up to 40,000 S-Max to come to US for '09?

[range]

latest rumor, Ford will import up to 40 000 S Max minivans starting with the 2009 model year.

 

Edited January 28, 2007 by range

[Hugh]

Don't tease. :D

[J2D]

Bad Idea won't work

[DCK]

If they can import them at a competitive price I think they will fly off the shelves.

 

 

Ford NEEDS TO TAKE RISKS AND ENTER EMPTY SEGMENTS NOT CROWDED WITH 50 THOUSAND OTHER MODELS in order to gain back a footing while they're restructering is in full swing.

 

This would be a nice step foward into the right direction for once.

Edited January 28, 2007 by DCK

[RichardJensen]

Uh. Rumor from where?

 

This thing is not a minivan. It's a 4 door crossover with 3 row seating, just like the Fairlane thingy, and the Lincoln thingy, and with the exchange rate what it is, it would have to sell at over a 20% higher denominated price in dollars, vs. the price in Euros just to provide the same gross margin, let alone the cost of transport and amortization of Federalization expenses.

 

Stupid idea, should be shot down.

[mackinaw]

If Toyota can move over 61,000 of the boxy, designed-for-the-Japanese-market Scion xB during 2006, surely Ford can find a market for 40,000 of the much better looking (to me) S-max.

[ZanatWork]

They should be Mercuries, and thus give that "differentiation" that's been an empty promise forever.

 

I hope this is right...that vehicle is such a perfect fit for Merc that the logic of it is almost too big and obvious for normal eyes (unlike mine, which have had that thing in mind for Mercury since it unveiled).

 

Mercury isn't getting a D3 crossover like the others...what a perfect fit!

 

Regardless what Richard says.

[Swizco]

Uh. Rumor from where?

 

Stupid idea, should be shot down.

 

*aherm* There are currently 9 (nine) European vehicles undergoing crash programs as we speak, headed our way. I assume this is one of them. I don't know which, specifically, but I'll pass along info as it becomes available.

 

Swizco

[ZanatWork]

That's kinda bass-ackwards. As much as I push for Euro and Aussie Fords to help the current lineup, the first thing to do is DISPLAY THEM IN US AUTOSHOWS. Let the attendees help the decision making...y'know, like they should have for the MKR and Interceptor.

[LSFan00]

I still don't get the point of the Edge/Fairlane/MKX/CX7 redundancy yet non-class-leadership market over-kill. This is a smaller vehicle which I would actually consider buying.

[jlsaylor]

They should be Mercuries, and thus give that "differentiation" that's been an empty promise forever.

 

I hope this is right...that vehicle is such a perfect fit for Merc that the logic of it is almost too big and obvious for normal eyes (unlike mine, which have had that thing in mind for Mercury since it unveiled).

 

Mercury isn't getting a D3 crossover like the others...what a perfect fit!

 

Regardless what Richard says.

 

I too like the idea of vehicles like the S-Max coming to our shores badged as Mercurys. But, Richard has a point. Importing from any first world European country is going to bring it's own bag of problems given the value of their currency. In light of this, importation from Europe only really makes sense as a short term solution. It would seem prudent to move production to a more advantageous locale. One of the more stable Central or South America countries.......or Mexico for that matter, seem a good choice.

Edited January 28, 2007 by jlsaylor

[waymondospiff]

And this rumour started where?

 

I'm all for it, if Ford can do it profitably. But, by the time the S-Max would arrive in 2009, it would be over three years old. I just hope Ford wouldn't plan on introducing a three-year old car and then plan on leaving it alone for another six years.

 

But then, is there any chance that the S-Max is actually coming here?

 

Scott

[NLPRacing]

Bad Idea won't work

 

Why?

 

 

They should be Mercuries, and thus give that "differentiation" that's been an empty promise forever.

 

I hope this is right...that vehicle is such a perfect fit for Merc that the logic of it is almost too big and obvious for normal eyes (unlike mine, which have had that thing in mind for Mercury since it unveiled).

 

Mercury isn't getting a D3 crossover like the others...what a perfect fit!

 

Regardless what Richard says.

 

I agree. Mercury needs a CUV of their own and I think the S-Max would be perfect. Just please don't water it down too much, don't call it a "Merkur" and keep the turbo & manual tranny options.

[mkaresh]

Mercury is dead. Get over it.

