Crazy Idea for Mercury

[xr7g428]

Okay this is a crazy idea, but hey it's the internet, that is what we do here...

 

First of all, I get a pretty good laugh every time I hear the latest suggestion that Ford needs to partner up with a foreign rival. Ford needs to partner up with Ford first. But I digress....

 

If you were at Ford of Europe, wouldn't you be jealous of BMW getting to sell all of those cars in America, why they can even build some here...

 

And if you were Ford of Australia, wouldn't you also like to get a shot at the USA, after all, why should the Japanese have all the fun?

 

And if you were running Mercury, outta time, outta chances, outta budget, what if you went outta the USA for a solution?

 

What if you approached the foreign cousins and offered to give them a shot at the US market, Mercury could provide the dealers, they provide the vehicles, and the marketing funds.

 

The cars would be rebadged Mercury and targeted squarely at BMW, Lexus, Infinity. Rear drive no problem: Falcon Premium small car: Euro Focus Truck: bring on the UTE. With a little massaging the mix would be the performance bookend to Lincoln luxury.

 

But here is the killer ap: Get the Europeans and Australians to do (and fund) the development, exactly the same way that BMW does for the US market. It is the old school importer model with a new twist.

 

I know there is, in the final analysis, only a single checkbook, but then again, that cuts both ways, a win is a win for everybody.

 

Watching Mercury die is just as smart as naming the new Taurus the Five Hundred. It is time for something completely different?

[LaredoRV]

Not the first time I hear this idea... But I think that Mercury should import european model (Mondeo !)... The Falcon should be a Ford !

[goinbroke2]

Interesting...

Lets see, they imported the euro capri and the mercur (or however you spell it) and both times it was viewed as "neat little foreign car".

 

I think it would work.

 

I like it.

[saintlaz1]

Interesting...

Lets see, they imported the euro capri and the mercur (or however you spell it) and both times it was viewed as "neat little foreign car".

 

I think it would work.

 

I like it.

 

Yeah this has been brought up many times but it looks like Ford will be bring in european and austrilian cars for themselves.

[xr7g428]

What makes this different is the idea that Ford of Europe and Australia would approach the US market as if they were exporters.

 

In the past, the idea was that Mercury would select a car and then do the development for the US market. By the time the cars got here, they had lost most of what made them appealing to begin with. Mercury felt that the cars were not real "Mercuries" in the traditional sense, and the FOE folks didn't take ownership of the product because it was no longer theirs. The cars were a compromise that didn't really do much for either party.

[JimmyL57]

That would be a great Idea!! It may also show the Ford executives and design teams here in the US how to design cars!

 

 

 

 

Okay this is a crazy idea, but hey it's the internet, that is what we do here...

 

First of all, I get a pretty good laugh every time I hear the latest suggestion that Ford needs to partner up with a foreign rival. Ford needs to partner up with Ford first. But I digress....

 

If you were at Ford of Europe, wouldn't you be jealous of BMW getting to sell all of those cars in America, why they can even build some here...

 

And if you were Ford of Australia, wouldn't you also like to get a shot at the USA, after all, why should the Japanese have all the fun?

 

And if you were running Mercury, outta time, outta chances, outta budget, what if you went outta the USA for a solution?

 

What if you approached the foreign cousins and offered to give them a shot at the US market, Mercury could provide the dealers, they provide the vehicles, and the marketing funds.

 

The cars would be rebadged Mercury and targeted squarely at BMW, Lexus, Infinity. Rear drive no problem: Falcon Premium small car: Euro Focus Truck: bring on the UTE. With a little massaging the mix would be the performance bookend to Lincoln luxury.

 

But here is the killer ap: Get the Europeans and Australians to do (and fund) the development, exactly the same way that BMW does for the US market. It is the old school importer model with a new twist.

 

I know there is, in the final analysis, only a single checkbook, but then again, that cuts both ways, a win is a win for everybody.

