Debate: Did Ford pull the plug on Mercury prematurely?

[saintlaz1]

In 2009, 36.5% of all Mercury's went to fleets. That's a higher percentage than both Ford or Lincoln. It's actually one of the highest percentages in the industry.

 

Source

 

 

Your reaching when there was only a 4% difference between Ford and Mercury, like i said before What Fleets are getting these? I know of not one company that has bought this can i see more proof that a possibly incorrect statistic?

[saintlaz1]

FORDBUYER and MERCURYMICHAEL i love you guys!!!

[TomServo92]

Your reaching when there was only a 4% difference between Ford and Mercury, like i said before What Fleets are getting these? I know of not one company that has bought this can i see more proof that a possibly incorrect statistic?

 

I can't see Japan from where I sit so therefore it's existence is suspect.

 

Can't you see how ridiculous that sounds?

 

As for the percentage, it is what it is. The TRUTH is that Mercury has a higher fleet percentage than Ford's other two brands. The difference is irrelavant.

[saintlaz1]

The 99-02 Cougar was what i thought was going to be a big comeback for Mercury, first car without a direct counterpart to Ford had bold styling that was one of the most beautiful coupes out there at the time but apparently I was wrong. At least i had the joy of owning them. What upsets me most is what GM is doing with Buick, a company out of bankruptcy with 7 brands still out there and yet they have the money to invest in Buick and they are not doing anything special really its rebadged Opels but who the F cares. True Buick owners will be more than enough satisfied; i would have killed for a rebadge Mustang, Edge and Focus for Mercury.

Edited July 23, 2010 by saintlaz1

[akirby]

The 99-02 Cougar was what i thought was going to be a big comeback for Mercury, first car without a direct counterpart to Ford had bold styling that was one of the most beautiful coupes out there at the time but apparently I was wrong. At least i had the joy of owning them. What upsets me most is what GM is doing with Buick, a company out of bankruptcy with 7 brands still out there and yet they have the money to invest in Buick and they are not doing anything special really its rebadged Opels but who the F cares. True Buick owners will be more than enough satisfied; i would have killed for a rebadge Mustang, Edge and Focus for Mercury.

 

But could GM be even better without Buick? Why can't those same vehicles either be higher end Chevys or lower end Caddys? Is keeping Buick hurting Chevy and Caddy?

[FordBuyer]

I can't see Japan from where I sit so therefore it's existence is suspect.

 

Can't you see how ridiculous that sounds?

 

As for the percentage, it is what it is. The TRUTH is that Mercury has a higher fleet percentage than Ford's other two brands. The difference is irrelavant.

 

I find it interesting that before Mulally made his decision to end Mercury, almost every poster on here supported Mercury and said they thought Mercury was making Ford money since Ford didn't have to spend a lot of money on them and customers still bought them. And Hermosillo and KCAP have the excess capacity to build Milans and Mariners no problem. Now Mulally abruptly and shockingly pulls the plug on Mercury, and everyone all of a sudden does an about face and applauds the demise of Mercury. I'm certainly not going to argue that Mulally hasn't been great for Ford, but Mulally is also human and has and will make mistakes. Maybe the demise of Mercurcy won't be a mistake, but it could end up being one. Especially if the auto market does come back and there is a demand for something between Ford and Lincoln.

 

As a Ford shareholder and bondholder, I certainly recognize the need to make a profit. But I'm also a Ford customer and recognize the need for affordability and choice. Ford is big enough to support three brands and has been doing so for decades. Arguably Ford is now one of the stronger auto manufacturers out there. With LR, Jaguar, and Volvo gone, Ford could easity have made a better case for Mercury. Some speculated that Mercury would have been good division to put European themed vehicles into and keep Ford for more "American" themed vehicles. Unfortunately, the dirty deed has been done and Mercury is about to leave the automotive scene for good. I hope for Ford's sake that it was a good decision. NONE of us know as of now. Time will tell.

[FordBuyer]

But could GM be even better without Buick? Why can't those same vehicles either be higher end Chevys or lower end Caddys? Is keeping Buick hurting Chevy and Caddy?

