rperez817
-
Posts
5,949 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by rperez817
-
-
17 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:
Heck, they ain't even spun it off
Ford's official line regarding spinning off any of the 3 BUs as part of Ford+ is as follows.
We are focused on our Ford+ plan to transform the company and thrive in this new era of electric and connected vehicles. We have no plans to spin off our battery electric vehicle business or our traditional [internal combustion engine] business.However, LA Times indicated that Jim Farley didn't completely rule it out, especially since investors and industry analysts have pushed Ford and other legacy automakers to pursue spinoffs. Note Farley's mention of a "whatever-it-takes mind-set".
Jim Farley didn’t reject the possibility of spinning off either operation when queried on the subject during the company’s earnings call.
“Running a successful ICE business and a successful BEV business are not the same,” Farley said. “I’m really excited about the company’s commitment to operate the businesses as they should be.” The EV business is “fundamentally different” in the customers it attracts, the way its products are built and the engineering and design talent that must be hired.
“We’re not seeking half measures,” Farley said on the call. “We’re done with incremental change. We have a clear plan, a bias for action and a whatever-it-takes mind-set.”Guess we'll have to wait and see. Maybe the recent degradation of Model e division's dealer certification program as discussed in this thread will become a catalyst for spinoffs.
-
58 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:
Ford's t3 engineers are having a good laugh right now considering t3 was almost certainly engineered to beat the higher figures the CT promised when it was first shown. So it's gonna wipe the floor with the production CT.
I agree DeluxeStang. Jim Farley stated that one category where Ford has strong potential to beat Tesla is in BEV pickup trucks. Plus, the current F-150 Lightning gives Ford first mover advantage. Lightning's industry leading "mind share" is evident in Autolist's survey data from a couple years ago.
Nonetheless, Ford needs to take the competition seriously. Cybertruck's innovative design and features seem to be particularly appealing to younger people. Looking deeper at the Autolist survey data, respondents 35 years of age or younger were more likely to choose Cybertruck than F-150 Lightning. All other age groups preferred Lightning.
-
1
-
-
Cybertruck Configurator now active. Configurator | Tesla
-
21 minutes ago, jpd80 said:
Im sorry, you’re just spouting Ford propaganda. How much of a transition is possible if you’re prepared to keep all the things that continue to hold back the company? There is a much bigger issue within Ford but Farley and the board refuse to address it.
I agree with you jpd80 that Ford still has issues with "all the things that continue to hold back the company". But the Ford+ plan is a step in the right direction, and it's noteworthy that Ford was the first legacy automaker to establish separate BUs.
The biggest issue of all not just for Ford, but for most legacy automakers, is that the pace of their transition efforts is much slower that they should be. Elon Musk spoke about this a few months ago.
-
-
On 11/30/2023 at 1:11 PM, Rick73 said:
is the Model 3 which is about the cheapest BEV from dedicated electric manufacturer affordable (desirable) to median-household-income family?
Using the “20/4/10” rule for maximum car spending (20 percent down payment, a 4-year loan and total monthly spending for the loan and insurance of at most 10 percent of the household gross income), the median household income family in the U.S. as a whole wouldn't be able to afford a new Model 3. However, there are many locales in which the median household income is higher than the national average, enough where a median income family could afford a Model 3.
New Jersey has a lot of locales like that, particularly in the northern and central parts of the state.
-
43 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
Tesla Model 3 is much more expensive than a comparable Accord or Camry.
That's true Rick73, but Model 3 is in the compact executive car segment, not the mainstream family sedan segment. Here is a list of products in the former segment (U.S. market) along with base pricing for each.
- Tesla Model 3 RWD, $40,630
- BMW 330i, $45,495
- Mercedes-Benz C300, $46,000
- Audi A4 40 TFSI, $42,295
- Lexus IS300 RWD, $42,885
- Infiniti Q50, $43,800
- Acura TLX, $41,245
- Alfa Romeo Giulia, $44,670
- Volvo S60, $43,095
- Genesis G70, $40,525
-
17 minutes ago, Rangers09 said:
Since BEV's are currently selling poorly and have no short term profit expectation, surely the best option is to build more PHEV's/hybrids that the customer is currently purchasing in larger numbers and Ford may be at least breaking even, or making a small profit.
In the U.S. market overall and in the CARB Section 177 states in particular (all green or blue colored states shown in the map below), for all automakers as a whole BEV easily outsells PHEV. This has been the case since at least 2015.
.svg/640px-Section_177_states_(2019).svg.png)
-
13 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
If Tavares is correct and EVs are roughly 40% higher
The figure Tavares mentioned may have been correct years ago, but not anymore for any automaker who is serious about implementing totally different strategies and approaches to designing, engineering, manufacturing, and producing BEV. Stellantis N.V., the company Tavares leads, is one of those automakers and presented this data in its Dare Forward 2030 presentation back in 2022.
-
Photos.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, akirby said:
To be fair - and why I asked the question - just because they have different organizations doesn’t necessarily mean they’re operating any differently.
