Footballfan Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Is there any doubt that Mually is anything other than an axe man? http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...NYT01/701260375 In 2007, Ford projects it will be fourth in sales behind GM, Toyota, and Chrysler. This was a company that ten years ago was within two points of being the number one automaker in this country. Word of advice to Ford: if you plan on being on the same level as Honda and Nissan, please realize that they have zero legacy costs in this country. You just put half of your workforce on retirement, and now for every active worker you have two retirees. How do you plan on offering a competitive lineup when probably $1,500 of every car is going to go for legacy costs? We all know that you have a CFO that cannot add, but common sense will tell you that even at the fifth and sixth spot, those competitors will outspend you in product development. This is a revenue-based business. The market share you can keep from the competition translates into less profit for that comeptiton. Case in point, chief bean counter Don LeClair (another exec that needs to be shown the door) said that the Taurus was the best selling car they had, but they stopped making it because profits were only marginal, and most of the sales were to fleets. Well guess what, GM, Chrysler, and Toyota are more than happy to pick up the slack as they were in other areas you abandoned (minivans, RWD luxury cars, compact trucks). Ford used to be the leader in midsize cars, compact trucks, midsize SUVs, and full-size trucks (this is seriosuly being challenged by GM. And if Ford looses the sales leadership to GM in this area, they will be the leader in nothing. Not a good prospect. Ford has nothing to pry away customers from their Toyotas, Hondas, and even GM and Chrysler products. They have adequate product in some areas, but no breakthrough product. A plan that does not grow a business- any business- is a plan for failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 (edited) A plan that does not grow a business- any business- is a plan for failure. To keep open a factory just to keep market share is sure way to go out of business when provides next to no profit. Ford has far too much fat to shed first before it can worry about growing again...making cars just to make cars isn't a way to make money either. Edited January 27, 2007 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Which Boeing would you rather have? The overstaffed Boeing of 2001 with barely any orders, or the understaffed Boeing of 2006 with a 3 year backlog? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 I say give the guy and Ford a chance. They do need to downsize and who cares if they fall to #4, as long as the are profitable they can begin to build back up. No one knows for sure how long things are going to be rosy for GM or especially DCX. DCX is making all the mistakes that Ford made if not more, however they have the Germans backing them so they have a lot longer leash even if they are not successful. In another post I told about my family helping Ford just this afternoon. Thank goodness my brother is ok, but his 98 Accord is a total loss. He needed a good second car because his wife uses their '05 Mariner and he has to get to school to teach. I told him to ask my parents if they would sell their 2000 Taurus to him. They bought it new so he knows what he is getting and besides it gave my dad an excuse to get a new ride! Well anyhow they just got a new 2007 Fusion V6 today and I just got off the phone with him and after getting home with it, he said, I don't get why people think Ford builds crap these days. He said the car is great, miles above any other Ford car he ever bought, fit and finish is great and the price was hard to beat. A lot of value for the price of the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Which Boeing would you rather have? The overstaffed Boeing of 2001 with barely any orders, or the understaffed Boeing of 2006 with a 3 year backlog? My Boeing stock has done a lot better over the past 5 years than my Ford shares have. My money is with Mulally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfan Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 To keep open a factory just to keep market share is sure way to go out of business when provides next to no profit. Ford has far too much fat to shed first before it can worry about growing again...making cars just to make cars isn't a way to make money either. My point was that Ford was making money on the Taurus- the profit came after building the car and covering all the fixed costs- you were still making money plus you had that point of market share, and 2,000 captive customers at the plant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfan Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 Which Boeing would you rather have? The overstaffed Boeing of 2001 with barely any orders, or the understaffed Boeing of 2006 with a 3 year backlog? Apples and oranges my friend. There are two major airline manufactueres in the world; there are about ten viable automakers in this country. Airlines will wait three years for an airplane, the customer will not wait three years for a car. As the article said, Mr Mually has a lot to learn about the auto industry. Getting