2010 Mercury Sable?

[RichardJensen]

That's why I brought some evidence to the argument. Of course it's conjecture.

Haven't you seen the Simpsons?

 

"Mr. Hutz do you have ANY evidence?"

 

"I have plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence"

Edited April 12, 2008 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

Slightly off topic,

I watched the February Autoline interview with Mulally, he hinted establishing a Lincoln RWD in Asia and China.

Kuzak has a meeting with Ford Australia on 1st may regarding their desire for exports to Asia,

South Africa and Europe. This would also mean developing a Left hand drive version of the Falcon line.

I find it strange that a CEO would talk about a meeting before it happens and his desired outcome.

 

Can we put 2 and 2 together?

[P71_CrownVic]

Mercury is more dead than the Panther platform. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.

[P71_CrownVic]

btw, I highly recommend people take a look at 6:45

 

It's not that rigged drag race is it?

[BORG]

Haven't you seen the Simpsons?

 

"Mr. Hutz do you have ANY evidence?"

 

"I have plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence"

 

Yeah, just like the rumored sale of Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Land Rover were conjecture. I seem to remember you insisting such a thing was rubbish.

[armadamaster]

We can only hope. Because frankly, no matter how cool a new RWD Lincoln sedan is, I'm not plunking down my hard-earned cash for anything named "Town Car".

 

C'mon now, if it looked cool enough, and enough of the neighbors' bought one, it could be called the Lincoln Pap Smear and I bet you'd plunk down your signature on the loan for it in a heartbeat.

 

Remember kids, no GMQ = no Mercury.

 

New Panthers please.

[RichardJensen]

Yeah, just like the rumored sale of Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Land Rover were conjecture. I seem to remember you insisting such a thing was rubbish.

Ford was not 'selling' AM until summer 2006, and Jaguar/Land Rover until summer 2007.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This means that speculation about imminent sales of ALL those brands in 2004 and 2005 were rubbish.

 

Remember that story last summer about Volvo being sold to BMW?

 

Are you going to retroactively assign credence to that bit of bumf if, somewhere down the line, Ford sells off Volvo? If Ford sells Volvo in 2013, are you going to say, "Well, the FT had it right way back in 2007 when they said that Ford was going to sell Volvo."

 

Articles about the sale of Jaguar/Land Rover as a 'done deal' in 2006 were garbage. Articles about an imminent sale of Jaguar/Land Rover in 2006 were rubbish. End of story.

 

The only thing that can be stated with ANY certainty is that Ford has no significant long range plans for Mercury.

 

Everything beyond that is CONJECTURE, and as such, cannot be asserted as FACT or EVIDENCE.

 

No matter how many times you eliminate conditional verbs from your postulations.

[wescoent]

Remember kids, no GMQ = no Mercury.

 

New Panthers please.

 

You'll get your wish. New Grand Marquis was approved.

 

Here's my problem with designing and building a car to replace the Grand Marquis. In other words, a long, wide, comfort-oriented RWD sedan. I am absolutely convinced the reason for the Grand Marquis' remaining strong retail sales are old people, who will be dead within the next 10-15 years.

 

A performance model would sell to younger people, ala 300C or G8.

[silvrsvt]

Here's my problem with designing and building a car to replace the Grand Marquis. In other words, a long, wide, comfort-oriented RWD sedan. I am absolutely convinced the reason for the Grand Marquis' remaining strong retail sales are old people, who will be dead within the next 10-15 years.

 

 

In all seriousness, the Greatest Generation, who are the biggest clientele shouldn't even be driving these days. Babyboomers are already hitting the age to collect SS and we know that the vast majority of them will buy imports. I'd say that the GM is lucky to have another 2-3 years of sales left in it to retail markets.

 

On another note, I got a ride up to the Airport Thursday in a TC strech sedan (the one with the extra long rear door) and while it was nice, I have zero interest in buying one now.

[P71_CrownVic]

I am absolutely convinced the reason for the Grand Marquis' remaining strong retail sales are old people, who will be dead within the next 10-15 years.

Damn...so in 10-15 years there will be no more old people?

[BORG]

Ford was not 'selling' AM until summer 2006, and Jaguar/Land Rover until summer 2007.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This means that speculation about imminent sales of ALL those brands in 2004 and 2005 were rubbish.

 

Remember that story last summer about Volvo being sold to BMW?

 

Are you going to retroactively assign credence to that bit of bumf if, somewhere down the line, Ford sells off Volvo? If Ford sells Volvo in 2013, are you going to say, "Well, the FT had it right way back in 2007 when they said that Ford was going to sell Volvo."

 

Articles about the sale of Jaguar/Land Rover as a 'done deal' in 2006 were garbage. Articles about an imminent sale of Jaguar/Land Rover in 2006 were rubbish. End of story.

 

The only thing that can be stated with ANY certainty is that Ford has no significant long range plans for Mercury.

 

Everything beyond that is CONJECTURE, and as such, cannot be asserted as FACT or EVIDENCE.

 

No matter how many times you eliminate conditional verbs from your postulations.

