September Sales?

[Bluecon]

You did. You said it was "sunny" in 99.9% of the universe.

 

I guess, if you meant "able to see stars", then yeah, you're soooooooo right.

 

But where I live, sunny doesn't mean "able to see stars". Able to see stars is at night.

Where I live when there are no clouds in the way we can see the sun during the day(when it is sunny). The sun is a big star. What do they teach you at school. That is about grade 3 science.

 

If you can see the star you are receiving light from the star. Even if you need the Hubble telescope to see the star you are still receiving light from the star.

[RichardJensen]

If you can see the star you are receiving light from the star.

And that, of course, is the dictionary definition of "sunny".

 

BTW, the sun is NOT a big star.

 

Betelgeuse is a big star.

[Bluecon]

Back to the original argument.

 

There was no shortage of Fusions and to say otherwise is pure baloney.

 

Hopefully for Ford this one month slide in sales is an anomoly and they do not have another Five Hundred on their hands.

[RichardJensen]

Back to the original argument.

 

There was no shortage of Fusions and to say otherwise is pure baloney.

 

Hopefully for Ford this one month slide in sales is an anomoly and they do not have another Five Hundred on their hands.

Gee, Bluecon, if I do say so myself, I handled the OTP/OAC mistake far more graciously than you've managed this little matter.

 

As to the "no shortage of Fusions" line, it can't be proven, so it should not be stated as fact.

[evok]

As to the "no shortage of Fusions" line, it can't be proven, so it should not be stated as fact.

 

 

BS - There is a good indication that there is not a shortage of Fusions given the demand. They might be tight on 07s but they still have to move the 06s in inventory also. Look at the facts instead of unsupported opinion.

[RichardJensen]

BS - There is a good indication that there is not a shortage of Fusions given the demand. They might be tight on 07s but they still have to move the 06s in inventory also. Look at the facts instead of unsupported opinion.

The Ford press release stated there was a shortage of availability in September. It is not now September. The situation at present is not indicative of what it was like in early September, say, around Labor Day, a big selling weekend for the industry.

 

You cannot deduce, from data on hand, the situation on dealers' lots in early September. You can look at August 31 inventory numbers and September 30 inventory numbers, and draw a direct line, but that line is an estimate of what was really the case during September.

 

There may have been an inventory shortage, there may not have been. Neither you, nor I can state so unequivocally, in absence of any verifiable numbers for on-lot inventory at the beginning of September, it is improper to assert dogmatically that there was no shortage.

 

It's odd that my status as Ford apologist #1 comes from refusing to take assertions against Ford at face value. Also interesting that I am alleged to never admit mistakes by people who never admit mistakes themselves.

[evok]

The Ford press release stated there was a shortage of availability in September. It is not now September. The situation at present is not indicative of what it was like in early September, say, around Labor Day, a big selling weekend for the industry.

 

 

I have shown numberious times with data that there have been plenty of Fusions inventory going into Sept 1 2006 and there have been enough product in the stystem that supported the dealer base during the month of Sept. 2006 and have answered every challenge you have made. Your argument is weak since you choose not to support your position with accepted facts and your reliance on a press statement that is not supported with industry accepted facts and runs counter to the Fusion sales level. Yes Ford might have a tight supply of 2007 MY Fusions which cannot be decifered from the data but that is not what Pipas stated. There appears to be plenty of Fusions in inventory to support the app. 10-12k Fusions a month. Fusion sales in Sept. were off the inflated high in August of 15k units sold but sales in Sept. were not catastropic and inline with the rate at which the vehicle has been selling.

 

You cannot deduce, from data on hand, the situation on dealers' lots in early September. You can look at August 31 inventory numbers and September 30 inventory numbers, and draw a direct line, but that line is an estimate of what was really the case during September.

Yes it is an estimate but an accepted estimate given no one divulges real time data. Is their slop in the number yes but not significant.

 

 

There may have been an inventory shortage, there may not have been. Neither you, nor I can state so unequivocally, in absence of any verifiable numbers for on-lot inventory at the beginning of September, it is improper to assert dogmatically that there was no shortage.