 

Watching Mercury die is just as smart as naming the new Taurus the Five Hundred. It is time for something completely different?

[Roadrunner]

Really interesting idea!

 

So basically Mercury would be independent of Ford/Lincoln FOA. It would be run completely by FOE or FO Aussie.

 

What about the L-M dealerships?

[Walt]

IMHO, FMC really needs to decide if they want Mercury or not. Slowly starving it to death, and then proclaiming someone else killed it, just isn't good management.

 

FMC really needs to stop Ford and Mercury from completing with each other. A Ford sale or a Mercury sale, are both still a FMC sale. Target Ford and Mercury to complete, on the same team, against GM, Honda, Toyota, etc.

 

Having their own lineup of vehicles would certainly help. I guess importing someone else's designs is one way of achieving it.

 

However, one other quick-way, is to get rid of all the Ford "Limited" models. For example, if a customer wants a high-end, loaded, Explorer, send them over to Mercury for a Mountaineer. In other words, having both an Explorer Limited, and a Mountaineer is too close; too competitive; too wasteful.

[xr7g428]

Really interesting idea!

 

So basically Mercury would be independent of Ford/Lincoln FOA. It would be run completely by FOE or FO Aussie.

 

What about the L-M dealerships?

 

The idea is that "Mercury" would function like an importer. Europe and Australia would do all of the product development. They would approach development of the vehicles in much the same way that BMW did when it entered the US market. Mercury would provide the distribution channel, the LM dealers, do the promotion, and develop the business case for pricing etc.

 

There is a common misconception that eliminating Mercury will somehow increase Ford sales. This is only true when the products are not differentiated well enough for consumers to understand the difference. Eliminating a Mercury sale might result in Ford sale, but it also might result in a Toyota sale. For what ever reason, the consumer saw, or felt, something was different about the Mercury. If there is a marketing benefit to Ford from eliminating Mercury, then there is also a marketing benefit to every one of Fords competitors.

 

Car companies think they compete with each other, but in reality, they compete for the customer. There are so many choices today that customers don't have to settle for second best. New car sales are not based on necessity, they are based on desire. People buy what they want, not what they need. To allow Ford of Europe to compete for US customers just puts more hooks in the water.

 

Ford has some of the best selling vehicles in Europe and Australia. Isn't there a chance that these vehicles might compete here as effectively as some of the vehicles they outsell in their home markets?

[NickF1011]

This whole idea gets shot to hell as soon as you consider Mulally's "One Ford" objective. With the different global divisions each contributing to future platform development, the idea of FoE or FoA being put "in charge" of developing products for an American division would be an idea that's DOA. FNA is supposedly heading development of GRWD. FNA is leading development of C2. FoE is leading development of EUCD2. It's all a mish-mash. Throw in the fact that FNA is going to be getting dang near the exact same products that FoA and FoE will be offering in a few years' time, this idea for Mercury falls even flatter on its face.

 

Mercury, by all accounts, is still making money. The only lack of product they have is that they just happen to have fewer rebadges than they did in the past. They have ALWAYS been a division of rebadges. They will continue to be a division of rebadges.

[xr7g428]

This whole idea gets shot to hell as soon as you consider Mulally's "One Ford" objective. With the different global divisions each contributing to future platform development, the idea of FoE or FoA being put "in charge" of developing products for an American division would be an idea that's DOA. FNA is supposedly heading development of GRWD. FNA is leading development of C2. FoE is leading development of EUCD2. It's all a mish-mash. Throw in the fact that FNA is going to be getting dang near the exact same products that FoA and FoE will be offering in a few years' time, this idea for Mercury falls even flatter on its face.

 

Mercury, by all accounts, is still making money. The only lack of product they have is that they just happen to have fewer rebadges than they did in the past. They have ALWAYS been a division of rebadges. They will continue to be a division of rebadges.

