fuzzymoomoo

There isn't enough rail cars to handle the shipping demand of the auto industry as a whole.

The funniest thing I took from that was JoMama de Aspirin

You missed the point. There's not enough rail cars to handle the demand. It's also effecting GM and Chrysler too.

Too bad neither plant in Kentucky is set up to build the Focus of Fiesta. Part of the reason for the shortage on inventory too isn't just at the assembly plants, but with shipping. Most of the cars are shipped via rail and there is a nationwide shortage of auto haulers and motive power to pull said cars. The problem is exacerbated by Ford having to modify a bunch of railcars to fit the tall bodied Transit vans. Until either more autoracks are put into service or Locomotive orders begin to be filled for the major class I railroads in North America, the problem is going to continue.

Her point is the department heads weren't being the leaders they are supposed to be.

But Johan doesn't want the brand used in such a way!

I do see her logic behind it, forcing the issue into the hands of the managers when are supposed to be leaders. Unfortunately for Johan, he's the last person in the company who needs any sort of autonomous control with no oversight.

The week of June 28 includes July 4th

DRESS APPROPRIATELY

How many C-max's do you sell though? Judging by how may we build, they are keeping the inventory short on purpose. Also, I suspect that MY2015 will be a short one for C-Max, I think Trials begin for MY 2016 soon.

It is, I think he means assemble it in China for the Chinese market

Haha I was being sarcastic, but yeah we will see. I don't think it will come close to the new mustang if it is indeed evolutionary and not revolutionary

Aren't all 3 plants in the rouge on the same local contract? I know for sure MAP Final and MAP Body/ISA are separate local contracts

But the new camaro will blow the mustang out of the water!

Can the C-max just die already? I wonder what the mix of '14 vs '15 model focus is....

Nope, they were built on the same line, that's why the fusion was able to be built there so easily I am pretty sure there is a second, unused line there.

We can't bump back to body because body is considered a different plant.

My fiancé and I both thought Chrysler 200

It's bigger, and bigger means better!

you got that backwards, the fusion was flexed in on the mustang line. there is no "old" mustang line, its all the same.

Asking around last night to people who are plugged into the situation over at FRAP, the rumor mill concerning any new product coming in there any time soon seems to have gone cold.

They didn't claim that, that's just how they're acting

That's what I was saying, tune it to fit the car, but I still don't think using the exact same setup is necessarily a good thing here. At the very least, distance themselves from the performance division and give it a different name. Save the performance names for a future red label trim or a possible lincstang.

I'm not saying that, I'm saying there's no way production is starting in the fall. Not if the production version is a 2017 model.

That's because they live in their own little world where they are always right and everyone else is wrong