 

There is enough of an indication from the available data and data that I have access to that is not readily made public for me to make my ascertions and conclusion. You on the other had have presented yet again only an opinion based upon a Pipas statement.

 

It's odd that my status as Ford apologist #1 comes from refusing to take assertions against Ford at face value. Also interesting that I am alleged to never admit mistakes by people who never admit mistakes themselves.

 

OK - Ford imploded the last 6 years and has been in denial about it. I take nothing from Ford managment as fact. Ford management has lost all credibility, and it will take time and consistent results to earn that back. Therefore I will question everything that comes out of the shattered Glass House.

[RichardJensen]

The numbers you have furnished prove nothing.

 

They are somewhat questionable statements of inventory that cannot be assumed to reflect inventory on dealer lots.

 

Furthermore, the production estimates do not dovetail with inventory estimates, and inventory estimates are not stated to be market specific (Do these numbers represent all Fusions in inventory from the Yucatan to the Yukon, or just stateside?)

 

For instance, August 1 Fusion inventory + August estimated Fusion production - August Fusion sales gives a total of 26,260 Fusions for Sept 1, Yet Auto News lists 27,700 Fusions in inventory for Sept. 1. I would like to know where these extra 1,440 vehicles came from. What was in error? Sept 1 inventory, August production, or August 1 inventory? Further, these sales numbers do not reflect sales outside the U.S. which would have certainly INCREASED the discepancy between Sept 1 inventory reported, and Sept inventory as deduced by Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug sales.

 

The production numbers are clearly labeled as estimates, and the inventory numbers always (suspiciously) end in 00. Therefore there is strong reason to suppose that they too are estimates. Further, the inventory does not once match up with the production minus the sales, with the estimated inventory always exceeding the estimated production minus the U.S. ONLY sales, suggesting that AN's inventory estimates for the CD3s tend to be high--or their production estimates tend to be low.

 

Furthermore, while the General routinely posts a spreadsheet with production numbers, Ford does not. Ford publishes no more sales numbers than the law requires. They post aggregate sales for the EU, UK, and Canada, and do not break out sales model by model. In the absence of these numbers being published on Ford's media site (and I have full media access to it), and in the presence of obviously artificial inventory and production numbers from AN, I have a hard time believing that they are close to accurate, simply because they are published by AN.

 

Therefore, you'll pardon me if I continue to suspend my belief in your alternate theory of events.

Edited October 8, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Guest Sixcav]

Therefore, you'll pardon me if I continue to suspend my belief in your alternate theory of events.

 

LMAO, I'd pay good money to be there if old Richie would walk into a bar and start talking to people the way he talks to everyone here. The facial expression would be priceless. Sort of "Is he being a smart ass or what?" "Dude, I don't know." lol

Edited October 8, 2006 by Sixcav

[evok]

The numbers you have furnished prove nothing.

 

They are somewhat questionable statements of inventory that cannot be assumed to reflect inventory on dealer lots.

 

Furthermore, the production estimates do not dovetail with inventory estimates, and inventory estimates are not stated to be market specific (Do these numbers represent all Fusions in inventory from the Yucatan to the Yukon, or just stateside?)

 

For instance, August 1 Fusion inventory + August estimated Fusion production - August Fusion sales gives a total of 26,260 Fusions for Sept 1, Yet Auto News lists 27,700 Fusions in inventory for Sept. 1. I would like to know where these extra 1,440 vehicles came from. What was in error? Sept 1 inventory, August production, or August 1 inventory? Further, these sales numbers do not reflect sales outside the U.S. which would have certainly INCREASED the discepancy between Sept 1 inventory reported, and Sept inventory as deduced by Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug sales.

 

The production numbers are clearly labeled as estimates, and the inventory numbers always (suspiciously) end in 00. Therefore there is strong reason to suppose that they too are estimates. Further, the inventory does not once match up with the production minus the sales, with the estimated inventory always exceeding the estimated production minus the U.S. ONLY sales, suggesting that AN's inventory estimates for the CD3s tend to be high--or their production estimates tend to be low.