 

 

More choice is good. Some customers want something better than a Chevy without Cadillac prices. GM is doing a good job with Buick as of late. The new LaCrosse certainly is better than anything Chevy offers, but not as good as Cadillac. I believe GM is showing Ford the way, but Ford decided to end Mercury and not give it a chance. If Buick does really well, then I rate Mulally's decision as a mistake.

[FordBuyer]

But could GM be even better without Buick? Why can't those same vehicles either be higher end Chevys or lower end Caddys? Is keeping Buick hurting Chevy and Caddy?

 

I believe GM has stated that the Buick Enclave and LaCrosse both have high conquest rates, namely from foreign nameplates. So how is Buick hurting Chevy and Caddy? GM is trying to use Buick to garner customers that usually buy foreign. In other words, they never would have bought a Chevy or Caddy anyway. Chevy doesn't fit their view of themselves and Caddy is too expensive. This is called smart marketing.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Steve McGarrett would turn in his grave if he could see what is happening to Mercury today.

 

Danno is driving a 5.0 Stang in the new Hawaii Five-0 remake that should be awesome to watch, what will car McGarratts son be driving in the new TV series will he restore Steves old Mercury that he finds in his Dads garage, will it be his dads old Mercury restored that he uses as his drive?

 

New 5-0 series is being shown in the autumn in the UK gotta say l am looking forward to seeing the remake.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[FordBuyer]

Steve McGarrett would turn in his grave if he could see what is happening to Mercury today.

 

Danno is driving a 5.0 Stang in the new Hawaii Five-0 remake that should be awesome to watch, what will car McGarratts son be driving in the new TV series will he restore Steves old Mercury he finds in his Dads garage, will be the old Mercury restored?

 

New 5-0 series is being shown in the autumn in the UK gotta say l am looking forward to seeing the remake.

 

My father would be also as he was driving a Merc GM just before he died. Many diehard Ford customers turn to Mercury products when they start getting that AARP card and of late many younger females were driving Mercs, especially the Mariner. And many of those females would have never bought an Escape.

[TomServo92]

I find it interesting that before Mulally made his decision to end Mercury, almost every poster on here supported Mercury and said they thought Mercury was making Ford money since Ford didn't have to spend a lot of money on them and customers still bought them.

 

Let me clarify my position on Mercury:

 

If the decision was to keep Mercury, I would have supported it just as I support the decision to shut it down. Why? Because I have confidence in the decisions being made by Mulally and the rest of the Ford management team. They have proven (so far) to be making very good business decisions. It's a shame that Mercury is going away but things change. The world isn't the same as it was 10 years ago.

[akirby]

Let me clarify my position on Mercury:

 

If the decision was to keep Mercury, I would have supported it just as I support the decision to shut it down. Why? Because I have confidence in the decisions being made by Mulally and the rest of the Ford management team. They have proven (so far) to be making very good business decisions. It's a shame that Mercury is going away but things change. The world isn't the same as it was 10 years ago.

 

Once again you hit the nail on the head. The plan for the last 3 years was to hold Mercury as is with no significant investment, put all the resources toward fixing Ford first, then Lincoln, then decide what to do with Mercury. Mercury could have easily been kept alive and my hope was they would eventually get unique, niche products once Ford was profitable and Lincoln had been taken care of.

 

However, to do so would have meant less resources for Ford and Lincoln and perhaps more importantly - the need to continue to support marginal dealerships. Getting rid of Mercury helps thin the dealer herd which was created when Ford enjoyed a much higher market share. It also allows Ford to concentrate solely on Ford and Lincoln.

 

This decision wasn't made by itself. Nobody sat down and debated whether it should be kept or not. They have a business plan which includes everything they want to do with Lincoln and that happens to include killing Mercury.

 

Anybody that thinks otherwise is simply uninformed about how business decisions get made (at least by a good management team like Mulally and company).

 

We're excited about Ford moving forward with Lincoln and not having any diversions. Some of us also believe that you can't support more than 2 brands without compromising one or the other in some way.

[akirby]

And many of those females would have never bought an Escape.

 

You don't know that, even if that's what they said at the time. Everything that makes the Mariner attractive also makes the Escape attractive and if you put them in the position of getting the escape with slightly different styling or a totally different vehicle from another manufacturer, I bet 80% of the time they still pick the Ford.

