CNN: Ford to sell off PAG....

[wescoent]

Where exactly and which analysts? One Wall street trader was already quoted by CNN as saying

 

"why is Ford contemplating selling Land Rover, one of it's two most profitable product lines? Is Ford loosing so much money it needs the cash to keep afloat".

 

Do you truly appreciate the mark up on the Land Rover range and predicted possible sales of 250,000 units this year (up by 25%)? Per car they have some of the biggest margins in the business. They are the second most wanted dealership in the UK after Porsche (who have the biggest markups). How is Ford going to replace what analysts say is one of their most profitable product lines? As someone else said PAG fans need to worry about PAG being starved of cash not Ford. Looking at sales growth of 25% then you should be asking why Ford isn't making the much requested Landie?

****incedentally that quote above has been in my head all day. Do Ford need the cash to stay afloat for the next few years?*****

 

Unless you're an analyst in PAG's finance department, hell if you know the operating margins and profitability of the brand. If Land Rover really is pulling in SO much money, and can RELIABLY and PREDICTABLY continue doing so into the forseeable future, then Ford certainly will not sell them. What happens if Land Rover becomes unfashionable again? Land Rover cannot grow much more than it already has, although I do expect a huge boost coming from the LR2/Freelander.

 

Ford isn't going to sell Lincoln/Mercury in Europe... the US and China has MUCH more potential for sales.

[mackinaw]

Do you truly appreciate the mark up on the Land Rover range and predicted possible sales of 250,000 units this year (up by 25%)? Per car they have some of the biggest margins in the business. They are the second most wanted dealership in the UK after Porsche (who have the biggest markups). How is Ford going to replace what analysts say is one of their most profitable product lines? As someone else said PAG fans need to worry about PAG being starved of cash not Ford. Looking at sales growth of 25% then you should be asking why Ford isn't making the much requested Landie?

 

If Ford was flush with cash, they'd probably love to keep Land Rover. But with Jaguar losing money, and with Ford management apparently having lost patience, it makes more sense to package both of the British brands together if you're serious about selling them.

 

Plus Land Rover and Jaguar are slowly being joined at the hip. Both the Jag "X" type and the new Land Rover LR3 are being built at Jag's Halewood assembly plant.

 

Personally, I hope Ford keeps PAG. I just don't know if that's possible given the restructuring problems facing Ford NA.

[TStag]

Unless you're an analyst in PAG's finance department, hell if you know the operating margins and profitability of the brand. If Land Rover really is pulling in SO much money, and can RELIABLY and PREDICTABLY continue doing so into the forseeable future, then Ford certainly will not sell them. What happens if Land Rover becomes unfashionable again? Land Rover cannot grow much more than it already has, although I do expect a huge boost coming from the LR2/Freelander.

 

Ford isn't going to sell Lincoln/Mercury in Europe... the US and China has MUCH more potential for sales.

 

When was Land Rover unfashionable? In the UK at least sales have never gone backwards only up. How about any other Ford brand? Name one which can match Land Rover for never having seen sales drop significantly? Land Rover can grow, new high volume Landie for starters and a production facility in China....

 

As for profit margins Land Rover admitted that they are the second most sought after dealerships in the world because the margins are so high (higher than BMW even).

[jpd80]

Wow. $400 Million in profit, after investing over $20 Billion over almost 20 years.

 

You sure are a shrewd investor. What stocks do you hold? Enron, and pre-bankruptcy K-mart? :rolleyes:

 

A shrewd idea would be to avoid a fire sale like this and bang together at least 4 to 6 good quarters of profit any way you can.

Somebody will buy if they think PAG has returned to profit.

Mulally is a shrewd money man and I think Ford's way forward plans are hitting their mark with PAG.

Q2 2007 will be out in a few weeks, lets see if PAG goes 2 for 2.

Edited June 13, 2007 by jpd80

[TStag]

Changing tact for a moment. Do we think Ford has enough cash to get through the next few years? See:

 

http://business.bostonherald.com/businessN...mat=&page=1

 

Is Ford really in danger of burning through it's cash too quick?

[RichardJensen]

Really? How much did the Rover designed Freelander cost to build (excluding long term capital asset cost's)? Range Rover cost 1 billion pounds, is one of the most expensive cars in history and is very profitable. Now lets see Mercury of Lincoln pull off the same trick.

It took SEVEN YEARS for the Freelander to come to market in the U.S., where it received the treatment it deserved--scorn and dismissal.