 

Therefore, you'll pardon me if I continue to suspend my belief in your alternate theory of events.

 

You are missing something. I HAVE the ACTUAL Ford prodution numbers and there is not a significant difference between the AN numbers.

 

Bottom line - Fusion sales in Sept. were on par with past months. It is not like Ford was selling 20 - 40k a month like the competition in that segment.

Edited October 8, 2006 by evok

[RichardJensen]

You are missing something. I HAVE the ACTUAL Ford prodution numbers and there is not a significant difference between the AN numbers.

 

Bottom line - Fusion sales in Sept. were on par with past months. It is not like Ford was selling 20 - 40k a month like the competition in that segment.

So, then, it's the inventory numbers that skew high.

[evok]

So, then, it's the inventory numbers that skew high.

 

HUH read what I said.

[Bluecon]

There were lots of Fusions available at the end of August and lots of Fusions available at the end of September. During the other days of September the Fusions mysteriously dissappeared.

 

RJ-- do you also own ocean front property in South Dakota?

 

And if the Sun is not a big star the Fusion is sure not a big seller.

Edited October 8, 2006 by Bluecon

[swenson88]

And if the Sun is not a big star the Fusion is sure not a big seller.

 

True, the sun is considered a very medium size star, and the Fusion is at best a medium-seller. whoopie doo.

[Bluecon]

True, the sun is considered a very medium size star, and the Fusion is at best a medium-seller. whoopie doo.

Sun an average star Fusion 10k a month.

Camry 40k a month.

[swenson88]

Sun an average star Fusion 10k a month.

Camry 40k a month.

 

What's your point? Since when is the Camry "average" selling for the midsize car market? Who in their right mind thought the Fusion would sell 400K units in its first year? No one. There's only two midsize vehicles that sell in very large numbers - Camry and Accord. Now, think of how many different manufacturers sell a midsize car and you'll see that the Fusion is selling at a completely average sales pace.

[RichardJensen]

HUH read what I said.

I did, and inferred this:

 

Ford sales numbers = accurate

 

Ford production numbers = fairly accurate (per your assessment)

 

Therefore, any discrepancy between reported inventory on August 1 and Sept 1, lies with the inventory numbers themselves. No other numbers enter into the equation:

 

Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug sales = Sept 1. inventory.

 

Now, since you say that the Aug production numbers are fairly accurate, and since Ford's sales numbers are accurate under penalty of fines, that means that any discrepancy must lie almost exclusively with estimated inventory numbers.

 

Now, I'm going to explain it again:

 

Ford sales are reliable

 

Auto News' production numbers can be assumed reliable, if evok says so (he allegedly having Ford's actual numbers).

 

Therefore, if any discrepancy occurs in an equation that involves four variables, and two of them are known accurate, the two numbers not known to be accurate must, therefore, be inaccurate.

 

Once more, for emphasis:

 

For the Ford Fusion, there is a 1,440 unit discrepancy between US market sales, AN reported inventory on August 1, AN estimated production, and AN reported inventory on Sept 1.

 

Now we know that US market sales figures are accurate. We also know (per evok) that estimated production is fairly accurate.

 

So what does that give us?

 

Let's cross out numbers that we can rely on:

 

Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug Sales = Sept 1 inventory

 

Gee. What's left? Estimated inventory totals.

 

So, it seems a fairly straightforward conclusion that AN's inventory estimates are off.

 

Either they're off, or their production estimates are off, and since evok says the production estimates are fairly accurate.........................................

 

 

Do I need to make a 4th attempt to explain this?

Edited October 9, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Bluecon]

And while you're at it describe that ocean front property in SD.

[Michael Reynolds]

And while you're at it describe that ocean front property in SD.

 

Right after you describe how well those 3 shifts that you rambled on and on about earlier this year as being good for Chrysler.

