Ford Europe bosses demanding Mercury closure?

[macattak1]

...One more thing - the thought of any FOE director calling for Mercury to be axed is laughable - I can't imagine anyone in Europe being stupid enough to stick their nose into a part of the operation that isn't their responsibility. It goes against everything Mullaly represents, and I imagine he would snap back quite aggressively towards someone dumb enough to "call for" such an action that is outside their realm of responsibility. Would you want to intentionally put yourself in Mullaly's gunsight?

 

Excellent point! No better way to get canned or chopped off at the knees than to stick your nose into a totally different branches operations and try to call for huge cuts let alone closings. Just pick up your last pay check as soon as your done voicing your position on that one.

 

Peace and Blessings

[twintornados]

My God...this thread takes "blind cheerleading" to a whole new level.

Bububububu.... Geez P71...would have thought you'd be cheering Mercury on, while pooh-poohing FoE since they don't have a Panther in the stable to sell like Mercury does

 

:hysterical:

 

EDIT: ...oops, almost forgot...you HATE Ford and all things "blue oval" :shades:

Edited March 5, 2008 by twintornados

[Michael Reynolds]

My God...this thread takes "blind cheerleading" to a whole new level.

 

 

Yet another one of your off base comments that MAKE no sense whatsoever. How is this cheerleading?

[jpd80]

Late to the discussion but, I took the time to read all postings on this thread.

Some points of fact,

1. Mercury is basically 6 vehicles - 3 cars and 3 trucks all versions of Ford product.

2. The cost of Mercury's shared development and production costs pale in comparison to J/LR.

3. Mercury is not in isolation, it shares the showroom with Lincoln, another Ford brand.

4. Between them, Mercury and Lincoln products (11 vehicles) had 300,000 sales last year.

5. If $3,000 was made on each of these luxury versions of Fords, that's $900 million profit.

 

I will leave it with North American posters to confirm the validity of point 5 but I beleive it's true!

Edited March 5, 2008 by jpd80

[battyr]

Another report which gives the impression that Ford Europe is questioning why they must lose profitable international brands like Aston Martin, Land Rover and possibly Volvo, yet Ford USA does not have to act on loss making Mercury.

 

I don't understand what is ment by "loss making Mercury". You can not say mercury is losing money. Mercury does not make cars. They have no factories. They have no enginers. They make no cars. They take Ford cars and have Ford put Mercury badges on them. It cost the same to build a Mercury as it do a Ford. The engineering cost is already paid for by designing the Ford. Mercury adds to the production of cars since some people who will buy a Mercury, may not like the look or name of Ford. This helps lower the cost of all Fords that the Mercury is based on. Mercury's are usually optioned up so this adds to their profit. Mercury helps sell lincolns.

 

The only way you can say Mercury is losing money is by saying Ford is losing money and than Mercury helps minimumize Ford's loss.

 

You could replace Mercury with Volvo, but then you would be selling a car that would steals sales away from Lincoln.

 

Ford is doing nothing with Mercury because that is how they make the most profit with it. They are investing into Lincoln because that will add to Lincoln's and Mercury's and Fords profit.

[wescoent]

Late to the discussion but, I took the time to read all postings on this thread.

Some points of fact,

1. Mercury is basically 6 vehicles - 3 cars and 3 trucks all versions of Ford product.

2. The cost of Mercury's shared development and production costs pale in comparison to J/LR.

3. Mercury is not in isolation, it shares the showroom with Lincoln, another Ford brand.

4. Between them, Mercury and Lincoln products (11 vehicles) had 300,000 sales last year.

5. If $3,000 was made on each of these luxury versions of Fords, that's $900 million profit.

 

I will leave it with North American posters to confirm the validity of point 5 but I beleive it's true!

 

The key with Mercury is that a person who buys a Mercury, beyond a shadow of a doubt, would not buy an equivalent Ford. If Mercury is discontinued, these sales will not stay with the Ford family.

 

It's obvious to anyone willing to see it that Mercury has a great deal of potential locked up within the brand. Mercury can be much greater than it is today. However, at this moment in time, there is no money to spare to unlock this potential. However, the brand can be kept around with minimal investment while turning a profit.

 

Hence, Mercury lives.

[NickF1011]

The key with Mercury is that a person who buys a Mercury, beyond a shadow of a doubt, would not buy an equivalent Ford. If Mercury is discontinued, these sales will not stay with the Ford family.

