are not receiving orders from their dealers. This must mean things are getting ugly on the front line. Which means: "It's the economy, stupid".

"Ford is pursuing a similar strategy with the Five Hundred/Freestyle--sales are not as high as the company optimistically predicted" So Richard, are you willing to concede that Peter DeLorenzo was right about the 500.

I have a '68 Mercury Cougar 7.0 Litre GT-E. For those of you unfamiliar with this particular model, the GT-E was the last model that Ford installed the 427 in at the factory. It was a RPO option package that cost $1300 and included a unique hood scoop, grill, taillights, side trim and two tone paint with the lower body painted argent and the upper body available in 11 different colors. It was available on both the base model and the XR7. It was assembled in Dearborn along with the Mustang which came in coupe, fastback and convertible models equipped with engines ranging from the 200 CID 6 cylinder to the 428 CobraJet. But the 427 could only be had in the GT-E. How many GT-Es with the 427 did Dearborn assemble for 1968? A whopping 357 How much is a GT-E worth today? They change hands rarely and mostly privately. The last one sold I'm aware of went for $125,000. You want me to believe that 40 years ago Ford could assemble 357 units of a special model in a plant that could build a couple hundred thousand cars, but today they can't do the same with the Shelby GT in one of their so-called flexible plants. In the name of greater efficiency, they must farm the work out. This puts the "dic" in ridiculous.

Advertising Age says the new Lincoln ads are perfect: perfectly vacuous, perfectly pompous and perfectly pointless. http://adage.com/columns/article?article_id=111127

I was at a conference in New York in 2000 when Joseph Philippi, an auto analyst for one of the Wall Street investment firms, said that Ford was going to buy BMW. It was considered highly likely at the time. This was before the Explorer/Firestone calamityand subsequent financial hemorrhage.

It's only going to get worse. Why, you may ask? To quote James Carville: "It's the economy, stupid". The economy is slowing and concerns are growing that it may be heading for a recession by the first quarter of "07. Statistics for June indicate that the market for residential housing has entered a recession. With house prices predicted to decline in many markets, this will put an end to the house as ATM through the use of home equity withdrawals. Many have used this source to purchase new cars. Furthermore, estimates of as high as 30% of those with auto loans are upside down. An recession will affect all of the manufacturers, but the weakened condition of Ford and GM will make it worse for them. You can smell the fear.