 

I'd pesonally love to have a six-speed S-Max. But price is a big issue. Still waiting to see how GM handles it with the Astra.

[@_@]

Bad Idea won't work

 

Please explain why... thanks.

[Blueblood]

People need to get over Mercury, I swear, some of you want every single car Ford makes overseas for sale under the Mercury nameplate which will only ensure it fails.

 

Most people probably don't even know what a Mercury is these days, there are hardly any L-M dealerships around, it just wouldn't work.

 

Sell them just as they look over there, with the Blue oval on them!

[Blueblood]

Please explain why... thanks.

 

Probably because he thinks the Wal-Mart American Fords are better, as we can all see by their blistering sales..

[jlsaylor]

People need to get over Mercury, I swear, some of you want every single car Ford makes overseas for sale under the Mercury nameplate which will only ensure it fails.

 

Most people probably don't even know what a Mercury is these days, there are hardly any L-M dealerships around, it just wouldn't work.

 

Sell them just as they look over there, with the Blue oval on them!

 

First, only a few of the cars made in foreign locales are truly well suited for sale in the US. The Fiesta, Euro Focus, Mondeo, C-Max, S-Max, Mondeo, Territory, and Falcon more or less represent this lineup, si I don;t think that everybody is clamoring for Mercury to be the American catch all of every internationl car. Even so, that is quite the lineup of cars. Enough of a lineup in fact to make up an entire brand on their own and leave no glaring holes to be filled in the process.

 

But bringing those to the US under the blue oval isn't as rosy as some seem to think either. We have to seriously consider wether or not these will cars 'fix' Ford's problems. The answer is a glaring no. First, assuming I bend completely to the argument that these are all better product than what we have now, we'd have to then come to a consensus that good product is enough to turn the train around right now, and it isn't. Realistically speaking, whatever anybody may personally think of the US market Fusion sedan, the same is a well executed car which is distinctive, generally considered attractive, possesses more than a few dynamic advantages over all of it's Japanese competitors, and offers all of this for a lot less than those Japanese sedans ask while getting phenomenal reliability ratings as well. It does have some glitches relative to the competition, but they are relatively small and do nothing to offset the advantages which the car offers. My point being that there is nothing about the Fusion that should have prevented it from being a more direct threat to the Japanese competition than it has been as is, with demand being off the charts or at least stroner than it is, but the demand just isn't there. Looked at stritly In this light the Fusion should be a far more popular offering than it is. That is, until you consider the real problem. (which few seem to be doing)

 

It is simply really. You wont convince Accord and Camry owners to jump out of their sedans by offering a car which effectively is what they are and does what they do. Given this the Mondeo will not fare any better than, if as well as, the Fusion has. Offering a European twist on the same old thing simply isn't that compelling. Of course, there are other matters to address. Without question to sell in any volume the five cylinder engine lineup will have to go, being replaced by V-6 designs. And it would be an uphill battle to claim that the Mondeo could do anything more than match the Accord and Camry in pricing.

 

But all of those are just asides compared to the real problem, which is, once again, that there is simply nothing about the Mondeo compelling enough to cause Accord and Camry owners to jump ship. Being a 'good car' just isn't good enough in this respect. Honda and Cmary owners will simply wait for Honda and Toyota to make up what little ground they may have lost, and they will do just that. And this wouldn't be like the first gen Focus, meeting with wonder and awe as some seem to think. Why? The first generation Focus was a bit of a coup, but that was because the Focus eclipsed everything in the class by quite some margin at that point, and was a relatively distinct take on the class by offering amazing room and execution that felt like what you might find in a 'big car'. Outside of the Fiesta none of the cars mentioned in the list above can currently be expected to fall into this same kind of fortunate scenario because the cars the competition is offering are simply too good. The Falcon is nice as well, but it too would be running head-long into a class filled with competent players by the time of it's debut, just like the Mondeo. There are no American market miracles to be found in FOE, and only the seriously FOE-swlling would think that there are.

 

If Ford is to succeed in America they need something competent, but they need something different and compelling as well. I surmised in another post that a return to rwd, with awd heavily featured, could possibly help accomplish the same by offering cars which would be far superior dynamically' better proportioned stylistically, and very American as well to little acceptance (which I hardly found surprising) Whatever the answer might be it has to be something sufficiently different to uproot Camry and Accord owners and the Mondeo isn't. FOE simply offers more of what Honda and Toyota already offer with a European accent, and as Fords they would absolutely be failures when considered in the light of what Ford needs them to do. That is why I say bringing the same to these shores badged as Mercurys make sense. It would satisfisy the demand to go global, and imbeds these products in a brand where a bit of quirkiness, and relatively low initial sales, will suffice...possibly even thrive.

