Farley with Auto News: EV Plans and More

[Harley Lover]

8 hours ago, akirby said:

 Volt/ELR or Fusion/MKZ/Cmax Energi?  
Bolt or Mach-E?  

Hummer or F150 Lightning/E Transit?  

 

GM are much further along with their supply chain strategy and sourcing, the latest example:  https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2021/12/09/gm-partner-two-new-suppliers-future-evs/6435319001/

 

Whether or not that translates into market success, I don't know, but I give them credit for pushing the ball down the path more quickly than Ford.

[akirby]

40 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

 

GM are much further along with their supply chain strategy and sourcing, the latest example:  https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2021/12/09/gm-partner-two-new-suppliers-future-evs/6435319001/

 

Whether or not that translates into market success, I don't know, but I give them credit for pushing the ball down the path more quickly than Ford.

Oh I agree they’re investing in technology and supply chain.  Their ultium batteries sound great.  My issue with GM is on the product strategy.  They do all these one hit wonders instead of applying the technology across existing mainstream products.  Take Volt - essentially just a plug in hybrid.  One vehicle if you don’t count the huge flop ELR.  Ford extended plug in hybrids to 3 vehicles initially and now has 4 with more likely on the way.

 

Bolt is a stand alone compliance vehicle whereas Mach-E is much more desirable and part of a family of vehicles.  Hummer is a $100k toy that won’t fit in a garage whereas F150 and Transit BEVs are cheaper and better at doing real work and are part of larger vehicle families.

 

Maybe the new GM BEVs will be different but for now it seems to me that Ford has a more comprehensive corporate product strategy which includes commercial markets whereas GM does individual vehicles.

[AGR]

44 minutes ago, akirby said:

Oh I agree they’re investing in technology and supply chain.  Their ultium batteries sound great.  My issue with GM is on the product strategy.  They do all these one hit wonders instead of applying the technology across existing mainstream products.  Take Volt - essentially just a plug in hybrid.  One vehicle if you don’t count the huge flop ELR.  Ford extended plug in hybrids to 3 vehicles initially and now has 4 with more likely on the way.

 

Bolt is a stand alone compliance vehicle whereas Mach-E is much more desirable and part of a family of vehicles.  Hummer is a $100k toy that won’t fit in a garage whereas F150 and Transit BEVs are cheaper and better at doing real work and are part of larger vehicle families.

 

Maybe the new GM BEVs will be different but for now it seems to me that Ford has a more comprehensive corporate product strategy which includes commercial markets whereas GM does individual vehicles.

 

Well, that's what they have out RIGHT NOW. And don't forget about the Cadillac Lyriq, I think it's out now. But do you really think that GM doesn't have a full range of EV cars, crossovers, pickups, and SUVs on the way?? They'll probably have most of them on the market before Ford brings out their competitors. This forum has Ford insiders, but no GM insiders that I'm aware of, so you don't really know what they have  on the way.

[silvrsvt]

1 hour ago, AGR said:

 

Well, that's what they have out RIGHT NOW. And don't forget about the Cadillac Lyriq, I think it's out now. But do you really think that GM doesn't have a full range of EV cars, crossovers, pickups, and SUVs on the way?? They'll probably have most of them on the market before Ford brings out their competitors. This forum has Ford insiders, but no GM insiders that I'm aware of, so you don't really know what they have  on the way.

 

Well the automotive press and some insiders are poo-pooing on GM's plans-saying they are a lot of flash without much substance. Not to mention the huge blackeye with the Bolt Battery packs

[akirby]

2 hours ago, AGR said:

 

Well, that's what they have out RIGHT NOW. And don't forget about the Cadillac Lyriq, I think it's out now. But do you really think that GM doesn't have a full range of EV cars, crossovers, pickups, and SUVs on the way?? They'll probably have most of them on the market before Ford brings out their competitors. This forum has Ford insiders, but no GM insiders that I'm aware of, so you don't really know what they have  on the way.

