Big Al thinkking of selling Volvo

[NickF1011]

Then what would you call the two best selling cars in the segment?

Segment leaders in sales. That doesn't really make them a "halo" of any sort.

[RichardJensen]

You may want to believe that, and like I said, I WISH I could have found the link WHERE I read it, BUT I READ IT!

If he actually said that, it would've been posted here and would've been the most heavily commented article. Autoblog, TTAC, all the 'lesser' enthusiast press would've latched onto it like an Enquirer editor onto a picture of Britney and K-Fed kissing.

[Michael Reynolds]

Yeah all those poor people that drove vehicles without ABS for so many years, must have been plowing into any and everything years ago. Furthermore, I did not indicate that I could. I simply stated that everyone should know how to prevent their tires from locking up in the event that you are in a vehicle without ABS.

 

And no it is not excusable that Ford did not equip the Focus without rear headrests. We can split hairs all day long, and compare crash test ratings etc. The Focus does compare favorably even without the safety equipment such as headrests or ABS standard, it fairs better than the Civic in NHTSAs rollover test and earns a 'good' rating in rear impacts from IIHS. So while yes it may be at a disadvantage, it does come with pre-tensioned seat belts and a host of airbags.

 

BTW likening a Civic and Corolla as 'halo' cars would be like calling a Camry and Accord a 'halo' cars. Tend to be limited in volume, offer stellar performance...i.e. a Ford GT.

[Critic]

If he actually said that, it would've been posted here and would've been the most heavily commented article. Autoblog, TTAC, all the 'lesser' enthusiast press would've latched onto it like an Enquirer editor onto a picture of Britney and K-Fed kissing.

 

I agree, I'm tried to find it again, with just yahoo and Google search engines and they suck at this point. BUT I have posted articles yesterday where it names someone within the company saying one thing and then someone today saying the opposite.

 

I think EVERYONE knows how journalists will write what they think they thought someone said.

 

I wondered if I should have posted it yesterday, but I swear it said that as of now it was 'off the block' until the business gets better. I, me, and myself feel it will still be 'going back on the block' after the company stabilizes and they have cleared the books.

 

but don't quote me on this....

[battyr]

No.

 

Ford mortgaged Volvo.

 

And, per the agreement they have with their bankers, they cannot "pocket" the cash from any sale of Volvo.

 

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/11/27/bloomberg/bxford.php

 

"For collateral, the company is using U.S. plants, other U.S. automotive assets and "all or a portion" of profitable units including Ford Motor Credit and Volvo."

 

Per a couple stories last year, the terms of the agreement are that Ford MUST use the proceeds from the sale of any of the collateralized assets to retire debt.

 

So Ford needs to sell Volvo for more than $8 Billion.

[TStag]

Bingo! Skoda and Seat are VW's Mercury.

 

Really? Go and compare the sales numbers. And also whilst you are there tell me why these sales deadbeats are getting two big factories in China to meet strong local demand there. Also for the other miguided soul who said there sales are just in Eastern Europe, well Seat is Spanish and Spain is in the Southern part of Western Europe not the East. That's where most of its sales are.

 

ALL VW's brands have varying degrees of Autonomy (e.g. Bentley is run almost totally out of the UK) and most of the time all their brands make money.

 

Yes folks that's right, VW has the managerial competance to run several brands at once. And don't throw Bugatti at me, because it's a tiny brand that VW bosses run for fun as a technical excercise in how to make more incredibly engineered cars.

 

Finally VW bosses are not content with just making lorries, cars, vans and supercars, they now plan to buy a motorbike manufacturer and rumours persist that they are looking to buy a US car maker.......

[Critic]

Finally VW bosses are not content with just making lorries, cars, vans and supercars, they now plan to buy a motorbike manufacturer and rumours persist that they are looking to buy a US car maker.......

 

Penta-Star will be available shortly, soon we can put it out of it's misery. And to think, back in the 60's/70's I was Chrysler Biased.

