Mays to redesign Ford design unit

[RichardJensen]

Ford has cut incentives while GM has kept them flat. You can debate the wisdom of either decision--it is not as though GM has grown marketshare while cutting incentives. Moreover, the question was the validity of Saturn as 'proof' that GM has mastered global design.

[BORG]

You brought Chevy into the conversation, so I'm making a point that it was undeserved.

[ShockFX]

GM is profitable, GM is increasing marketshare in a soft market, GM has rationalized its global position at least 5 years ahead of Ford. Chevy is the best selling brand in America and about to get a massive bread and butter infusion of vehicles. The timing may have been odd, but they are still moving much faster and more aggresively than Ford. Ford may have a better Taurus, but the market for large cars is so soft and non-fickle that Chevy's Impala update was a far wiser use of resources.

 

GM is in terrible shape in NA. They are having problems and aren't that profitable with an all new truck and SUV lineup. Too many brands, too many cars, too many dealers, just too much of everything. Globally GM is in great shape. Their position in China is solid, Europe is great except for the idea to introduce Chevrolet. GM NA is just so bloated. 2 years they will be in terrible shape with way too much capacity again.

[RichardJensen]

You brought Chevy into the conversation, so I'm making a point that it was undeserved.

Chevy is the 'most popular brand' on the strength of higher incentives than Ford, and higher fleet volumes.

 

Chevy has been starved for quality new product, in order to feed marginal brands such as Cadillac, Saturn, and Buick.

 

Chevy was originally off the Lambda program, they are still making do with a platform that is now old enough to vote and will be old enough to drink before it gets replaced, they have, in short, gotten the raw end of the GM product 'blitz'.

 

 

 

 

And their marketing is terrible--worse than Ford's.

 

----

 

But we were talking about the poor precedent of looking at Saturn's exceptionally generic 'anywhere' styling as proof that GM has already done what Ford needs to do (they haven't, IMO if GM was using Opel styling on CHEVROLET cars, they would be doing what Ford has to do, but they're not so I stand by my initial opinion).

[jpd80]

they have, in short, gotten the raw end of the GM product 'blitz'.

Should that read GM product "bLUTZ"?

 

Edited November 6, 2007 by jpd80

[MKII]

I think that another huge issue for Ford is that the brand is positioned differently in Europe than in the US. Its definitively more premium in Europe than the US...

 

But does it have to continue to be positioned differently?

Is the perception of Ford in N.A. any reason the company is in the position it is currently in?

[bolita]

But does it have to continue to be positioned differently?

Is the perception of Ford in N.A. any reason the company is in the position it is currently in?

 

IMHO, yes...

[BORG]

Chevy is the 'most popular brand' on the strength of higher incentives than Ford, and higher fleet volumes.

 

Chevy has been starved for quality new product, in order to feed marginal brands such as Cadillac, Saturn, and Buick.

 

Chevy was originally off the Lambda program, they are still making do with a platform that is now old enough to vote and will be old enough to drink before it gets replaced, they have, in short, gotten the raw end of the GM product 'blitz'.

And their marketing is terrible--worse than Ford's.

 

----

 

But we were talking about the poor precedent of looking at Saturn's exceptionally generic 'anywhere' styling as proof that GM has already done what Ford needs to do (they haven't, IMO if GM was using Opel styling on CHEVROLET cars, they would be doing what Ford has to do, but they're not so I stand by my initial opinion).

 

The Traverse is a Lambda and will be in production before Flex is on sale. Ford doesn't have an answer to Lambda until the next Explorer. A fresh new Malibu on a global chassis as opposed to the Fusion on a local chassis. Chevy is doing good things less incremental than Ford. I don't disagree that Chevy is a poorly managed brand but their product turn around is happening very swiftly now. GM is where Ford hopes to be in 5 years.

 

Collectively GM is targeting a broader audience with lower volumes at each brand. Its the same story with Ford/Lincoln/Mercury. Brands targeting specific consumers but using the same fundamental hardware. As for marginal brands, Cadillac will be established as a global luxury brand, something Ford will soon be loosing entirely and it is the biggest growing segment in Asia. GM is investing in its global position, Ford is not and that is why the future looks particularly bleak for Ford even if they do turn around NA, they don't have their global operations to fall back on.

Edited November 6, 2007 by BORG

[bolita]

The Traverse is a Lambda and will be in production before Flex is on sale. Ford doesn't have an answer to Lambda until the next Explorer. A fresh new Malibu on a global chassis as opposed to the Fusion on a local chassis. Chevy is doing good things less incremental than Ford. I don't disagree that Chevy is a poorly managed brand but their product turn around is happening very swiftly now. GM is where Ford hopes to be in 5 years.

