Michael Reynolds Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 LOL, rock on DCK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 You ostriches sure been right about everything so far! Note: that was sarcasm Sometimes people do drink too much of the Blue Oval Kool-Ade. On the other hand, haven't you said that Chrysler is the "best run" of the domestics, and the one that is in the best shape? Given recent losses and current management's admission that it has resurrected one of the corporation's worst practices - the infamous Sales Bank - I would say that there is a lot of crow to be eaten around here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebritt Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 "And what does that tell you about Billy Ford? My take: Bad Billy’s inability to walk away from the family firm he’s been running into the ground makes him part of the problem, not the solution. The fact that Baby Face Mark Fields– original architect of The Way Fordward and twenty-minute heir apparent– is still wandering the corridors of power is equally troubling." http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2333 Send the retards home and get some real men to run the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old999 Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 I just read where Mark Fields has claimed that he does not see Mulally overhauling the executive ranks .. worse yet, that he sees him as "a huge add to the team". My God, that disaster is a team ? If Mulally becomes just another "team player", Ford is dead Even more disconcerting is the expectation expressed by Fields that Mulally will help change the culture at Ford. If true, that translates into a "take the loot and scoot" play by Mulally .. a fat deal in which he can tread water until he can bail out. Ford's "culture" definitely neds a dramatic change, but it will have to come from chopping out the executive fat and a major streamlining .. all of which starts with dramatic action .. not by sitting around hand holding with Bill Ford and the executive mess that he has created. If true, kiss any hopes for a strong take charge leader goodbye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 Realistically, Fields isn't going to say, "I expect him to clean house immediately." That's just not the way that corporations work. Look for lots of soothing platitudes for public consumption right before Mullaly begins swinging the axe... Plus, a fair number of executives have already left. A CEO can't just begin firing people until he appraises each one and decides whether he or she is a help or a hindrance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted October 1, 2006 Author Share Posted October 1, 2006 Sometimes people do drink too much of the Blue Oval Kool-Ade. On the other hand, haven't you said that Chrysler is the "best run" of the domestics, and the one that is in the best shape? Given recent losses and current management's admission that it has resurrected one of the corporation's worst practices - the infamous Sales Bank - I would say that there is a lot of crow to be eaten around here... I still think that Chrysler is in much better shape than GM or Ford. Let us wait and see the third quarter numbers. Much is being made of Chryslers predicted losses for the third quarter. If Chrysler loses 1 and a half billion what will Fords losses be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 The second they figure that out, the country’s third largest automaker can stop making so many product decisions that come straight from left field. Then they’d have a chance to sort out their corporate culture and start building desirable products in a timely fashion. The problem at Ford in a nutshell. Maybe Mulally can straighten it out. But it's not looking good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSenstad Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 I just read where Mark Fields has claimed that he does not see Mulally overhauling the executive ranks .. worse yet, that he sees him as "a huge add to the team". My God, that disaster is a team ? If Mulally becomes just another "team player", Ford is dead Even more disconcerting is the expectation expressed by Fields that Mulally will help change the culture at Ford. If true, that translates into a "take the loot and scoot" play by Mulally .. a fat deal in which he can tread water until he can bail out. Ford's "culture" definitely neds a dramatic change, but it will have to come from chopping out the executive fat and a major streamlining .. all of which starts with dramatic action .. not by sitting around hand holding with Bill Ford and the executive mess that he has created. If true, kiss any hopes for a strong take charge leader goodbye. You have been around long enough to know that the top people have a language of their own. He is most likely admitting the cuts will reach very high into the Glass House. Personally, when I do the math I come up with 28,000 salary and 50,000 hourly when this is all done. Less than 2 workers for every one salary person is too high. I think Mulally needs to cut about 18,000-20,0000 salary jobs in his first swing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 ICEBERG RIGHT AHEAD!!!!!!!!! :titanic: lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swenson88 Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 I still think that Chrysler is in much better shape than GM or Ford. Well, that's because you drink DCX Kool-Aid while we drink Ford Kool-Aid. Different