 

I wouldn't say that's entirely true. I know plenty of people who have owned both Ford and Mercury vehicles. Sure, they'd lose SOME of those customers if Mercury went away, but I'm betting most of them would gravitate toward Ford instead. After all, there's a lot more in common between a Mercury and a Ford than say a Mercury and a Toyota.

[wescoent]

I wouldn't say that's entirely true. I know plenty of people who have owned both Ford and Mercury vehicles. Sure, they'd lose SOME of those customers if Mercury went away, but I'm betting most of them would gravitate toward Ford instead. After all, there's a lot more in common between a Mercury and a Ford than say a Mercury and a Toyota.

 

I could say the same thing about Oldsmobile... most of those customers just bought Buicks after Olds went away, right?

[NickF1011]

I could say the same thing about Oldsmobile... most of those customers just bought Buicks after Olds went away, right?

 

....or Chevys, or Cadillacs, or Pontiacs, or Saturns, or Hummers, or Saabs, or GMC's......

 

I'm betting most of them stayed in the domestic fold somewhere (not that there were many of them left anyway).

[wescoent]

....or Chevys, or Cadillacs, or Pontiacs, or Saturns, or Hummers, or Saabs, or GMC's......

 

I'm betting most of them stayed in the domestic fold somewhere (not that there were many of them left anyway).

 

Not the case, so I've read. I don't have any hard evidence to back this up (it was from many years ago), but Oldsmobile buyers went mostly to import brands once Olds bit the dust. Mainly due to Olds' Euro feel towards the end.

[NickF1011]

Not the case, so I've read. I don't have any hard evidence to back this up (it was from many years ago), but Oldsmobile buyers went mostly to import brands once Olds bit the dust. Mainly due to Olds' Euro feel towards the end.

 

Well there's another difference. Oldsmobile is not Mercury. There isn't a Mercury on the market now that isn't a blatent rebadge of a Ford. No unique sheet metal. No unique powertrains. There's nothing "euro" or "japanese" about their feel. They are slightly upgraded Fords and most people see them as nothing more.

[mlhm5]

You name the directors that haven't called for Mercury to be axed. It works both ways. I have suggested that FOE directors are most likely calling for Mercury to be axed judging by the sheer number of articles that I've read saying that FOE bosses are spitting blood over PAG's break up. Show me the board room evidence they are not. There are lots of articles saying that FOE staff are furious at Ford USA having one rule at home and one rule abroad for brands.

 

Now that JLR is being sold it's fair game for FOE people and enthusiast to start to turn things on their head and look at US operations. You said Mercury makes an operating profit, but how look carefull at those profits and ask if it really is profitable consitently. Is it profitable now? Would it be profitable if it had to stand alone from Ford? I mean let's follow your arguement. Why doesn't FOE start it's own version of Mercury. Are you saying that Mercury's model is so good that FOE should replicate it with it's own version? Also why do so many other people on this very site argue Mercury should be closed. If it is a profit center why are so many US ford fans calling time on Mercury?

 

You may hate what I'm saying but your niave if you don't think office politics like this happen at board level. I mean that's sooooooo niave!

 

Anyone who thinks Ford USA is a real business only has to look at the comparison of how well Ford Europe is doing in a more competitive market. Last time I looked, there was no Renault, Puegot, Seat, Isuzu, Fiat, Citroen, Alfa Romeo, Lancia, etc competing against US Ford.

 

The long knives are out.

Edited March 5, 2008 by mlhm5

[NickF1011]

Anyone who thinks Ford USA is a real business only has to look at the comparison of how well Ford Europe is doing in a more competitive market. Last time I looked, there was no Renault, Puegot, Seat, Isuzu, Fiat, Citroen, Alfa Romeo, Lancia, etc competing against US Ford.

 

The long knives are out.

 

My my, how short people's memories are around here. It wasn't long ago at all that FoE was losing money hand over fist much as FoNA has the past couple of years.

 

Yeah, there's FAR LESS competition in the US auto market. ARE YOU KIDDING!?!?!?!

[Edstock]

The long knives are out.

 

The long knives are out — to lunch.

[BORG]

Does FoE even know about Mercury?

 

I really can't say what hasn't already been said, Mercury has and always will be a Ford trim level which serves the following important functions with minimal investment.

