Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Recommended Posts

Didnt know Mary Barra is a dude

Only worry when they're line coaches mate.....throw your arms in the air and walk away.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What you're missing is that they're not just stopping production of cars and building more SUVs. They're introducing new platforms and new vehicles at the same time which also includes Ranger and Bronco and a whole host of hybrids. You don't see Toyota making those kinds of changes in the same timeframe.

 

When you do that much stuff all at the same time and you're not building new factories, something has to give. It's not ideal but it's probably the right long term strategy.

As long as Ford can bring cars in volume to the US, if and when gas prices jump up, then this might a good strategy.

 

If they get caught again like before the economy tanked in '08, then it will be interesting.

For me, they only advertise the F150, Explorer and Edge, (lately the baby CUV, whatever it's called).

 

Ford/Lincoln will only advertise when the product is new or refreshed, then they just drop it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as Ford can bring cars in volume to the US, if and when gas prices jump up, then this might a good strategy.

 

If they get caught again like before the economy tanked in '08, then it will be interesting.

For me, they only advertise the F150, Explorer and Edge, (lately the baby CUV, whatever it's called).

 

Ford/Lincoln will only advertise when the product is new or refreshed, then they just drop it.

Right - as long as they have products ready and don’t have to start over from scratch like they did with Fusion then they’ll be fine. But even if the economy tanks again they’ll have lower priced utilities and Focus. And if gas prices spike they have that covered with all the new hybrids.

 

I think the best strategy would have been to build another plant, maybe 2 in North America so they have more flexibility and wouldn’t have to kill or import vehicles that are still selling decently. But given that they are where they are, I think what they’re doing is a decent strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right - as long as they have products ready and don’t have to start over from scratch like they did with Fusion then they’ll be fine. But even if the economy tanks again they’ll have lower priced utilities and Focus. And if gas prices spike they have that covered with all the new hybrids.

 

I think the best strategy would have been to build another plant, maybe 2 in North America so they have more flexibility and wouldn’t have to kill or import vehicles that are still selling decently. But given that they are where they are, I think what they’re doing is a decent strategy.

 

I think they should've finished the San Luis Potisi plant - how long have we been talking about how production strained Ford is almost across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should add a line at an existing truck/SUV plant or/and bodyshop to run 2-4 different vehicles down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think they should've finished the San Luis Potisi plant - how long have we been talking about how production strained Ford is almost across the board.

 

 

I think Ford's thinking is that they don't expect to expand market share enough that they need another plant. What are they going to do with it when SAAR goes back down to 15 million units a year in a downturn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ford's thinking is that they don't expect to expand market share enough that they need another plant. What are they going to do with it when SAAR goes back down to 15 million units a year in a downturn?

Same thing other companies do - cut a shift here or there.

 

It’s great to be able to run factories close to capacity but then you can’t get new products out the door to take advantage of new markets or even just overflow production when one plant is at capacity (Escape e.g.).

 

I think another plant would give them way more flexibility without breaking the bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect the 60s to ever come back, with annual style changes and 90 percent car sales. Have to get used to it and move on.

 

If gas prices go up, expect more small CUV sales, and maybe a little more cars, but no more "good old days".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same thing other companies do - cut a shift here or there.

Its great to be able to run factories close to capacity but then you cant get new products out the door to take advantage of new markets or even just overflow production when one plant is at capacity (Escape e.g.).

I think another plant would give them way more flexibility without breaking the bank.

I remember being advised that a plant was considered to be at 100% when it had 2x 8 hour shifts

And a quick line speed. So Ford having what is it, five plants on three shifts shows just how hard

it is working equipment and workers - theres no time to do anything extra and if something breaks

well thats a major drama.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember being advised that a plant was considered to be at 100% when it had 2x 8 hour shifts

And a quick line speed. So Ford having what is it, five plants on three shifts shows just how hard

it is working equipment and workers - theres no time to do anything extra and if something breaks

well thats a major drama.

Just out of curiosity, are 10 hour shifts restricted by the UAW contracts? 10 hour schedules (4 days @10) offers a lot of benefits to both the employer as well as the employee IMO. I can't imagine running a large manufacturing operation with three 8 hour shifts. How do you have an orderly shift change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, are 10 hour shifts restricted by the UAW contracts? 10 hour schedules (4 days @10) offers a lot of benefits to both the employer as well as the employee IMO. I can't imagine running a large manufacturing operation with three 8 hour shifts. How do you have an orderly shift change?

Most plants run a 4x10 schedule. MAP currently is on a 5x8 schedule with 10 hours a day scheduled, thats how they get around scheduling that 5th day. There are restrictions to scheduling Saturday and Sunday production, or super weekends for plants running the 3 crew schedule. they can only schedule 2 per month. Edited by fuzzymoomoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rental fleets still buy cars, since renting an SUV is still more expensive, and business travelers have cost limits.

 

But also, car buyers expect a "deal", and want rebates or get used fleet cars. So, less profit.

