DOA: Mercury and Mark LT

[suv_guy_19]

As I understand it, their goal was about 12-15K, which isn't that far from actual target. I'm looking thru the Ford site for the media release about it, but it's outdated info not on their website.

 

The one with the 100K goal was the Avalanche.

 

I never said anything about a 100k goal. I said based on the addition of the mark LT and the projected increase in F-series sales at the time. I'm not sure how much each was supposed to contribute. It wasn't Ford that said that anyway, it was Motortrend.

[ANTAUS]

Motortrend said that? Well, that itself says alot. THey have lofty aspirations then are quick to kill a vehicle when they don't sell as THEY had expected lol

[DCK]

When they axe the Mark LT they should axe the people who approved it, and axe the accountants who only approved enough development to slide in a new grill.

 

The Mark LT could of been so much more, a true luxury truck but Ford just couldn't be bothered to do anything more than a new grill. The Mark LT was the poster child of how fucked up Ford had become.

 

They need to wash their hands of the failures and welcome in the new lincoln product that is actually mroe than a new grill.

[68Cougar]

When they axe the Mark LT they should axe the people who approved it, and axe the accountants who only approved enough development to slide in a new grill.

 

The Mark LT could of been so much more, a true luxury truck but Ford just couldn't be bothered to do anything more than a new grill. The Mark LT was the poster child of how fucked up Ford had become.

 

They need to wash their hands of the failures and welcome in the new lincoln product that is actually mroe than a new grill.

No the Mark LT was a good idea for the time. Lincoln needed volume badly, and the quickest way to get it was to badge-engineer a truck. Lincoln has better cars now to make up for it, and better ones in the pipeline.

[68Cougar]

Question is, does Ford want to walk away from 300-400K unit sales from Mercury ? And if, and, or but, can they supply 200K units of Lincoln vehicles to make up for those L/M dealerships ?

I don't think it's worth keeping Mercury at this point. Ford only needs to make two versions of cars, and will be able to make them not look so similar. Ford will not have to use money to advertise Mercury's version of its cars (goodbye Jill). Mercury is a distraction for Ford at this time, and with Ford's price points moving up and Lincoln's moving down, there just isn't a reason for Mercury anymore.

[2005Explorer]

I don't think it's worth keeping Mercury at this point. Ford only needs to make two versions of cars, and will be able to make them not look so similar. Ford will not have to use money to advertise Mercury's version of its cars (goodbye Jill). Mercury is a distraction for Ford at this time, and with Ford's price points moving up and Lincoln's moving down, there just isn't a reason for Mercury anymore.

 

The problem with dumping Mercury is that I don't think every Mercury customer is just going to buy a Ford or move up to a Lincoln. Mercury has been selling around 175,000-200,000 vehicles a year. It is nothing like their sales in the 1970's or 1980's, however that is a lot of sales to walk away from. You might get 50% or so of Mercury customers to buy a Ford or Lincoln instead. There are different reasons, but a big one is leaving their dealership if they do business at a Lincoln/Mercury dealership and they might not want to spend the extra thousands for a Lincoln. It seems there are still a lot of stand alone Lincoln/Mercury dealers out there.

 

GM assumed that all the Oldsmobile customers would just choose a vehicle from a different division. I am sure that Ford is assuming the same thing in regards to Mercury. The assumption proved to be wrong for GM. A lot of Oldsmobile customers moved on to non-GM vehicles. Many felt betrayed and others just did not like what else GM offered. If Ford dumps Mercury (and lets remember it is all speculation at this time) then expect more marketshare to be lost.

[Biker16]

there needs to be a shift.

 

We can no longer handicap our products just to protect another.

 

WE not veto a focus RS just to protect the mustang.

 

mercury created an artificial ceiling for Ford products.

 

think about it this way, without the Milan we could have money to build a performance fusion sedan or even a fusion coupe.

 

without the overhead of a mercury dealership.

[DCK]

there needs to be a shift.