 

As far as the Range Rover is concerned, why not take a look at the Ford assisted (Disco 3) LR3/RRS platform for comparison--this platform has spun off TWO radically different vehicles, was a much less expensive platform to develop, and featured innovations (driveshaft through frame rails, for instance) that Ford was able to provide LR.

 

The RR may be profitable, but I'll bet you the LR3/RRS chassis is much more profitable.

 

And, friend TStag, the LR3/RRS was what LR did with Ford ownership. If you can't see the difference between those two vehicles and the RR & Freelander, I can't help you.

[xr7g428]

You will NEVER persuade Europeans to buy Mercury's or Lincoln's. GM is trying and failing with Caddillac. Land Rover is bucking the market by increasing sales as you pointed out. So why would you think Mercury could do the same thing against the invincible Land Rover? Land Rover and Jag are global brands and in Britain Land Rover is percieved to be the dog's dangly bit's. Put this another way it's extremely hard to crack the European market with a foreign luxury brand, it's much easier to crack te US market with a European one.

 

You got the idea there at the very end. Ford already is selling these products in Europe. The problem is that Mercury has nothing to sell in the USA. The original Mercury Cougar was slated as a Jaguar competitor. Deja Vu.

 

I do not think Mercury could or should try to compete with LR.

 

Land Rover has a difficult future. If the objective at Ford is to build from a common parts bin, on common platforms, then the LR is likely to become more like the Explorer, and less like a Land Rover. It is also hard to see a future where large expensive SUV's grow in popularity.

[twintornados]

I can see Ford selling off Jaguar, and Range Rover and remaking PAG into a group for Europe and Asia that would start with Mazda, then move up to Ford and finally end With Volvo. NA would have all the marques...starting with Mazda, then Ford, then Mercury, on to Volvo, and finally Lincoln.

[wescoent]

http://www.leftlanenews.com/chryslers-new-...land-rover.html

 

Cerberus Capital Management is now in the bidding for Land Rover and Jaguar.

 

God help us.

[RichardJensen]

Cerberus would have no chance at making a Chrysler/Jag/LR combo work. No chance. There's not enough possible cost reductions among those five car lines and given the weakness of Chrysler outside the U.S. and Jag/LR within it.

 

It is likely that even if Cerberus put in the highest bid for Jag/LR, Ford wouldn't sell simply because Cerberus wouldn't know what to do with it.

[TStag]

Cerberus would have no chance at making a Chrysler/Jag/LR combo work. No chance. There's not enough possible cost reductions among those five car lines and given the weakness of Chrysler outside the U.S. and Jag/LR within it.

 

It is likely that even if Cerberus put in the highest bid for Jag/LR, Ford wouldn't sell simply because Cerberus wouldn't know what to do with it.

 

Surely there's a ot of potential cost reductions and lots of potential growth for all the brands? Unlike Ford Chrysler isn't in Europe really. But Land Rover/ Jag/ Rover gives them better entry options. Chrysler has really struggled over here, but the Rover brand would be easier for them to exploit because it's better known and would be able to access Land Rover dealerships. Ford don't get the same benefit as easily because they own Volvo.

 

In addition Jeep could share floorpans with Land Rover/ Range Rover. Between them they would make a sizable dent on this market. Land Rover's could then be made from kits in the US on Jeep lines and Jeeps could go the other way. Thus bulking up production and lowering exposure to exchange rate risk.

 

Jaguar gives them the Mercedes replacement brand. Cerebus seem to think in terms of expansion rather than contraction, so logically it may even be that they would attempt to give Jag a real boost/ kick up the backside.

 

The big difference is that Chrysler is nowhere in Europe. Land Rover and Jag would be the way in potentially....

[Edstock]

Can't you just see it — That Range-Rover got HEMI!

[RichardJensen]

Surely there's a ot of potential cost reductions

 

Rover brand would be easier for them to exploit because it's better known and would be able to access Land Rover dealerships. Ford don't get the same benefit as easily because they own Volvo.

 

In addition Jeep could share floorpans with Land Rover/ Range Rover.

 

it may even be that they would attempt to give Jag a real boost/ kick up the backside.

1) Name the cost reductions: Can Dodge share the Caliber platform with the Jaguar C-XF? How many parts do you want to share between a $15k Dodge and a $70k Jaguar?

 

2) Owning the Rover name does NOT give anyone access to the Land Rover dealerships. There are Rover dealers that would have to be bought out first.