 

I fail to see how the same is pandering to the Mercury brand, since I would prefer Mercury simply die as a once storied American brand that lost its way, and eventually, its purpose. The above move to international product would eventually overshadow all of that, and would be killing Mercury by proxy IMO. The name would continue, but not Edsel's Mercury. But in fairness Edsel's vision for Mercury died long ago anyway. From a business perspective the above makes sense by going global without falling into the implausibly global quagmire many here are hoping for, so I support the notion. Of course, this is assuming that Ford figures out what is really required for a US Ford brand turnaround.

Edited January 29, 2007 by jlsaylor

[jlsaylor]

Probably because he thinks the Wal-Mart American Fords are better, as we can all see by their blistering sales..

 

And again we we you missing the point. Better, by itself, simply wont do at this point. This is the same reason Toyota's new Tundra was already doomed to failure even if you assumed that the pricing wasn't going to be ridiculous.

Edited January 29, 2007 by jlsaylor

[NickF1011]

And again we we you missing the point. Better, by itself, simply wont do at this point. This is the same reason Toyota's new Tundra was already doomed to failure even if you assumed that the pricing wasn't going to be ridiculous.

 

 

No, better product by itself won't fix the problem. But it's certainly part of the equation.

 

Right now Ford has:

 

Crappy product.

Crappy sales experience.

Crappy service experience.

Crappy factory utilization.

Crappy marketing.

 

At least selling competitive product that already exists elsewhere in Ford's global infrastructure would allow Ford to focus its "fix-it" dollars on the other 4 areas instead of into its somewhat dismal NA product offerings.

 

There is no "silver bullet" that will cure all of Ford's ills, and I think that's part of their problem. They invest billions of dollars into what they THINK is the cure only to find that it's a band-aid to cover up the overall problem. They need to adopt the thinking that their recovery will happen in bits and pieces, and not in one fell swoop. Fixing the product is just one small piece of the puzzle, but it's a piece that could probably be implemented most quickly (aside from the marketing problem - they needed to fire those bozos yesterday).

[jlsaylor]

No, better product by itself won't fix the problem. But it's certainly part of the equation.

 

Right now Ford has:

 

Crappy product.

Crappy sales experience.

Crappy service experience.

Crappy factory utilization.

Crappy marketing.

 

At least selling competitive product that already exists elsewhere in Ford's global infrastructure would allow Ford to focus its "fix-it" dollars on the other 4 areas instead of into its somewhat dismal NA product offerings.

 

There is no "silver bullet" that will cure all of Ford's ills, and I think that's part of their problem. They invest billions of dollars into what they THINK is the cure only to find that it's a band-aid to cover up the overall problem. They need to adopt the thinking that their recovery will happen in bits and pieces, and not in one fell swoop. Fixing the product is just one small piece of the puzzle, but it's a piece that could probably be implemented most quickly (aside from the marketing problem - they needed to fire those bozos yesterday).

 

I don't disagree with your problems, but I do disagree with your solutions. First, the short term 'better product' argument importing cars from FOE, etc. promises just doesn't hold up. As I said above the Fusion proves this to be the case. You wont beat the Camry and Accord by building a better 'Camcord' because, realistically, you can't. Toyota and Honda are conservative here and they execute about as well as can be reasonably expected, and consumers know it. The only scenario where such a thing is even plausible would have to involve some form of catastrophic breakdown on behalf of Honda or Toyota in some area or another. I don't see it happening.

 

Bringing the Euro Focus over would be a step up from our current model, but the Mondeo arguably wouldn't be since that cars I-5 would be a bit off-putting for most people buying in this segment, especially in turbo guise. By the time you fix this by dropping in the new 3.5L V-6 you could have more easily done the same with the existing Fusion. And even assuming you fixed everything (again, in this instance updating the Fusion would likely make more sense) all of this would simply be masking the real problem anyway, not to mention delaying a real solution.

