Jump to content

Full year Profits Plunge $3.6B, Slower Sales/Pension


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, falconlover 1 said:

I see a big problem in the operational area of Ford. The Chicago plant must be scrutinized. Why did the Explorers and Aviators assembled there go out with serious defects, to the point of having to send them to another plant to fix them? So serious were the problems that could not be solved there?

FWIW, they were sending Fusions to other plants to fix problems in assembly at the start of the 2013 production run, and Hermosillo had consistently been Ford's top quality assembly plant in North America. They didn't suddenly forget how to put cars together, but there was something about the new product that was problematic. Sending the cars from Mexico to Michigan had less to do with not being able to solve the problems at Hermosillo than it did with needing to keep Hermosillo running while they fixed the problems--you only have so much space and so many people at the plant, and you need both for production, so you send the vehicles that need fixin' somewhere you have more space and people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


That's a total exaggeration and you know it. 

 

Yes sir. But faconlover 1 correctly identified one of the main root causes for the 2020 Explorer debacle. Ford's corporate culture tolerates making the same mistakes over and over again. That is also what led to Ford's near bankruptcy in 2007-2008. If Jim Hackett is unable to reform Ford's culture of failure and blame soon, Ford may go bankrupt in the next decade.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

Yes sir. But faconlover 1 correctly identified one of the main root causes for the 2020 Explorer debacle. Ford's corporate culture tolerates making the same mistakes over and over again. That is also what led to Ford's near bankruptcy in 2007-2008. If Jim Hackett is unable to reform Ford's culture of failure and blame soon, Ford may go bankrupt in the next decade.


You’re confusing ineptitude with risky business decisions.  They had no issues with the F150 retooling which was far bigger and more complicated.  But the risk there was enormous so they put the time, effort and money into making sure it succeeded.  With CAP they accepted more risk and it backfired.  But it’s a temporary problem that will be quickly forgotten just like the 2013 Fusion/MKZ launch.

 

What needs to happen at a Ford is they need to get the new platforms and products out the door so they can get back to a normal cadence of updates and refreshes and they can afford to slow down and address quality.   We did hear they’ve loosened the screws on the suppliers a little so that should help with parts quality.  And they have a new plant manger at CAP now so they are doing something.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MKII said:

I don't think akirby has read or listen to Mulally. Hard to miss the words "improve quality" spoken by Mulally over his tenure. As an example in this autonews article 6 weeks into Mulally tenure  mentions "quality" multiple times . 1st one is the first paragraph "Six weeks into his full-time stint as Ford Motor Co. CEO, Alan Mulally has already tweaked the automaker's product plan with a focus on improving fuel-efficiency, reliability and quality. https://www.autonews.com/article/20061110/SUB/61110080/ford-ceo-to-employees-new-product-top-priority


I should have been more specific and said Fields and Hackett.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, akirby said:

 

 

What needs to happen at a Ford is they need to get the new platforms and products out the door so they can get back to a normal cadence of updates and refreshes and they can afford to slow down and address quality.   We did hear they’ve loosened the screws on the suppliers a little so that should help with parts quality.  And they have a new plant manger at CAP now so they are doing something.

 

But this is starting to feel like Groundhog Day, the Dearborn Edition...Ford keeps needing to relearn the importance of quality and regular, meaningful vehicle refreshes. Toyota, and to lesser extent, Honda, have been proving that a consistent focus on these two areas builds brand equity and improves profits over the long haul.

 

Why does Ford have to repeatedly relearn these lessons?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, grbeck said:

 

But this is starting to feel like Groundhog Day, the Dearborn Edition...Ford keeps needing to relearn the importance of quality and regular, meaningful vehicle refreshes. Toyota, and to lesser extent, Honda, have been proving that a consistent focus on these two areas builds brand equity and improves profits over the long haul.

 

Why does Ford have to repeatedly relearn these lessons?

 

When has Toyota or Honda made the number of changes that Ford has made the last 7 or 8 years and are working on now?   Since 2010 Ford has introduced 8 new ecoboost engines, 2 new V8 gas engines, at least 2 new diesels and at least 3 new transmissions.  Bronco and Ford GT are all new.   Hybrid and PHEV Explorer, Aviator, Corsair and Escape.   Hybrid and BEV mustang and F150.   Not to mention AVs.   Baby Bronco and the trucklet.   New Lincoln BEV with Rivian platform.  2 new midsized BEV utilities.    All while keeping F150 fresh and reintroducing Ranger to NA.  2 new platforms.

