Is Ford Dropping the Taurus?

[silvrsvt]

So you are saying building the Mustang is a bad idea? Interesting point of view.....

 

He's just saying that to be an ass about things. If he was running for FOE would be the model of doing everything...

[NickF1011]

I dread what the automotive industry landscape will look like in 10 or 15 years.

Whatever it looks like, I'll be driving through it guzzling gas, no matter how expensive it gets, in my then 25-30 year old Mustang.

Edited March 22, 2013 by NickF1011

[NickF1011]

the name and the legacy cannot make up for a bad business decision.

As long as it's profitable (which it seems like the Taurus is as well), I don't see why keeping either of them would be a bad business decision. Although I would say the intangible benefits of the Mustang brand does give it a little more leeway for tighter (although not negative) margins.

[Biker16]

But the potential customer backlash will....

 

Guess your too young to remember what happened 25 years ago or so with the Probe almost becoming the Mustang.

 

With that mindset, the Corvette (it is GM we are talking about here, so moot point) or other performance cars wouldn't be worthwhile.

 

The problem your completely ignoring is the Mustang was the first platform that was designed to be profitable at sales numbers of 100K units or so..and the first couple years it sold well over that...it doesn't sell close to those numbers these days, but at the same time auto sales have dropped significantly since 2005 also. Car sales in 2012 where roughly 2 million less then they where in 2006.

 

The price of the Mustang has risen since its introduction also. A loaded GT in 2006 was right around 31K with an automatic. A 2013 GT with all the options nearly $47K with an automatic. Yes there are more options on the 2013, but a 16K difference in price is pretty significant. You could drop down to a V6 Mustang GT which has nearly the same performance as the first Gen S197 GTs and they go for $36K fully loaded....its not like Ford is losing money on the Mustang now.

 

 

I'm 35 I remember the probe, my question is by what standard is for green-lighting products? why does a low volume bastard platform ( no offense to the car itself) get pass, while a vehicle on a global architecture gets cancelled?

 

Simply because of legacy?

 

I think that the Mustang and Taurus should have been moved to the same platform and the Taurus be sold as Ford's Global flagship sedan. selling only the Mondeo/fusion as a flagship ignore the lessons for FOE the mainstream midsize market is shrinking and fragmenting, VW sells the upmarket CC and has Audi to maintain margins while ford has no product that can command higher margins to make up for the volume losses in the segment. More acute issue in the ROW than in the US, but trying to stretch the Fusion to cover both markets will fail, and Ford will lose market share.

 

As always this is IMO.

[NickF1011]

VW sells the upmarket CC and has Audi to maintain margins while ford has no product that can command higher margins to make up for the volume losses in the segment.

Perhaps that holds more weight in Europe where there is more fragmentation in the sedan market, but in the US, I'm pretty certain Fusion still handily outsells Passat and CC combined, so not really sure what the benefit of splitting that lineup apart further would accomplish for Ford, at least in NA. And would any possible added benefit for ROW sales be worth the extra engineering effort?

 

As for Mustang, I'm sure its margins are becoming razor thin these days, which is likely the only reason it is going to export markets in the next generation. It does show that Ford is committed to giving the Mustang another chance at life where it may have let other products die though. If expanding markets for it globally does not end up having a substantial affect on margins though, I doubt Ford will keep it around just for the sake of keeping it around. A loser is a loser, no matter what it's called.

Edited March 22, 2013 by NickF1011

[Biker16]

As long as it's profitable (which it seems like the Taurus is as well), I don't see why keeping either of them would be a bad business decision. Although I would say the intangible benefits of the Mustang brand does give it a little more leeway for tighter (although not negative) margins.

exactly why cancel a profitable product? what is motivating Ford to make this decision. why is a global coupe more important than a variant of a volume platform?

 

could it be that Ford finds an opportunity cost in freeing up capacity for more explorers and a Lincoln variant than to continue car production in Chicago? If so this is a bad way to make product decisions, making decision based upon the inability to find production capacity while Europe is sitting on tons of extra capacity is not a good long-term decision IMO.

[Biker16]

He's just saying that to be an ass about things. If he was running for FOE would be the model of doing everything...

