FordBuyer Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 What you said was that he earned his bonus. What I am saying is there are many that would disagree, me being one of them. All they have to do is tell us WHY our cars are not being shipped. My dealer called it's Ford rep and were told that the Fusion manufacturing process is a nightmare. The rep said many cars were sent to MIchigan for QC and they were sent back to Mexico when they were finished. Does that sound like a smart process? Is it faster to ship a car through Mexico than to ship it straight to the dealer? Are they just doing the QC and sending the car back to Mexico to be repaired? Who knows, they tell us nothing except we will have it when we have it. That is good to know, but the question I asked was what was keeping my vehicle from shipping. They have never answered that question. My vehicle was built Nov 8th, I think if they can build a car in a day they should be able to fix what's wrong with it in 4 months, so it can ship. It has been taken offsite at least twice that I know of, so something has been done to it. The customer service girl on Facebook checked for me and says that from the information she can see it is just waiting to ship. That has been over a month. From the tracking Cyberdman does I can see cars going straight from the assembly line to a train, so there is no shortage of rail cars. I am just venting. Thanks for listening. Don't worry, if any heads roll because of the Fusion/MKZ launch fiasco, it will be some poor guys on the front lines, not any big time executives sitting up there in their suites insulated from it all. The little guy always pays. Mulally will be riding off to Seattle soon with enough money to capitalize a mid sized bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Don't worry, if any heads roll because of the Fusion/MKZ launch fiasco, it will be some poor guys on the front lines, not any big time executives sitting up there in their suites insulated from it all. The little guy always pays. Mulally will be riding off to Seattle soon with enough money to capitalize a mid sized bank. I like this. I like how everyone is underpaid, and everyone else is overpaid. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If that PREDICTION does come true, who should pay? Oh, I don't know. Certainly not the analysts who remain gainfully employed despite being perpetually wrong. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 (edited) I can't believe people are still pissing and moaning about less than perfect product launches.... Recent bad launches have had more to do with supplier based issues than build quality from plants. Hello, Ford just had a massive month with all major products showing strong sales !!!!!! MKZ is a bit player in the big picture, getting quality right takes precedent over delivering a questionable product. The byproduct of slow MKZ lunch was elevated production of Fusion and build up of inventory levels to enable last months record sales. To me this is just as important or maybe more so than getting MKZ out the door on time.. Two thirds of Fusion ICE sales were Ecoboost versions of SE and Titanium, that is heady news... Edited March 7, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If that PREDICTION does come true, who should pay? Answer the question. Just workers as their plants close? Executives meanwhile raid the treasury more. Ford of Europe performance affects the bottom line just as much as anywhere else. Mulally is responsible for global Ford, not just North America. Not begrudging his millions/year, just ever escalating payoffs year after year irrespecitve if one year is better or worse than other. Ford workers get less in their annual profit bonus check if company makes less money. Everyone should be held accountable. My point was that you are calling for heads to roll before the results are even in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) Analysts today are predicting that Ford of Europe will lose at least $2.5 billion, not the $2 billion Ford is giving guidance on. So what group of executives should get dinged if that prediction comes true. You want to take credit (raid the treasury for more money than you could ever spend in many lifetimes) for the good times, then take a hit for the bad times too. And how much of those $2 billion losses are attributed to restructuring the business? See Ford has already said that it expects to make around $2 billion losses in 2013 and 2014 but 2015 will be profitable. With the track record of the current Ford guys, I tend to have more faith in their estimations than some journalist's best guess prediction. Like North America, the cash burn to eliminate production capacity and relocate key products to low cost Spain has significant up front costs but all the bleating in the world is not going to prevent losses, it's stemming the flow that's important here, something that will happen in 2015. I doubt GM fans could be that confident about GM's loss making European division, their plan by contrast shows little acceptance of reality. Edited March 8, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyd Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Good for him. He earned it. Right...he saved Ford Motor. Fields will destroy it..over time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 I know