 

We can no longer handicap our products just to protect another.

 

WE not veto a focus RS just to protect the mustang.

 

mercury created an artificial ceiling for Ford products.

 

think about it this way, without the Milan we could have money to build a performance fusion sedan or even a fusion coupe.

 

without the overhead of a mercury dealership.

But if Mercury generated more revenue than they spent, then that is more money for product development than if mercury didn't existed.

[Biker16]

But if Mercury generated more revenue than they spent, then that is more money for product development than if mercury didn't existed.

would we have the same revenue if we added models to ford?

 

plus look at the volume ford has lost in the last few years. cna we afford to expend energy and effort keeping a marginal brand around? when the grand Marquis dies, what would be left of mercury?

 

Mulally explained it this way:

 

 

“The neatest thing about that is that you end up with more investment per vehicle and that consistency of purpose,” Mulally said. “Clearly, this is different from Ford in the past.”

Edited September 4, 2007 by Biker16

[Traveler]

Well, here's a crazy idea...and one that Ford can move to do right away.

 

First, kill the Crown Vic completely. Equip police with the Grand Marquis GS. Police have used Mercury sedans in the past. And the Mercurys look more like their Ford counterparts than ever before. St. Thomas can produce just the Grand Marquis and the Town Car for the duration of the Panther life. Next, instead of producing the Interceptor as a Ford, build it as a Mercury and sell it as the Mercury flagship.

 

Ford is attempting to appeal to a more youthful market and many of those do not covet a big V8 RWD sedan. Instead, put this car in the Mercury stable.

[silvrsvt]

would we have the same revenue if we added models to ford?

 

plus look at the volume ford has lost in the last few years. cna we afford to expend energy and effort keeping a marginal brand around? when the grand Marquis dies, what would be left of mercury?

 

Mulally explained it this way:

“The neatest thing about that is that you end up with more investment per vehicle and that consistency of purpose,” Mulally said. “Clearly, this is different from Ford in the past.”

 

 

i think the best example of this is the Flex...they got rid of the silders and went hog wide with a nicer interior for it...

 

Well, here's a crazy idea...and one that Ford can move to do right away.

 

First, kill the Crown Vic completely. Equip police with the Grand Marquis GS. Police have used Mercury sedans in the past. And the Mercurys look more like their Ford counterparts than ever before. St. Thomas can produce just the Grand Marquis and the Town Car for the duration of the Panther life. Next, instead of producing the Interceptor as a Ford, build it as a Mercury and sell it as the Mercury flagship.

 

Ford is attempting to appeal to a more youthful market and many of those do not covet a big V8 RWD sedan. Instead, put this car in the Mercury stable.

 

Why even bother?

Edited September 4, 2007 by silvrsvt

[630land]

"A lot of Oldsmobile customers moved on to non-GM vehicles." Actually they passed on. Olds was in free fall, and not enough 'young hip' buyers were getting Aleros and Auroras. Also, those Silouettes sure were 'great products' werent they??

 

"Many felt betrayed and others just did not like what else GM offered." As if the Alero was 'so much better' than an equal Grand Am?? The Intrigue was just another cookie cutter W bdoy, with squeaks and rattles. Olds started dying in the 70's when the Chevy motors were dropped in them.

 

"If Ford dumps Mercury then expect more marketshare to be lost." Booo f-n hooo. Real car buyers DO NOT CARE about 1950-70 car names and trivia!!! Go to a growing, modern, less 'old thinking' region far from the Detroit/Cleveland Rust Belt, such and Denver, Pheonix, Las Vegas, Miami, Charlotte, Seattle, Los Angeles, or even Chicago, and people don't see any reason to buy a Merc over a Ford. And they dont care about 'brand differentiation' within the old Big 3, like the old timers in UAWville.

 

Ford brand name has to equal Toyota in volume and equity. L-M dealers have high ratings, how about sharing the wealth? Badge engineering is a huge waste of $$ and time. Get over the old days of 'all dealers have to have the same car".