[evok]

I did, and inferred this:

 

Ford sales numbers = accurate

 

Ford production numbers = fairly accurate (per your assessment)

 

Therefore, any discrepancy between reported inventory on August 1 and Sept 1, lies with the inventory numbers themselves. No other numbers enter into the equation:

 

Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug sales = Sept 1. inventory.

 

Now, since you say that the Aug production numbers are fairly accurate, and since Ford's sales numbers are accurate under penalty of fines, that means that any discrepancy must lie almost exclusively with estimated inventory numbers.

 

Now, I'm going to explain it again:

 

Ford sales are reliable

 

Auto News' production numbers can be assumed reliable, if evok says so (he allegedly having Ford's actual numbers).

 

Therefore, if any discrepancy occurs in an equation that involves four variables, and two of them are known accurate, the two numbers not known to be accurate must, therefore, be inaccurate.

 

Once more, for emphasis:

 

For the Ford Fusion, there is a 1,440 unit discrepancy between US market sales, AN reported inventory on August 1, AN estimated production, and AN reported inventory on Sept 1.

 

Now we know that US market sales figures are accurate. We also know (per evok) that estimated production is fairly accurate.

 

So what does that give us?

 

Let's cross out numbers that we can rely on:

 

Aug 1 inventory + Aug production - Aug Sales = Sept 1 inventory

 

Gee. What's left? Estimated inventory totals.

 

So, it seems a fairly straightforward conclusion that AN's inventory estimates are off.

 

Either they're off, or their production estimates are off, and since evok says the production estimates are fairly accurate.........................................

Do I need to make a 4th attempt to explain this?

 

For someone that likes to come across as knowledgable about automotive, it sounds like you do not even have a subscription to AN?

[Noah Harbinger]

For someone that likes to come across as knowledgable about automotive, it sounds like you do not even have a subscription to AN?

 

I don't get it? He proves that your source must be faulty, therefore you criticize him for not subscribing to your source?

[Michael Reynolds]

For someone that likes to come across as knowledgable about automotive, it sounds like you do not even have a subscription to AN?

 

And a subscription to AN, guarantees automotive knowledge? Just give it up why don't ya.

[pcsario]

I don't get it? He proves that your source must be faulty, therefore you criticize him for not subscribing to your source?

 

He didn't prove anything. If all the spins from Richard were actually true, Ford wouldn't be in the mess it is today. If anything, that post was laughable, talk about grasping at straws... LOL

 

Who should we believe? The words from an insider backing his case with A HIGHLY respected industry site with no agenda like AN, or a known PR bot on a Ford message board, doing his usual thing?

 

Hmmm... though choice.

 

At the end of the day, evok --who is a fair critic that also gives GM a hard time-- is right, no matter how many times you people TRY to spin yourselves into denial ("Wow Richard is right on Ford again!"), when as the 500 Freestyle Fusion etc sales numbers have proven, 90% of his damage control ends up being FAR from reality. ("Bububu nonsense, people will be proven wrong about the 500 blah blah blah insert press release")

Edited October 10, 2006 by pcsario

[Edstock]

"He didn't prove anything. If all the spins from Richard were actually true, Ford wouldn't be in the mess it is today. If anything those posts are laughable, talk about grasping for straws... LOL."

 

Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, however myopic it might be.

 

When you call Richard's point-by-point display of the flaws in 'faultless' AN statistics, "spin", it indicates that a study of logic might be beneficial for you.

 

Then again, buying Excedrin by the case might be expensive, LOL.

[Bluecon]

"He didn't prove anything. If all the spins from Richard were actually true, Ford wouldn't be in the mess it is today. If anything those posts are laughable, talk about grasping for straws... LOL."

 

Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, however myopic it might be.

 

When you call Richard's point-by-point display of the flaws in 'faultless' AN statistics, "spin", it indicates that a study of logic might be beneficial for you.

 

Then again, buying Excedrin by the case might be expensive, LOL.

So you actually believe that baloney about there being a lot of Fusions available at the end of Aug. and a lot available at the end of Sept. But none available during the month of September?

 

RJ we have a potential customer for that ocean front property in SD.