But will there come a time when SUV's are at max supply and start losing extra profit margins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most plants run a 4x10 schedule. MAP currently is on a 5x8 schedule with 10 hours a day scheduled, thats how they get around scheduling that 5th day. There are restrictions to scheduling Saturday and Sunday production, or super weekends for plants running the 3 crew schedule. they can only schedule 2 per month.

 

Thx for that info.

 

Also seems there has been discussion on this thread about plant capacity and the need for more plants. Seems to me that during the Mulally era there was a concerted effort to get rid of excess capacity. Having said that, how many plants today have excess capacity? I recognize that most plants are set up for specific production but I'm thinking of the decision to let the Taurus die on the vine. I see plenty of Camry's that are high end-as well as all the larger Kias/Hyundais that appear to be loaded. Had more attention been paid to the Taurus what would those incremental sales have added to the bottom line.??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not that large cars can’t make money. It’s whether there is enough profit to warrant the ongoing investment versus using those resources on other segments that are growing or where Ford is not currently a player (Ranger/Bronco e.g.).

 

Don’t forget incentives. If those large cars are selling but only with $5K on the hood that drastically reduces your profit potential. And it’s only going to get worse.

 

Also during Mulally the SAAR fell from 17M to 11M. That plus the need to cancel some vehicles like the old Ranger left excess plant capacity. It would have been nice to hold on to some of that capacity but that just wasn’t financially feasible back then. Also, some of those plants may have needed a gut and rebuild to stay viable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toyota is already on record as expecting more of its Camry customers to move to RAV4

and is preparing to manage that transition in the next few years.

 

Toyota is not immune to change, just the last to feel the effects.

 

Toyota has slapped hefty incentives on the current Camry since the day it went on sale. It has also sent a fair number to fleets. I'd say Toyota has already felt the effects. Those tactics masked the decline in demand among retail customers.

 

Honda has not sold large numbers of Accords to fleet customers, and the "deals" are stingy in comparison to those offered by the competition. The result has been a double-digit sales decline this year, despite the critical plaudits for the car.

Edited by grbeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated in another tread, Fusion sales of 200,000 are not to be ignored. With gasoline creeping past $3.00, they better rethink dropping Fusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated in another tread, Fusion sales of 200,000 are not to be ignored. With gasoline creeping past $3.00, they better rethink dropping Fusion.

My bet Joe is the party line will be.."when gas becomes expensive again, the smaller SUV/crossovers will give the consumer plenty of options in terms of fuel economy".

 

This is unlike the spike in the early 2000's when there were few alternatives to choose from.

 

I guess one thought I have, is that as prices continue to climb, and with the typical 36 month auto loan a thing of the past, does everyone need AWD? What about basic transportation? How many people are paying for features they will NEVER use or understand for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet Joe is the party line will be.."when gas becomes expensive again, the smaller SUV/crossovers will give the consumer plenty of options in terms of fuel economy".

 

This is unlike the spike in the early 2000's when there were few alternatives to choose from.

 

I guess one thought I have, is that as prices continue to climb, and with the typical 36 month auto loan a thing of the past, does everyone need AWD? What about basic transportation? How many people are paying for features they will NEVER use or understand for that matter.

 

But buyers want all the features, and won't buy the stripper models without them...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of which is encouraged by automakers to increase profits.

I mean, this is what Hackett's plan is all about, they don't want to sell $22K Fusions when they can sell $28K Utiltiies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I stated in another tread, Fusion sales of 200,000 are not to be ignored. With gasoline creeping past $3.00, they better rethink dropping Fusion.

I'm well on my way to buying Farley's "retraction" ange003.gif...

...tho maybe they'll be stoopid about hiatus'ing the Fusion Name :banghead: ,

imho what they need to work on MOST is

 

hiring suits who can speak without chewing their feet

OrElse.gif

Edited by 2b2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess one thought I have, is that as prices continue to climb, and with the typical 36 month auto loan a thing of the past, does everyone need AWD? What about basic transportation? How many people are paying for features they will NEVER use or understand for that matter.

 

Basic transportation is a used car. Not all CUV's have AWD

 

Lots of people buy things they don't understand or are lucky to use once or twice that is on the car- I have a stupid sunshade in my SHO I think I put up once or twice-it doesn't fucking work now the last time I use it and I don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If "gasoline prices go back up," the beneficiaries will be the EcoSport, Escape, Honda HR-V and CR-V, and Toyota RAV-4, not the Focus or other cars in that segment.

 

Those aren't exactly gas-guzzlers in 2018.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess one thought I have, is that as prices continue to climb, and with the typical 36 month auto loan a thing of the past, does everyone need AWD? What about basic transportation? How many people are paying for features they will NEVER use or understand for that matter.

Maybe ten years back, we were visiting friends who live in Northport, New York (on Long Island). It was winter, and they just had several inches of snow. A neighbor of my friends was stuck in her driveway. She was driving some sort of Nissan SUV. I went over to help push her out and noticed that her Nissan was in 2WD. I told her to put it in 4WD. She didn't know how. She had the vehicle for several year and had never put it in 4WD. I pulled back on the lever (stiff from non-use) and put it in 4WD. She drove right out of the snowdrift. So yes, people buy things all the time they never use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×