Noah Harbinger Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Now the right wing talk hosts are picking up on this, "Obama made Ford pull the ad because it wasn't PC." Ford may get some more sympathizers out of this, but I bet if they knew the shitstorm this would stir up they wouldn't have approved it. I'm not convinced of that. They may have orchestrated it precisely because they know their ethical bankruptcy would be called out, but that most people are not sufficiently engaged with the details of the bailout to understand the nuances of the situation - hence gaining them favor in the eye of the majority of the car-buying public. Now, maybe that's just paranoia. But if there's any truth to that, it sounds like evil genius to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 On one of the F150 forums, someone made an add-on sticker you put below the 4x4 sticker on the box. It says it all... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 On one of the F150 forums, someone made an add-on sticker you put below the 4x4 sticker on the box. It says it all... Nice! Incidentally, Ford's YouTube page has additional customer testimonial based adverts (including a couple who own a Fusion Hybrid and a lady that drives a Mk3 Focus). Excellent campaign, particularly with the "Chris" spot! :happy feet: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Like it or not, the politics of the Chrysler and General Motors bailout has, and will continue to, affect consumer buying habits. Despite this, it seems as though the topic is considered taboo within the industry. The bigger problem for GM and Chrysler is that when their vehicles are compared to Ford offerings, they usually come up short. That is the REAL problem for both companies. Who, aside from Avis, the local police department and your cranky, tightwad 70-year-old Uncle Fred wants an Impala over a Taurus?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Who, aside from Avis, the local police department and your cranky, tightwad 70-year-old Uncle Fred wants an Impala over a Taurus?! Maybe so, but Chrysler doesn't come out so badly in that comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 (edited) This is like when in court one lawyer or witness makes a statement and the opposing lawyer asks the judge to strike it from the record. The judge then tells the jurors to disregard that last statement! Guess what: It's too late! Similarly, the message got out! Ford wins, especially with the mainstream media coverage that has resulted! Edited September 28, 2011 by Joe771476 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Maybe so, but Chrysler doesn't come out so badly in that comparison. Chrysler quality control is still very much a hit-or-miss proposition. I agree that the Charger is an exciting car to look at and - with the proper engine - to drive. But owning and driving it on a daily basis will cast it in an entirely different light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 What happens now if Ford needs a bailout? That's why I don't like these ads, Ford's debt is significant, it doesn't take much for a bad economy and some bad decisions to put Ford in a particularly disadvantaged position relative to their neighbors. Eh, looking at their current debt load and cash on hand, that scenario is seeming less and less likely. The market would have to absolutely tank, and I mean far worse than it did a few years ago, in order to pull Ford under at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 28, 2011 Share Posted September 28, 2011 Eh, looking at their current debt load and cash on hand, that scenario is seeming less and less likely. The market would have to absolutely tank, and I mean far worse than it did a few years ago, in order to pull Ford under at this point. People seem to forget that Ford actually made over $20B in profit last year before paying down the debt. More importantly they reduced fixed costs so they could survive a huge downturn and still remain profitable and continue to make interest payments on the debt. They've already seen the worst - I don't see vehicle sales going below 10M and Ford has already proven it can stay solvent at those reduced volumes. GM would be much more likely to bite the dust again because they still haven't gotten their costs or production volumes under control. Worst case Ford keeps their current debt level or has to increase it slightly for a short period. But no way Ford is in any danger whatsoever at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger20 Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 I know of two big dollar Fords (F-150 Limited 6.2L and F-250 Lariat Power Stroke) that were bought by my neighbors just in the last month because they didn't take the bailout money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) I think Ford is out of the woods unless something monstrous enough to take most any manufacturer down happens. Edited September 29, 2011 by Intrepidatious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 What happens now if Ford needs a bailout? That's why I don't like these ads, Ford's debt is significant, it doesn't take much for a bad economy and some bad decisions to put Ford in a particularly disadvantaged position relative to their neighbors. It's been said that the MAJOR reason Ford decided not to take bailout money is because the big Ford exectutives didn't want to take an executive pay haircut like GM and Chysler did. Ford executives have been cleaning up pay wise last couple years. Personally, I'm glad Ford didn't take one because I had Ford notes outstanding and ultimately got paid off over 100 cents on dollar when Ford called them in a year or so ago. Major props to Ford. As for the recent Ford "Faux Press Conference" commercials about Ford products, I find the them rather lame and not near as good as the Mike Rowe/Ford commercials shown earlier. I don't see Ford ever needing a bailout this decade unless they run into another Explorer like fiasco. Ford is structured so that it can make money even in 9 million new vehicle market. And even if Lincoln crashes and burns, Ford is not spending super significant money on its resurrection, at least not yet. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Drives: 2002 Matador Red Ford Taurus SES Sport 2001 Orient Red Metallic Porsche Boxster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's been said that the MAJOR reason Ford decided not to take bailout money is because the big Ford executives didn't want to take an executive pay haircut like GM and Chrysler did. Ford executives have been cleaning up pay wise last couple years. Personally, I'm glad Ford didn't take one because I had Ford notes outstanding and ultimately got paid off over 100 cents on dollar when Ford called them in a year or so ago. Major props to Ford. The reason Ford didn't take the bailout was that they didn't need it as they had cash on hand, but the big thing was if they did the Ford Family would have lost control of the company. Mullay never would have went to Washington had he known the beating he was going to take, he went there for the industry because it could have hurt Ford if the supplier base got disrupted. He handled it way better than I would have when the hearings went after him - I would have gone after a few of the panel members on the polices they put in place that brought about the total financial collapse. GM should have just gone though bankruptcy the normal way, people would have respected them a lot more for it, than the deal they got, GM Salary retiree and family members I know will never buy another GM product as long as they live. I can believe that the White House got involved and made a comment -- look that the Boeing issue going on now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 "It has been said by many?" Huh?? Ford executives had nothing to do with whether Ford took bailout money or not. Good grief, one sure has to love revisionist history. Ford had a bunch of cash on hand, when GM and Chrysler begged Washington DC for help. There are 2 very distinct reasons that Ford was there. 1) To lend support to GM and Chrysler, as they share alot of suppliers, and the uncontrolled collapse of those companies would have greatly injured Ford................... and 2) To see what the strings were on government money. Ford execs are excellent businessmen. If the gov would have offered next to no interest loans, with no strings attached, Ford would have been stupid to not take them up on it. They would have then retired some of their expensive debt, with very inexpensive debt. Since this was not the case, Ford said no thank you. The reality is, when the collapse of GM and Chrysler happened, Ford would not have been able to declare BK. They had too much cash, and could easily pay their bills. The loans they had taken had nothing to do with keeping the lights on, and everything to do with a complete restructuring of the company in a timeframe with a certain deep recession (anyone who says noone could see a recession was immenant, is stupid). Ford execs could present all the facts to the Ford family, but ultimately, they are the ones who would never agree to a BK, no matter how bad things got. The Ford family would have lost control of the company, and they would have never allowed that to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 "Ford execs are excellent businessmen"....Extreme 4by4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Let's not get carried away here. Talk about "revsisionist history." Other than Mulally, it's this basically same cast of characters that drove Ford's stock price down to less than $2/share, put Ford's balance sheet completely out of whack with skyrocketing long term debt problems, and sold off Premier Group for pennies on dollar. Even looking at it this way, I never thought Ford was as bad as pundits said, and conversely I don't believe Ford is now as great as the pundits state. I still feel Ford has a long way to go and not even close to its potential as of yet. Ford's stock is not even double digit yet. I'm somewhat bullish about Ford going forward, but not even close to being euphoric. I still feel there are more questions than answers. In fact, I question if it's wise to payout a dividend on a single digit to very low double digit stock price? And I own Ford common stock. I want to see more before I'm williing to grade Ford execs as "excellent." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Sigh. Welcome back FordBuyer. Remember that 500 word limit? It's still in effect. With a slight modification. You can make additional posts on this thread if you, f'r cryin' out loud, will actually provide a source that supports even one of these outlandish claims (e.g. Ford's execs are incompetent because they sold PAG) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Now conspiracy theorist Darrell Issa R-CA wants Mulally to explain why the ad was pulled. http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/30/chairman-of-house-oversight-asks-ford-why-it-pulled-ad/#aol-comments Does Mr. Issa really have nothing better to do? How about looking into the Billions of dollars unaccounted for in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe a hearing on war profiteering by well connected contractors over the last decade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 "Ford execs are excellent businessmen"....Extreme 4by4 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Let's not get carried away here. Talk about "revsisionist history." Other than Mulally, it's this basically same cast of characters that drove Ford's stock price down to less than $2/share, put Ford's balance sheet completely out of whack with skyrocketing long term debt problems, and sold off Premier Group for pennies on dollar. Even looking at it this way, I never thought Ford was as bad as pundits said, and conversely I don't believe Ford is now as great as the pundits state. I still feel Ford has a long way to go and not even close to its potential as of yet. Ford's stock is not even double digit yet. I'm somewhat bullish about Ford going forward, but not even close to being euphoric. I still feel there are more questions than answers. In fact, I question if it's wise to payout a dividend on a single digit to very low double digit stock price? And I own Ford common stock. I want to see more before I'm