 

Collectively GM is targeting a broader audience with lower volumes at each brand. Its the same story with Ford/Lincoln/Mercury. Brands targeting specific consumers but using the same fundamental hardware. As for marginal brands, Cadillac will be established as a global luxury brand, something Ford will soon be loosing entirely and it is the biggest growing segment in Asia. GM is investing in its global position, Ford is not and that is why the future looks particularly bleak for Ford even if they do turn around NA, they don't have their global operations to fall back on.

 

I believe that Ford is in trouble in NA and to a lesser extent in the ASEAN area. However, in the next 3 years, there will be new product for ASEAN which should help Ford recover.

 

Their South American operations, are extremeley profitable and growing. I think it has been well established that Ford's operations in Europe are also doing well and growing in the ex-Soviet block countries. Ford Middle East, is growing and very profitable as are China operations.

 

So, I really don't share your vision that Ford doesn't have global operations to fall back on.

[LincolnFan]

The Traverse is a Lambda and will be in production before Flex is on sale. Ford doesn't have an answer to Lambda until the next Explorer.

 

I thought the Flex was the answer to the Lambda? I hardly have any faith in GM, I think the Traverse will look a lot like it's siblings, I mean the triplets already look too much alike imo, but then again, I have only seen the GMC in real life. We don't have Saturn nor Buick here.

 

A fresh new Malibu on a global chassis as opposed to the Fusion on a local chassis.

 

*applause*, finally, someone brings up the Malibu platform. Global Platform, eh? So what? How old is the chassis? About as old as the Focus chassis. It's funny how GM fanboys call the C170 old when the Malibu is just as old if not older, not only that, but it doesn't support AWD either. The Fusion's bones aren't as old as the Malibu's.

 

Chevy is doing good things less incremental than Ford. I don't disagree that Chevy is a poorly managed brand but their product turn around is happening very swiftly now. GM is where Ford hopes to be in 5 years.

 

I don't want Ford to be like GM, GM good news always come with 10 bad news, the new Silvarado interior sucks, did they really upgrade it from the GMT-800? I didn't notice much difference. The Cobalt never brought anything new. It's boring as hell. The Wimpala is still Wimpy and GM will chicken out and won't make a RWD Impala, they just don't have the guts.

 

Collectively GM is targeting a broader audience with lower volumes at each brand. Its the same story with Ford/Lincoln/Mercury. Brands targeting specific consumers but using the same fundamental hardware. As for marginal brands, Cadillac will be established as a global luxury brand, something Ford will soon be loosing entirely and it is the biggest growing segment in Asia. GM is investing in its global position, Ford is not and that is why the future looks particularly bleak for Ford even if they do turn around NA, they don't have their global operations to fall back on.

 

Lincoln is already in China with the Town Car and the Navigator, Wish if they'd start shipping some of the New-Lincoln products (MKZ/MKX/MKS/MKFlex). Buick is famous in China because of some important politician who loved Buicks with a passion, it's not GM's advertising or anything else. (Although it was GM's product, but that was way back in the day)

[RichardJensen]

The Traverse is a Lambda and will be in production before Flex is on sale. Ford doesn't have an answer to Lambda until the next Explorer. A fresh new Malibu on a global chassis as opposed to the Fusion on a local chassis. Chevy is doing good things less incremental than Ford. I don't disagree that Chevy is a poorly managed brand but their product turn around is happening very swiftly now. GM is where Ford hopes to be in 5 years.

 

Collectively GM is targeting a broader audience with lower volumes at each brand. Its the same story with Ford/Lincoln/Mercury. Brands targeting specific consumers but using the same fundamental hardware. As for marginal brands, Cadillac will be established as a global luxury brand, something Ford will soon be loosing entirely and it is the biggest growing segment in Asia. GM is investing in its global position, Ford is not and that is why the future looks particularly bleak for Ford even if they do turn around NA, they don't have their global operations to fall back on.

I never said Chevy was -off- Lambda, I said they were 'originally' off the program.

 

Which they were.

 

It's why the Chevy model will be built at Spring Hill.

 

It'll also be neck and neck whether the Flex arrives before/after the Traverse.

 

---

 

Furthermore, the Malibu is, as Lincolnfan mentioned, on -Epsilon- not -Epsilon II-, it's debuting on a platform that is (as has been pointed out) as old as the Focus platform. And it's not AWD capable, which is why they've got this whole other platform for their CUVs.