 

Compare that to what Toyota and Honda have done in the same time period and you'll understand why Ford doesn't have as much money or resources to spend on cars and quality.   And that's my point - they need to get to that point where all they really need to worry about is product updates and refreshes and a new vehicle here and there.   They've bitten off more than they can chew right now.   Hopefully the investment in all the new products works out.  I think it will.  But it's painful to watch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:


I should have been more specific and said Fields and Hackett.

It seems like forever since Mullally was in charge and we were all talking about one ford. 

 

I really don't think you needed to specify the latter 2 CEOs who have presided over Fords recent troubles. 

 

I personally am going to give hacket the bennifit of time to see his rebuild through 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, falconlover 1 said:

I see a big problem in the operational area of Ford. The Chicago plant must be scrutinized. Why did the Explorers and Aviators assembled there go out with serious defects, to the point of having to send them to another plant to fix them? So serious were the problems that could not be solved there? Is there any degree of sabotage by workers? Who supervised this plant?  Why they didn't realize what was happening, or, if they realized, why didn't they act? Hackett knew that the company's flagship product (apart from the F-series truck), the one that should leave the most juicy profits and maintain the market share, was being built that way, damaging the image of the product and the brand? There are many things that I do not understand, and I am sure, that in the future we will know what happened and it will be seen in its true magnitude as to damaged Ford this failed launch. Even Hackett points it out as the cause of the financial results! This will be the size of the debacle!  And this in only a part of the "Explorer debacle". The poor and horrible interior design, with bad quality materials, the use of a platform dedicated only for this product (in a costly decision), the wrong price policy (when we see the bad quality materials of the interior...) add some aspects to this problem. Is evident that the Explorer interior needs an urgent redesign (more money invested...) to keep a decent sales numbers... and the price must go down (less money for Ford...), because the competition is hard, offering better products, with better quality at lower price.

 

2019 was a horrible year. I hope Ford learn from the mistakes, and the launch of the Mach E, Bronco , new F series and Baby Bronco will be better than the Explorer launch. Ford cant make more mistakes.

I might suggest a comment regarding the Chicago plant launch! I spent over 30 years at Ford in North American Automotive Parts distribution! Our department was responsible for the timely delivery of parts to maintain production at all of our North American assembly plants.  We had launch teams assigned to each plants launch and worked with the plants,  supply base, engineering and purchasing to maintain a smooth transition and successful Job 1 launch! Over time , the company decided to hire contact companies ( Penske, etc...) who assigned their workers to learn the functions alongside the Ford salaried employees! I personally supervised select launch teams and insured they were performing their assignments! I noticed many inefficiencies and lack of concern from some of these contract workers! However, management simply told us to correct and resolve the shortcomings. When Ford announced "specially retirements" in the past few years for salary personnel , a vast group of highly experienced workers took the package. The loss of experience was a hardship and many retirees were hired back during each of the following new plant launches! Currently, with virtually all of the parts distribution and launch teams resulting in contract workers, I see this may have been one of the reasons the launch was so dismal! I might consider one of the major causal factors is turnover of contract workers, the recent loss of experience, the inability to coordinate the necessary communication between engineering, launch team , purchasing and the critical supply base! Hopefully, the company is learning from this and will endeavor to address the shortcomings in the near future! We all want Ford to succeed!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, probowler said:

 

I really don't think you needed to specify the latter 2 CEOs who have presided over Fords recent troublesI


Anybody who doesn’t see the difference in Fields and Hackett is blind as a bat.  Fields slowed down or stopped development to save money.  Hackett has accelerated development.

 

And les not forget that Mulally presided over the fusion/MKZ launch debacle in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grbeck said:

 

But this is starting to feel like Groundhog Day, the Dearborn Edition...Ford keeps needing to relearn the importance of quality and regular, meaningful vehicle refreshes. Toyota, and to lesser extent, Honda, have been proving that a consistent focus on these two areas builds brand equity and improves profits over the long haul.

 

Why does Ford have to repeatedly relearn these lessons?


I was taking to a friend of mine who works in the IT department about a year ago about this. We noticed that Ford does this about every 10 years or so where they focus on quality to the point where it crushes margins, then they go to the extreme the other way and cut costs as much as they possibly can and quality subsequently takes a hit. It didn't make sense to either of us. This swinging pendulum stuff is maddening. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, akirby said:

 

When has Toyota or Honda made the number of changes that Ford has made the last 7 or 8 years and are working on now?   Since 2010 Ford has introduced 8 new ecoboost engines, 2 new V8 gas engines, at least 2 new diesels and at least 3 new transmissions.  Bronco and Ford GT are all new.   Hybrid and PHEV Explorer, Aviator, Corsair and Escape.   Hybrid and BEV mustang and F150.   Not to mention AVs.   Baby Bronco and the trucklet.   New Lincoln BEV with Rivian platform.  2 new midsized BEV utilities.    All while keeping F150 fresh and reintroducing Ranger to NA.  2 new platforms.

