LincolnFan Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 IIRC according to the japanese law, having %25 of the companies shares allows you to own it or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one2gamble Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Some think Ford should let Mazda go. Mazda has made rumblings about buying itself out of Ford ownership. Some think they don't do enough for Ford. They do balk at Ford plans. Their quality can be suspect. Their fleet does not help Ford's CAFE. Their sales do not help market share. Recently they opted out of the 2.5 engine program. Let them go and take LR/Jag with them. Why not just take complete control of them so they cant "opt out" of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Ford doesn't own Mazda. The have a controlling interest (34%). Big difference. What is the difference? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) What is the difference? My understanding is that, according to Japanese law, owning 33% or more of a company is regarded as a controlling interest (as someone mentioned above). With a controlling interest, Ford calls the shots and doesn't have to invest the additonal $$ to buy 100% interest. So, AFAIK, there's no real need for Ford to own a higher percentage. If anyone doubts who is in control, look back at how many American executives Ford has placed in charge of Mazda (Mark Fields and Lewis Booth come to mind). Ford definitely pulls the strings at Mazda. Edited July 10, 2007 by Harley Lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) My understanding is that, according to Japanese law, owning 33% or more of a company is regarded as a controlling interest (as someone mentioned above). With a controlling interest, Ford calls the shots and doesn't have to invest the additonal $$ to buy 100% interest. So, AFAIK, there's no real need for Ford to own a higher percentage. If anyone doubts who is in control, look back at how many American executives Ford has placed in charge of Mazda (Mark Fields and Lewis Booth come to mind). Ford definitely pulls the strings at Mazda. Thank you. I trully understand and have knowledge of Mazda history and Japanese law. My point was about divesting Mazda more than it was about ownership/controlling interest. Mazda wants out and that was my point. This is the inside line. Edited July 10, 2007 by Blue II Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 AFAIK, the B segment is popular here in Canada and the Mazda 2 would do fine without stealing sales from the Mazda 3. As well by comparision, the Toyota Yaris is doing well through advertising and the Corolla is older in looks and design, the sales may change when the new one comes out. As for the Nissan Versa and Sentra, both are pretty close in age by a model year so I don't have numbers. The Honda Fit is doing well even with a New Civic out. It reminds me of the 90's Civics in fit and finish. Okay but needs work. Maybe people who are finally getting rid of their Civics go to a Fit because it's familiar. Who can say? As for this Mazda/Ford thing. I wouldn't like them to split but what's best for both companies has to take precedence. 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.