 

Volvo will be sold! Are you going to tell me no because it's not happening tomorrow?

 

There is evidence everywhere that Ford is done with Mercury. Ford NEVER refers to it in its publicly published business forecasts, there are no new products in the pipeline, and they refuse to address their immediate or long term plan for Mercury or that they are looking at Mercury beyond its present roll. They are doing everything they can to dismiss the issue, luckily nobody is talking about it. We can't even get them to admit that a Mercury Sable will share the Ecoboost tech with the next Taurus. I have never seen Ford FORGET to mention the Mercury cousin, especially if it boosts the number of nameplates to bandy about that are sharing the latest and greatest Ford innovation.

 

You understand PR don't you? Then explain to me what kind of company fails to provide any commitment to a brand even if its as simple as guaranteeing that they are getting new products?

 

You change your tune and then spin your intent once the facts become clear all the time Richard. The fact is, you argued against the possibilities that Ford was prepping those nameplates for sell. Soon as Aston Martin moved, you changed your tune on JLR. You have a track record of arguing against the evidence and then proven wrong. Your tune is changing slightly on Mercury now that the evidence is mounting.

Edited April 12, 2008 by BORG

[buyacargetachec]

Looks like Mercury is being phased out as the Grand Marquis dies in 2010 and the MKS and MKT are added. The LM dealers will sell fewer vehicles without Mercury but at a higher profit with the lower volume, more desirable Taurus/Flex-based products. To cap the transition, Lincoln should add a low-volume, IRS-equipped, beautiful Mustang-based Mark IX. This might help keep plant utilization up as the Mustang starts competing against Camaro and Challenger.

 

New big rear-drive Ford/Lincoln sedans make no sense to me with CAFE getting tougher and with so much D3/4 investment being made. More importantly, the market for big sedans (aside from MB/BMW/Lexus) has been shrinking for years. What's the point? High investment cost/shrinking market doesn't sound like a promising profit strategy. But this is Ford we're talking about.

[Edstock]

New big rear-drive Ford/Lincoln sedans make no sense to me with CAFE getting tougher and with so much D3/4 investment being made. More importantly, the market for big sedans (aside from MB/BMW/Lexus) has been shrinking for years. What's the point? High investment cost/shrinking market doesn't sound like a promising profit strategy. But this is Ford we're talking about.

Good questions.

First, while the market for big sedans may have been shrinking, that may be due to the lack of middle-priced product. Anyway, add the MB/BMW/Lexus marketshare, and it's worth going after, especially considering the number of Ford-brand RWD sedan owners out there, around the world.

Add the stubborn persistence of a preference for lengthwise engines. AUDI recently changed all their chassis to this configuration, even the low-buck FWD models.

Add that Ford has the Mustang, and it is RWD to stay. So, a new platform is needed for after 2K10

Ford OZ has the RWD Falcon, and any change from RWD would be market suicide for the model, and it will need a new chassis, too.

Bigger vehicles tend to be more expensive, so if CAFE requires hybrids and diesels, then that's what will be offered.

So, IMHO, Ford might as well design a Mustang platform that has many other uses.

Edited April 12, 2008 by Edstock

[Mark B. Morrow]

Damn...so in 10-15 years there will be no more old people?

 

That is one of the best comebacks I have ever seen.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Haven't you seen the Simpsons?

 

"Mr. Hutz do you have ANY evidence?"

 

"I have plenty of hearsay and conjecture. Those are kinds of evidence"

:rip: Rest in Peace Lionel Hutz.

[P71_CrownVic]

That is one of the best comebacks I have ever seen.

 

Yep...the only thing keeping the old people on this planet is the Panthers. Think about it, if we 'offed' the Panthers years ago...we could have many more years with no old people.

 

Seriously though, it just goes to show how stupid the :cheerleader: argument is regarding the Panthers.

"Well the old people are dying so we must stop making the Panthers."

 

Edited April 12, 2008 by P71_CrownVic

[campbell53]

As a dealer we were amazed at how many GM's we were selling 10 years ago. When do we run out of old people? Well we didn't. And we won't. If we had a new updated GM we would sell them for another 10 years. Just like old people for generations go to Fla or Az for the winter, they want bigger cars when they retire. All of this unfounded speculation about running out of old people to sell a GM to is nonsense.

Edited April 12, 2008 by campbell53

[TomServo92]

As a dealer we were amazed at how many GM's we were selling 10 years ago. When do we run out of old people? Well we didn't. And we won't. If we had a new updated GM we would sell them for another 10 years. Just like old people for generations go to Fla or Az for the winter, they want bigger cars when they retire. All of this unfounded speculation about running out of old people to sell a GM to is nonsense.

 

It's not that we'll run out of old people. It's that we'll run out of old people that lived in the heyday of the Big 3. The generation that grew up on Hondas and Toyotas will eventually grow old and I don't think they'll be buying a Mercury unless Ford gives them a compelling reason to do so.

[silvrsvt]

As a dealer we were amazed at how many GM's we were selling 10 years ago.

 

And how many Explorers where you selling then vs today?