we have had this discussion before. In fact, many times before. But every time we hear about big time executives making astronomical bonus packages, it becomes good time to bring it up again. A Tier two worker barely makes enough money to "maybe" afford a basic Focus, and the executives who run the show make many millions of dollars every year, and they really aren't held accountable for mistakes. Oh, they make $8 million/year instead of $15 million of they have a "bad" year. It seems like so many gripe about the unions and their pay, which is good in some ways, but IMO there should be far more griping about what the big executives make, and their pay keeps escalating far faster than profits and shareholder value. There is a complete disconnect, be it CEO of Exxon Mobil, GE, GM, or Ford. In my view, even with executive pay at GM constrained, they still make way too much. In my view, the buck doesn't stop at the big executives desk, it stops on the factory floor or some lower level manager who pays with his job or whatever. And even if an executive is held responsible for a major mistake, his punishment is a multi million dollar golden parachute package. Kind of like the Catholic Church...you like boys too much, they send you back to monastery and cover it up. My biggest problem with investing is excessive executive pay. It's immoral in my view. Worse than the excessive volatility of the market. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyd Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 I know we have had this discussion before. In fact, many times before. But every time we hear about big time executives making astronomical bonus packages, it becomes good time to bring it up again. A Tier two worker barely makes enough money to "maybe" afford a basic Focus, and the executives who run the show make many millions of dollars every year, and they really aren't held accountable for mistakes. Oh, they make $8 million/year instead of $15 million of they have a "bad" year. It seems like so many gripe about the unions and their pay, which is good in some ways, but IMO there should be far more griping about what the big executives make, and their pay keeps escalating far faster than profits and shareholder value. There is a complete disconnect, be it CEO of Exxon Mobil, GE, GM, or Ford. In my view, even with executive pay at GM constrained, they still make way too much. In my view, the buck doesn't stop at the big executives desk, it stops on the factory floor or some lower level manager who pays with his job or whatever. And even if an executive is held responsible for a major mistake, his punishment is a multi million dollar golden parachute package. Kind of like the Catholic Church...you like boys too much, they send you back to monastery and cover it up. My biggest problem with investing is excessive executive pay. It's immoral in my view. Worse than the excessive volatility of the market. FB, I usually agree with you, but not on this one. Alan saved Ford $$$$ and from bankruptcy. He saved our image that GM/Chrysler-Fiat have to live with. I am not alone in stating he was worth every million he was given. However, I take more issue with your analogy about the Catholic church and the 'sexual assaults" that you eluded too. The ACTUAL STATISTICS on sexual assaults will hopefully open your one sided prejudice. Here we go: Catholic Priests account for 38,000 Worldwide (includes chaplains, missionaries, diocese leaders etc). The highest recorded number of "suspected assaults reported" since 2000 was 4%. THE PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS account for approximately 4 million nationwide. The LOWEST recorded number of "suspected assaults reported" was 10%. The main reason that the PUBLIC school teachers are not media news is the unions are experts on covering it up. The union stopped a California proposal to expedite the prosecution of the rising rate of teacher assaults in the elementary schools in October 2012. Its all about the unions power. So please, be fair and balanced when using these analogies. I only wish the media was! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) You're over your limit FB. Any additional posts will be summarily deleted. Edited March 8, 2013 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 If you continue to post, FB, odds are pretty high you'll get a vacation from the site. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
md3184 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 It does seem unusual that performance based pay will increase for Alan year over year given the profits were about flat, and the myriad of product launch issues in 2012 (eg fusion/escape). I think this is more a function of the movement of the stock price over time and his bonuses being mostly stock awards. I would like to see a more holistic measurment of performance related to exec comp. The salaried workers get performance pay (bonuses) that are tied to a number of dimensions including quality. Salaried bonuses are being annouced next week are reported to hit only 70 pct of target, compared to over 100 pct last year. I suspect it related mainly to the quality factors used in measurements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) Alan gets a bonus and my plant can't afford to buy me the parts to fix the things I need to fix to keep