 

Anyone who thinks a Mercury is a 'better' car than a Ford, even though they run down the same assembly line, lives in some backwards thinking bubble.

[RichardJensen]

Y'know... GM's numbers after they canceled Oldsmobile reflected that they had dropped a division. I don't think all Oldsmobile customers died concurrently with the cancellation of the division. I think a lot of Oldsmobile customers bought Camries and Avalons.

 

Thing is, a Buick and an Oldsmobile are interchangeable--except that they aren't. People buy brands of things. They don't just buy things. Don't believe me? Try shoe-shopping for your teenage son at Payless.

[68Cougar]

Y'know... GM's numbers after they canceled Oldsmobile reflected that they had dropped a division. I don't think all Oldsmobile customers died concurrently with the cancellation of the division. I think a lot of Oldsmobile customers bought Camries and Avalons.

If Olds was still around, those people still would have bought Camries and Avalons. GM was losing market share before the death of Olds as well as after. GM did the right thing, since all their name plates were stepping on each other in the marketplace. The so-called "middle brands" are dead. Mercury used to fill the price points between Lincoln and Ford, but now Lincoln on the bottom and Ford at the top overlap each other.

Edited September 4, 2007 by 68Cougar

[Edstock]

IMHO, the money GM spent in creating the Saturn division and the expanded Cadillac line-up robbed Olds/Pontiac/Buick of the resources they needed to stay competitive. It meant that these divisions had to use the push-rod 3.8 and the 60° push-rod family that were 1980-vintage, way, way longer than they should have. Olds' great mistake was cancelling the Cutlass model-name. IMHO, if the Intrigue had been sold under the CUtlass moniker, it would have sold a lot better. Kind of like 500/Taurus.

[RichardJensen]

GM was losing market share before the death of Olds as well as after.

True. However canceling Olds did nothing to slow the decline elsewhere.

 

The theory was that killing Olds would free 'resources' for other divisions allowing them to build better profits. To date, that theory hasn't exactly borne fruit. Also, the idea was that the Intrigue, for instance, competed too much with the Regal, Century, and Grand Prix; but look at the sales numbers during the decline of the Intrigue--all these other cars continued their declines as well.

 

Essentially, what I'm saying is that it's hard to prove that killing Oldsmobile benefited GM. Especially since they had to pay all those Olds dealers for the privilege.

[mercurymichael]

Ford would be foolish to not develope and save Mercury. I will not drive a Ford, unless they revive a decent Thunderbird, and cannot afford a Lincoln, unless it continues to trend down market. A loaded Ford is not an upscale car and a stripped Lincoln is not really a luxury car--Mercury always filled this gap and made sence doing it.

[mercurymichael]

IMHO, the money GM spent in creating the Saturn division and the expanded Cadillac line-up robbed Olds/Pontiac/Buick of the resources they needed to stay competitive. It meant that these divisions had to use the push-rod 3.8 and the 60° push-rod family that were 1980-vintage, way, way longer than they should have. Olds' great mistake was cancelling the Cutlass model-name. IMHO, if the Intrigue had been sold under the CUtlass moniker, it would have sold a lot better. Kind of like 500/Taurus.

Completely agree--Oldsmobile, while far from my favorite gm division did not need to die. In fact there last models were some of their best looking ever i.m.o.

[NickF1011]

Completely agree--Oldsmobile, while far from my favorite gm division did not need to die. In fact there last models were some of their best looking ever i.m.o.

 

Best looking and they still didn't sell. The brand had no relevance. Everything Oldsmobile did, Buick could do instead. It will just take a generation or two for the target consumers to remember that the other even existed.

 

The same likely holds true with Mercury. It will take awhile for the Mercury buyers to get over its disappearance, and in another generation, likely no one will remember it existed and will automatically gravitate toward Ford or Lincoln instead if they are looking anywhere in a domestic's direction. I wish Mercury would stay around too, but unless they come up with some genius plan to make it relevant again, I don't see the point.

