Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by akirby

  1. 9 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:


    Akirby, what financial metric would you like to focus on, so that in 2 years we can see if Ford has achieved the growth you are anticipating?  I'm willing to print this page off and tack it to the wall so we can remember to re-visit your prediction.


    Maybe one from this list?   https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/f/financials




    Net income, EBITDA and profit margin.

  2. 16 minutes ago, FordBuyer said:


    Based on one quarter? Look, not that many years ago, Ford easily sold 260,00/month and had 4 to 5 nameplates in the top 10 sales race. Now they have one. Now a good month for Ford is 185,000/month. Ford has shrunk and still rumoring about closing more plants and no new plants on the horizon.

    Why are you so obsessed with sales volume?  Oh that’s right you’re still pissed they canceled sedans.


    300k fusion or focus sales are worthless if they’re not generating profit.  Remember when GM went bankrupt?  They were #1 in volume. 

    Growth in Ford’s case is adding brand new models in new market segments.  And most should generate a lot more profit than the ones they cancelled.  If you can’t understand the difference between growth in profit and models and market segments as opposed to sales volume then I don’t know how to explain it.

  3. 56 minutes ago, passis said:

    Something is wrong when VW can sell a 7 seats crossover based on its latest technologies, as is the case of the Tiguan Allspace, for less than Ford can sell a 5 seater with questionable qualities manifactured with lower costs in China...

    That depends - how many are each one selling?  I mean, if they’re able to sell them for more money that’s a good thing.  If they’re priced too high they won’t sell very many.

  4. 53 minutes ago, probowler said:

    Eventually ford has to start trying to sell more vehicles, they can't cut forever. Adding the new Broncos is a good start, and the Mach-E we'll see how that goes, but eventually Ford is going to run out of room for new types of trucks and SUVs.

    At that point if Ford has the available resources to invest in new car development and pursue car buyers, why not start making and selling those vehicles again?  By ignoring that segment you're just denying yourselves profit and market share.

    Look at the number of vehicles Ford will have vs the competition.  Or look at Ford in 2 years vs Ford 10 years ago.  They’re not shrinking.

  5. 11 hours ago, chicken said:

    What do you guys think pricing is going to look like compared to sticker.   I am seeing RAM discounting their pickups heavily off of list right now, seems to be in the 20-25% range off msrp.   As much as I would like to buy a new f150 later this year, if it’s list or above list I may go with the RAM.  Thanks 

    No way it will be anywhere close to MSRP.  It will be very close to the 2020 pricing.  Maybe slightly lower rebates initially but not much.  If you’re concerned about price wait until the 2020 leftover inventory gets low and they should have bigger rebates.

  6. 4 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

    Instead of going into technology, stick with something you've done before, like farm tractor and class 8 truck!  Or anything with wheels, like mass transit, buses and start electrifying it all along the way!  But just thinking, is there any overhead with tech?  I don't think so.  Maybe that's why Google and Apple etc are so profitable!

    There is a lot of overhead.  Software requires developers and developers require compute and storage infrastructure.  It requires less up front investment especially if you use public cloud but there is still significant overhead.

    It really comes down to how much profit can be generated over the long term.  It’s always somewhat of a crapshoot.


  7. 3 hours ago, fabfordeb said:

    Still love the new Bronco, but the Moab video of the Bronco climbing up the rock actually supports the SFA argument.  SFA would have allowed the drivers front tire to drop down and be on the rock giving both front tires traction, while the Bronco did it with only the passenger front tire having traction.  The front locker made it work.

    The fact that it still worked bone stock says it all.  Whether something else would have worked better is somewhat irrelevant.  They didn’t even air down the tires.  

  8. 13 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

    Any time either Trump or Biden opens their mouth it's always alphabet soup of nonsense 


    Or just about any of the high profile folks on both sides.   Honestly, we just need to clean house and start over with folks who aren't obsessed with beating the other team and who can actually meet somewhere in the middle.


    Rand Paul seems to be the only one with any semblance of doing what's right without playing political games.

  9. 8 minutes ago, PREMiERdrum said:

    Mulally's 4 "hallmarks" for new product development definitely got things moving in the right direction, but the industry was in such a different place 11 years ago that it's difficult to compare. 


    Mulally was *absolutely* what Ford needed at the time, and his ability to focus on both the organizational structure and the product portfolio - which were both in shambles - saved Ford from a similar fate as GM and Chrysler.


    Knowing what I know about corporate management, I think his biggest achievement was changing the management culture.   I remember the story of his first staff meeting where the head of Europe and the head of North America not only didn't work together they wouldn't even share financial data or be honest about problems that were occurring.  They also had huge binders that their staff probably worked on full time.    Mulally told them to come back next week with only one sheet of paper and to be prepared to share everything with everybody.   The amazing part is that his predecessor allowed that to happen.  

  10. 49 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:


    I call BS on your comment on Mulally - there's too much revisionist history around here on Mulally lately.


    I thought Mulally did a great job - I wasn't blaming him at all.   And I could probably concede that the 2013 Fusion was BIC.  But I'm having a hard time remembering any other vehicles developed between 2008 and 2014 that truly went all out to "own the segment" like they're doing with Bronco.   Certainly not the 2011 Explorer or CMAX.


    I think it all comes down to how much investment they're willing to make in both time and money.   And maybe Bronco is an exception because it's one of the 3 Icons now with F150 and Mustang and it's a sub brand.   I think that's also driven by the focus on higher profit margins.