 

---

 

Finally, a look at Cadillac's 'success' in Europe should give you pause before you confidently assert that they -will- be a global brand. Why not say that's the plan, and have done.

 

----

 

 

 

 

 

 

But all that is beside the point.

 

The point is, GM is not using global styling on CHEVROLET, which is why they are NOT already doing what Ford aims to do with the Ford brand.

 

--

 

Oh, and one other dig. Ford is far ahead of GM in reliability and initial quality, and arguably ahead of GM in the breadth of their quality designs. GM may be ahead of Ford in capacity utilization and parts sharing, but Ford is ahead of GM in -quality, -design, -driving dynamics, -powertrain sophistication, -market segmentation.

[BORG]

The Traverse is a larger and more conventional large crossover than the wagon-like Flex, not to mention the Flex will be more expensive. They are not targeting the same audience. I expect an Explorer successor to be more appropriate, I just wish Ford was positioning itself more aggressively on this segment, as it's done with the Edge.

 

I respect Ford for it's deep house cleaning, but with the assumption that things will work out in the end. They will be a VERY clean and lean company at the end of this process, far more so than GM or even Toyota.

 

I'm not sure the progress Richards states is quantitative enough.

 

GM has the resources to attempt a market penetration with Caddy, Ford doesn't so I don't expect Ford to try the same nor do I think it's a worthwhile effort outside of Asia. I am glad to see Ford tending Lincoln so well because it's their only way to penetrate the fastest growing segments in America, entry level luxury. The fact I see Lincolns all over the place in my neck of the woods tells me they are making inroads (these are not Ford employees btw).

 

As we've learned from Contour and Focus, direct translations of outside market vehicles is never the best or most cost efficient solution. I'm hoping they remember this at Ford when they look at their new globalized future. I'm more nervous than enthusiastic about the attempt to universalize design and engineering.

[RichardJensen]

Ford could -try- to push Lincoln in Europe.

 

Fortunately they have the sanity NOT to.

 

As far as 'quantitative progress' is concerned, CU put Chrysler and GM in the bottom of their manufacturer ratings. Ford was nowhere near that position. Ford also put all three of its domestic makes in the JD Power IQS top 10.

 

In terms of design, there too, progress has been made. While both GM and Ford have developed 'signature' cues for their brands, the signature cues on Ford products appear to be -drawing- customers, as opposed to serving as little more than a means of identifying products from 'quite a long ways away'.

 

("Number 3, the Malibu. Number 3, the Malibu")

 

There is absolutely no question that Ford's progress on quality is both quantifiable and garnering attention outside the rabid-gear-head set. That the 'style' factor is also changing perception is more open to debate, but I would argue that it's working well, and has made the difference between the Fusion and Five Hundred.

 

But let's talk about what we agree on: The MKS looks pretty doggone cool.

 

It's a stunner (Art History bonus points if you can name the movement which first used that term).

Edited November 7, 2007 by RichardJensen

[ShockFX]

Ford could -try- to push Lincoln in Europe.

 

Fortunately they have the sanity NOT to.

 

As far as 'quantitative progress' is concerned, CU put Chrysler and GM in the bottom of their manufacturer ratings. Ford was nowhere near that position. Ford also put all three of its domestic makes in the JD Power IQS top 10.

 

In terms of design, there too, progress has been made. While both GM and Ford have developed 'signature' cues for their brands, the signature cues on Ford products appear to be -drawing- customers, as opposed to serving as little more than a means of identifying products from 'quite a long ways away'.

 

("Number 3, the Malibu. Number 3, the Malibu")

 

There is absolutely no question that Ford's progress on quality is both quantifiable and garnering attention outside the rabid-gear-head set. That the 'style' factor is also changing perception is more open to debate, but I would argue that it's working well, and has made the difference between the Fusion and Five Hundred.

 

But let's talk about what we agree on: The MKS looks pretty doggone cool.

 

It's a stunner (Art History bonus points if you can name the movement which first used that term).

 

I think impressionism...my mom loves Monet.

[RichardJensen]

I think impressionism...my mom loves Monet.

Okay, I'm giving you your first clue, but the prize goes down 15 points.

 

Impressionism is wrong, but you are in the right century.

[ShockFX]

Okay, I'm giving you your first clue, but the prize goes down 15 points.

 

Impressionism is wrong, but you are in the right century.

 

I'm about as far from an art history major as you can get. I only guess that because I would consider that style to have been "stunning" at the time.

[RichardJensen]

I'm about as far from an art history major as you can get. I only guess that because I would consider that style to have been "stunning" at the time.