 

What is exactly the definition of "One Ford"? If as you suggest, it means that Ford will sell the same set of products world wide, then you are right in that this plan fails. I hope that One Ford is a broad strategy of orchestrating the entire company in a unified mission. What a disappointment if it only amounts to a tactical step of consolidation of platforms. Where would Ford be today if they were selling the US platforms in Europe and Australia? It seems to me that diversity in product development has given Ford some tools for recovery that should not be discounted. Imagine where GM would be if they did not have Holden to draw upon right now...

 

I don't think that there is a sense that Ford is developing too much product. I think the problem is that the product Ford develops shares too few parts at the component level. Examples have been given of mundane parts like hood hinges that could be shared, but are not. The world car concept, by definition, defines the product as a compromise in every market, ideal for none. Conversely, great components make better products in every case.

 

Historically, Mercury was the most successful when it was also the most differentiated. Specifically, consider that the Cougar outsold all the other Mustang competition except the Camaro in the 60's. Many many components were shared with the Mustang, but not a single piece of sheet metal could be interchanged. Even the wheel base was 3" longer. Has Mercury had a real identity since it was "At the Sign of the Cat?"

[NickF1011]

What is exactly the definition of "One Ford"? If as you suggest, it means that Ford will sell the same set of products world wide, then you are right in that this plan fails. I hope that One Ford is a broad strategy of orchestrating the entire company in a unified mission. What a disappointment if it only amounts to a tactical step of consolidation of platforms. Where would Ford be today if they were selling the US platforms in Europe and Australia? It seems to me that diversity in product development has given Ford some tools for recovery that should not be discounted. Imagine where GM would be if they did not have Holden to draw upon right now...

 

I don't think that there is a sense that Ford is developing too much product. I think the problem is that the product Ford develops shares too few parts at the component level. Examples have been given of mundane parts like hood hinges that could be shared, but are not. The world car concept, by definition, defines the product as a compromise in every market, ideal for none. Conversely, great components make better products in every case.

 

Historically, Mercury was the most successful when it was also the most differentiated. Specifically, consider that the Cougar outsold all the other Mustang competition except the Camaro in the 60's. Many many components were shared with the Mustang, but not a single piece of sheet metal could be interchanged. Even the wheel base was 3" longer. Has Mercury had a real identity since it was "At the Sign of the Cat?"

 

"One Ford" will be all of Ford's global regions being in the know of what the other regions are doing. They will be able to share platforms, components, powertrains, etc much more easily. Derick Kuzack is now the global product czar (sort of like GM's Bob Lutz). The buck will stop with him when it comes to letting "compromise" product through the pipeline. Products will continue to be unique as needed for their particular market. In North America's case, that means developing separate Ford, Lincoln, and Mercury variants of the platforms made available to them globally.

 

Where would GM be without Holden? Well if GM had global platform integration in place already, they'd be in MUCH better shape instead of having to rely on a foreign platform to save their butts. They would have already had that platform at their disposal from the start. We wouldn't have had a reskinned GTO. We wouldn't STILL be waiting for a new Camaro.

 

Mercury could certainly do well to be a bit more differentiated from Ford, but the best thing Ford could do for it right now is simply give it more rebadges to bring volume back in line. As time passes and global integration occurs more rapidly, this will free up resources for Ford's NA operations to dedicate a little more time to making Mercury more unique. That plan won't do any good though if there is no Mercury left to revive.

[xr7g428]

Good point on Holden!

 

You might have missed this from my first post:

 

First of all, I get a pretty good laugh every time I hear the latest suggestion that Ford needs to partner up with a foreign rival. Ford needs to partner up with Ford first. But I digress....

 

I have to agree with you on needing more re-badges. The only exception being that I would not limit the thinking process to US platforms. Anything would help...

