Ford April 2012 Sales Figures

[Edstock]

Will penguins stop wearing sweaters?

[twmalonehunter]

While the fit and finish on my Focus is pretty gd, I was checking out some taurus' the other day and it was pretty Crappy. All the problems seemed to be consistent to each vehicle. Kinda disappointing.

[2005Explorer]

 

LOL... I love it!

 

Laugh all you want and tell me I don't know anything... but just you watch... When the new GM SUVs launch next year the old Expedition and Navigator will collect dust and sales will trickle to a pace that is not sustainable until 2015. With an update they have a small chance of hanging on to what they have, otherwise maybe they should just discontinue them after this model year and then re-introduce them in 2015.

[Edstock]

Detroit News:

 

Ford starting third shift at Cleveland plant to keep up with EcoBoost engine demand.

[RichardJensen]

do you see a negitive trend with anything at Ford?

Every NA Ford plant is either down for retooling, going down for retooling, or running at a very profitable capacity.

 

Market share PERCENTAGES are in and of themselves a valueless statistic.

Edited May 4, 2012 by RichardJensen

[mettech]

Every NA Ford plant is either down for retooling, going down for retooling, or running at a very profitable capacity.

 

Market share PERCENTAGES are in and of themselves a valueless statistic.

 

How about when comparing Market share and profit with competitors?

 

If brand V and H/K are picking up more market share and profit than Ford does... it appears to me that value and a synopsis can be applied to the data.

 

Concerns:

 

1. is the market is moving away from Ford due to noted negative issues.

 

2. Ford misreading what customers really want in the different segments.

 

3. Lincoln failing

 

4. _Fill in the Blank)____________

Edited May 4, 2012 by mettech

[FordBuyer]

How about when comparing Market share and profit with competitors?

 

If brand V and H/K are picking up more market share and profit than Ford does... it appears to me that value and a synopsis can be applied to the data.

 

Concerns:

 

1. is the market is moving away from Ford due to noted negative issues.

 

2. Ford misreading what customers really want in the different segments.

 

3. Lincoln failing

 

4. _Fill in the Blank)____________

 

Mostly ending vehicle lines without any replacements. The newer Ford vehicles appear to be selling quite well except for maybe Fiesta, Flex, and MKT. And we have discussed the reasons why Fiesta sales have fallen in recent months. You can't end relatively high volume lines like Crown Vic, Grand Marquis, Ranger, Town Car, and whole division like Mercury and expect to pick up market share. That being said, Ford sales in recent months have not been great, or terrible, but lackluster. I would imagine that is mostly because if any model has break out month like Focus and Fusion in March, then inventory in big way is affected and significantly reduces sales the following month. Like a good baseball team, I imagine Ford is trying to be very strong down the middle and hopefully later get the remaining pieces to become complete whatever that means in Ford's case. To some it means a compact pickup, to others a RWD luxury car, and to others a super car. To me it means a Fusion sport wagon.

[akirby]

In the end the only thing that matters is profitability. Increasing market share usually increases profitability but not always.

 

Having plants at near capacity and selling vehicles with minimal incentives are far more important than absolute market share.

 

If other mfrs are buying market share at the expense of profits (with huge incentives) then that's not something Ford should worry about.

 

Any where Ford is losing market share the question should be whether changes are already being made or whether it's worth the cost to get it back.

 

GM was #1 in market share and went bankrupt. Honda has never been close to #1 and they've been very successful.

 

Market share alone is a worthless statistic.

[akirby]

LOL... I love it!

 

Laugh all you want and tell me I don't know anything... but just you watch... When the new GM SUVs launch next year the old Expedition and Navigator will collect dust and sales will trickle to a pace that is not sustainable until 2015. With an update they have a small chance of hanging on to what they have, otherwise maybe they should just discontinue them after this model year and then re-introduce them in 2015.

 

Expy is currently at 36K/yr. Let's say the new GMs drop that to 24K. So what? It's only "not sustainable" if Ford has something better to do with the plant capacity. They might decide to kill them until the new ones come out but it's certainly not a requirement no matter the sales volume.

 

You people think sales volume is the only metric that matters when in fact it's only a small piece of a very complicated equation that includes sunk cost, future product plans, plant capacity, incentives, market direction, market strategy, etc. etc.

[Biker16]

Those all look very minor to me and the dealer probably could re-adjust for the most part.