It was revolutionary. Many of the best Impressionist and Post-Impressionist works found homes in the U.S. because they were not wanted in France.

 

But it's not Impressionism.

 

(for those of you still playing along)

 

We've lowered the prize another 15 points.

 

The movement was British, not French. As they actually used the word 'stunner', not its French equivalent (whatever that may be).

[RichardJensen]

Mostly, I'm curious about BORG as he TAed in an Art History class.

[jpd80]

Let's hope Mays new design language doesn't end up a confusion of ideas.

Perhaps something different and agressive.

Edited November 7, 2007 by jpd80

[BORG]

Ford could -try- to push Lincoln in Europe.

 

Fortunately they have the sanity NOT to.

 

As far as 'quantitative progress' is concerned, CU put Chrysler and GM in the bottom of their manufacturer ratings. Ford was nowhere near that position. Ford also put all three of its domestic makes in the JD Power IQS top 10.

 

In terms of design, there too, progress has been made. While both GM and Ford have developed 'signature' cues for their brands, the signature cues on Ford products appear to be -drawing- customers, as opposed to serving as little more than a means of identifying products from 'quite a long ways away'.

 

("Number 3, the Malibu. Number 3, the Malibu")

 

There is absolutely no question that Ford's progress on quality is both quantifiable and garnering attention outside the rabid-gear-head set. That the 'style' factor is also changing perception is more open to debate, but I would argue that it's working well, and has made the difference between the Fusion and Five Hundred.

 

But let's talk about what we agree on: The MKS looks pretty doggone cool.

 

It's a stunner (Art History bonus points if you can name the movement which first used that term).

 

Yes, the MKS is just about perfection in my definition of design . Proportions, kinetics, dynamism, clearity, etc...

 

And I believe you speak of Avant Garde, the term stunning used by the Pre-Raphaelites which were some of the earliest artists of the avant garde movement. And they were British

 

I was an Art History TA, although I focused on Asian and Islamic art, I love Chinese Art and Islamic Architecture.

[Watchdevil]

Let's hope Mays new design language doesn't end up a confusion of ideas.

Perhaps something different and agressive.

 

Lets hope he doesn't pass off the design of the current Passat as the next Taurus...

[NickF1011]

Lets hope he doesn't pass off the design of the current Passat as the next Taurus...

 

These quips need to stop. While Mays was at VW during the period when last generation of cars was being designed, he has had absolutely ZERO to do with anything VW is doing today. To think that he would somehow try to mimmick a design language at his old company that was developed AFTER his departure is rather ridiculous. And really, there are only two examples of anything even remotely VW-ish in ANYTHING Mays has done at Ford anyway -- the first D3's and the Explorer grille. Other than that, his design influence has been VERY Ford.

[RichardJensen]

Yes, the MKS is just about perfection in my definition of design . Proportions, kinetics, dynamism, clearity, etc...

 

And I believe you speak of Avant Garde, the term stunning used by the Pre-Raphaelites which were some of the earliest artists of the avant garde movement. And they were British

 

I was an Art History TA, although I focused on Asian and Islamic art, I love Chinese Art and Islamic Architecture.

Judges...............................?

 

Yes. We will accept that. The answer we were looking for was the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, members of which referred to particularly beautiful women as 'stunners'.

 

 

I wouldn't, myself, classify the proto-modernists as constituting a single 'Avant Garde' movement, though.

 

Also, not a big fan of Islamic architecture, but a huge fan of Chinese landscape painting, which has (to sound pretentious) 'informed' much of my landscape photography.

Edited November 7, 2007 by RichardJensen

[BORG]

Judges...............................?

 

Yes. We will accept that. The answer we were looking for was the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, members of which referred to particularly beautiful women as 'stunners'.

 

 

I wouldn't, myself, classify the proto-modernists as constituting a single 'Avant Garde' movement, though.

 

Also, not a big fan of Islamic architecture, but a huge fan of Chinese landscape painting, which has (to sound pretentious) 'informed' much of my landscape photography.

 

Well, I assumed the terms were interchangeable, Pre Raphaelites and the Brotherhood.

 

Islamic architecture never had much of an opportunity to flourish but I'm mesmorized by Islamic Mosaics, relief cavings, and muqarnas/qarnas.

 

And I'm right with you on Chinese landscape paintings. Photography and gardening are my personal creative outlets.

[RichardJensen]

Well, I assumed the terms were interchangeable, Pre Raphaelites and the Brotherhood.

Oh c'mon. I had to keep the metaphor going a little longer.

 

 

Islamic mosaics interest me about as much as the knotwork in the Book of Kells; technically magnificent, but leaves me cold.