 

Compare that to what Toyota and Honda have done in the same time period and you'll understand why Ford doesn't have as much money or resources to spend on cars and quality.   And that's my point - they need to get to that point where all they really need to worry about is product updates and refreshes and a new vehicle here and there.   They've bitten off more than they can chew right now.   Hopefully the investment in all the new products works out.  I think it will.  But it's painful to watch.

 

But isn't that a big part of the problem? We're seeing a deluge of new Ford vehicles and drivetrains now because there was a drought - particularly of the former - for several years. That is where REGULAR updates to vehicles, as opposed to letting everything but the F-Series stay past its sell-by date, would be helpful.

 

And it's not as though Honda and Toyota have been sitting still. How many revamps of the CR-V did we witness while Ford kept the previous-generation Escape on the market? How many times was the Civic redone while Ford kept offering the same Focus (let alone stick with that terrible automatic transmission!)?

 

And some of this is basic vehicle manufacturing. The adoption of new drivetrains or new platforms, for example, is no excuse for shipping Explorers without parts or with sloppily aligned exterior panels.

 

The Explorer is a critical new product. It's a very attractive product that has real presence on the road. But this is the kind of stuff that makes people stick with boring, awkward-looking Toyotas. Or encourages them to try out one of those new Hyundais or Kias.

Edited by grbeck
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, grbeck said:

 

But isn't that a big part of the problem? We're seeing a deluge of new Ford vehicles and drivetrains now because there was a drought - particularly of the former - for several years. That is where REGULAR updates to vehicles, as opposed to letting everything but the F-Series stay past its sell-by date, would be helpful.

 

And it's not as though Honda and Toyota have been sitting still. How many revamps of the CR-V did we witness while Ford kept the previous-generation Escape on the market? How many times was the Civic redone while Ford kept offering the same Focus (let alone stick with that terrible automatic transmission!)?

 

And some of this is basic vehicle manufacturing. The adoption of new drivetrains or new platforms, for example, is no excuse for shipping Explorers without parts or with sloppily aligned exterior panels.

 

The Explorer is a critical new product. It's a very attractive product that has real presence on the road. But this is the kind of stuff that makes people stick with boring, awkward-looking Toyotas. Or encourages them to try out one of those new Hyundais or Kias.

 

That's why Fields was canned - he paused basically everything, which resulted in so many products withering on the vine well past what should have been their redesign schedules.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


I was taking to a friend of mine who works in the IT department about a year ago about this. We noticed that Ford does this about every 10 years or so where they focus on quality to the point where it crushes margins, then they go to the extreme the other way and cut costs as much as they possibly can and quality subsequently takes a hit. It didn't make sense to either of us. This swinging pendulum stuff is maddening. 

 

I don't even want to get started with Ford's IT department. It takes forever to get problems fixed, Dealer requests are mostly ignored, and they never finish projects. Years after partially implemented programs are launched, instead of completing them, they get scrapped so that can launch launch their next new and improved program, process, etc. Perfect example is WBDO (Web Based Dealer Order) system that was launched years ago. It's still not fully implemented and many functions still require using the outdated CONCEPS system.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grbeck said:

 

But isn't that a big part of the problem? We're seeing a deluge of new Ford vehicles and drivetrains now because there was a drought - particularly of the former - for several years. That is where REGULAR updates to vehicles, as opposed to letting everything but the F-Series stay past its sell-by date, would be helpful.

 

And it's not as though Honda and Toyota have been sitting still. How many revamps of the CR-V did we witness while Ford kept the previous-generation Escape on the market? How many times was the Civic redone while Ford kept offering the same Focus (let alone stick with that terrible automatic transmission!)?

 

And some of this is basic vehicle manufacturing. The adoption of new drivetrains or new platforms, for example, is no excuse for shipping Explorers without parts or with sloppily aligned exterior panels.

 

The Explorer is a critical new product. It's a very attractive product that has real presence on the road. But this is the kind of stuff that makes people stick with boring, awkward-looking Toyotas. Or encourages them to try out one of those new Hyundais or Kias.