Ford invests differently than GM.  Ford invested in Mach-e, F150 lightning and E transit which will probably outsell Bolt,  Lyriq and Hummer.  Remember Ford’s plan for Lightning and E Transit and later Super Duty also includes Pro services for fleets which GM doesn’t have.

 

GMs announcements and vehicles are flashier but Ford’s strategy seems more cohesive and longer term to me.  If you disagree that’s fine.

[justins]

I think the part that's really getting forgotten in a lot of these discussions is the software services that Ford are planning to bring to their Pro division.

 

Think about what happens when you choose to buy either an iPhone or an Android... Once you're in an ecosystem, you're in, and it's so hard to leave. 

 

If you have a fleet of vehicles - eTransits and Lightning Pros, all signed up to Ford's software services, all paying monthly subscriptions, then you're in. Changing vehicles, and having to use 2 software services, pay for them etc. Just isn't worth it. Ford have you locked in. And it doesn't really matter what GM or Rivian come out with, you're not going to change. Year after year, model after model, and as your fleet grows and more vehicles go on Ford's services, your even more tied to them. 

 

That will be gold for Ford if they get it right. A money printing machine. 

[silvrsvt]

27 minutes ago, justins said:

I think the part that's really getting forgotten in a lot of these discussions is the software services that Ford are planning to bring to their Pro division.

 

Think about what happens when you choose to buy either an iPhone or an Android... Once you're in an ecosystem, you're in, and it's so hard to leave. 

 

If you have a fleet of vehicles - eTransits and Lightning Pros, all signed up to Ford's software services, all paying monthly subscriptions, then you're in. Changing vehicles, and having to use 2 software services, pay for them etc. Just isn't worth it. Ford have you locked in. And it doesn't really matter what GM or Rivian come out with, you're not going to change. Year after year, model after model, and as your fleet grows and more vehicles go on Ford's services, your even more tied to them. 

 

That will be gold for Ford if they get it right. A money printing machine. 

 

That is if the customers accept it...I just recently saw that Toyota was charging $80 a year to use remote start on their cars! That is a good way to piss your customer base off. 

 

I know commercial market is a bit different, but unless the functionality of it is worth it to the customer, I don't see taking off. 

[justins]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

That is if the customers accept it...I just recently saw that Toyota was charging $80 a year to use remote start on their cars! That is a good way to piss your customer base off. 

 

I know commercial market is a bit different, but unless the functionality of it is worth it to the customer, I don't see taking off. 

I think I remember reading that swinging wanted to charge a subscription for heated seats ?

 

I think Ford are looking more at GPS tracking, telematics, fuel economy, servicing, that kind of thing for their Pro services. 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

That is if the customers accept it...I just recently saw that Toyota was charging $80 a year to use remote start on their cars! That is a good way to piss your customer base off. 

 

I know commercial market is a bit different, but unless the functionality of it is worth it to the customer, I don't see taking off. 

Fleet buyers already pay for those types of services from a 3rd party but they’re expensive and require additional hardware so smaller fleets may not use them.  But with the telematics already built in there is no additional up front cost and no cost as you add new vehicles, just the subscription cost.

 

A florist buys 3 transits and Ford says hey, for $20/month you can get these services - location tracking, accident notification, vehicle health, maintenance tracking, etc etc.  Here is a 60 day free trial.  Cancel anytime.  No upfront cost.  
 

It’s a no brainer.  It won’t sway big fleets that already have their own systems and who buy multiple brands but I think it will work on medium to smaller fleets assuming the vehicles themselves are competitive.

[FordBuyer]

On 12/11/2021 at 9:05 AM, Harley Lover said:

 

GM are much further along with their supply chain strategy and sourcing, the latest example:  https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2021/12/09/gm-partner-two-new-suppliers-future-evs/6435319001/

 

Whether or not that translates into market success, I don't know, but I give them credit for pushing the ball down the path more quickly than Ford.