 

My honest opinion is that Mercury is already gone. Doing a Cougar off the Mustang is just so obvious that the only way to miss that one is on purpose. I can not believe that any one with in Mercury would have ever said thanks, but no thanks, to a new Cougar. It seems obvious that the only version they could have gotten would have been so close to the Mustang (nothing different except the badges) that it would have damaged the Mustang image. Differentiation cuts both ways.

[NickF1011]

I have to agree with you on needing more re-badges. The only exception being that I would not limit the thinking process to US platforms. Anything would help...

 

They will come, but I think Ford sees the lack of wisdom GM is having by importing handfuls of vehicles at break-even or probably a loss just for the sake of image a'la GTO and G8. Mercury will get them when Ford gets them, which really isn't that far off anyway in the big scheme of things.

 

My honest opinion is that Mercury is already gone. Doing a Cougar off the Mustang is just so obvious that the only way to miss that one is on purpose. I can not believe that any one with in Mercury would have ever said thanks, but no thanks, to a new Cougar. It seems obvious that the only version they could have gotten would have been so close to the Mustang (nothing different except the badges) that it would have damaged the Mustang image. Differentiation cuts both ways.

 

I believe the main reason for the lack of a Cougar had nothing to do with a decision to axe Mercury. I believe it had more to do with demand for the Mustang. Flat Rock didn't have the ability to churn out 150,000+ Mustangs a year while also satisfying demand for the Mazda6 AND a Cougar on top of that. It would make sense to have the Cougar now that demand has tapered off for the Mustang, but that could just as easily be explained by the Mustang being a little long-in-tooth. I see a much better chance for a Cougar once the Mustang moves to some sort of shared platform that could be flex-built in more than one location.

 

Agree on your final point about differentiation too. It could have been bad in the Mustang's case, where style and personality are a big part of the equation. For the bulk of Mercury's lineup, that sort of thing hasn't been very important to keep the volume up though. Style and personality were never big selling points for the Sable or Grand Marquis after all.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

What makes this different is the idea that Ford of Europe and Australia would approach the US market as if they were exporters.

 

In the past, the idea was that Mercury would select a car and then do the development for the US market. By the time the cars got here, they had lost most of what made them appealing to begin with. Mercury felt that the cars were not real "Mercuries" in the traditional sense, and the FOE folks didn't take ownership of the product because it was no longer theirs. The cars were a compromise that didn't really do much for either party.

 

I can remember the Mk1 Capri being launched in 1969, Mercury had it up for sale in the US by 1970, they sold 500,000 units it must have stopped a lot imports of Porsches and other sports cars etc at the time, but it also done a lot of damage to Ford and Mustang sales at the same time as well they were hit harder than most. So did Ford really gain from it who knows?

 

On the other hand it could work where lets say Ford don't build a certain type of vehicle for a market. Ford no longer sell a sports car, muscle car or an SUV in Europe so by selling a Mustang or an Escape they would not have been eating into FOE home market and taking sales away from FOE, they could be sold through Ford outlets here and increase jobs in the US, and l have gotta say l would buy both a Escape or a Mustang today if they were sold here in the UK.

[mercurymichael]

Style and personality were never big selling points for the Sable or Grand Marquis after all.

I completely disagree. Style has also, and even in these week days at Mercury, been the selling point. The original Sable was much more stylish than the Taurus, as was the Cougar vs. Thunderbird, Grand Marquis vs. Crown Vic, in the same time period which was also around the time of Mercury's sales peak. Even the thinly disgusied Fords: Monarch, Marquis, Lynx, Topaz, Mystique, Monterery, Montego, Milan have come off looking somewhat more formal and high end, or the baby Lincoln which is exactly what Mercury's place has always been. Could Mercury thrive with more style, personality and less obvious re-badge--absolutely. Are unique engines and powertrains that important to Mercury--not at all. An earlier post mentioned dumping all the Ford "limited" model and letting Mercury fill this role--that is how it was originally designed and exactly what would work best. It would also allow Lincoln to move back up in the stratusphere where it belongs.