 

It is important to get the car right in the plant and not waste time and money fixing the problem later, From a dealer POV ford does not pay for preemptive quality Repairs AFAIK, especially cosmetic repairs they won't do anything unless the customer notices the defect. I had my Focus readjusted for the same thing. it's just sloppy assembly I have never seen a recent GM product with panel gaps as bad as I have seen on recent Ford's.

 

do not minimize this problem it is very common and will comeback to bite for in the ass.

 

true story.

 

I had a leak in the cargo area of my car, why? because the headliner module was installed in a way that crushed the drain tube from my moon roof, Seriously WTF. I have nothing but rattles from that module since I got the car. I will be returning it to be fixed and for them to make sure the front drain tube is not crushed too.

 

The issue is from a manufacturing POV, you have had MAP and CAP working heavy overtime for over a year, the line speed is crazy fast, the jobs are unbalanced, and the build mix is complex. if you are only installing moonroofs in <8% of cars how much practice do you have at getting it right, never mind the effects of tag relief and training new people.

My uncle works at Jefferson north where he has consistency been working 50-60 hrs a week for over a year, this is not good on the body or for quality. Jefferson north is adding a 3 shift now and MAP and CAP are doing the same. I hope this allows Ford to take more time building these cars and get it right the First time.

[FordBuyer]

In the end the only thing that matters is profitability. Increasing market share usually increases profitability but not always.

 

Having plants at near capacity and selling vehicles with minimal incentives are far more important than absolute market share.

 

If other mfrs are buying market share at the expense of profits (with huge incentives) then that's not something Ford should worry about.

 

Any where Ford is losing market share the question should be whether changes are already being made or whether it's worth the cost to get it back.

 

GM was #1 in market share and went bankrupt. Honda has never been close to #1 and they've been very successful.

 

Market share alone is a worthless statistic.

 

I don't think anyone said market share is only thing that matters in being successful. But it certainly does matter. If you find yourself losing consistent market share over time, profits will be impacted over time. The natives will start getting restless if month after month your market share stagnates or goes down as market overall improves. Certainly looks like many investors are selling Ford stock as share price goes down 2% or so day after day. I don't easily panic as I rode out worst of financial crisis and March, '09 lows, but it certainly has my attention. Ford's competition is coming back at Ford and it still remains to be seen if Ford quality can hold up or more importantly improve as Ford plants start approaching full capacity trying to meet demand with increasing line speed.

[FordBuyer]

It is important to get the car right in the plant and not waste time and money fixing the problem later, From a dealer POV ford does not pay for preemptive quality Repairs AFAIK, especially cosmetic repairs they won't do anything unless the customer notices the defect. I had my Focus readjusted for the same thing. it's just sloppy assembly I have never seen a recent GM product with panel gaps as bad as I have seen on recent Ford's.

 

do not minimize this problem it is very common and will comeback to bite for in the ass.

 

true story.

 

I had a leak in the cargo area of my car, why? because the headliner module was installed in a way that crushed the drain tube from my moon roof, Seriously WTF. I have nothing but rattles from that module since I got the car. I will be returning it to be fixed and for them to make sure the front drain tube is not crushed too.

 

The issue is from a manufacturing POV, you have had MAP and CAP working heavy overtime for over a year, the line speed is crazy fast, the jobs are unbalanced, and the build mix is complex. if you are only installing moonroofs in <8% of cars how much practice do you have at getting it right, never mind the effects of tag relief and training new people.

My uncle works at Jefferson north where he has consistency been working 50-60 hrs a week for over a year, this is not good on the body or for quality. Jefferson north is adding a 3 shift now and MAP and CAP are doing the same. I hope this allows Ford to take more time building these cars and get it right the First time.

 

The domestics in general, Ford included, still have to prove they can improve quality when their plants are going full bore. We know they can improve quality when their plants are at 50% capacity, but I don't know that their quality has ever been exceptional when line speed is at max. Maybe more robots are required. It seems to be those manufacturers with best build quality do have more automated plants that don't get tired and rushed.

[Biker16]

Expy is currently at 36K/yr. Let's say the new GMs drop that to 24K. So what? It's only "not sustainable" if Ford has something better to do with the plant capacity. They might decide to kill them until the new ones come out but it's certainly not a requirement no matter the sales volume.

 

You people think sales volume is the only metric that matters when in fact it's only a small piece of a very complicated equation that includes sunk cost, future product plans, plant capacity, incentives, market direction, market strategy, etc. etc.