my line running smoothly. Gotta love it. Edited March 8, 2013 by Pioneer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 It does seem unusual that performance based pay will increase for Alan year over year given the profits were about flat, and the myriad of product launch issues in 2012 (eg fusion/escape). I think this is more a function of the movement of the stock price over time and his bonuses being mostly stock awards. I would like to see a more holistic measurment of performance related to exec comp. The salaried workers get performance pay (bonuses) that are tied to a number of dimensions including quality. Salaried bonuses are being annouced next week are reported to hit only 70 pct of target, compared to over 100 pct last year. I suspect it related mainly to the quality factors used in measurements. Salaried bonuses are tied to world performance. Europe is what hurt them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
md3184 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Probably a major factor too (europe). 2012 was the first year bonuses are tied to global performance, not regional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) I know we have had this discussion before. In fact, many times before. If you own a company, you pay the people what you think they are worth, not what others think they should be paid. This constant harping on about CEO pay is not productive but the results from Mulally and his team are and due to their efforts in restructuring and improving business, Ford NA is now running at 10-12% return on revenue. While I don't entirely agree with the execution of two tier wage system, Ford did make provision to hire / transfer a lot of staff back at the higher level, it's only the newer workers coming in from this point who will be on the lower level. More jobs and production in the USA has to be in everyone's interests, get the work first and then improve conditions. Edited March 8, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Alan gets a bonus and my plant can't afford to buy me the parts to fix the things I need to fix to keep my line running smoothly. Gotta love it. I'm starting to think your plant manager is skimming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 If you own a company, you pay the people what you think they are worth, not what others think they should be paid. Precisely! And if you don't pay them what they are worth, they will go somewhere else. If they don't go somewhere else, then, they must be compensated fairly, correct? Either by pay, or perks, or benefits, or... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I know we have had this discussion before. In fact, many times before. But every time we hear about big time executives making astronomical bonus packages, it becomes good time to bring it up again. A Tier two worker barely makes enough money to "maybe" afford a basic Focus, and the executives who run the show make many millions of dollars every year, and they really aren't held accountable for mistakes. Oh, they make $8 million/year instead of $15 million of they have a "bad" year. It seems like so many gripe about the unions and their pay, which is good in some ways, but IMO there should be far more griping about what the big executives make, and their pay keeps escalating far faster than profits and shareholder value. The problem is that there are 160,000 employees and 1 CEO. If you imagine that all compensation were split up from the same inelastic pool (which is not the case), every million dollars the CEO is paid would deduct only a third of a cent per hour (50 cents per month) from each employee's salary. Executive pay is diseased and disgusting for sociological reasons, in my opinion, but in terms of practical effect on a Fortune 10 company, it doesn't take much away from others' compensation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 And when you consider that the primary form of 'excess' compensation is stock grants, options, warrants and the like, the impact is not on employees, it's on stockholders, and the impact of these awards on the float and trading volume is minimal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) And when you consider that the primary form of 'excess' compensation is stock grants, options, warrants and the like, the impact is not on employees, it's on stockholders, and the impact of these awards on the float and trading volume is minimal. If Ford's stock price was collapsing, no one would be shedding tears if the execs got nothing out of stocks and options... Everybody sees the big pay off but don't see the risks if the company is mismanaged and stock falls... Edited March 9, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Stayed out of this... until now While I do agree that CEOs make way to much money regardless of which company, and should never receive a "golden parachute" when the company fails or they retire. It's not our call. Is a 12 million dollar investment ( don't think of it as a wage ) worth billions of dollars in profits for the company ? My opiion = yes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Agreed. Golden Parachutes that reward executives for being fired are ridiculous. But the market sets the compensation level for each job whether it's a janitor or a CEO. 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.