Honda and Toyota haven’t done half of what Ford has done with new or heavily revised vehicles and new power trains.   And powertrain development never paused.   The point is this heavy investment is diverting resources that are either causing problems or making problems worse.  It’s not an excuse, it’s a fact that Ford made a business decision.  And sometimes those come back to haunt you.  If the new products coming the next 2 years are as great as we’ve been led to believe then maybe it’s worth it.  It’s definitely frustrating in the meantime.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, akirby said:

 

When has Toyota or Honda made the number of changes that Ford has made the last 7 or 8 years and are working on now?   Since 2010 Ford has introduced 8 new ecoboost engines, 2 new V8 gas engines, at least 2 new diesels and at least 3 new transmissions.  Bronco and Ford GT are all new.   Hybrid and PHEV Explorer, Aviator, Corsair and Escape.   Hybrid and BEV mustang and F150.   Not to mention AVs.   Baby Bronco and the trucklet.   New Lincoln BEV with Rivian platform.  2 new midsized BEV utilities.    All while keeping F150 fresh and reintroducing Ranger to NA.  2 new platforms.

 

Compare that to what Toyota and Honda have done in the same time period and you'll understand why Ford doesn't have as much money or resources to spend on cars and quality.   And that's my point - they need to get to that point where all they really need to worry about is product updates and refreshes and a new vehicle here and there.   They've bitten off more than they can chew right now.   Hopefully the investment in all the new products works out.  I think it will.  But it's painful to watch.

 

I don't think this is an accurate comparison since Toyota and to a lesser extent also have a huge global presence and I would be willing to wager, many more vehicle line ups across the board. You may be correct in the US, but I would not think that would stand up if you look at what Toyota is doing globally versus Ford. 

 

Since we are in the NA market-it certainly is painful to watch, but somewhat promising with everything they are getting right with Lincoln. Jury is out on Bronco and F150 and the Mustang Mach E. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

That's why Fields was canned - he paused basically everything, which resulted in so many products withering on the vine well past what should have been their redesign schedules.

The irony is that pause and modest refresh to Ford cars back in 2015 probably hastened Ford's switch to more utilities.

The most unfortunate thing about Fields short tenure was the rapid change in vehicle preferences and politics that

saw Ford start a third Mexican plant and then cancel it, plans seem to be changing every six months.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, akirby said:


  If the new products coming the next 2 years are as great as we’ve been led to believe then maybe it’s worth it.  

 

In the here and now, the new product (Explorer) isn't great - it's plagued with quality issues and (perceived) cheapness in the interior. Enough partisans are sick of the "wait 'til the next introduction" when Ford blows a product as critical as Explorer in the way they have.

 

And please, no more speeches about how Ford knows how to build vehicles and Tesla doesn't. All the excuses applied to the Explorer's failed launch are far too similar to the excuses for Tesla's issue that were poo pooed at the time (not directed at you akirby, it's a rhetorical comment). And I'm not defending Tesla.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

In the here and now, the new product (Explorer) isn't great - it's plagued with quality issues and (perceived) cheapness in the interior. Enough partisans are sick of the "wait 'til the next introduction" when Ford blows a product as critical as Explorer in the way they have.

 

The problem is the internet is an echo chamber-people who have problems, no matter how small will bitch and complain about the car. If you seen nothing but bitching and complaining about a product, your going to assume that the product is a problem. Yes, the Explorer had a bad/rough launch, but that was nearly 12 months ago. I've been following this shit for over 20 years now and its the same thing again and again. 

 

There are lots of people who have new Explorers and Aviators that don't have issues-my sister has one and no issues so far. I've seen random people on the internet chime in when these gloom and doom articles are posted saying I don't have any issues with mine. 

 

Just as another example-my Wife and sister both had 2010 Escapes-Only difference was my wife's was an XLT and my sister had a Limited-my Sister was at the dealership alot more then my wife's Escape was and the both had roughly the same usage and mileage put on them. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

 

In the here and now, the new product (Explorer) isn't great - it's plagued with quality issues and (perceived) cheapness in the interior. Enough partisans are sick of the "wait 'til the next introduction" when Ford blows a product as critical as Explorer in the way they have.

 

And please, no more speeches about how Ford knows how to build vehicles and Tesla doesn't. All the excuses applied to the Explorer's failed launch are far too similar to the excuses for Tesla's issue that were poo pooed at the time (not directed at you akirby, it's a rhetorical comment). And I'm not defending Tesla.


Tesla has one NA factory.  Ford has at least 9 if not 10 and 100 years more experience.  They also have legacy baggage.

 

CAP was a culmination of several problems at the same time.  Other launches have been trouble free.  I bet by the end of 1Q Explorer is back on track.  We already heard 20% of sales are STs and that’s great for ATPs.

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...