 

Don't bother to argue - it can't be prove either way. So you keep your opinion and I'll keep mine and we'll see how the sales fall next year.

[TomServo92]

Once again you hit the nail on the head. The plan for the last 3 years was to hold Mercury as is with no significant investment, put all the resources toward fixing Ford first, then Lincoln, then decide what to do with Mercury. Mercury could have easily been kept alive and my hope was they would eventually get unique, niche products once Ford was profitable and Lincoln had been taken care of.

 

However, to do so would have meant less resources for Ford and Lincoln and perhaps more importantly - the need to continue to support marginal dealerships. Getting rid of Mercury helps thin the dealer herd which was created when Ford enjoyed a much higher market share. It also allows Ford to concentrate solely on Ford and Lincoln.

 

This decision wasn't made by itself. Nobody sat down and debated whether it should be kept or not. They have a business plan which includes everything they want to do with Lincoln and that happens to include killing Mercury.

 

Anybody that thinks otherwise is simply uninformed about how business decisions get made (at least by a good management team like Mulally and company).

 

We're excited about Ford moving forward with Lincoln and not having any diversions. Some of us also believe that you can't support more than 2 brands without compromising one or the other in some way.

 

I got an email at work this morning that had this quote in the signature:

 

“Do what you feel in your heart to be right - for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't." (Eleanor Roosevelt) 

 

I think it's very fitting to this discussion.

[FordBuyer]

Once again you hit the nail on the head. The plan for the last 3 years was to hold Mercury as is with no significant investment, put all the resources toward fixing Ford first, then Lincoln, then decide what to do with Mercury. Mercury could have easily been kept alive and my hope was they would eventually get unique, niche products once Ford was profitable and Lincoln had been taken care of.

 

However, to do so would have meant less resources for Ford and Lincoln and perhaps more importantly - the need to continue to support marginal dealerships. Getting rid of Mercury helps thin the dealer herd which was created when Ford enjoyed a much higher market share. It also allows Ford to concentrate solely on Ford and Lincoln.

 

This decision wasn't made by itself. Nobody sat down and debated whether it should be kept or not. They have a business plan which includes everything they want to do with Lincoln and that happens to include killing Mercury.

 

Anybody that thinks otherwise is simply uninformed about how business decisions get made (at least by a good management team like Mulally and company).

 

We're excited about Ford moving forward with Lincoln and not having any diversions. Some of us also believe that you can't support more than 2 brands without compromising one or the other in some way.

 

And again, is killing Mercury still a good decision if GM does well with Buick as Chevy and Cadillac continue to do well? Jeeesh...there is even chance that Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep will do well in future assuming auto market comes back a bit. IMO, if this scenario holds up then Ford made mistake. Yeah, time will tell. Right now, Buick is looking up with Enclave, and LaCrosse. The Lucerne and to me the Regal don't look so good.

 

Looks to me like Ford wants a premium brand and an ultra premium brand. GM is going with more affordable brand, premium brand, and ultra premium brand. I personally like GM's marketing better right now. I have always been loyal to Ford, but if Ford sticks with this marketing approach and Chevy undercuts Ford big time on price, I will buy a Chevy next time. Most consumers are not stupid...they want a decent vehicle for a decent price. I like the new Focus better than the Chevy Cruze, but if Cruze is thousands cheaper because Ford wants to make Ford a premium brand, then hello Cruze. In my view, Ford's marketing approach won't work competitive wise if Ford brand becomes as expensive as Buick brand.

 

What makes me say this......Focus S and Fusion S are not found on lots and Fusion S is gone for 2011. The SE models are becoming very expensive with Focus price approaching $20,000 sticker and Fusion approaching $23,000 sticker. The SELs are getting way up there in price. The Edge, Flex, and new Explorer are basically $30,000+ vehicles and easy get them up to $40,000 and beyond at a time when it's next to impossible to sell your house for even remotely sane price. The Taurus is also a $30,000+ vehicle. Ford thus is becoming a premium brand...good for profits but maybe not competitive with Chevy if they hold the line on prices and leave Buick as premium brand. Over time, Ford will lose sales and profits if they keep escalating sticker prices with no end in sight and try to be only premium brand.