Good point akirby. As it relates to dealership-manufacturer relations, Ford to its credit established a new operating paradigm for Model e division. Jim Farley described it as follows during the Ford+ presentation in May 2023.
It takes more though than great products to really win customers over, particularly new customers to Ford. It takes a buying and ownership experience that's way, way beyond what we do today. We know that most customers would enjoy the buying process a lot more if they could skip the step of negotiating on price. Starting in January, Model E customers will have flexible purchase options, online, in the store, with transparent pricing that they don't have to haggle over, and remote vehicle delivery, and later pick up as well. These better experiences make customers more likely to build a relationship and choose the same dealer again. There are benefits to the dealer.
Customers also want to get their dream vehicle, not settle for what's on the lot. Soon they'll have far more options available to purchase through their dealer from new retail replenishment centers. These centers can hold a couple of weeks of inventory and deliver the right vehicle in less than 10 days. With how we've brought the complexity of our lineup down, we can cut the system inventory in half to 50 days.
Our dealers are freed as well from negotiating with customers to sell what they have on the lot, and that's happier customers, but it's also fewer discounts. We want each of our Model E dealers to be a trusted partner for new EV customers who want to see and learn about these new great products.Farley suggested that Model e division's new initiatives and operations for dealer relations as well as with new technology development will eventually make its way to Blue and Pro, particularly software and subscription-based services.
We've talked about how electrification changes the product and changes the business, but electrification isn't the biggest transformation going on in the auto industry, and it's not the limit of what we're trying to do in Model E as well. Model E is intended to bring tech and software to the center of all ICE, hybrid, and electric vehicles across Ford Blue, Model E, and Pro. With software, these aren't just vehicles, they're products, but a very special kind of product. -
14 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
To be fair, Toyotas sell well because they have the perception of long term reliability. I say perception, because the ranger and maverick both scored better than the Tacoma on reliability and quality indexs.
Toyota's reputation for reliability isn't just based on perception. The company consistently ranks high in objective measures in this regard. For example, Toyota and Lexus took the top 2 spots for predicted reliability among brands in Consumer Reports' most recent Automotive Reliability Survey, the results of which were released to readers yesterday.
However, 2024 Tacoma may experience mediocre or worse reliability rating in its first year. New Tundra, which 2024 Tacoma shares some engineering with, is the least reliable Toyota model in the survey and is rated below average (see below). Also, when the Tacoma was last redesigned for 2016 model year, it also rated below average in its first year.
-
1 hour ago, Gurgeh said:
But I do understand that the big government push (correctly read both ways) to go all-electric is increasingly forcing companies that need to provide what consumers want in order to stay in business to shift to products that aren't in as much demand, banking on the government to force consumers to demand something else because at some point what they want will no longer be permitted to be made.
The relationship between government and automakers was described perfectly by Aaron Robinson of Car and Driver.
The relationship between government and [automotive] industry follows this pattern: Government demands something, the industry screams that it's impossible, and then it delivers exactly what was demanded. Repeat steps one through three about 67,000 times and you define the modern automobile.When CARB formulated the ZEV targets in Advanced Clean Cars II, they were deliberately conservative, maybe to reduce the likelihood that "the industry screams that it's impossible".
-
8 hours ago, jpd80 said:
Farley quickly broke Ford into three groups to impress others like Wall Street investment advisers and the Ford board but the truth is that it’s all show, piss and wind with nothing really behind it except a thin wall between the real Ford and a pretend world where all the accountants and bureaucrats don’t exist…
12 minutes ago, akirby said:Is that your opinion or is that based on inside knowledge? I thought the EV business was a completely separate Division with separate leadership, processes and accountability.
The Ford+ plan breaking Ford into Blue, Model e, and Pro business units within a common corporate umbrella is not to "impress others like Wall Street investment advisors and the Ford board" but a fundamental transformation of Ford Motor Company overall in order to be better prepared for survival and hopefully thriving amid the ongoing automotive industry revolution. Ford was the first major legacy automaker with this arrangement. It's a competitive advantage for Ford that remains unmatched by its legacy automaker competitors.
akirby is correct about the BU separation. Each has different leadership, operations, and strategies. Kumar Galhotra leads Blue, Doug Field leads Model e, Ted Cannis leads Pro.
John Lawler is giving an update on Ford+ in about an hour. Ford Motor Company - John Lawler to Discuss Plan to Compete and Grow with Ford+ at Barclays Global Automotive and Mobility Tech Conference
-
10 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:
I'll give them credit that many of their designs are unique looking, fresh, and energetic. But they don't age gracefully at all.
Good point DeluxeStang, you are absolutely correct. That's the downside to Akio Toyoda's push to make Toyota cars and trucks less "boring" in terms of styling. These vehicles look fresh and energetic (but ugly as well in many cases) when they are first released, but that avant garde styling becomes stale more quickly than Toyota's older and more conservative designs.