 

1.) Appeals to Conquest Customers and Females

2.) Provide dealership market share to support the Lincoln distribution network

 

Indeed Lincoln will carry most of these rolls in the future so the Mercury brand can be phased out in a cost effective manner. But if FoE is really concerned about Mercury *snorts*, they can be assured that Mercury will be gone in 5 years.

Edited March 5, 2008 by BORG

[CarShark]

Sure Mercury isn't doing much financial damage, but they can't be helping Ford's image too much. How can you say that things are different and you're making relevant products and getting rid of overlap when you have a brand entirely composed of rebadges?

Edited March 5, 2008 by CarShark

[NickF1011]

But if FoE is really concerned about (snickers), they can be assured that Mercury will be gone in 5 years.

 

I wouldn't bet on that. It could happen, but it just as likely won't. As you said, Mercury is a trim level that appeals to conquest buyers. With the little money it takes to operate it, what is the incentive to get rid of it?

[NickF1011]

Sure Mercury isn't doing much financial damage, but they can't be helping Ford's image too much. How can you say that things are different and you're making relevant products and getting rid of overlap when you have a brand entirely composed of rebadges?

 

How exactly does Mercury HURT Ford's image?

[BORG]

I wouldn't bet on that. It could happen, but it just as likely won't. As you said, Mercury is a trim level that appeals to conquest buyers. With the little money it takes to operate it, what is the incentive to get rid of it?

 

I don't know how many times I have to say this before people believe me, but Mercury is in a 5 year wind-down cycle tied to Lincoln. It will be gone in 5 years, no ifs and or buts about it. It can only be saved by a new administration, but the corner has been turned.

Edited March 5, 2008 by BORG

[CarShark]

How exactly does Mercury HURT Ford's image?

I think it's seen as an irrelevant brand by many, a vestige of the old days when there was no competition. I think people see a Mercury that looks nearly identical to a Ford and think to themselves, "They must think I'm stupid to not know the difference." They then wonder what else they're being fooled about.

[NickF1011]

I think it's seen as an irrelevant brand by many, a vestige of the old days when there was no competition. I think people see a Mercury that looks nearly identical to a Ford and think to themselves, "They must think I'm stupid to not know the difference." They then wonder what else they're being fooled about.

 

That's one opinion....

 

I think most opinions are in the camp that knows Mercury is just an upscale Ford and takes it as such. Nobody expects it to be more than that, but someone wanting a "nicer Ford" is still given an option.

[NickF1011]

I don't know how many times I have to say this before people believe me, but Mercury is in a 5 year wind-down cycle tied to Lincoln. It will be gone in 5 years, no ifs and or buts about it. It can only be saved by a new administration, but the corner has been turned.

 

And you know this how? What makes you different from any other pundit who has been talking about the death of Mercury for the past 8-9 years?

[twintornados]

I wouldn't bet on that. It could happen, but it just as likely won't. As you said, Mercury is a trim level that appeals to conquest buyers. With the little money it takes to operate it, what is the incentive to get rid of it?

 

Conquest is exactly the point....my buddy at work....he and his wife went small SUV shopping....she fell in love with the Mercury Mariner and they bought one, he started to look over the F150's on the lot and is now thinking that in two years, he will trade his Chevrolet in for one.....his words to me, "I never owned a Ford, but that Mercury sure is nice." and, "While we were there...I peeked at a new F150....it looked great."

[RichardJensen]

Actually, I would imagine that Mercury is existing product cycle to product cycle at this point.

 

There are Mercuries planned for the next generation, but probably not beyond that.

 

Frankly, Mercury can probably exist at that level for some time. I mean it's peanuts to 'engineer' a new Mercury, so they can hold off until very late in the product cycle before green lighting a Mercury.

 

Will Mercury gradually fade away? Probably. Will it gradually fade away as opposed to disappear at a predetermined drop-dead point? Yes. Ford is not going to axe Mercury, they'll probably let nature take its course.

 

Earlier I quoted Austen, now I'm going to quote the Simpsons:

 

"Do we really need to 'settle' Abe Simpson? He's pretty old. Maybe nature will 'settle' him for us."

[silvrsvt]

That's one opinion....

 

I think most opinions are in the camp that knows Mercury is just an upscale Ford and takes it as such. Nobody expects it to be more than that, but someone wanting a "nicer Ford" is still given an option.

 

 

Not to mention that its an alternative to people who may not like the razor blade grill on a car..I know thats one of reasons why my parents got a Sable instead of a Taurus, plus it was "nicer"