brand, same result - bias. DCX is doing just as bad as the other two, but please feel free to keep telling yourself differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 I still think that Chrysler is in much better shape than GM or Ford. They've been building vehicles without dealer orders. How is that indicative that they're in 'better shape'? ... You can think whatever you want, but looking at Chrysler's unique inventory problem, and the rather unique way they have created it for themselves, insisting that the company that made this mess is in 'better shape' than Ford or GM doesn't do much to shore up the opinion of the rest of us, regarding your self-acclaimed insight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted October 2, 2006 Author Share Posted October 2, 2006 They've been building vehicles without dealer orders. How is that indicative that they're in 'better shape'? ... You can think whatever you want, but looking at Chrysler's unique inventory problem, and the rather unique way they have created it for themselves, insisting that the company that made this mess is in 'better shape' than Ford or GM doesn't do much to shore up the opinion of the rest of us, regarding your self-acclaimed insight. Unique inventory problems? What is unique? All the big 2.5 have inventory problems. Let us see the 3rd and 4th quarter results. Well, that's because you drink DCX Kool-Aid while we drink Ford Kool-Aid. Different brand, same result - bias. DCX is doing just as bad as the other two, but please feel free to keep telling yourself differently. It is not Chrysler Kool-Aid. Management at Ford plants is just so confused and it extends up the food chain. Let us see the third and 4th quarter numbers. All of the Big 2.5 are in serious trouble. The legacy health costs are just crippling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Unique inventory problems?What is unique? Chrysler was building cars without dealer orders. BTW, Chrysler's announced Q4 production cuts are now larger, as a percentage of volume, than Ford's. Also, you don't see articles like this: http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...1024/LATESTNEWS About Ford OR GM. ONLY Chrysler. But yeah, you keep thinking that they're well run, and that we'll just have to 'wait and see' different. HAH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted October 3, 2006 Author Share Posted October 3, 2006 Chrysler was building cars without dealer orders. BTW, Chrysler's announced Q4 production cuts are now larger, as a percentage of volume, than Ford's. Also, you don't see articles like this: http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?...1024/LATESTNEWS About Ford OR GM. ONLY Chrysler. But yeah, you keep thinking that they're well run, and that we'll just have to 'wait and see' different. HAH. The beauty is we don't need to wait very long for 3rd qtr results. HA HA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 The beauty is we don't need to wait very long for 3rd qtr results. HA HA! You know, you go on and on about how Bill Ford 'ruined' people's lives. Well, Zetsche and Bernard oversaw the slashing of 40,000 jobs at Chrysler group no more than five years ago, and look where they are today? Announcing an estimated $1.6B loss, and--thus far--a 24% decrease in Q4 production. Zetsche wielded an axe, and apparently did no more to assure the long-term health of Chrysler, than Bill Ford has done with Ford. And Ford is no longer CEO, while Zetsche got a promotion. So................................................... Chrysler Group's the healthiest of the Big Three, you were saying, right? They certainly have, thus far, 'ruined more lives' than either GM or Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenJ Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Aside from the LX cars which are ridiculously cheap interiors, Mopar has nothing left going for it today. Plus the obvious product dumping that they have been doing as Rich has just noted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluecon Posted October 3, 2006 Author Share Posted October 3, 2006 Blah Blah Blah Let the 3rd and 4th quarter results results do the talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swenson88 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Blah Blah Blah Let the 3rd and 4th quarter results results do the talking. You keep saying this but in my eyes that's the same type of Wall Street thinking that gets all of the Big 2.5 in trouble every time. The quarterly numbers only mean something if they're consistently good for YEARS, not the 3rd quarter, not the 4th quarter. Hell, DCX was putting up fantastic numbers not too long ago, but now we find out they were cooked by keeping production up even when demand was low, now it's biting them in the ass. Call me crazy, but judging a company in the same fashion as the useless Wall Street analysts is a recipe for disaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Blah Blah Blah Let the 3rd and 4th quarter results results do the talking. Bluecon advocating patience and a 'wait and see' attitude? That's a far cry from saying that Zetsche has "ruined the lives of tens of thousands of people", isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Blah Blah Blah Let the 3rd and 4th quarter results results do the talking. The last 2 quarters are going to reflect the buyouts...it'll be ugly, financially, for both ford and GM. They won't reap the rewards of the lower costs for some months. 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.