For example, the 4th generation Hilux pickup truck from 40 years ago (used in the Back to the Future movie) has aged very well in terms of style. That won't be the case for 2024 Tacoma 40 years from now. Or even 10 years.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:
There's a couple guys autocrossing an ex-police Crown Vic PI, brought it to the national championships this year and on "all season" tires and they didn't quite finish last. They're advocating for a class for the CVPI and other retired police cars on real street tires as a low cost entry point to racing.
That would be cool! And even if the Crown Vic autocrossers do finish last, they can still be champions of the "neutral drop" ?
-
33 minutes ago, akirby said:
The auto driving car hit a pedestrian lying in the road.
That incident on October 2 in San Francisco involved a hit-and-run human driver striking a pedestrian, propelling her into the path of a GM Cruise AV. The AV could not stop in time, resulting in a secondary hit to that pedestrian. US agency, California gathering details of accident involving robot taxi and pedestrian | Reuters
GM provided video footage from the Cruise AV to authorities including California DMV but inappropriately edited that video, removing relevant information. That's what got GM in trouble and prompted California DMV to suspend GM's permit to operate its driverless robotaxi service in the state.
-
2 hours ago, akirby said:
They aren’t going away but they’re also not going to be anywhere near 100% of sales in the near future.
For near future timeframe (2024 - 2027), GM isn't expecting BEV to comprise anywhere near 100% of their sales. That goal is longer term, after 2027 for sure, probably in the early to mid 2030s.
The decision under consideration by GM management is whether to incorporate hybrids (which GM currently sells in China) into their North America product lineup for regulatory compliance and other reasons, and whether the opportunity costs of doing so are worth it.
-
1 hour ago, akirby said:
Or maybe it’s a long overdue realization that this technology has major issues outside controlled settings. Which other companies have already admitted.
AV technology continues to evolve. GM Cruise's recent woes aren't due to technology but stems from their decision to deliberately withhold relevant information from an accident report filed with the California DMV in early October 2023. When California DMV eventually found the missing information from another government agency, essentially catching GM Cruise lying to them, they suspended Cruise's permit to operate AVs in the state of California without a safety driver. Following that, GM Cruise shut down all of its driverless robotaxi services globally, and shortly thereafter Kyle Vogt resigned.
-
11 minutes ago, Deanh said:
absolutely NOTHING to do with running a dealership of any kind
Cox Automotive's constituent businesses provide dealers with services, software, and consulting for all aspects of dealership operations - new car sales, used car sales, F&I, and fixed ops. Among the areas where Cox Automotive does business with dealers are DMS and CRM software, data analytics, digital marketing, lead generation, advertising, remarketing, vehicle transport, vehicle inspection, inventory management, pricing strategies, service/parts scheduling and shop management, vehicle registration & titling, and fleet management among others.
The breadth and depth of Cox Automotive's operations is one reason why they're highly respected in automotive retailing.
-
This was inevitable following the resignation of GM Cruise founder and CEO Kyle Vogt last week. Cruise's recent missteps could present an opportunity for Ford's Latitude AI division to expand its robotaxi related capabilities.
-
13 minutes ago, Deanh said:
FUNNY...yet another outside "expert" that has no vested interest in running the vehicular business or obvious know how.
Cox Automotive not only has a "vested interest in running the vehicular business", but their "obvious know how" in that business sector is renowned and respected. The company operates all of the following.
- Autotrader
- Central Dispatch
- Dealer.com
- Dealertrack
- EV Battery Solutions
- FleetNet America
- Fleet Services
- Kelley Blue Book
- Manheim
- NextGear Capital
- vAuto
- VinSolutions
- Xtime
-
1 hour ago, Joe771476 said:
Manufacturers and even governments are slowly but surely abandoning these EV's and mandates.
Not at all. Ford Motor Company (among other manufacturers) remains committed to a 100% ZEV product lineup by 2035 in "all leading markets", and governments of the following U.S. states adhere to the CARB Advanced Clean Cars II standards discussed in this thread.
- California
- Colorado
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- New Jersey (administrative rule issued; first applicable model year not finalized)
- New Mexico
- New York
- Oregon
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
By the latter part of the decade, U.S. federal government may harmonize its own ZEV mandates with CARB's, just as it did back in 2014 when EPA Tier 3 vehicle emissions standards were harmonized with CARB LEV III. This provides consistency for automakers across all 50 states.
-
25 minutes ago, Deanh said:
how many people were polled...where are they located..blah, blah blah blah and blah....
1,024 consumers and 152 franchised dealers throughout the USA were polled. For more details contact Cox Automotive Senior Manager of Corporate Communications Dara Hailes at dara.hailes@coxautoinc.com.
November has best ever sales month for Lightning
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
Blue Oval City is expected to open in 2025, and Ford stated that it expects to have 600,000 units/year run rate for BEV sometime in 2024 (previously, they expected to achieve that goal in 2023 but pushed it forward a year or so) and 2,000,000 units/year run rate by 2026. That's for all Ford BEV, not just F-150 Lightning. But it certainly suggests that F-150 Lightning sales alone can and should exceed 12,000-15,000 units/month. Twice or even 3 times that volume by 2025 for F-150 Lightning alone is quite possible.