RichardJensen Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 From "your perspective" means you're changing the context of the argument My perspective does not involve changing the context. It involves dismissing your context and your argument as invalid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 My perspective does not involve changing the context. It involves dismissing your context and your argument as invalid. Still ignoring and redirecting, per the usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Still ignoring and redirecting, per the usual. Focusing on the last two years is stupid. "Hi! I have these two data points. I'd like to extrapolate a trend!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 It was 50 degrees yesterday. It was 55 degrees today. That means it's going to be 1,880 degrees on March 29, 2017. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 The real question is what will the market share look like in 2016 now that F series is back to full production and full inventory. F Series inventory at 277K and 170K of them at dealers around the country, dare we imagine that Ford could shift 80K-90K of them in a single month... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 From "your perspective" means you're changing the context of the argument I'm making which is focused on the past 2 years. Explain to me who is grabbing the marketshare that Ford isn't? And why does that mean Ram isn't taking any of it? Is your meaning that marketshare and potential sales are different things and one can't assume F-150 lost anything to the competition? If so, than that is truly speculative. It's not really a matter of market share. The market itself grew thanks to the addition of new models (the collective Canyonado) which, between 2014 and 2015, increased their sales tenfold. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 It's not really a matter of market share. The market itself grew thanks to the addition of new models (the collective Canyonado) which, between 2014 and 2015, increased their sales tenfold. That is a good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev-Mo Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 So if Ford is back up to 32% market share in 2016 would you agree they haven't lost marketshare? Mark for follow-up at the end of 2016 - I want to see how this lively debate ends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 2015 North America GM - 3.6 Million vehicles @ $11 billion pre-tax profit Ford - 3.0 Million vehicles @ $9.7 billion pre-tax profit GMNA sales are 20% more than Ford NA but, their pre-tax profits are only 13.5% greater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BORG Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 It's not really a matter of market share. The market itself grew thanks to the addition of new models (the collective Canyonado) which, between 2014 and 2015, increased their sales tenfold. This is an appropriate response to my observation, Richard just wants to pick a fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 (edited) This is an appropriate response to my observation, Richard just wants to pick a fight. Honestly, I'm surprised no one brought it up before I did. I'm usually late to the party. But yeah, Ford can only control what it can control as far as the market and profitability. If other mfrs decide they want to saturate the market, and the buying public responds in kind, Ford's drop in market share needs to be contextualized properly. In this case -- and I'll work with your reference point of the past two years because it represents the launch of the new F150 -- Ford increased sales, but not as quickly as the market expanded. That can't be seen as an indictment on Ford for not keeping up. Case in point: F Series grew by 3.5% last year, while the overall market grew nearly 3 times that. (source: goodcarbadcar.net) ----- As far as you and RIchard, I'm not about to take sides. Y'all need to just hug it out and keep it moving. Edited April 1, 2016 by papilgee4evaeva 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 If other mfrs decide they want to saturate the market, and the buying public responds in kind, Ford's drop in market share needs to be contextualized properly. Case in point: F Series grew by 3.5% last year, while the overall market grew nearly 3 times that. (source: goodcarbadcar.net) Part of the context involves DTP not running at full speed for roughly the first quarter of 2015, coupled with, IIRC, 2 months of downtime at KCAP in 2015 and less than full speed production at KCAP for a significant time period after that. Not to mention the supplier issues. Ford probably could've increased F-Series sales commensurate with the market if they had 12 months of full capacity available. You've got three plants building F-Series, and between those 36 plant-months, you probably lost nearly 10% of their available output due to slowed lines and retooling; not to mention the production that went into building up inventory levels (net gain in year-over-year inventory = production output that did not count as sales to consumers). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Part of the context involves DTP not running at full speed for roughly the first quarter of 2015, coupled with, IIRC, 2 months of downtime at KCAP in 2015 and less than full speed production at KCAP for a significant time period after that. Not to mention the supplier issues. Ford probably could've increased F-Series sales commensurate with the market if they had 12 months of full capacity available. You've got three plants building F-Series, and between those 36 plant-months, you probably lost nearly 10% of their available output due to slowed lines and retooling; not to mention the production that went into building up inventory levels (net gain in year-over-year inventory = production output that did not count as sales to consumers). All good points. So, I was looking over the most recent sales reports for this year (of course, March will be out later today), and it appears that the majority of other truck models have kept the pace of last year. With Ford no longer being capacity-constrained as they were last year due to the shortages, I figure they should expand their market share this CY. This should assuage any concerns about them ceding the market to other brands. As far as the "profit over numbers" discussion, well, it's the F Series. How often does Ford lose money on it? You can tell me if I'm off base or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Part of the context involves DTP not running at full speed for roughly the first quarter of 2015, coupled with, IIRC, 2 months of downtime at KCAP in 2015 and less than full speed production at KCAP for a significant time period after that. Not to mention the supplier issues. Ford probably could've increased F-Series sales commensurate with the market if they had 12 months of full capacity available. You've got three plants building F-Series, and between those 36 plant-months, you probably lost nearly 10% of their available output due to slowed lines and retooling; not to mention the production that went into building up inventory levels (net gain in year-over-year inventory = production output that did not count as sales to consumers). Only 2 plants build F-150 as opposed to 4 before 2009. So yes, a changeover causes much more chaos as only one plant can build while the other retools and slowly ramps up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Only 2 plants build F-150 as opposed to 4 before 2009. So yes, a changeover causes much more chaos as only one plant can build while the other retools and slowly ramps up. Only three built the F150 before 2009. The third was Norfolk. Ford had a small assembly plant in Ontario, Ontario Truck, that was folded into the Oakville Assembly Complex in 2003-ish, but AFAIK, that plant never or almost never exported to the US; it existed to comply with Canadian local-assembly laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 (edited) Just drove past a M-250 (66-68?) in baby blue and white. Good looking truck Edited April 1, 2016 by Hugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Only three built the F150 before 2009. The third was Norfolk. Ford had a small assembly plant in Ontario, Ontario Truck, that was folded into the Oakville Assembly Complex in 2003-ish, but AFAIK, that plant never or almost never exported to the US; it existed to comply with Canadian local-assembly laws. They did export some. IIRC, they were shipping regular cabs to the US. That and OTP was home of the Lightning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 Only three built the F150 before 2009. The third was Norfolk. Ford had a small assembly plant in Ontario, Ontario Truck, that was folded into the Oakville Assembly Complex in 2003-ish, but AFAIK, that plant never or almost never exported to the US; it existed to comply with Canadian local-assembly laws. The fourth was Mexico. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_F-Series_eleventh_generationA fifth in Venezuela made them for South America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 The fourth was Mexico. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_F-Series_eleventh_generation 2004- Mexican-built F150s weren't sold retail in the US. I just went through my database of VINs that have ran through my clients' dealerships, and we haven't seen a Mexican F150 in over a decade. Super duties? Yes. But no F150s, although I wouldn't be surprised if a few came in as gray market vehicles 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.