Electric Vehicle Discussion Thread - Ford Related

[Oac98]

20 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

There is a price to pay for cost cutting and that’s showing with all,of those recall problems that you’d think would be nailed years ago. I think Ford has a big problem with compact EVs and that something like a roomier small mid sized EV is more likely the plan in the future…

 

Im beginning to wonder if a well thought out PHEV may be a better plan for compacts, especially for North America and some far flung antipodean colonies. Whatever happens, I hope Canadian workers get good contracts based on solid future EV production.

 

Ther’s always an option to lease outside of Ford and pay full retail and dealer markups but in the end, is it really worth it….What I’m wondering is whether locking into a Ford Credit lease with online pricing stops those nasty dealer markups and if so, whay worry about the residual value….

 

Yes and now that all vehicle residual prices are much higher, dealers and Ford want that extra cash, not let buyers have that…

Hopefully Ford may just learn from their mistake and put a bit more effort into quality control.  I hope we get good products and a good contract as well. I’m really interested to see what forthcoming products are in the pipeline. Still waiting to get a glimpse of whatever new products they’re gonna build at OAC AND elsewhere!

[ice-capades]

58 minutes ago, Oacjay98 said:

Hopefully Ford may just learn from their mistake and put a bit more effort into quality control.  I hope we get good products and a good contract as well. I’m really interested to see what forthcoming products are in the pipeline. Still waiting to get a glimpse of whatever new products they’re gonna build at OAC AND elsewhere!

 

Unfortunately, Ford never seems to learn from their mistakes. Someone comes up with a plan to address problems like quality issues, the plan is mismanaged and/or set aside as new priorities arise, and the cycle repeats. It's been going on for decades and is worse now than it ever was. It was amusing years ago when Ford's marketing slogan was "Quality is Job #1!". It involves a number of factors, including engineering, and goes beyond the current supply chain and vendor issues. Add in the fact that there are far too many options, especially freestanding options, and far too many models and trims that increase production costs, make scheduling more difficult, increase plant constraints, etc. And while the quality issues and related costs continue to get worse on a daily basis, Ford adds even more models, trims, etc. that make long term solutions even more difficult.

 

Ford started an "Inventory Reframing" program last year to simplify the specifications for Dealer stock orders. It's almost laughable as to how many order configurations are available. Some Dearborn executive decides that they have a better idea, develops a plan that they sell to senior management, the plan gets launched and the problems that the plan were to address actually get worse.    

[Oac98]

28 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

 

Unfortunately, Ford never seems to learn from their mistakes. Someone comes up with a plan to address problems like quality issues, the plan is mismanaged and/or set aside as new priorities arise, and the cycle repeats. It's been going on for decades and is worse now than it ever was. It was amusing years ago when Ford's marketing slogan was "Quality is Job #1!". It involves a number of factors, including engineering, and goes beyond the current supply chain and vendor issues. Add in the fact that there are far too many options, especially freestanding options, and far too many models and trims that increase production costs, make scheduling more difficult, increase plant constraints, etc. And while the quality issues and related costs continue to get worse on a daily basis, Ford adds even more models, trims, etc. that make long term solutions even more difficult.

 

Ford started an "Inventory Reframing" program last year to simplify the specifications for Dealer stock orders. It's almost laughable as to how many order configurations are available. Some Dearborn executive decides that they have a better idea, develops a plan that they sell to senior management, the plan gets launched and the problems that the plan were to address actually get worse.    

I thought Farley was a man with a competent plan but as you have stated the same old issues seem to be creeping up. Farley needs to get this house in order since he is seen as a good CEO. I expect him and his team to rectify at least some of these issues and improve the situation with this company and the way they operate at all levels.

[akirby]

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

It's not always that simple and you know it. A lot can change over 3 years. 

If you lease you’re stuck for 3 years.  If you buy you can sell it any ti e you want, even 3 months after you buy it.  This is just a minor inconvenience.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Oacjay98 said:

I thought Farley was a man with a competent plan but as you have stated the same old issues seem to be creeping up. Farley needs to get this house in order since he is seen as a good CEO. I expect him and his team to rectify at least some of these issues and improve the situation with this company and the way they operate at all levels.

Actually Sandy Munro summed up Ford perfectly, it sticks to a plan for so long and when it changes it’s like an elephant rushing from one thing to another without noticing details like all the other things  it must do to get there…and then the experts at Ford pile on trying to fix new mistakes…

Hackett apparently put Ford on the  path to electrification but didn’t bother organising guaranteed and sufficient supply of batteries, something that is absolutely killing Ford at the moment but hidden by chip shortages….

