Pioneer Posted January 27, 2018 Share Posted January 27, 2018 Ill bring the baseball bat as a persuader Just make sure it's an aluminum bat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27, 2018 Share Posted January 27, 2018 Some would argue that Carbon fiber is better....rolleyes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 I believe that the board of directors think lightening can strike twice - remember, Alan was not a "car guy" too....As for aluminum, it is a commodity like anything else and its price for raw materials and recycled materials will fluctuate on the open market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 I believe that the board of directors think lightening can strike twice - remember, Alan was not a "car guy" too.... As for aluminum, it is a commodity like anything else and its price for raw materials and recycled materials will fluctuate on the open market. Alan was an engineer. He understood the mechanics of things. Hatchet was a salesman and CEO whose claim to fame was cost cutting by sending production to China. Big difference. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 Alan was an engineer. He understood the mechanics of things. Hatchet was a salesman and CEO whose claim to fame was cost cutting by sending production to China. Big difference. I'm not entirely ready to bring a pitchfork and torch to the guy for his background, but I think you succinctly state the concerns. I'll add that, whatever his track record on how he cut costs, I worry about having a guy chiefly known as a cost-cutter at the helm in a time when it seems that more investment is needed to stay competitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 (edited) I worry about having a guy chiefly known as a cost-cutter at the helm in a time when it seems that more investment is needed to stay competitive. I don't think the issue is his willingness to make investments, it's a question of whether or not his chosen areas to invest are the best bang for the buck. My take is that the purpose of the cost cutting is to provide more capital for investment in what he sees as the future of the company (the whole cornucopia of mobility/driverless cars/automated cities/other claptrap about which he's spoken). In addition to that, more investment is being directed to hybrid and BEV development (the $11 billion we all know about). I think it could be argued that the $11 billion directed towards "electrification" is really more $$ aimed at product development, in that almost all Fords in the 2020's will have some element of electrification to them, therefore even though Ford is identifying the $11 billion for "electrification", that money is probably being spent in part for bread and butter product that will help pay the bills in the 20's. I'm not defending Hatchet (nice play on the name), but seeking a ray of sunshine in the what we've been told lately. Edited January 28, 2018 by Harley Lover Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosetang Posted January 28, 2018 Share Posted January 28, 2018 I don't think the issue is his willingness to make investments, it's a question of whether or not his chosen areas to invest are the best bang for the buck. My take is that the purpose of the cost cutting is to provide more capital for investment in what he sees as the future of the company (the whole cornucopia of mobility/driverless cars/automated cities/other claptrap about which he's spoken). In addition to that, more investment is being directed to hybrid and BEV development (the $11 billion we all know about). I think it could be argued that the $11 billion directed towards "electrification" is really more $$ aimed at product development, in that almost all Fords in the 2020's will have some element of electrification to them, therefore even though Ford is identifying the $11 billion for "electrification", that money is probably being spent in part for bread and butter product that will help pay the bills in the 20's. I'm not defending Hatchet (nice play on the name), but seeking a ray of sunshine in the what we've been told lately. I largely agree with your thoughts here, which is one of the reasons I have generally steered clear of the Hatchet threads prior to today. However, what little we have heard of his recent moves has eroded my willingness to give him the benefit. The "get fit to prepare for disruption" slogan in particular has me very put off. While he's been talking about bringing a lot of electric product to market, we've not seen or heard much about how Ford is investing to move the electric football forward. That's what I think of when I'm talking about investment, not just spending the money to crank out product but spending the money to make sure the product isn't a bunch of also-rans. 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.