Don't be a Richard, I am not attacking the mustang I am Questioning the decision making process that could lead to the cancellation of a profitable mainstream vehicle yet green lights a potentially less profitable niche coupe.

[twintornados]

Bottom line, Taurus is not going anywhere. The name plate would migrate to a CD4 based vehicle and Fusion will slot in under it. There is a reason why it is called CD4...it will work in "C" segment as well as "D" segment variants but share significant components to spread development costs out.

[NickF1011]

exactly why cancel a profitable product? what is motivating Ford to make this decision. why is a global coupe more important than a variant of a volume platform?

 

could it be that Ford finds an opportunity cost in freeing up capacity for more explorers and a Lincoln variant than to continue car production in Chicago? If so this is a bad way to make product decisions, making decision based upon the inability to find production capacity while Europe is sitting on tons of extra capacity is not a good long-term decision IMO.

Well, personally, I don't think there's much truth to the rumor that Taurus will be going away, especially since it has at least been maintaining sales momentum, despite glaring platform weaknesses that have been holding it back since its launch as the Five Hundred.

[Biker16]

Perhaps that holds more weight in Europe where there is more fragmentation in the sedan market, but in the US, I'm pretty certain Fusion still handily outsells Passat and CC combined, so not really sure what the benefit of splitting that lineup apart further would accomplish for Ford, at least in NA. And would any possible added benefit for ROW sales be worth the extra engineering effort?

 

But the market is already split between the Taurus and the Fusion, In a way the premium sedan market include the Taurus, CC, Maxima, Avalon, Azera, the thougth process is that the fusion can compete in the entry level midize market and the near luxury/premium sedan market, and succeed. I don;t think it can.

 

As for Mustang, I'm sure its margins are becoming razor thin these days, which is likely the only reason it is going to export markets in the next generation. It does show that Ford is committed to giving the Mustang another chance at life where it may have let other products die though. If expanding markets for it globally does not end up having a substantial affect on margins though, I doubt Ford will keep it around just for the sake of keeping it around. A loser is a loser, no matter what it's called.

 

That makes complete sense.

[silvrsvt]

As for Mustang, I'm sure its margins are becoming razor thin these days, which is likely the only reason it is going to export markets in the next generation. It does show that Ford is committed to giving the Mustang another chance at life where it may have let other products die though. If expanding markets for it globally does not end up having a substantial affect on margins though, I doubt Ford will keep it around just for the sake of keeping it around. A loser is a loser, no matter what it's called.

 

The issue here is that is it really going to improve sales that much more then what they are doing now? I see ROW sales of the Mustang maybe being around 20K or so. The Mustang can sell in 100K range in a "healthy" car sales market in North America. I also believe the program has paid for itself in the first couple years of sales and that the upcoming updates to it aren't as expensive as people are making it out to be, allowing the car to go on for another 10 years or so before a totally new platform has be done for it.

 

 

I am Questioning the decision making process that could lead to the cancellation of a profitable mainstream vehicle yet green lights a potentially less profitable niche coupe.

 

I think the Taurus going anyway is a bunch of bunk...it makes no sense what so ever, esp with the planned CD4.3 platform its supposed to be built off of being developed for the Edge and I'd assume the Explorer when they do a new one of that. Just between the Edge and Explorer you would have over 200K a year in sales and the Taurus and MKS would add about 100K if not more to that.

[NickF1011]

But the market is already split between the Taurus and the Fusion, In a way the premium sedan market include the Taurus, CC, Maxima, Avalon, Azera, the thougth process is that the fusion can compete in the entry level midize market and the near luxury/premium sedan market, and succeed. I don;t think it can.

Ah, I thought you were suggesting Ford should split the Fusion's market even further with something in addition to the Taurus. I see what you are saying now and agree. I think the next Taurus definitely needs to address interior dimensions however, and give it a much more meaningful fullsize feel compared to the now too similar Fusion.

