Jump to content

Ford And GM's Decision To Abandon Small Cars Is Already Costing Them


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, AGR said:

 

It also is hypocritical for someone to post that, and then turn around and do the same.

I'm with T-dubz, I drive a bit on the fast side and want a car with good handling. And my Focus hatchback is every bit as flexible as any CUV.


That’s not hypocrisy it’s an analogy and I was trying to point out that people living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  Saying other people buy vehicles they don’t need (Which is exactly what rperez said above and has said repeatedly in the past) while doing exactly the same thing is the definition of hypocrisy.  
 

I’ve never told someone they didn’t need a particular vehicle.  No matter what you drive you can always find another vehicle that is cheaper or smaller but gets the job done just as well. 
 

And you can say that you don’t care but by pointing it out you’re showing that you do care to some extent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, akirby said:

Saying other people buy vehicles they don’t need (Which is exactly what rperez said above and has said repeatedly in the past) while doing exactly the same thing is the definition of hypocrisy. 

 

No sir, that's the definition of consistency. In any case, as I mentioned before it's good marketing strategy for automakers and dealerships to convince consumers to buy stuff they don't need.

 

Or another way to put it. It's rational for automakers and dealerships to take advantage of the irrational, emotional aspect of car shopping & buying by consumers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


That’s not hypocrisy it’s an analogy and I was trying to point out that people living in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  Saying other people buy vehicles they don’t need (Which is exactly what rperez said above and has said repeatedly in the past) while doing exactly the same thing is the definition of hypocrisy.  
 

I’ve never told someone they didn’t need a particular vehicle.  No matter what you drive you can always find another vehicle that is cheaper or smaller but gets the job done just as well. 
 

And you can say that you don’t care but by pointing it out you’re showing that you do care to some extent.

 

Where did I say that I don't care?? You've pulled that from somewhere, but not from anything that I've posted. If I didn't care, I wouldn't be here.

Right now, I'm leaning towards the used Ford, something I can drive for 4-5 years until hopefully EV prices come down and real fast charging becomes more of an ubiquitous thing. On my two TVs, I have the NFL on one and the race on the other. I will be cheering for Harvick and against the three tucking Foyota drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look how many times Ford has changed its plans in the past two or three years

and it's clear that the market / buyers  are dictating the swing to utilities.

 

While most buyers purchase more vehicle size/capability than they actually need,

that motivation comes from a desire to have enough  vehicle to cover any future

change in needs either planned or unexpected. 

 

What happens is that most buyers turn up on a lot with a general idea of what they want

but are also open to alternatives and that's where the sales person steps in and offers

choices. That tells me most buyers don't know what they really want or haven't really

thought about it....

 

and then you have women who tend to shop by color which is why some men have no hair...

 

 

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Assimilator said:

Remember, Ford was committed to the Focus Active for the US market until the changing trade conditions made that untenable.  The market has many forces, not all of them are driven by customers.  

 

Yes sir. All of those different forces made it clear to Ford and GM executives that abandoning the U.S. subcompact and compact passenger car segments sooner rather than later was the right thing to do. They're making the bet that the Jalopnik article described below. I think it's a good bet.

 

"Ford and GM are betting, I guess, that the truck and SUV boom will last long enough to bridge the gap between the shift from internal combustion engine vehicles to electrified ones, when old concepts about brand loyalty may not matter."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

 

I never said I didn't care, I said I wasn't judging/begrudging. I just don't understand it. 

 

Though with anything my feeling is you do you, just leave me out of it. As long as you’re not hurting anyone knock yourself out. 


Fair enough.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When they say Ford is betting on trucks and SUVs it sounds like F150, Expedition and Explorer.   
 

But it’s also smaller crossovers, (new Escape is just a slightly taller Focus hatchback), unibody trucks and utilities and BEVs not to mention hybrids and phevs across the lineup.  That’s not just “trucks and SUVs”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

Yes sir. All of those different forces made it clear to Ford and GM executives that abandoning the U.S. subcompact and compact passenger car segments sooner rather than later was the right thing to do. They're making the bet that the Jalopnik article described below. I think it's a good bet.

 

 

 

It is about closing plants down.....detroit never has been able to compete in the small car segment...detroit has simply walked away

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, akirby said:

When they say Ford is betting on trucks and SUVs it sounds like F150, Expedition and Explorer.   
 

But it’s also smaller crossovers, (new Escape is just a slightly taller Focus hatchback), unibody trucks and utilities and BEVs not to mention hybrids and phevs across the lineup.  That’s not just “trucks and SUVs”.

Maybe trucks and utilities in the sense of  non-cars.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, snooter said:

detroit never has been able to compete in the small car segment...detroit has simply walked away

 

That's because Detroit based automakers' mentality with small cars in the U.S. market over the past 40 years has always been about regulatory compliance, specifically CAFE. Not about product excellence or customer satisfaction. The losses that those automakers incurred selling mediocre or poor quality small cars were balanced by those cars' contribution to higher average fleet fuel economy ratings. That allowed the companies to avoid fines for not meeting CAFE targets.