 

22 minutes ago, akirby said:

If you lease you’re stuck for 3 years.  If you buy you can sell it any ti e you want, even 3 months after you buy it.  This is just a minor inconvenience.

Like flipping it almost immediately for more than you paid for it…

Edited June 25, 2022 by jpd80

[Footballfan]

1 hour ago, Oacjay98 said:

I thought Farley was a man with a competent plan but as you have stated the same old issues seem to be creeping up. Farley needs to get this house in order since he is seen as a good CEO. I expect him and his team to rectify at least some of these issues and improve the situation with this company and the way they operate at all levels.

Nothing against Farley but this looks like a repeat of Ford's MO regarding CEOs since the turn of the century (with the exception of Mulally).  Put someone in, hype them up, put a plan together that ends up stalling and start the process all over again.

[jpd80]

30 minutes ago, Footballfan said:

Nothing against Farley but this looks like a repeat of Ford's MO regarding CEOs since the turn of the century (with the exception of Mulally).  Put someone in, hype them up, put a plan together that ends up stalling and start the process all over again.

I remember Bill Ford from early 2000s declaring that by 2006(?) 25% of Fords sold would be hybrids…….every decade a new plan.

When we see a lot of changes in a short time that is both praiseworthy and worrisome, you kind of wonder if they’re making it up as they go, on the fly decisions always cost more in the long run…..that’s not to say sit and do nothing but more think about the whole plan and not just the selfish high profit bits.

 

Hackett and Farley both inherited a cashed up Ford and we’re able to play like millionaires with changing Ford’s future without going deep into debt to do it, not yet anyway. I keep thinking about akirby’s sage warning that Ford doesn’t know the true depth of BEV sales but they seem to be betting the farm that it’s the future with F Series. I’m sure that it will all work out but equally, destiny isn’t written in stone, it relies on a bit of luck, calculated risk and persistence. I wonder if Ford has enough of those to be truly great.

Edited June 25, 2022 by jpd80

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

If you lease you’re stuck for 3 years.  If you buy you can sell it any ti e you want, even 3 months after you buy it.  This is just a minor inconvenience.

If they won't let you buy it at the end of your lease what makes you think they will allow it after 3 months? What about after 1 year? I highly doubt it based on what I read. 

[jpd80]

23 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

If they won't let you buy it at the end of your lease what makes you think they will allow it after 3 months? What about after 1 year? I highly doubt it based on what I read. 

Surely they can’t lock in a volume product like that, a Ford GT yes but any other high series mass produced vehicles, that doesn’t seem right or legally enforceable. Where are we heading if we need lawyers to  look over car purchase contracts.

Edited June 25, 2022 by jpd80

[HotRunrGuy]

7 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

If they won't let you buy it at the end of your lease what makes you think they will allow it after 3 months? What about after 1 year? I highly doubt it based on what I read. 

 

Fuzzy, I think what AK is trying to say is if you purchase the vehicle initially (rather than lease),  you could sell it whenever you want (after 3 months, after 1 year).

 

Unless it's a Ford GT, or course,,,,,

 

HRG

[jpd80]

35 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Fuzzy, I think what AK is trying to say is if you purchase the vehicle initially (rather than lease),  you could sell it whenever you want (after 3 months, after 1 year).

 

Unless it's a Ford GT, or course,,,,,

 

HRG

They’re suggesting that for Lightning now as well….

[akirby]

11 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

If they won't let you buy it at the end of your lease what makes you think they will allow it after 3 months? What about after 1 year? I highly doubt it based on what I read. 

Ok, let’s be realistic.

 

You lease for 3 years.  The only benefits are lower initial payments and an easier transaction if you want to replace it with a new one.  If you buy it out then you finance it for another 4-5 years.

 

So instead of leasing, you finance it for 72 or 84 months.  Payments are about the same and you have infinite options to sell at any time after the first year (worst case).

 

Lime I said this a minor inconvenience.

[akirby]

11 hours ago, Footballfan said:

Nothing against Farley but this looks like a repeat of Ford's MO regarding CEOs since the turn of the century (with the exception of Mulally).  Put someone in, hype them up, put a plan together that ends up stalling and start the process all over again.

In my 35 years in the corporate world, I’ve seen countless new goals and strategies fail.