[Edstock]

Yes folks that's right, VW has the managerial competance to run several brands at once. And don't throw Bugatti at me, because it's a tiny brand that VW bosses run for fun as a technical excercise in how to make more incredibly engineered cars.

Incredibly engineered? Uh, sure, if that's what you want to believe.

 

Actually, the Veyron is an incredible exercise in pushing past the point of diminishing returns. Those who are in thrall of complexity see this as incredible engineering, like those who applauded the B-36, in the late 40's, or the Curtis-Wright Turbo-Compound confections that powered the Super Constellation.

 

Do not confuse complexity with engineering excellence. For what the Veyron cost to develop, VW could have turned out a simpler, better, faster and cheaper vehicle by eschewing the use of a complex multi-bank engine with 4 turbos and all the plumbing, and using a simple gas turbine instead. You know, like the Lycoming found in a Huey, or the STP Lotus Indy car.

 

Maybe VW will decide to build the Phaeton in the US.

[battyr]

Really? Go and compare the sales numbers. And also whilst you are there tell me why these sales deadbeats are getting two big factories in China to meet strong local demand there. Also for the other miguided soul who said there sales are just in Eastern Europe, well Seat is Spanish and Spain is in the Southern part of Western Europe not the East. That's where most of its sales are.

 

ALL VW's brands have varying degrees of Autonomy (e.g. Bentley is run almost totally out of the UK) and most of the time all their brands make money.

 

Yes folks that's right, VW has the managerial competance to run several brands at once. And don't throw Bugatti at me, because it's a tiny brand that VW bosses run for fun as a technical excercise in how to make more incredibly engineered cars.

 

Finally VW bosses are not content with just making lorries, cars, vans and supercars, they now plan to buy a motorbike manufacturer and rumours persist that they are looking to buy a US car maker.......

 

VW's different brands are oriented to different customers in the market. Seat customers want low cost cars, VW want affordable performance, etc.

 

Mercury sell to the exact same people as Ford. Mercury just has a different dealer network. Mercury needs to appeal to someone who does not want a Ford.

 

Volvo has a unique customer market, but it appeals to too small of a market. Volvo needs to appeal to more people.

[RichardJensen]

Pity VW has lost proportionally more money in the US than Ford. Their sales volume is equal to about Lincoln + Mercury here, yet they managed to lose roughly a billion dollars a pop over the last 3 years.

[Michael Reynolds]

Yes folks that's right, VW has the managerial competance to run several brands at once. And don't throw Bugatti at me, because it's a tiny brand that VW bosses run for fun as a technical excercise in how to make more incredibly engineered cars.

 

Finally VW bosses are not content with just making lorries, cars, vans and supercars, they now plan to buy a motorbike manufacturer and rumours persist that they are looking to buy a US car maker.......

 

Of course you leave the fact out that VW has been under government protection for god knows how long. Furthermore I wouldn't call Skoda an exercise of anything but a Mercury of Europe (with their thinly veiled VW designs).

 

If VW's management exemplified 'competence': VWoA would not be in such the disaster it is, their quality wouldn't continue to lag almost every other manufacturer out there, there wouldn't be sales disasters such as the Passat W8 or the Phaeton and they would have at least figured out a warranty program vs. changing it every 5 years.

 

And who the hell is VW going to buy, when Porsche virtually have their hands on the prize.

[Michael Reynolds]

Maybe VW will decide to build the Phaeton in the US.

 

For old times sake how about in Westmoreland.

[MKII]

C1 & EUCD were sort of one-off cooperative efforts among various independent product development teams.

 

They did not require a local pd chief answer to a global boss in Dearborn.

 

That has changed, and if Volvo shows an institutional resistance to that change, I expect them to be sold.

 

I think Ford missed several opportunities to push culture change at Jaguar and in the end, I think that's one of the reasons why they got sold. They never really bought into the "we are FORD" idea, and as a result, they never improved performance to the extent possible, and because of THAT, they never achieved sustainable profitability, and because of THAT they got sold.