[mercurymichael]

Anyone who thinks a Mercury is a 'better' car than a Ford, even though they run down the same assembly line, lives in some backwards thinking bubble.

I don't think they are better--they just look it. Kind of like jeans bought at Wal Mart vs The Gap vs Nieman Marcus. More than likely they are all made in China and will wear similarly, however some will prefer Neiman Marcus over The Gap and The Gap over Wal Mart based on how the experience makes them feel, what they can afford and how much they care about a pair of jeans. I cannot afford Niemans and would not cross the street for Wal Mart and The Gap is closed--guess I'll look elsewhere!

[FordBuyer]

Best looking and they still didn't sell. The brand had no relevance. Everything Oldsmobile did, Buick could do instead. It will just take a generation or two for the target consumers to remember that the other even existed.

 

The same likely holds true with Mercury. It will take awhile for the Mercury buyers to get over its disappearance, and in another generation, likely no one will remember it existed and will automatically gravitate toward Ford or Lincoln instead if they are looking anywhere in a domestic's direction. I wish Mercury would stay around too, but unless they come up with some genius plan to make it relevant again, I don't see the point.

 

I would say that only chance for Mercury surviving is if Ford plans on importing some of the vehicles it makes overseas into N.A. market. And I doubt that since Ford has already stated that N.A. will be using global platforms, not importing vehicles made overseas for other markets. The next Fusion and Focus will be using gobal platform, but will be designed specifically for N.A.

[NickF1011]

I would say that only chance for Mercury surviving is if Ford plans on importing some of the vehicles it makes overseas into N.A. market. And I doubt that since Ford has already stated that N.A. will be using global platforms, not importing vehicles made overseas for other markets. The next Fusion and Focus will be using gobal platform, but will be designed specifically for N.A.

 

It doesn't need to be "European this" or "Australian that" or "Japanese wannabe"...it just needs identity. Nobody knows what Mercury stands for....not even Ford.

[pcsario]

The 'insider' reports have pretty uniformly said the Mark LT missed targets. I've never seen a report that they hit their targets. I think Ford wanted to sell 12k a year, and the Mark LT hasn't hit that.

12k is the number they sold last year. The internal target for the project was 20k.

 

 

"A lot of Oldsmobile customers moved on to non-GM vehicles." Actually they passed on. Olds was in free fall, and not enough 'young hip' buyers were getting Aleros and Auroras. Also, those Silouettes sure were 'great products' werent they??

 

"Many felt betrayed and others just did not like what else GM offered." As if the Alero was 'so much better' than an equal Grand Am?? The Intrigue was just another cookie cutter W bdoy, with squeaks and rattles. Olds started dying in the 70's when the Chevy motors were dropped in them.

 

"If Ford dumps Mercury then expect more marketshare to be lost." Booo f-n hooo. Real car buyers DO NOT CARE about 1950-70 car names and trivia!!! Go to a growing, modern, less 'old thinking' region far from the Detroit/Cleveland Rust Belt, such and Denver, Pheonix, Las Vegas, Miami, Charlotte, Seattle, Los Angeles, or even Chicago, and people don't see any reason to buy a Merc over a Ford. And they dont care about 'brand differentiation' within the old Big 3, like the old timers in UAWville.

 

Ford brand name has to equal Toyota in volume and equity. L-M dealers have high ratings, how about sharing the wealth? Badge engineering is a huge waste of $ and time. Get over the old days of 'all dealers have to have the same car".

 

Anyone who thinks a Mercury is a 'better' car than a Ford, even though they run down the same assembly line, lives in some backwards thinking bubble.

Best post so far. I can't believe we are in complete agreement on something.

 

 

Ford would be foolish to not develope and save Mercury. I will not drive a Ford (...) guess I'll look elsewhere!

You people are as annoying as the Panther mafia. Ford would be even more foolish if they choose to save Mercury, instead of improving Ford to the level it needs to be, to be truly competitive.