 

Meanwhile, GM has no answer for Bronco, Bronco Sport, Mach E, and Maverick, and no answer for Ford's hybrids. All in very hot segments. 

[bzcat]

GM is the #2 seller of EV in the world. They are fully engaged in China as a market leader in low cost EV. Different company different focus. 

 

Farley doesn't like investing in low cost vehicles and that is why Ford seems to be content on using VW's MEB for small EVs.

 

[rmc523]

5 hours ago, bzcat said:

GM is the #2 seller of EV in the world. They are fully engaged in China as a market leader in low cost EV. Different company different focus. 

 

Farley doesn't like investing in low cost vehicles and that is why Ford seems to be content on using VW's MEB for small EVs.

 

 

I'd push back on the latter comment...

 

If "low cost vehicles" weren't worth investing in, we wouldn't have Maverick - the issue is more can a profit be made on whatever model it is.  I also think the VW/MEB tie up was a quicker way for Ford to jump in the EV pool when it viewed itself as behind.  Long term we may see them move away from MEB or maybe not, who knows.

[rperez817]

On 12/11/2021 at 10:36 AM, AGR said:

But do you really think that GM doesn't have a full range of EV cars, crossovers, pickups, and SUVs on the way?? They'll probably have most of them on the market before Ford brings out their competitors.

 

GM does have a full range of BEV cars, crossovers, pickups, SUVs that will be introduced in the next couple years. GM is "all in" with BEV, and as Harley Lover mentioned, their component sourcing and supply chain work for building BEV has been extensive. Probably the best of any incumbent automaker. And I agree with you AGR sir that GM is likely to bring those vehicles to market before Ford or other incumbent automakers.

 

But GM CEO Mary Barra is way too overconfident that GM will be #1 in BEV, and her refusal to acknowledge the competitive threat Tesla presents (if she keeps it up) will be GM's downfall. By contrast, Ford CEO Jim Farley is much more pragmatic. He not only acknowledges Tesla as Ford's biggest competitor nowadays, but is content for Ford to be #2 in BEV following Tesla. Farley's level headed approach is a much better recipe for long term success.

 

Barra's hubris is mentioned in the videos that Stray Kat and LookingToBuyAFord shared in the Sandy Munro topic recently.

 

[balthisar]

What am I missing here in all of this discussion about "converting" a plant? There's still a body shop, stamping area (possibly), final assembly area, paint shop. Battery boxes come in from outside (either Ford Blue Oval City or Nemak or someone else), and instead of a chassis assembly with an engine (I don't mean a body-on-frame chassis), you install the battery box an electric drive.

 

The CSAP "conversion" was really no different than any other vehicle program launch. Seriously.

 

There's no high bar at all to "converting" to EV production. The bottleneck might be space, if the plant has to support hybrid and/or ICE complexities.

 

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, balthisar said:

What am I missing here in all of this discussion about "converting" a plant? There's still a body shop, stamping area (possibly), final assembly area, paint shop. Battery boxes come in from outside (either Ford Blue Oval City or Nemak or someone else), and instead of a chassis assembly with an engine (I don't mean a body-on-frame chassis), you install the battery box an electric drive.

The point was that not all ICE plants will be required, not that they can’t be converted.

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

The point was that not all ICE plants will be required, not that they can’t be converted.

 

Why not?  

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Why not?  

Over capacity.

 

[Footballfan]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Over capacity.

 

Remember Ford closed 5 assembly plants in the US and 1 in Canada since 2000.  Perhaps Ford is growing yhe business again?

[silvrsvt]

15 hours ago, Footballfan said:

Remember Ford closed 5 assembly plants in the US and 1 in Canada since 2000.  Perhaps Ford is growing yhe business again?

 

Well one thing to remember here-using Tesla as a guideline, they only built about 250K units at the Tesla factory in 2020, which I believe was their best sales year to date, between three models.

 

That same plant, in 2006, built 428K units that where ICE

 

So using that as a metric, I really do wonder if BEVs are going to require less plants to build to keep the same numbers. 