[TomServo92]

And again, is killing Mercury still a good decision if GM does well with Buick as Chevy and Cadillac continue to do well? Jeeesh...there is even chance that Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep will do well in future assuming auto market comes back a bit. IMO, if this scenario holds up then Ford made mistake. Yeah, time will tell. Right now, Buick is looking up with Enclave, and LaCrosse. The Lucerne and to me the Regal don't look so good.

 

GM management hasn't shown to be as adept at making good business decisions like Ford. IMO, that's what makes the decision to keep Buick a shaky one. Also, the strategy of bringing rebadged Opels here was a big fat FAIL for Saturn. Why do you think it's going to work for Buick?

[akirby]

Having Buick means Chevy can't have a premium sedan like Ford has with the Taurus or an entry level Cadillac like the MKZ. They're just splitting the same market among 3 brands instead of 2. Why do they need 4 small and 4 mid-sized crossovers?

 

People see Chevy as a cheap brand. That hurts them in the long run. If Ford loses all those buyers looking for "cheap" cars - GREAT! They've already proven there is more profit selling fewer well equipped vehicles.

 

You keep saying Ford is doing the wrong things, yet they've made almost $5B in the first half of this year. I think I'll go with Ford's $5B profit over your worthless opinions or GM's current financial performance.

[NickF1011]

They have to sell them a lot better than they currently are or the average $ becomes irrelivant quickly!

 

They don't really have to sell a lot better. Better? Sure. But it's not like the other luxury automakers are selling 5 or 6 times more vehicles than Lincoln. They aren't. But who ever said that Lincoln was in great shape? They're just on slightly more solid footing than Mercury, that's all. Plenty of problems to fix, but fewer than Mercury had.

[NickF1011]

Cadillac continue to do well?

 

Cadillac is doing well? They have two vehicles that sell well: The CTS and SRX. That's certainly worth the billions of dollars GM has pumped into the brand in recent years, huh?

[TomServo92]

Cadillac is doing well? They have two vehicles that sell well: The CTS and SRX. That's certainly worth the billions of dollars GM has pumped into the brand in recent years, huh?

 

I don't think there's anything about GM management that Ford should be emulationg.

[saintlaz1]

Cadillac is doing well? They have two vehicles that sell well: The CTS and SRX. That's certainly worth the billions of dollars GM has pumped into the brand in recent years, huh?

 

 

And what does Lincoln have to show? The fact that their lower end discontinued cousin keeps kicking its ass in sales?

[saintlaz1]

I can't see Japan from where I sit so therefore it's existence is suspect.

 

Can't you see how ridiculous that sounds?

 

As for the percentage, it is what it is. The TRUTH is that Mercury has a higher fleet percentage than Ford's other two brands. The difference is irrelavant.

 

 

The difference is NOT irrelavant with such a small margin.

 

OK, so show me where these Mercury's went buddy? I live in Miami and its funny as you see alot of Milan and Mariner around here none being fleet cars. in my building alone there are two Milans one Mariner and guess what No Lincolns.

[saintlaz1]

But could GM be even better without Buick? Why can't those same vehicles either be higher end Chevys or lower end Caddys? Is keeping Buick hurting Chevy and Caddy?

 

 

So whats the point of Having Caddy and Lincoln? if Ford and Chevy want to be in the likes of Lexus, Mercedes and BMW then lets get rid of those and invest 100% in Ford/Chevy and see what happens no need to support extra brands if you ONE brand can appeal to all... I dont see how doing that doesnt make sense based on what most of you are saying.

[TomServo92]

The difference is NOT irrelavant with such a small margin.

 

OK, so show me where these Mercury's went buddy? I live in Miami and its funny as you see alot of Milan and Mariner around here none being fleet cars. in my building alone there are two Milans one Mariner and guess what No Lincolns.

 

The only relevant fact is that a higher percentage of Mercury's go to fleets than Fords or Lincolns. Sorry if that disturbs your little world but it's the TRUTH. Suck it up and deal with it.

 

As for where did they go, I did show you. The fleet registration link very clearly indicated where they went. You're either too stupid or too stubborn to comprehend it. Either way, it's not my problem.

[TomServo92]

And what does Lincoln have to show? The fact that their lower end discontinued cousin keeps kicking its ass in FLEET sales?

 

Fixed it for you.