 

The Walmart of cars approach simply didn't work. Next Fusion will need to be really on par with the segment leaders. The only Fords people seem to be interested in, are the ones who show the most effort, or are a Top 3 choice (F150, Edge, Mustang, etc).

 

As for "losing" 200k sales... as was pointed out, people dumped GM because ALL of their cars were shit, not because grandpa planned some kind of vendetta against the company. If we're using that kind of logic, then just realize for a second how much sales FORD has lost thanks to Mercury, mainly due to the invisible barrier Biker was talking about earlier, which makes people dismiss Ford as a "second rate brand", because that's how most of their (handicapped) products are perceived.

 

It's ridiculous how Ford has to make the Fusion's interior look like complete shit on purpose, just so a Mercury variant can be justified, while Honda, Nissan, etc. don't have to worry about it and just make the best cars they can. Save Mercury? No, SAVE FORD, and stop these jokes:

Edited September 5, 2007 by pcsario

[RichardJensen]

And once again, a press photo is used to prop up an opinion on interior quality.

 

I'm assuming that the objections you have to the Fusion, vs. the Milan, are such things as the -different- fake materials, and the fonts used on the Fusion (matte silver vs. chrome instrument bezels, red leather "Sport" inserts vs. Alcantara suede, and Eurostile extended as opposed to Univers).

 

Reality is that absent the Milan, most of those things wouldn't be in the Fusion anyway.

 

Ford has used Eurostile since the 80s. They are still using it on their newest models. It goes away (finally) on the Flex. Eurostile is seen as quite out of date, true, but without the Milan, the Fusion would have still had it.

 

Then there's the buff nickel or aluminum or whatever on the Fusion's gauge surrounds. Again, it seems unlikely, seeing that chrome is used so sparingly elsewhere in the Fusion's interior that chrome would've been used here, if there wasn't a Milan. And why assert one is better than the other? Can such be categorically stated? Or is it just opinion?

 

Ditto the perforated red leather inserts on the Sport Appearance package vs. Alcantara inserts on the Milan--why would you assume that -both- options would be on a Fusion without a Milan? Furthermore, who is to say that one is 'better' than the other.

 

Then you get down to nitpicking the fake materials, which IMO, is extremely silly.

 

Frankly the assertion that the Fusion was 'decontented' to improve the appearance of the Milan is not sustainable, as the bulk of the material used in each model is (color aside) exactly the same.

 

The assertion that the Milan 'looks better' than the Fusion is debatable, and if anything suggests the viability of the Milan as a distinct vehicle, as assuredly there are many willing to debate the opposite position--that the Fusion looks better than the Milan.

[pcsario]

No, as a matter of fact I think its uglier on the outside. My point was that, if you want a less grotesque tan interior for the Fusion, even if you have the cash for the SEL model, you wouldn't be able to get it, all because someone in Dearborn thought it was better to invest hundreds of millions of dollars on a rebadge, than on making the Fusion be the best car it could've been in all aspects. I only consider that interior a simple way of making the one for the Ford less ugly. Whoever doesn't want an all black interior, is stuck with something like this:

 

 

And as you admit, Ford saves NO money, so yes, they still feel their bread and butter customers should be fucked over to justify a Mercury rebadge. Take the nav out and even the base Milan looks like that pic. Fake or not, that trim & clock are FREE and standard on every version, and the base model costs less than 1k more than a base Fusion, so this is hardly a cost-driven decision.

 

Aluminum/silver inserts are a huge part of J Mays' vision for Ford interiors. Dearborn took them away because "the Mercury just has to look better, decontent or uglify the Ford". Want more proof? Look no further than the steering wheel of the outgoing Mondeo, and those for the Montego and the 500. And the first pics of the F150 interior. Ford NA interiors are indeed decontented and we're being deprived from the interiors Ford needs. But that's another debate.

 

My main point remains: Kill Mercury already and remove that invisible ceiling.

Edited September 5, 2007 by pcsario