 

it is development cost divided by the expected number units produced.

 

lower volume means reduced PD budgets. I don't think Ford can afford to do a ground up redesign of the trucks, without ditching the standalone frame they use today. and going with F-series frame. this has a cascade effect that forces a redesign of the of the body as well, increasing PD costs.

 

I don't think for wants to commit to such a uncertain segment, but the longer they wait the more expensive it get to redesign them, because the F-150 keeps moving further and further away from the Expy/NAvi what could be an incremental step to maintina commonality will become a complete teardown job in a few generations.

 

while they could continue to produce the trucks unchanged for the foreseeable future, the more the truck loses in commonality with other models the more expensive it is to produce.

[Biker16]

The domestics in general, Ford included, still have to prove they can improve quality when their plants are going full bore. We know they can improve quality when their plants are at 50% capacity, but I don't know that their quality has ever been exceptional when line speed is at max. Maybe more robots are required. It seems to be those manufacturers with best build quality do have more automated plants that don't get tired and rushed.

 

Robots can not install headliners in focus hatches, sedans and C-maxes without a human. they already assist, but they do not have the dexterity to locate and install it.

[akirby]

I don't think anyone said market share is only thing that matters in being successful. But it certainly does matter. If you find yourself losing consistent market share over time, profits will be impacted over time. The natives will start getting restless if month after month your market share stagnates or goes down as market overall improves. Certainly looks like many investors are selling Ford stock as share price goes down 2% or so day after day. I don't easily panic as I rode out worst of financial crisis and March, '09 lows, but it certainly has my attention. Ford's competition is coming back at Ford and it still remains to be seen if Ford quality can hold up or more importantly improve as Ford plants start approaching full capacity trying to meet demand with increasing line speed.

 

You and several others repeatedly point out low sales volumes or falling volumes and immediately declare that the product is in trouble and something needs to be done. It's not that simple. Market share is but one small piece of the puzzle and by itself is meaningless.

 

Let's say I have 2 plants making one vehicle and the second plant is only at 20% capacity and I have to put $3K cash on the hood to keep up that pace. Now the competition is gaining market share by putting $5K on their hoods. Should I up the ante to $5K and build more or should I shut down the 2nd plant and reduce the incentives from $3K to $1K? In that case you'd almost always save money by closing the plant and reducing incentives as opposed to chasing market share.

 

Market share gives you the opportunity to make more money but never guarantees it. Market share trends are important but only if you understand WHY the market share is shifting. It may or may not indicate the need for a change - depends on what is happening with the others to cause the shift.

 

 

As for stock price - who gives a crap? Stock performance is in no way tied directly to a company's success or failure. Companies can do great but see their stock price fall because people decide to take the profit and run. They can do poorly and see the stock price rise because it becomes a great investment. In the end stock price is too dependent on sheer speculation about future stock price and again that has nothing to do with company performance.

 

Managers used to manage to stock prices and they all found out it was a stupid way to run a company.

Edited May 4, 2012 by akirby

[aneekr]

As for stock price - who gives a crap? Stock performance is in no way tied directly to a company's success or failure.

 

Are you an investor?

[akirby]

Are you an investor?

 

Doesn't matter. Do you think Ford should make product decisions based on stock price? How does Ford (the company) benefit from an increase in stock price or suffer from a decrease?

 

The market is impatient and wants immediate results. If you change your business to cater to that market then you end up making bad long term decisions and it hurts you in the long run. E.g. you cut R&D which saves you money and gives you more profit in the short term that helps the stock price but long term you end up with less competitive products that do more harm down the road.

 

Terrible way to run a business.

[Edstock]

Terrible way to run a business.

Yup. Fixation on stock price is the hallmark of the amateur who thinks as shallowly as possible. Buy Ford stock, hold it for 10 years, today's stock price really won't mean very much.

 

But you can see from the comments, that a lot of people expect this to jump around overnight.

[FordBuyer]

You and several others repeatedly point out low sales volumes or falling volumes and immediately declare that the product is in trouble and something needs to be done. It's not that simple. Market share is but one small piece of the puzzle and by itself is meaningless.

 

Let's say I have 2 plants making one vehicle and the second plant is only at 20% capacity and I have to put $3K cash on the hood to keep up that pace. Now the competition is gaining market share by putting $5K on their hoods. Should I up the ante to $5K and build more or should I shut down the 2nd plant and reduce the incentives from $3K to $1K? In that case you'd almost always save money by closing the plant and reducing incentives as opposed to chasing market share.