 

I mean, Ford crammed a pretty bad product strategy down their throats, but they, for their part, treated the Ford shared vehicles as redheaded stepchildren. There is shared responsibility there.

 

Publication: Automotive News

Publication Date: 26-NOV-07

Delivery: Immediate Online Access

Author:

Company: Volvo Car Corp.; Ford Motor Co.

 

Article Excerpt

Byline: Mark Rechtin

 

Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally's recent pronouncement of increased autonomy for Volvo Car Corp. is not the first step toward prepping the automaker for future sale.

 

Rather, Volvo executives say, it gives them a chance to make product and marketing decisions free from Ford's oversight. Meanwhile, Volvo can maintain valuable r&d and engineering connections with Ford, they say.

 

Mulally's statements - made in connection with Ford's third-quarter earnings .

[elkarlo]

Publication: Automotive News

Publication Date: 26-NOV-07

Delivery: Immediate Online Access

Author:

Company: Volvo Car Corp.; Ford Motor Co.

 

Article Excerpt

Byline: Mark Rechtin

 

Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally's recent pronouncement of increased autonomy for Volvo Car Corp. is not the first step toward prepping the automaker for future sale.

 

Rather, Volvo executives say, it gives them a chance to make product and marketing decisions free from Ford's oversight. Meanwhile, Volvo can maintain valuable r&d and engineering connections with Ford, they say.

 

Mulally's statements - made in connection with Ford's third-quarter earnings .

 

 

Agreed. Volvo should be the Mazda of Europe. Quirky in it's own way. Therefore brining unique strengths to the table.

[elkarlo]

VW's different brands are oriented to different customers in the market. Seat customers want low cost cars, VW want affordable performance, etc.

 

Mercury sell to the exact same people as Ford. Mercury just has a different dealer network. Mercury needs to appeal to someone who does not want a Ford.

 

Volvo has a unique customer market, but it appeals to too small of a market. Volvo needs to appeal to more people.

 

 

You sir have caught the correct. I think Merc needs to focus on attracting non-core Ford custumers. Ether that of let Merc turn absorb present day Lincoln. While shoving Lincoln upmarket.

[RichardJensen]

it gives them a chance to make product and marketing decisions free from Ford's oversight. Meanwhile, Volvo can maintain valuable r&d and engineering connections with Ford, they say.

Wow. That'll work out well. Sure did for Jaguar & LR.

 

You know companies that end up owned by other companies because they can't function as independent companies are best advised to remember that if they still act like independent companies, they're just as screwed as they were before they were bought.

 

Buying a company doesn't solve its core problems.

[elkarlo]

Wow. That'll work out well. Sure did for Jaguar & LR.

 

You know companies that end up owned by other companies because they can't function as independent companies are best advised to remember that if they still act like independent companies, they're just as screwed as they were before they were bought.

 

Buying a company doesn't solve its core problems.

J/LR was screwed up beyond belief. Volvo is still good and produces some good products. With minimal effort I think they can re-right the Volvo car company.

[RichardJensen]

Volvo is not self-sustaining. Ergo, any attempts to act independent will fail.

[armadamaster]

I agree Ed, It would be nice if Ford developed Lincoln into another Lexus. If Lexus can sell in Europe at the moment why can't Ford do the same thing with Lincoln and make it a global car. Lexus is sold through Toyota dealers in the UK why can't Ford do the same and sell Lincoln and sell it through Ford dealerships in the UK?

 

Um...apparently you have not seen the MKTaurus:

 

 

 

 

Hey. The 'classless society' was Marx's idea. It is not really American either.

 

IMO, you are confusing luxury, expense, and snob appeal.

 

You can throw down $100 large on a BMW 760iL and still feel every single expansion joint on the road because the dang thing has Mac Struts up front and very hard tires (can't get rid of bumps with a Mac Strut--all you can do is dampen 'em).

 

Is that luxury? Not to me.