[FordBuyer]

I have to wonder how well the Taurus SHO is selling. Compared to the sounds and sights of a Charger SRT, the SHO is so understated that it's barely noticed in sound or sight. Ford definitely needs to improve the SHO so that it sounds and looks like a high performance sports sedan. And has been addressed, interior room needs to be improved, lower its profile, and get some excess weight out of it. I was surprised to learn that almost 50% of Taurus sales are to fleet, and I know for Charger fleet percentage is even higher.

[akirby]

Don't be a Richard, I am not attacking the mustang I am Questioning the decision making process that could lead to the cancellation of a profitable mainstream vehicle yet green lights a potentially less profitable niche coupe.

 

There are many reasons why business decisions are made other than purely financial. The typical term is "Strategic" meaning there are advantages to doing something that are either intangible (company image) or have a longer term benefit that's not immediately obvious (pathway to future vehicles e.g.).

[NickF1011]

I have to wonder how well the Taurus SHO is selling. Compared to the sounds and sights of a Charger SRT, the SHO is so understated that it's barely noticed in sound or sight. Ford definitely needs to improve the SHO so that it sounds and looks like a high performance sports sedan. And has been addressed, interior room needs to be improved, lower its profile, and get some excess weight out of it. I was surprised to learn that almost 50% of Taurus sales are to fleet, and I know for Charger fleet percentage is even higher.

The only real shortcomings I see in the SHO are the same shortcomings the rest of the lineup has: the interior, weight, etc as you mentioned. I think part of what has always been the appeal of the SHO has been its understated performance character. It has never been an "in-your-face" type of vehicle, nor do I think that's really what its customers are looking for. It will never match the Charger's menace, so why try? Do something different as it is now.

[fordmantpw]

I have to wonder how well the Taurus SHO is selling. Compared to the sounds and sights of a Charger SRT, the SHO is so understated that it's barely noticed in sound or sight. Ford definitely needs to improve the SHO so that it sounds and looks like a high performance sports sedan. And has been addressed, interior room needs to be improved, lower its profile, and get some excess weight out of it. I was surprised to learn that almost 50% of Taurus sales are to fleet, and I know for Charger fleet percentage is even higher.

 

That would be going against what the SHO stands for. The SHO is for those who want a bit extra performance, but don't really feel they need to stand out. It's not a pure performance car, but a hopped up family sedan.

[ds91776]

I don't see the Taurus going anywhere for several reasons.

1. The model has been selling pretty consistently with fairly high ATPs.

 

2. The current and future Taurus share/will share platforms, engines, wheelbases, etc with multiple Ford and Lincoln products...meaning the cost of development should be fairly low.

 

3. It serves a distinct niche in the market. Large cars may be a small segment now-a-days but they serve a purpose, attract high-end buyers, and are distinct enough from their midsize bretherin.

 

4. China. China loves large sedans and the next-gen Taurus will most certainly sold there. If the next-gen Taurus has significantly more interior room ( espeically rear-sear leg and headroom ) then it could easily find a market both in North America and in China.

 

5. Selling a long-wheelbase version of the Fusion might work in China...but it wouldn't work in North America. Thus is makes sense to develop a One Ford Large F/AWD sedan that can be sold in the two largest markets for sedans in the world. I could also see the next-gen Taurus being sold in Russia.

[Deanh]

my 2 cents, as mentioned the car is fundamentally flawed, too big/ heavy/ cramped for its physical dimensions...AND its not selling in any significant numbers barring the PI models. For that reason its on life support. Is the taurus going away?...NO, I see it utilizing a stretched version of a certain RWD vehicle arriving as a 2015 model....how bout THEM apples.....

[ds91776]

my 2 cents, as mentioned the car is fundamentally flawed, too big/ heavy/ cramped for its physical dimensions...AND its not selling in any significant numbers barring the PI models. For that reason its on life support. Is the taurus going away?...NO, I see it utilizing a stretched version of a certain RWD vehicle arriving as a 2015 model....how bout THEM apples.....

 

How is the car not selling well? Compare Taurus' sales with the LaCrosse, Azera, Avalon, Maxima, Charger...and the Taurus more than holds its own. Yes, the Taurus isn't as roomy as its exterior size suggests...but that wasn't as much as a probelm when it shared the showroom with the previous Fusion. The next-gen Taurus should be much more space efficient and offer significantly more interior room than the new Fusion.