[NickF1011]

Yep...the only thing keeping the old people on this planet is the Panthers. Think about it, if we 'offed' the Panthers years ago...we could have many more years with no old people.

 

Seriously though, it just goes to show how stupid the :cheerleader: argument is regarding the Panthers.

"Well the old people are dying so we must stop making the Panthers."

 

Nobody is even making such an argument. However, it can plainly be shown that the "old people" of today are far less interested in heavy RWD BOF sedans than they were in the previous couple of generations.

 

Tastes change, even if you're "old".

[Mark B. Morrow]

Nobody is even making such an argument. However, it can plainly be shown that the "old people" of today are far less interested in heavy RWD BOF sedans than they were in the previous couple of generations.

 

Tastes change, even if you're "old".

 

You're quite right. My dad is 73 and his last 6 cars have been full size RWD sedans, 3 Caprices, a Crown Vic, a Town Car and his present '02 Grand Marquis. I'm 47 and have no interest in a new Panther based on the dated styling and my need for a wagon type of vehicle, i.e. Explorer. I do bave a friend who drives a Marauder with an aftermarket supercharger that is a lot of fun. It is a shame that Ford didn't update the bodies on the Panthers in '03. Something on the order of the 427 and Continental concepts would have given the Panthers a new lease on life. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.

 

Back in the '60s it was easy to slap a new body on the same old frame. That is not possible anymore since the development, safety testing and production costs are so much greater. With the need to spread the cost of new models over a wide range, it looks like any new RWD platform will have to be adaptable to more than the limited market for the Panthers. Whether that range will include Falcon and Mustang (or maybe a new T-Bird) remains to be seen.

[RichardJensen]

You change your tune and then spin your intent once the facts become clear all the time Richard. The fact is, you argued against the possibilities that Ford was prepping those nameplates for sell. Soon as Aston Martin moved, you changed your tune on JLR. You have a track record of arguing against the evidence and then proven wrong. Your tune is changing slightly on Mercury now that the evidence is mounting.

Here's how you get confused:

 

1) You assume you already know what I think.

 

2) Somebody posts something like, "Ford should get rid of Mercury. They are a drain on Ford's profits."

 

3) I post something like this, "It would cost Ford a lot of money to buy out F-M & L-M dealers. There would be no short term savings."

 

OR

 

1) You assume you already know what I think.

 

2) Somebody posts something like, "Mercury customers can just switch to Ford."

 

3) I post something like, "Mercury customers are different." And then I provide a link to the Detroit News article on the subject.

 

Do you see me asserting that Ford will NOT, categorically, get rid of Mercury in either circumstance? NO.

 

But because of #1, you =THINK= that's what I said.

 

I invite you, dear Mr. Borg, to pay as much attention to what I post, as I pay to what YOU post.

 

Heck. I know you went to Oakland, have a job in the legal profession, love to garden, live across the street from a country club in Rochester Hills, MI, but YOU can't even be bothered to get my prejudices straight.

 

====

 

Oh, and listen to the Q&A on the March sales call. Farley said, "We are continuing to invest in Mercury" as a direct response to a question about Mercury's future.

Edited April 13, 2008 by RichardJensen

[armadamaster]

You'll get your wish. New Grand Marquis was approved.

 

Here's my problem with designing and building a car to replace the Grand Marquis. In other words, a long, wide, comfort-oriented RWD sedan. I am absolutely convinced the reason for the Grand Marquis' remaining strong retail sales are old people, who will be dead within the next 10-15 years. A performance model would sell to younger people, ala 300C or G8.

 

So let's say hypothetically for a minute you're 100% right on that point. That means a reskinned updated Panther would accomodate nicely AND cheaply (for FLM) through the new 2020 CAFE standards at which point most of the car lineup will have to go away anyway since no one will be able to sell anything larger than a Civic anyway.

 

New big rear-drive Ford/Lincoln sedans make no sense to me with CAFE getting tougher and with so much D3/4 investment being made. More importantly, the market for big sedans (aside from MB/BMW/Lexus) has been shrinking for years. What's the point? High investment cost/shrinking market doesn't sound like a promising profit strategy. But this is Ford we're talking about.

 

My above response applies here as well.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Armada Master

[Edstock]

2020 CAFE standards at which point most of the car lineup will have to go away anyway since no one will be able to sell anything larger than a Civic anyway

That's your benighted prediction. Whether your view of the future is right remains to be seen.

 

IMHO, you're wrong, because we will see technological improvements, and so there will still be larger-than-Civic vehicles. Maybe they'll have to use fuel cells, and maybe they'll be expensive, but larger vehicles will continue to exist.

 

So, for you, the appropriate question is, will you be able to afford a larger-than-Civic vehicle in 2020, if you want one?

[P71_CrownVic]

Oh, and listen to the Q&A on the March sales call. Farley said, "We are continuing to invest in Mercury" as a direct response to a question about Mercury's future.

 

Oh yeah...I suppose that VOGA crap equates to 'continuing to invest in Mercury'.

 

Do you really believe that crock of shit?