 

Market share gives you the opportunity to make more money but never guarantees it. Market share trends are important but only if you understand WHY the market share is shifting. It may or may not indicate the need for a change - depends on what is happening with the others to cause the shift.

 

 

As for stock price - who gives a crap? Stock performance is in no way tied directly to a company's success or failure. Companies can do great but see their stock price fall because people decide to take the profit and run. They can do poorly and see the stock price rise because it becomes a great investment. In the end stock price is too dependent on sheer speculation about future stock price and again that has nothing to do with company performance.

 

Managers used to manage to stock prices and they all found out it was a stupid way to run a company.

 

Where do you come up with this stuff? Market share is a SMALL piece of the puzzle? Share price, especially over time, is not a reflection of how the company is doing in comparison to others in that industry? Neither Ford's profit or market share is going up, and this is not a super recent trend. Quality has gone down too. I'm not saying everything is all gloom and doom with Ford because it's not, but not all overjoyed by Ford's performance in last 18 months or so either. I take the middle ground. Not great, and not terrible, just kind of lackluster in comparison to some of the other auto companies on a roll now.

[RichardJensen]

How about when comparing Market share and profit with competitors?

 

If brand V and H/K are picking up more market share and profit than Ford does... it appears to me that value and a synopsis can be applied to the data.

 

Concerns:

 

1. is the market is moving away from Ford due to noted negative issues.

 

2. Ford misreading what customers really want in the different segments.

 

3. Lincoln failing

 

4. _Fill in the Blank)____________

 

You're not even wrong. And your reasoning is not worth deconstructing.

 

To discover the flaws in your thinking, please read this statement and consider it carefully:

 

Regardless of how many midsize sedans are sold, Hermosillo can only build about 300k per year.

 

You should be able to grasp, easily, why this fact renders market share percentages valueless.

Edited May 4, 2012 by RichardJensen

[FordBuyer]

Doesn't matter. Do you think Ford should make product decisions based on stock price? How does Ford (the company) benefit from an increase in stock price or suffer from a decrease?

 

The market is impatient and wants immediate results. If you change your business to cater to that market then you end up making bad long term decisions and it hurts you in the long run. E.g. you cut R&D which saves you money and gives you more profit in the short term that helps the stock price but long term you end up with less competitive products that do more harm down the road.

 

Terrible way to run a business.

 

The market generally looks about 6 months or more down the road. And only a day trader would care what a stock does on any given day. And if Ford drops below $10, watch out as mutual funds and pension funds will drop it like hot potato. I personally am holding on until Ford's new Fusion and Escape are hitting on all cylinders, but if those turn out to be lackluster sales wise, I'm out. I don't have decades anymore to wait on Ford stock to perform. Roller coaster rides are for the young.

[RichardJensen]

The market generally looks about 6 months or more down the road.

Not true.

 

The market is not a rational actor.

[RichardJensen]

Market share is a SMALL piece of the puzzle?

Who had the most market share in the US at the end of 2008?

Edited May 4, 2012 by RichardJensen

[FordBuyer]

Who had the most market share in the US at the end of 2008?

 

And if Ford's profits are down 50%+ from 2011, market share down 1%+, quality at average or below, and share price in single digits, will Mulally and his minions deserve another pay raise plus increased bonuses? Or will the usual suspects still be cheerleaders for Ford as in they do no wrong. With that being said, I do expect 2013 to be a much better year for Ford, but I've pretty much given up for 2012 and see more lower expectations and profits at low end and more market share lost. And it's always much harder to gain than to lose, especially with the cutthroat competition out there.

[RichardJensen]

And if Ford's profits are down 50%+ from 2011, market share down 1%+, quality at average or below, and share price in single digits, will Mulally and his minions deserve another pay raise plus increased bonuses? Or will the usual suspects still be cheerleaders for Ford as in they do no wrong. With that being said, I do expect 2013 to be a much better year for Ford, but I've pretty much given up for 2012 and see more lower expectations and profits at low end and more market share lost. And it's always much harder to gain than to lose, especially with the cutthroat competition out there.

Why are Ford's profits down? Are they down because revenue is down? Or are they down because this industry requires substantial expenditures on a cyclical basis?

 

Why is Ford's market share down? Is it down because Ford is losing sales in a stagnant market, or is Ford's market share down because they are capacity constrained in a growing market?