back to your question- I would rather have neither. I want Ford to get back to where it was in the late 1980s where it was challenging GM for the lead, everyone was working, and Ford was winning award after award for their great product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 My point was that Ford was making money on the Taurus- the profit came after building the car and covering all the fixed costs- you were still making money plus you had that point of market share, and 2,000 captive customers at the plant. Ford hasn't make money on the Taraus in nearly 10 years...they've been dumping it into fleets since the 96 redesign... Good article on those "profits" it was making http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FW...109/ai_19525580 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Just like re-building a house after fire damage...you have to knock the majority of the walls down to get to the foundation (concrete slab of course), before you go ahead and build the new walls and roof. Yes, 2007 will be lower sales, lower fleet sales, yes Ford will still be in the red, No, there won't be any major new introductions, yes a boat load of people need to go, yes I would start outsourcing to Mexico and China...then in 2008/09, you can start putting up the walls. Now the important part is, when you start putting the walls up, you have to hurry up and put the roof, shingle it and slap the windows on real fast. It wasn't too long ago that Nissan did the same, at a smaller scale, but the issue was resolved. So like anything else, takes time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 I want Ford to get back to where it was in the late 1980s where it was challenging GM for the lead, everyone was working, and Ford was winning award after award for their great product. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. You don't have that option. Airlines didn't want the quantity of product Boeing was building, customers don't want vehicles in the quantity Ford is building them, and new car purchasers go 5-6 years on average between new car purchases. Sales Ford lost in the last 5 years aren't coming back anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Apples and oranges my friend. There are two major airline manufactueres in the world; there are about ten viable automakers in this country. Airlines will wait three years for an airplane, the customer will not wait three years for a car. As the article said, Mr Mually has a lot to learn about the auto industry. Getting back to your question- I would rather have neither. I want Ford to get back to where it was in the late 1980s where it was challenging GM for the lead, everyone was working, and Ford was winning award after award for their great product. Ford took award after award because the only competition at the time was the big three and the others were completely ignored. You can take that one step further. IMO even if Ford came out with a car that meets and beats it's competition, I highly doubt it would regain any major share because of the other ten automakers who have established brands and loyalty base amoungest it customers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfan Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 Ford hasn't make money on the Taraus in nearly 10 years...they've been dumping it into fleets since the 96 redesign... Good article on those "profits" it was making http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FW...109/ai_19525580 This article eludes to Ford offering incentives to maintain the sales crown. The article never said that Ford would be loosing money on the car had those incentives not been offered. My point was that Ford sold 200,000 Tauruses without any incentives or marketing- the name sold itself. Even Mually said it was a mistake to abandon that car. Let me make myself clear- I am not for buying market share at all costs, but when you have a vehichle that is selling itself, and you are making even a little money on it, why not keep it? It is a lot harder to go out and get a new customer than keep the one you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfan Posted January 27, 2007 Author Share Posted January 27, 2007 You can take that one step further. IMO even if Ford came out with a car that meets and beats it's competition, I highly doubt it would regain any major share because of the other ten automakers who have established brands and loyalty base amoungest it customers. That's true- that is why Ford should have held on to the Tuarus and kept it fresh. It was a car people were comfortbale with and loved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Just like re-building a house after fire damage...you have to knock the majority of the walls down to get to the foundation (concrete slab of course), before you go ahead and build the new walls and roof. A better analogy would be someone who can't make their mind up, changing the the house plans time and time again, effectively paying for the same thing over and over. We all laugh at people on those DIY house renovation programs when they get it wrong but, imagine Ford in their place with six more zeros on the end of each bill. Having successive well meaning but inefficient managers on a confused project is a recipe for disaster. Sooner or later the owner and manager are going to run out of time and money. What we're seeing here is some serious demolition, reduction of workers and equipment on the job and a foreman that questions every previous decision the the owner and managers made. Most people would tear up the all the old plans and start with a clean sheet of paper and get everyone following the one plan and budget. Then you go back to the bank and make it all happen. In this analogy, that's the smartest thing to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCK Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 What I cldearly don't get is how so many people here can defend Bill Ford as the right guy that Ford needed............................................