[rperez817]

16 hours ago, Footballfan said:

Perhaps Ford is growing yhe business again?

 

Yes sir Footballfan. As Farley finally gets Ford close to being "fit", it can consider embarking on growth based strategies.

 

At the very least, Ford is increasing its involvement within high growth segments of the automotive industry such as BEV, autonomous vehicles, mobility services, etc.

Edited December 19, 2021 by rperez817

[rmc523]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Well one thing to remember here-using Tesla as a guideline, they only built about 250K units at the Tesla factory in 2020, which I believe was their best sales year to date, between three models.

 

That same plant, in 2006, built 428K units that where ICE

 

So using that as a metric, I really do wonder if BEVs are going to require less plants to build to keep the same numbers. 

 

Eh, I don't know if you can quite compare the two directly, but I see your point.

[ice-capades]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Well one thing to remember here-using Tesla as a guideline, they only built about 250K units at the Tesla factory in 2020, which I believe was their best sales year to date, between three models.

 

That same plant, in 2006, built 428K units that where ICE

 

So using that as a metric, I really do wonder if BEVs are going to require less plants to build to keep the same numbers. 

 

It's been widely reported for some time that BEV vehicle assembly will be less labor intensive which will make upcoming UAW contract negotiations that much more interesting. I'd expect that the contract issues will be more focused on protecting job security for BEV component production rather than plant assembly operations. Tesla's expertise is not in vehicle assembly, so I doubt that comparing previous production at the plant is appropriate. 

 

The plant production matrix may change as a result of the transition from ICE to BEV production changes over the next few years. Regardless, the overall size of the market is not likely to change to any large degree meaning that the sales mix and production for GM and Ford could actually be reduced if the new OEM's are successful.

 

Further adventures to follow!

[jpd80]

12 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

It's been widely reported for some time that BEV vehicle assembly will be less labor intensive which will make upcoming UAW contract negotiations that much more interesting. I'd expect that the contract issues will be more focused on protecting job security for BEV component production rather than plant assembly operations. Tesla's expertise is not in vehicle assembly, so I doubt that comparing previous production at the plant is appropriate. 

 

The plant production matrix may change as a result of the transition from ICE to BEV production changes over the next few years. Regardless, the overall size of the market is not likely to change to any large degree meaning that the sales mix and production for GM and Ford could actually be reduced if the new OEM's are successful.

 

Further adventures to follow!

It’s the perfect opportunity to refocus Ford and the UAW on bringing  more sub assembly/ component work back under Ford control. That becomes sustainable jobs well into the future.

 

while the construction sequence might be similar to an ICE plant, I have a hunch that Ford will be looking to shorten the build time in BEV plants as much as possible. It’s a great opportunity to look at every step of the process and make it faster…….this is where a century of building cars and knowing the most efficient ways plays right into Ford’s wheelhouse.

Edited December 20, 2021 by jpd80

[Footballfan]

12 hours ago, ice-capades said:

 

It's been widely reported for some time that BEV vehicle assembly will be less labor intensive which will make upcoming UAW contract negotiations that much more interesting. I'd expect that the contract issues will be more focused on protecting job security for BEV component production rather than plant assembly operations. Tesla's expertise is not in vehicle assembly, so I doubt that comparing previous production at the plant is appropriate. 

 

The plant production matrix may change as a result of the transition from ICE to BEV production changes over the next few years. Regardless, the overall size of the market is not likely to change to any large degree meaning that the sales mix and production for GM and Ford could actually be reduced if the new OEM's are successful.

 

Further adventures to follow!

I think the focus will be on protecting both.  Assembly operations are usually the largest employment-wise in Ford's manufacturing footprint. 

[justins]

1 hour ago, Footballfan said:

I think the focus will be on protecting both.  Assembly operations are usually the largest employment-wise in Ford's manufacturing footprint. 

No way everyone gets to keep their job in the transition to EV. No way the unions will get to stay happy here. And that will cost all legacy auto makers big time.