World's Biggest R&D Spenders

[range]

LINK

 

 

 

[Pioneer]

Who's right?

The reality is, Toyota lives in both worlds: It spends more than any other carmaker on research and development -- $23 million a day -- and is the leading seller of clean hybrid cars.

 

LINK

[Pioneer]

You do realise that that blog lists a source from 2005, right?

 

EDIT: I noticed it also lists an article from the Detroit News from last Friday. The same day a female columnist states Toyota spends the most.

 

I think both of them are talking out of their ass.

Edited October 7, 2007 by Pioneer

[Ford Jellymoulds]

LINK

 

I might be a bit behind the times here, but l noticed that there was another link on your item, "Ford polishes Focus after consumer backlash", and l have got to say l have never been a big fan of the bland Focus but the cleaned up version does look like a bit of a winner. So well done Ford R&D budget looks like it has been well spent. How much do Toyota spent on reverse engineering anything innovative, probably more than it spends on development.

[range]

You do realise that that blog lists a source from 2005, right?

 

No, it actually quotes an AP story from Oct 5, 2007, reporting on the actual EU study on R&D expenditures. I didn't see any study mentioned whatsoever in the soundbite you posted.

Edited October 7, 2007 by range

[range]

You do realise that that blog lists a source from 2005, right?

 

EDIT: I noticed it also lists an article from the Detroit News from last Friday. The same day a female columnist states Toyota spends the most.

 

I think both of them are talking out of their ass.

 

One is talking out of their ass, and one is an actual study on the subject.

[Pioneer]

I will say this, no matter who is right Ford is not getting a very good return on their money considering the the current products they have. With the amount of money they supposedly spend, and the amount of time they have been spending it, they should have more and better products than anybody. Not scraping the bottom as they are now.

 

And they dare blame the line workers. Shameful. They should all be fired.

[jpd80]

I will say this, no matter who is right Ford is not getting a very good return on their money considering the the current products they have. With the amount of money they supposedly spend, and the amount of time they have been spending it, they should have more and better products than anybody. Not scraping the bottom as they are now.

 

And they dare blame the line workers. Shameful. They should all be fired.

 

Don't forget that's a rear view look at what has been.

We really haven't see the whole influence of Mulally's changes in PD and appointing Derrick Kuzak.

2007 is really about stopping all the internal money and resources wastage, Ford acheiveing huge gains in this area.

I would expect bang for bucks spent is another new internal Ford mantra, the days of endless cash for obscure reasons are over.

 

I also sense divisions are now quoting to deliver regional vehicles - eg, FoA winning the contract to build C2 Focus over South Africa.

Could this be a precursor for FNA sourcing replacement vehicles/platforms at economical prices?

A lot of changes happening that we're not being told about.

 

Another 6 plants closing means even more terminations and further improvements in efficiency.

Double edged sword Ford needs to swing until they achieve profitability

You can't keep selling $160 billion and not make a simple 5% profit - $8 Billion.

If it means going back to $120 billion in sales to make $6 Billion - they'll probably do it.

[Pioneer]

Don't forget that's a rear view look at what has been.

We really haven't see the whole influence of Mulally's changes in PD and appointing Derrick Kuzak.

 

What does Alan have to do with Ford having the highest R&D budget for at least the last 3 years, and the oldest lineup of any full-line car maker with the highest overall decline in marketshare?

 

That's right. Absolutely nothing.

[P71_CrownVic]

I will say this, no matter who is right Ford is not getting a very good return on their money considering the the current products they have. With the amount of money they supposedly spend, and the amount of time they have been spending it, they should have more and better products than anybody. Not scraping the bottom as they are now.

 

And they dare blame the line workers. Shameful. They should all be fired.

 

Yeah, talk about having nothing to show for the money you spent. At least...not in America.

[RichardJensen]

So, pioneer, when exactly will this grousing transport you back in time, to fix what was screwed up in the past?

[Pioneer]

So, pioneer, when exactly will this grousing transport you back in time, to fix what was screwed up in the past?

 

 

When is all the R&D money spent in the past going to fix Ford's current problems?

[LSFan00]

Don't forget that's a rear view look at what has been.

We really haven't see the whole influence of Mulally's changes in PD and appointing Derrick Kuzak.

2007 is really about stopping all the internal money and resources wastage, Ford acheiveing huge gains in this area.

I would expect bang for bucks spent is another new internal Ford mantra, the days of endless cash for obscure reasons are over.

 

I also sense divisions are now quoting to deliver regional vehicles - eg, FoA winning the contract to build C2 Focus over South Africa.

Could this be a precursor for FNA sourcing replacement vehicles/platforms at economical prices?

A lot of changes happening that we're not being told about.

 

Another 6 plants closing means even more terminations and further improvements in efficiency.

Double edged sword Ford needs to swing until they achieve profitability

You can't keep selling $160 billion and not make a simple 5% profit - $8 Billion.

If it means going back to $120 billion in sales to make $6 Billion - they'll probably do it.

 

I agree with your conclusion, by way of the following reasoning;

 

F won't make much until the core business in NA is profitable.

 

F NA won't be (truly) profitable until it has class leading cars.

 

Fusion/Taurus/Focus are currently not first in any prestige/quality rankings that matter (which is to say; 1 out of 20 consumers would favor over a Honda/Toyota, all factors otherwise equal).