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Ford hasn't make money on the Taraus in nearly 10 years...they've been dumping it into fleets since the 96 redesign... Good article on those "profits" it was making http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FW...109/ai_19525580 Good read. The future it predicted is here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddiehaskell Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 You can take that one step further. IMO even if Ford came out with a car that meets and beats it's competition, I highly doubt it would regain any major share because of the other ten automakers who have established brands and loyalty base amoungest it customers.I agree. Toyota seems to be on their way to 25% market share and GM could also hold steady at 25%. Then of cousre you've got Hyundai, Honda, DCx and Nissan which will all take a large piece of the pie. 3 of these brands are improving/gaining customers while Ford is being torn down to start over. In the near future, I can easily see Ford with about 7-8% market share. Just think about what Ford's current market share would be with about 15% fleet sales and incentives cut in half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 (edited) Re: Ford to #4 Not a chance -- Chrysler in '06 was so far down compared to Ford, it would have to mean that Ford's dropping of the rental donkey Taurus is why Ford would drop to DCX territory. FACTS - market share Company 2005 / 2004 GM ///// 25.9 / 27.8 Ford //// 17.9 / 19- DCX //// 14.9 / 14.6 src: http://www.mindfully.org/Industry/2006/GM-...-Lose5jan06.htm Toyota, between 2005 and 2006, somehow jumped from below 15 percent up to where Ford is now. But DCX never jumped, in fact they fell. I do NOT predict that DCX will outperform Ford at the end of the year in 2007. Ford is playing it conservatively. Edited January 27, 2007 by Roadrunner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 That's true- that is why Ford should have held on to the Tuarus and kept it fresh. It was a car people were comfortbale with and loved. Sure. That is correct, but you'll have to hurry back and prevent the 1996 Taurus for that fix to happen. Like I keep saying about the Taurus...all of you whining about the car are tend years late to the funeral. When they signed off on that abomination, it was effectively the end. Dig up Alex Trotman, find Jac Nasser...and give 'em a piece of your mind! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 GM is preoccupied with staying big and Ford has lost that concern altogether. Although it's painful, giving up on a Ford that challenges everybody in marketshare is probably the wisest thing they've ever done. Ford never really had a big crown to loose so it's not as spectacularly tragic as GM losing the #1 position to Toyota. Ford's biggest concern is losing the F-Series crown and they need to focus on making the F-Series the best truck and not the best-selling truck. When you loose the top spot, all you have left is respect so it's important to keep that moving forward so that you can get through the slump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 (edited) What I cldearly don't get is how so many people here can defend Bill Ford as the right guy that Ford needed............................................ he wasn't the right guy. He felt it was his mission to get the company away from Jac Nasser and "back on course". Between Nasser-Bill Ford-Alan Mulally, Ford share prices has roller coastered between $14.00 and $7.00 troughing in 2003 and 2006. Consider too, Ford family's special shares with 40% voting rights have halved in "equivalent value" to about $8 Billion. I think the man's suffered enough seeing the family's personal wealth drop approximately $8 Billion with him at the wheel, don't you? Real and permanent change can only be executed by someone who is able to see beyond the confines of the business in trouble, a CEO with an independant frame of reference. Edited January 27, 2007 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 "Americans ambivalent about globalization should note how Boeing, under chief executive James McNerney, is prospering. The Sept. 11 attacks devastated commercial airlines, causing Boeing — which cut its jetliner production in half — to rapidly shed more than 40,000 of its 93,000 workers who designed and built the planes. But the revival has added back some 13,000 jobs and raised Boeing's stock price from $25 to $88 a share. " http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will011807.php3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.