 

Now the two Detroit based automakers that remain (GM and Ford) don't need small ICE powered cars to meet CAFE targets. They negotiated with the Obama administration to adjust CAFE in ways that favor larger SUV/CUV and pickup trucks, using vehicle footprint to determine fuel economy targets. And both companies are investing heavily in electrification.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

That's because Detroit based automakers' mentality with small cars in the U.S. market over the past 40 years has always been about regulatory compliance, specifically CAFE. Not about product excellence or customer satisfaction. The losses that those automakers incurred selling mediocre or poor quality small cars were balanced by those cars' contribution to higher average fleet fuel economy ratings. That allowed the companies to avoid fines for not meeting CAFE targets.

 

Now the two Detroit based automakers that remain (GM and Ford) don't need small ICE powered cars to meet CAFE targets. They negotiated with the Obama administration to adjust CAFE in ways that favor larger SUV/CUV and pickup trucks, using vehicle footprint to determine fuel economy targets. And both companies are investing heavily in electrification.

 spot-on post..the crap they pulled after 73 still sours many ....they had to seek regress on cafe regulations...if the feds had targeted 1/2 ton trucks as heavily as they wanted ford would have faced bankruptcy...they are still in that predictament today..actually probably worse off in some case since they dumped every high mpg vehicle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

10 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

That's because Detroit based automakers' mentality with small cars in the U.S. market over the past 40 years has always been about regulatory compliance, specifically CAFE. Not about product excellence or customer satisfaction. The losses that those automakers incurred selling mediocre or poor quality small cars were balanced by those cars' contribution to higher average fleet fuel economy ratings. That allowed the companies to avoid fines for not meeting CAFE targets.

 

It could be argued that the EPA hastened the demise of small cars by imposing CAFE targets that were

too tough to meet in respect to the cost staying ahead of those limits in what are price sensitive segments.

 Very few non-Detroit based car makers are building compact cars in the US, most tending towards lower cost

areas like Mexico.

 

Quote

Now the two Detroit based automakers that remain (GM and Ford) don't need small ICE powered cars to meet CAFE targets. They negotiated with the Obama administration to adjust CAFE in ways that favor larger SUV/CUV and pickup trucks, using vehicle footprint to determine fuel economy targets. And both companies are investing heavily in electrification.

Since the demise of thirsty V8 powered large cars, there's been little if any need for CAFE offset on Ford's cars as each vehicle segment now has defined CAFE targets based on the vehicle's footprint ,it's also why Dodge can sell Charger and Challenger without small cars as offset. the whole world has moved on from the 2000s and cars are just fading away ti a far less important sales role.

 

The relaxation of CAFE targets for trucks and SUVs was more about delaying increases and simply allowing manufacturers more grace to spend their funding on better long term solutions rather than continuing to meet inane increases that are becoming totally unrealistic. Electrification is the future and the present so embracing it ASAP is key to moving forward.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support ford putting up the lil ?ustang lectric car..no issues..they work in the city....out in boonies its an issue...gasser more than half the cost of mach 3...not going lectric in near future...dont need gubment nannies telling me what i need either...happy right now with owning beater truck thats long ago paid off and my dog is happy in her seat as well....

 

 

 

 

Edited by snooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at where most of the population lives and who is the target audience. Offering more than a compliance vehicle gets the BEV sales out there justifying expansion of the charging network but folks are right to question the availability of charging  stations, you can have thousands of them and still not enough for volumes hitting the roads so home based charging and staying withing total range is going to be important over the next decade.

 

No one is forcing people to change and there will be lots of ICE/hybrids sold in the next decade, those will remain valid choices well into the future.

 

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 9:11 AM, akirby said:

 

I doubt it.   I mean, they were making $2B/qtr with Focus and Fiesta and they made $2B last quarter without them, so what does that tell you?

I agree.

Also, if you compare operating income, which excludes interest, taxes, etc:

3rd quarter 2018 $36,802,000 versus $37,252,00 for 3rd quarter 2019.

In 2018 they were still selling Focus and Fiesta, but virtually none it 2019.

 

I believe traditional sedans will be replaced by lifted vehicles, like the Mach E.

Edited by RichardK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

car sales are cyclical...and weve seen this before...considering Fords current lineup could be perceived as merely Sedans with tall tyop hats, I think if the market took a turn and gravitated back to sedans as such, I don't think it would be that hard for them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deanh said:

car sales are cyclical...and weve seen this before...considering Fords current lineup could be perceived as merely Sedans with tall tyop hats, I think if the market took a turn and gravitated back to sedans as such, I don't think it would be that hard for them...

 

Well, and they still have Fiesta and Focus overseas, they can just ship them over (or whatever they figure out production wise).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Well, and they still have Fiesta and Focus overseas, they can just ship them over (or whatever they figure out production wise).

 

And since Mondeo and Edge replacements will be C2 based they could easily build them in Mexico, Canada or in FRAP if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...