 

3) Jeep could share what platforms with LR? The Disco 3 & Grand Cherokee? Why not. The difference in starting price between the two models is ONLY $12k after all.

 

4) You remember what happened when Ford tried to give Jag a 'kick up the backside'

 

This whole idea is stupid.

[suv_guy_19]

1) Name the cost reductions: Can Dodge share the Caliber platform with the Jaguar C-XF? How many parts do you want to share between a $15k Dodge and a $70k Jaguar?

 

2) Owning the Rover name does NOT give anyone access to the Land Rover dealerships. There are Rover dealers that would have to be bought out first.

 

3) Jeep could share what platforms with LR? The Disco 3 & Grand Cherokee? Why not. The difference in starting price between the two models is ONLY $12k after all.

 

4) You remember what happened when Ford tried to give Jag a 'kick up the backside'

 

This whole idea is stupid.

 

and the last thing you wrote surprises you....

[RichardJensen]

I keep hoping....

[TStag]

1) Name the cost reductions: Can Dodge share the Caliber platform with the Jaguar C-XF? How many parts do you want to share between a $15k Dodge and a $70k Jaguar?

 

2) Owning the Rover name does NOT give anyone access to the Land Rover dealerships. There are Rover dealers that would have to be bought out first.

 

3) Jeep could share what platforms with LR? The Disco 3 & Grand Cherokee? Why not. The difference in starting price between the two models is ONLY $12k after all.

 

4) You remember what happened when Ford tried to give Jag a 'kick up the backside'

 

This whole idea is stupid.

 

1.) I meant a Land Rover could share a floorpan with a Jeep. A Chrysler could share a Jaguar floopan, unlike some Cerebus may realise that applying future Jag floopans to Chryslers would enhance Chrysler and be less damaging to Jag which uses Mondeo floorpans on the X type.

 

2.) There are no Rover dealerships at present because Rover went under 2 years ago. At the time it badly needed a Chrysler. Logically Rover could be dusted off and used on future models through Land Rover dealers. Do you read the motoring press? If so you would know this.

 

3.) Starting prices on Jeeps are closer to Land Rover's over here. Just because there is a hug price difference does not mean you can't share floorpans and engines does it.....look at Volvo/ Ford.

 

4.) Ford missed and hit Jag in the head instead. Hence the cruddy Styling decisions. My last comment was that Cerebus seems ambitious. If they are brave then the may be thinking about expansion....

[LincolnFan]

Sell it to Cerberus if they're going to pay for it. Jaguar is bound to die anyway.

[RichardJensen]

1.) I meant a Land Rover could share a floorpan with a Jeep. A Chrysler could share a Jaguar floopan, unlike some Cerebus may realise that applying future Jag floopans to Chryslers would enhance Chrysler and be less damaging to Jag which uses Mondeo floorpans on the X type.

 

2.) There are no Rover dealerships at present because Rover went under 2 years ago. At the time it badly needed a Chrysler. Logically Rover could be dusted off and used on future models through Land Rover dealers. Do you read the motoring press? If so you would know this.

 

3.) Starting prices on Jeeps are closer to Land Rover's over here. Just because there is a hug price difference does not mean you can't share floorpans and engines does it.....look at Volvo/ Ford.

 

4.) Ford missed and hit Jag in the head instead. Hence the cruddy Styling decisions. My last comment was that Cerebus seems ambitious. If they are brave then the may be thinking about expansion....

Chrysler sharing a Jag platform. I wish you knew just how STUPID that sounds. Chrysler is lower rent, in the U.S. than Ford is in the U.K.

 

Rover dealerships would have some interest in a revised Rover brand, and if you knew that your legal system is about as litigious as ours, you'd realize that trying to start selling Rover through LR dealerships is just asking for lawsuit after lawsuit, not to mention that Chrysler's products would sell like hot crap pancakes in your snobby EU countries. These are American/Canadian built cars that are not very popular in America--how would putting them on the market under a dusted off brand name sold from a ridiculously inappropriate dealer network make any sense at all?

 

I don't care that starting prices for Jeeps OVER THERE are closer to LR prices. The reality is that--Grand Cherokee to LR3/Disco III aside, there is N-O room for overlap.

 

Oh yeah, the problem with Ford's decision to push Jag to 250,000 units a year was styling. Right. It was a g-r-e-a-t idea poorly executed. Sure. You bet. That too has got to be one of the stupidest things I've read here in a long time. Face it: Jaguar is not a volume luxury brand, it NEVER HAS BEEN and it NEVER WILL BE. Only by, say, rebadging the FWD Chrysler Sebring, could Jaguar get any volume, and if they do that, they will effectively strip Jaguar of any luxury pretenses.