 

I don't think 'luxury' is a quintessentially un-American attribute either. Certainly, the days of American marques commanding the reputation that Dusenberg, Pierce Arrow, and even Packard had are most likely over, however, that does not mean that the market for truly luxurious vehicles has gone away. Rather, I would argue, it has been thoroughly neglected as companies have climbed aboard the Bimmer Bandwagon, slavishly imitating all aspects of the company and--basically--fighting over second place behind BMW in the comparison tests rigged by the auto rags.

 

So what I am hearing Richard, is that a Town Car rides better than a $100K BMW....I've always known it but thanks for the quote.

Edited April 27, 2008 by Armada Master

[battyr]

Volvo is not self-sustaining. Ergo, any attempts to act independent will fail.

 

I don't see Volvo becoming independant from Ford. Volvo was under the control of Ford of Europe. This was bad because they sell cars world wide and Europe does not. Their cars are also too much like Ford of Europe cars, but handle poorer. I also see this in keeping Volvo from cooperating with Ford of the Americas and Asia Pacific.

 

I see them becoming an independant part of One Ford. I see them running their own marketing, under the supervision of Farley. Doing their own engineering using Ford global engineering resources and under the supervision of Kuzaks, etc...

 

Mazda does not take orders from Ford of the Americas, Volvo should not take orders from Ford of Europe.

[battyr]

Um...apparently you have not seen the MKTaurus:

 

 

 

 

 

 

So what I am hearing Richard, is that a Town Car rides better than a $100K BMW....I've always known it but thanks for the quote.

 

I rode in a Town Car once. The secret to it's ride is the fact that the car does not touch the ground. It just floats above it.

[syrtran]

You sir have caught the correct. I think Merc needs to focus on attracting non-core Ford custumers. Ether that of let Merc turn absorb present day Lincoln. While shoving Lincoln upmarket.

Please clarify what you've written. As it sits, it looks like you are not aware that Lincoln Mercury is a single marketing organization (aka "Division") within Ford Motor Company.

 

If you meant to say that Mercury should slide into Lincoln's current target market, I agree wholeheartedly.

 

As to this thread, I'd bet Volvo is selling more cars now than they ever did before joining Ford. While they still have their engineering emphasis on safety, their styling is well above their old independant efforts.

 

Now all they need is the return of the 850 Turbo wagon. Hey, with Ecoboost, you never know...

[TStag]

J/LR was screwed up beyond belief. Volvo is still good and produces some good products. With minimal effort I think they can re-right the Volvo car company.

 

But that's the thing. Volvo produces some good cars but it's a much more price sensitive company than JLR. JLR already operates in the market sector above Volvo and by the looks of it has been largely fixed. Volvo on the other hand will never easily slot into the sector above without loosing a lot of sales in the process. For some weird reason it seems as though Ford is trying to turn Volvo into JLR, when if people want a car like that they simply won't buy a Volvo.

 

Volvo is in a very difficult position. It makes great cars but at the wrong prices or without sufficient volume. Volvo is making a loss because it's US sales are collapsing on the strength of the Dollar. JLR's response has been to sell less for more and make more cash. With all due respect to Volvo they can't play that hand. That in a nutshell is the problem with Volvo. Frankly the only answer is to set up US factories for them. Which will be popular in Sweden.....not.

[TStag]

Pity VW has lost proportionally more money in the US than Ford. Their sales volume is equal to about Lincoln + Mercury here, yet they managed to lose roughly a billion dollars a pop over the last 3 years.

 

I agree with you. But globally they make billions in profit, running a myriad of brands. It will be interesting to see what they do next in the USA. Rumours are they want a US car maker that's not Chrysler (i.e bigger than them) or that they will open some US factories and will aim to match Toyota's sales numbers within a decade. Either way I feel they will make a significant impact soon. They are so strong here that you can't help but bet on them.

[mackinaw]

They are so strong here that you can't help but bet on them.

 

Good point. You got to realize that this is a very USA-centric forum, whose list members, by and large, have never been outside the continental US. Americans really don't realize how strong and dominant VW is in Europe.