 

Those 3 product lines aren't about to be replaced; RJ's of the senior F management world think that the past (different NA platforms, models, dumbed down to 'our' prices/standards) is how F should be run.

 

F will shrink a whole lot more than folks think it will, to get to that target.

[RichardJensen]

RJ's of the senior F management world think that the past (different NA platforms, models, dumbed down to 'our' prices/standards) is how F should be run.

Yeah. That would be because I think importing high demand EU vehicles to the U.S. and selling them for lower unit profit is stupid on any of a variety of levels, and because I think that Ford NA has to cultivate its own look instead of copying FoE (c.f. Fusion, Five Hundred for Ford NA cues vs. FoE cues).

 

 

 

 

I'm a moron because I think the U.S. and the E.U. are fundamentally different places.

 

Sure. Whatever. Keep reaching for the stars.

[RichardJensen]

When is all the R&D money spent in the past going to fix Ford's current problems?

What is your point? I don't think you can find anyone on this board that thinks Ford has spent its R&D money wisely over the last decade.

[Pioneer]

What is your point? I don't think you can find anyone on this board that thinks Ford has spent its R&D money wisely over the last decade.

 

 

It's been awhile since we've totally agreed on something.

[RichardJensen]

It's been awhile since we've totally agreed on something.

I happen to think blaming the UAW for Ford's woes is idiotic as well, but I don't think that anyone in Ford's upper echelons believes that.

[jpd80]

Fusion/Taurus/Focus are currently not first in any prestige/quality rankings that matter (which is to say; 1 out of 20 consumers would favor over a Honda/Toyota, all factors otherwise equal).

 

Those 3 product lines aren't about to be replaced; RJ's of the senior F management world think that the past (different NA platforms, models, dumbed down to 'our' prices/standards) is how F should be run.

Why does everyone leaps to products when we talk about saving money?

The problem is not with product so much but how the money flow is managed

I was talking more about Ford's changing internally to save money before ever discussing products.

[Furious1Auto]

LINK

How else do you expect them to report record losses in order to force their employees to concede, while they could have their books reflecting a profit?

[RichardJensen]

Yeah. Because they could spend =$0= on new product, and report a $7B profit.

 

And then go out of business.

[akirby]

When is all the R&D money spent in the past going to fix Ford's current problems?

 

In the past it was going to 2 different Focus platforms, 2 different CD platforms, a dedicated mustang platform, totally separate Australian platforms and engines, multiple engine programs, etc. etc. Not to mention Volvo, LR and Jag and Aston Martin.

 

Mulally is 100% responsible for forcing future platform sharing which will eliminate a lot of redundant R&D.

 

Has anyone compared the spend per vehicle? Ford has a huge number of vehicles compared to other mfrs especially if you include the PAG brands.

[bolita]

In the past it was going to 2 different Focus platforms, 2 different CD platforms, a dedicated mustang platform, totally separate Australian platforms and engines, multiple engine programs, etc. etc. Not to mention Volvo, LR and Jag and Aston Martin.

 

Mulally is 100% responsible for forcing future platform sharing which will eliminate a lot of redundant R&D.

 

Has anyone compared the spend per vehicle? Ford has a huge number of vehicles compared to other mfrs especially if you include the PAG brands.

 

I think that one should also evaluated R&D expenditure as a % of number of vehicles sold, as you clearly pointed out. I am sure that MB is number in R&D expenditure if you go that route.

 

Now, IMHO I would come to believe that what was spent in R&D three years ago would only surface to the consumer just now...and perhaps EU is being benefited by earlier surfacing of all this investmen a few years back.

 

I am in no way condecending that Ford NA probably blew it in many areas, but perhaps a few more years down the line, NA will also come in line with what EU and other regions are doing within Ford

 

It is also to point out that IMHO given todays Ford image in NA is so bad, that even though you have a good product (eg Taurus) it wont sell. We can go in circles for hours but Toyota produces very bland products ()eg Camry) that sell well (becuase they pretty good but have a rock solid image).

 

Unfortunately, it will take many many years for Ford to rebuild its image in the US. It wont only take a few good products, it'll take many excellent products over many years to get there. That fact alone, makes a big difference with what goes on in EU...

[jpd80]

The past is gone, big changes at Ford behind the scenes.

Ford needs to concentrate on selling its own products otherwise all the rest is meaningless.

[Furious1Auto]

Yeah. Because they could spend =$0= on new product, and report a $7B profit.

 

And then go out of business.

My point is that if they hadn't lost sight or concern for what their customers wanted, than they would not have waited until they where almost out of business to do something about it! Now they want us to pay for their mistakes!

Edited October 9, 2007 by Furious1Auto

[akirby]

My point is that if they hadn't lost sight or concern for what their customers wanted, than they would not have waited until they where almost out of business to do something about it! Now they want us to pay for their mistakes!

 

Take your pity party back to the employee forum. You're not being asked to pay for anybody's mistakes. You're being asked to accept fair market compensation - period.

 

In fact they were doing exactly that - giving their customers what they wanted: SUVs and trucks. That's where the volume was and that's where the profits were. Where they failed was in predicting high gas prices and a huge decline in the demand for large trucks and SUVs and they failed to diversify the product portfolio to lessen the impact of such market swings. In other words - they put all their eggs in one basket and the basket broke so now they're playing catch-up.