People are reluctant to change unless forced.

People will always do what they think benefits their compensation and/or career goals.

 

Leaders at every level have to be held accountable for quality goals above other goals especially budget and sales.

People (especially leaders) who make decisions contrary to quality goals have to be disciplined or replaced.

Executives have to be willing to accept budget and sales impacts.  E.g. in the Explorer launch fiasco they should have allocated more time and money for the gut job and rebuild and more down time for Explorer sales.  But they tried to do it as quickly and as cheaply as possible and the results speak for themselves.

 

Engineering requires process changes.  Supplier quality may require spending more or lowering volumes.

 

If people are still compensated based on meeting budgets and schedules and sales goals rather than net profit level and quality then will change.

 

I suspect Ford isn’t willing to make all the changes required to make drastic improvements.

 

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

I suspect Ford isn’t willing to make all the changes required to make drastic improvements.

 the more things change the more they stay the same. 

Edited June 25, 2022 by fuzzymoomoo

[akirby]

50 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

 the more things change the more they stay the same. 

For what it’s worth I think Farley wants to change.  A separate EV unit should make it easier to make those changes so we’ll see.

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

For what it’s worth I think Farley wants to change.  A separate EV unit should make it easier to make those changes so we’ll see.

I do too. There's areas I think they could change and make improvements that I don't think they've thought to look. There's some stuff going on right now I wish I could talk about but I can't and it would really emphasize my previous point. 

[jpd80]

8 hours ago, akirby said:

For what it’s worth I think Farley wants to change.  A separate EV unit should make it easier to make those changes so we’ll see.

Imagine trying to explain to board members that one of the biggest problems at Ford is it’s own corporate structure, rules and regulations getting in the way of developing new era electric vehicles. How far would Ford have to go to isolate/insulate those developments form the “nonsense clatter” of the main ICE business processes.

Edited June 25, 2022 by jpd80

[balthisar]

Banks do leases, too, as do dedicated leasing companies, and even the finance arms of competing manufacturers. You're not stuck with Ford Credit if you have to lease.

[silvrsvt]

5 hours ago, balthisar said:

Banks do leases, too, as do dedicated leasing companies, and even the finance arms of competing manufacturers. You're not stuck with Ford Credit if you have to lease.

 

There are issues with getting the tax credit though I believe...could be wrong though

 

[j2sys]

1 hour ago, silvrsvt said:

 

There are issues with getting the tax credit though I believe...could be wrong though

 

 

The lessor (Ford Credit or otherwise) generally is buying the car from the dealer and then leasing it to you.  For the federal tax credit, the lessor is thus eligible for the credit, not you. At least in the past, Ford Credit would offer an incentive in an amount approximating the credit as a way to pass it on, though they're technically not obligated to do so per se.

 

State incentives may vary.

 

For reference: https://www.ford.com/finance/finance-options/ford-options/#OptionComparison
 

Edited June 27, 2022 by j2sys

[akirby]

13 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

There are issues with getting the tax credit though I believe...could be wrong though

 

The tax credit - if there is one - goes to the owner which in the case of a lease is the finance company.  They then subsidize the lease payments.

 

Thats why at one time you could lease a Leaf for $199.

[AGR]

I can't find an article, but Autoline Daily said that a Bronco Sport EV would go into production on both sides of the Atlantic* in 2025. He was unsure of the platform it would use, possibly the GE1 that the Mach E uses.

*He only mentioned Spain, I'm presuming it would be here in NA as well.

[j2sys]

1 hour ago, AGR said:

I can't find an article, but Autoline Daily said that a Bronco Sport EV would go into production on both sides of the Atlantic* in 2025. He was unsure of the platform it would use, possibly the GE1 that the Mach E uses.

*He only mentioned Spain, I'm presuming it would be here in NA as well.

 

http://www.autoline.tv/journal/?p=82494

 

Jan 2026 for Bronco Sport EV rolling down the line in Spain, they claim.

[Oac98]

2 hours ago, AGR said:

I can't find an article, but Autoline Daily said that a Bronco Sport EV would go into production on both sides of the Atlantic* in 2025. He was unsure of the platform it would use, possibly the GE1 that the Mach E uses.

*He only mentioned Spain, I'm presuming it would be here in NA as well.

Very interesting. 

[Footballfan]

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/lg-reviews-18-billion-us-battery-plant-on-rising-costs

 

Bubble about to burst?