williing to grade Ford execs as "excellent." Welcome back genius. The current execs would be Mulally, who joined Ford in 2006. Kuzak, who was promoted in 2006. Fields, who was promoted in 2005. And Farley who joined Ford in 2007. Before Mulally, Ford operated in silos with Europe, North America and Australia each doing their own thing. Mulally is the one who put the kabosh on that and FORCED Ford to start operating as a single global company with global resources. He empowered Fields and Kuzak to make that happen. He sold off PAG which was totally necessary to allow Ford to focus on Ford. Before Mulally Ford produced more vehicles than consumers wanted to buy. Now they don't. They had multiple versions of the same vehicle on different platforms for no reason. Now they don't (or won't have soon). They used to fleet dump - not any more. Every change that Ford has made the last 5 years can be directly attributed to the executives and none of them were directly responsible for the past failures. If anyone was responsible for the past it was Bill Ford because he allowed it to happen whereas Mulally had the guts to fix the problem. But Bill isn't in charge any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Please, NO politics in this forum! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Quit putting words in my mouth head censor. What I said is Ford execs sold PAG for cents on the dollar. You can draw your own conclusions from that fact. Anyone can buy something at a premium price and sell for pennies on the dollar. Even I can do that. I know I wouldn't get a performance bonus for doing it. Only a loss. You guys can get as giddy as you want over Ford. I will stay reserved in my judgement whether you like it or not. Ford is still a work in progress and no more than that. PAG was a drain on the company and they sold it for what they could get for it. Was it a mistake to buy the brands in PAG? Yes. Did the current management have anything to do with it? No, they inherited it and made the right decision to get rid of the money pit. Even sold at a loss it was better than letting it drag the company down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Quit putting words in my mouth head censor. What I said is Ford execs sold PAG for cents on the dollar. You can draw your own conclusions from that fact. Anyone can buy something at a premium price and sell for pennies on the dollar. Even I can do that. I know I wouldn't get a performance bonus for doing it. Only a loss. You guys can get as giddy as you want over Ford. I will stay reserved in my judgement whether you like it or not. Ford is still a work in progress and no more than that. When is it better to sell something as a loss than to hold on to it? When it will cost you MORE money in the future to keep it. What you paid for it initially is of no consequence - that money is gone either way. By selling PAG (even if they had to give it away) they freed up capital that went into fixing first Ford and now Lincoln. Let's say you have a stock that you paid $30/share for back when but it's now worth only $5/share. But the long term projection is that it will only be worth pennies in a few months. Would you get rid of it now and lose $25/share or would you hold it and lose $29/share later? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Let me reframe the discussion. No. We've had enough of that from you. You haven't posted a single source supporting your arguments, and therefore, your posts will be deleted. If you don't like it, go join Ford Inside News. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ausrutherford Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 (edited) Now conspiracy theorist Darrell Issa R-CA wants Mulally to explain why the ad was pulled. http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/30/chairman-of-house-oversight-asks-ford-why-it-pulled-ad/#aol-comments Does Mr. Issa really have nothing better to do? How about looking into the Billions of dollars unaccounted for in Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe a hearing on war profiteering by well connected contractors over the last decade? Theres already investigations into that. Edited September 30, 2011 by RichardJensen Moderator already warned on political content. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 No. We've had enough of that from you. You haven't posted a single source supporting your arguments, and therefore, your posts will be deleted. If you don't like it, go join Ford Inside News. OK Mr. Censor. Now back to your La La Land where Ford is all knowing and all other auto manufacturers are incompetent boobs in your biased mind. You don't have proof either, but it doesn't stop you from vomiting all over GM and Chrysler plus other companies on daily basis. Now back to looking at Ford at $9 and some small change. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 (edited) OK Mr. Censor. Now back to your La La Land where Ford is all knowing and all other auto manufacturers are incompetent boobs in your biased mind. You don't have proof either, but it doesn't stop you from vomiting all over GM and Chrysler plus other companies on daily basis. Look at Ford's financial results over the past two years, $22 billion paid off debt, and around $11 billion in profit - that's amazing! I bet you can't name one other unassisted auto company that has had that kind of $33 billion turnaround at the same time? GM are also doing well, they got there with government help but have also reduced their workforce from 111,000 to 49,000 over the past five years just like Ford, so they have picked up a lot of efficiency too and i look forward to both Ford and GM gushing each other in the market place like they used to but this time, working together to eat into Toyota, Honda and Hyundai. Now back to looking at Ford at $9 and some small change. The stock price has nothing to do with Ford's operational results and everything to do with the lack of confidence in the stock market, people are moving their cash out of stocks and back into banks where they can get safety and a reasonable levels of interest.. Edited September 30, 2011 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.