[TStag]

Let me repeat this very s-l-o-w-l-y there are NO Rover dealers at present. Rover went bust 2 years ago. All the MG Rover dealers went down too. That's why MG is starting with 50 brand new dealers at launch with NO repeat NO legal implications. That legal issue that your talking about is purely an American problem. Selling new Rovers in Land Rover dealers ain't a problem.. Don't forget Rover group no longer exists, so any legal arrangements died with the old company. The brand was sold to new owners (Ford).

 

So you say a Chrysler couln't use a Jaguar platform. Then what floorpan does the Chrysler crossfire use? Hint it comes from Germany and is made by a company starting with the letter M....

 

There is nothing in what you said that say's Land Rover and Jeep can't share platforms. Hell the current Freelander uses the Focus platform and the old one used a Maestro platform from Austin Rover group.

 

Could Jaguar make 250,000 cars a year? Truth is I don't know either way. My original arguement is the same as Jerry Flint's. Cerebus may feel that most of Jag's problems are behind them and that Jag is on the way back. Maybe they are willing to back Jaguar in a much bigger way. Maybe Cerbus think they can take on and beat BMW.

 

The decision to take Jaguar retro was a truly awfull one. People always brought Jags because they were forward looking. I remember when Ford launched the last XJ model. There were gasps as the covers came off because it looked identical to the one it replaced, it wa like everyone knew Jag had got it badly wrong. Bearing in mind the UK is Jag's biggest market, then why oh why didn't Ford ask UK buyers what they wanted from a Jag? Why did they can the F type (a true halo car). Jag is in better shape than ever in some respects (like quality control and reliability) and who ever owns it simply needs to build from this base. Cerebus are'nt stupid. They want Jaguar because they know in Britain we still love it, we just refuse to buy cars that feel like they've been styled by a Public relations office in Detroit.

 

Ford can fix Jaguar they just need to listen to the people who buy them.

[Edstock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XirWfb4yN3Y...ted&search=

 

Top Gear's take on the Crossfire. Love it.

[kpc655]

1) Name the cost reductions: Can Dodge share the Caliber platform with the Jaguar C-XF? How many parts do you want to share between a $15k Dodge and a $70k Jaguar?

 

2) Owning the Rover name does NOT give anyone access to the Land Rover dealerships. There are Rover dealers that would have to be bought out first.

 

3) Jeep could share what platforms with LR? The Disco 3 & Grand Cherokee? Why not. The difference in starting price between the two models is ONLY $12k after all.

 

4) You remember what happened when Ford tried to give Jag a 'kick up the backside'

 

This whole idea is stupid.

 

turn back the clock 15 years..and we should have heard this...

 

1) Name the cost reductions: Can FORD share the TAURUS platform with the Jaguar C-XF? How many parts do you want to share between a $15k FORD and a $70k Jaguar?

 

4) You remember what happened when Ford tried to give Jag a 'kick up the backside'

 

This whole idea is stupid.

 

and still is.

[J-150]

When was Land Rover unfashionable? In the UK at least sales have never gone backwards only up. How about any other Ford brand? Name one which can match Land Rover for never having seen sales drop significantly? Land Rover can grow, new high volume Landie for starters and a production facility in China....

 

As for profit margins Land Rover admitted that they are the second most sought after dealerships in the world because the margins are so high (higher than BMW even).

 

 

a high volume LR?

 

Isn't that the same strategy that screwed Jag?

[wescoent]

a high volume LR?

 

Isn't that the same strategy that screwed Jag?

 

To be honest, I've always thought Land Rover has had a ton of potential to grow. Land Rover, for all intents and purposes, is a slightly more expensive British Jeep. With the Range Rover, the brand has become more of a status symbol than its humble roots.

 

There's a huge third world market, where the roads are iffy at best, where Toyota Land Cruiser dominate these days, where Defenders were the choice decades ago. I think Land Rover can split the Defender line into the military vehicle it currently is to compete with the H1 and G-Wagen, and a smaller, Wrangler-style offroader. This is an area where Ford and LR can REALLY collaborate, with Ford bringing out a Bronco, and LR bringing out a Defender Sport, or something to that degree, as a supremely functional boxy offroader with heavy-duty 4WD and such. I think the 3rd world would absolutely eat up something like that, especially if it were almost affordable (bare-bones models starting at 15-18k overseas).