 

Ford does not have the time or money for stopgap fixes that take a decade or so, or don't last, at this point. At best cars like the Mondeo would create an interest in Ford product that leads to a trickle into Ford showrooms. Arguably they already have that with the Fusion, and at this point the demand that car has generated is akin to taking a leak on a forest fire. Drinking another six pack to widen the stream a bit wont change the forecast.

 

The problem is that, even if they executed in every area you cite, they have to have product compelling enough to lure people out of the Honda showroom and into Ford dealerships right now, and they need a bit more volume in this respect than just a trickle. While good product nothing which FOE offers gives even an inkling that this would be the case. Again, these doesn't offer anything significantly different than Honda, Toyota, or even Nissan already do. Ford needs better product, but they need something mainstream which appeals to the U.S. consumer in a way that the Accord and Camry don't even more. They need a Mustang or F-150 for the sedan world if you prefer, and they need it right now or it simply wont matter what other problems they may have fixed. Cars have to be Camry and Civic beating, out of the park, home-runs in the very near future, and cars like the new Mondeo and C1 Focus, while nice, simply aren't.

Edited January 29, 2007 by jlsaylor

[RichardJensen]

the demand that car has generated is akin to taking a leak on a forest fire

In all fairness, the vehicle is selling to Ford's expectations, with Ford's retail/fleet mix target.

 

Crappy 2nd year marketing explains the decline in October/November volume, as George Pipas repeatedly acknowledge on the Nov. and Dec. conference calls.

[jlsaylor]

In all fairness, the vehicle is selling to Ford's expectations, with Ford's retail/fleet mix target.

 

Crappy 2nd year marketing explains the decline in October/November volume, as George Pipas repeatedly acknowledge on the Nov. and Dec. conference calls.

 

I don't disagree, in fact I rather like the car and feel that the Fusion's relative success helps to make my point. The fact that the Fusion is reasonably well executed and is more or less about as popular as Ford had hoped, but still has done very little to change Ford's fortunes, shows better than I ever could that meeting or barely beating Toyota and Honda at their own game is not the solution. Ford needs a product that can sell in Camry or Accord volumes upon debut, and they need the same from a vehicle in the compact segment as well. The Fusion obviously isn't the car to do that, and to be fair to the Fusion the reasons for this go beyond the car itself, but neither is the Mondeo despite what some here prefer to think.

Edited January 29, 2007 by jlsaylor

[RichardJensen]

Ford needs a product that can sell in Camry or Accord volumes upon debut

That just doesn't happen, and that's not what Ford needs.

 

What Ford needs is sustainable volume for its factories accomplished two ways:

 

1) a larger number of smaller volume products on shared platforms: Ideally you will see EUCD2 underpinning the Fusion, Edge, Milan, MKZ, MKX, Five Hundred, Freestyle, 'Fairlane', Montego, MKS, and unnamed Lincoln crossover--all these vehicles being assembled at three plants, where fifteen years before you had the Sable, Taurus, Windstar, and Continental on related platforms and assembled in four different plants.

 

The frustrating part, of course, is that it took 15 years to get there.

 

2) More shared architectures. Ford cannot make small volume plays work unless they share architectures.

 

Ford is working both of these problems out now, and it will take time to get things fully sorted.

 

Lest we forget Ford had 'project Ballpark' underway during the early part of Bill Ford Jr's tenure. It was the first attempt at global platform sharing and it stalled out when FOE went EUCD instead of CD3 and D3.

[wescoent]

I don't disagree, in fact I rather like the car and feel that the Fusion's relative success helps to make my point. The fact that the Fusion is reasonably well executed and is more or less about as popular as Ford had hoped, but still has done very little to change Ford's fortunes, shows better than I ever could that meeting or barely beating Toyota and Honda at their own game is not the solution. Ford needs a product that can sell in Camry or Accord volumes upon debut, and they need the same from a vehicle in the compact segment as well. The Fusion obviously isn't the car to do that, and to be fair to the Fusion the reasons for this go beyond the car itself, but neither is the Mondeo despite what some here prefer to think.

 

They can either seek Camry/Accord volumes, or be willing to introduce a wide range of vehicles in a variety of segments. I have no doubt Ford can put together a portfolio of vehicles on common architectures that can sell between 30,000 and 100,000 units annually. Imagine Ford in the mid-90's, only with more architecture-sharing. Replace the Aerostar with the Transit-Connect, the Probe with the Reflex, etc...