[silvrsvt]

I have to wonder how well the Taurus SHO is selling. Compared to the sounds and sights of a Charger SRT, the SHO is so understated that it's barely noticed in sound or sight.

 

The 2014 Dealer Guide for the Taurus has the SHO making 15% of total sales of the vehicle, so its about 5K units a year sold (using the 2011 information for retail sales, don't think any are being built for gov or rental fleet use, I was able to find). The Taurus actually outsells the Charger (at least in Retail sales) by a couple hundred units

 

my 2 cents, as mentioned the car is fundamentally flawed, too big/ heavy/ cramped for its physical dimensions...AND its not selling in any significant numbers barring the PI models. For that reason its on life support. Is the taurus going away?...NO, I see it utilizing a stretched version of a certain RWD vehicle arriving as a 2015 model....how bout THEM apples.....

 

Life support? Thats kinda of a strech...it actually increase sales 4% from 2011-2012 not including the additional sales of PI. I agree about the size issues esp with the interior (I'll tell you how I feel when I drive it every day with the actual external size of it!) but I don't see a RWD Taurus coming anytime soon..and if it did...why keep the Taurus name which has been FWD or recently AWD?

Edited March 22, 2013 by silvrsvt

[Deanh]

The 2014 Dealer Guide for the Taurus has the SHO making 15% of total sales of the vehicle, so its about 5K units a year sold (using the 2011 information for retail sales, don't think any are being built for gov or rental fleet use, I was able to find). The Taurus actually outsells the Charger (at least in Retail sales) by a couple hundred units

 

 

Life support? Thats kinda of a strech...it actually increase sales 4% from 2011-2012 not including the additional sales of PI. I agree about the size issues esp with the interior (I'll tell you how I feel when I drive it every day with the actual external size of it!) but I don't see a RWD Taurus coming anytime soon..and if it did...why keep the Taurus name which has been FWD or recently AWD?

I sell em, trust me, they ARENT moving........the car has become almost another Crown Victoria......Govt agencies, municipalities and PI are where the numbers are....retail they barely move.........

[Deanh]

How is the car not selling well? Compare Taurus' sales with the LaCrosse, Azera, Avalon, Maxima, Charger...and the Taurus more than holds its own. Yes, the Taurus isn't as roomy as its exterior size suggests...but that wasn't as much as a probelm when it shared the showroom with the previous Fusion. The next-gen Taurus should be much more space efficient and offer significantly more interior room than the new Fusion.

you are welcome to come and attempt to sell them...theres NO, and I mean NO retail interest......I dont think its going away at all, but I expect HUGE improvements in all the areas I noted...because right now, to be brutally honest, we are taking as few as we can eacj wholesale...call it a flooring burden.........

[jpd80]

Could Ford possibly reunite Fusion and Taurus back into one car that's slightly larger then the current Fusion?

I have a hunch that a small large car would achieve effective sales from mid size and large categories.

Edited March 22, 2013 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

I sell em, trust me, they ARENT moving........the car has become almost another Crown Victoria......Govt agencies, municipalities and PI are where the numbers are....retail they barely move.........

 

They might not sell in Southern CA, but they are obliviously selling other places...given the marketplace for large cars, the Taurus does best in retail sales vs the competition. The Charger is 57% fleet sales and the Impala is at 72%! The Taurus is at 47% fleet.

 

http://www.automotive-fleet.com/statistics/statsviewer.aspx?file=http%3a%2f%2fwww.automotive-fleet.com%2ffc_resources%2fstats%2faffb12-20-car-reg.pdf&channel=

 

 

 

[ehaase]

My two cents is that I would not be surprised if Ford has cancelled the CD4 Taurus replacement and that the current version, like the Panthers, will continue as long as the fleets like it and it makes money. Since the Fusion can be optioned up to $38,000, Ford may see little reason to develop a CD4 Taurus. I have conservative tastes and much prefer the Taurus' styling to the Fusion's, and I like the Taurus' large trunk even though the interior is about the same size as the Fusion.