Jump to content

Ford to unveil radical new business plan to improve quality and profitability


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Given that Ford has informed us that IC engines of less than Super Duty scale have maybe a decade left to live, a totally new 3/4 cylinder is a pretty unlikely bad investment. That looks a lot like the 2 liter Mazda based 4 in my Transit Connect, but for the turbo and longitude mounts. More like a PR flacks overly generous description of the usual mid life updates, sort of like how VW Group has "completely redesigned" the 1.5 to 2 liter  4 that dates back to the "B1" Audi 80 of a half century ago but it still has the same bore center spacing...

Another thing i noticed, aside from having the same stroke as the 2.5 Duratec, the oil filler cap is also located in the same spot as the 2.5.

2-5 Duratec.JPG

Edited by AM222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bob Rosadini said:

 

Hmnn  In this age of flat org charts, too bad that quality wasn't included/demanded of those already on the payroll.  When  Mulally landed Farley as he was considered the ultimate marketing guy I think, perhaps that "marketing strength" was valued more by Bill Ford more so than say someone who knew what it took to build a good product.  You Ford insiders have any idea who that may have been?

He's over at Borg Warner, now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2023 at 2:46 PM, Harley Lover said:

Here's a transcript of the 'fireside chat' - I hope everyone reads through this and come back with commentary and thoughts:  https://seekingalpha.com/article/4578609-ford-motor-company-f-presents-wolfe-research-global-auto-auto-tech-and-auto-consumer

 

It seems like the short term is primarily focused on fixing QC issues and fixing supply chain issues.

 

Also mentioned was the big reason why Ford spilt into different groups was the 92% of investors thought they couldn't make profits like Tesla does. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2023 at 9:09 PM, silvrsvt said:

Also mentioned was the big reason why Ford spilt into different groups was the 92% of investors thought they couldn't make profits like Tesla does. 

 

Jim Farley's recognition of Tesla's almost permanent advantage in profitability and cost competitiveness over any legacy automaker in the world is in itself huge. As mackinaw said, Farley is really committed to changing Ford for the better. I hope that by the end of this decade, Ford is no longer a company that careens from one crisis to another.

 

Rod Lache

One, maybe Jim, you can answer this question on Model E and how this is different. So, we host this weekly webinar on Thursday, is called Car Talk, and we asked our listeners, investors, people that are here, do you think that legacy automakers generically could become cost competitive with Tesla? 100 people decided to answer the poll question, 92% said no.

James Farley

Yes, I'm with them. It's okay. I'm in the 92% camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s funny how Tesla went from losing money on car sales every year until 2 years ago to being the “most profitable” when all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k.

Also a lack of your typical updates and sheet metal changes helps also. 
 

That won’t fly as far with more competition coming into the market either. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s funny how Tesla went from losing money on car sales every year until 2 years ago to being the “most profitable” when all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k.


Or they did everything that Farley is saying Ford should do now and it's all come to fruition over the last few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:

It’s funny how Tesla went from losing money on car sales every year until 2 years ago to being the “most profitable” when all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k.

 

Tesla did not "lose money on car sales every year until 2 years ago", nor is it the case that "all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

Sounds like he's trying to copy Elon's homework, should be interesting if they can execute.

 

What Farley is doing is not copying the homework of others but attempting to do the homework in the first place and submit it on time. That's a monumental task, given the perpetual crises that afflict Ford Motor Company. But if anyone can execute, it's Jim Farley.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

Tesla did not "lose money on car sales every year until 2 years ago", nor is it the case that "all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k".


Carbon credits don’t count.  They absolutely raised prices up to $8k the last 2 years.

 

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Carbon credits don’t count.  They absolutely raised prices up to $8k the last 2 years.

 

Neither regulatory credits nor price increases, which also applied to all legacy automakers selling BEV in the same time period, are the primary reasons for Tesla's superior profitability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, akirby said:

It’s funny how Tesla went from losing money on car sales every year until 2 years ago to being the “most profitable” when all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k.


It’s not like they changed their design at all to make them simpler to build at all. It’s amazing what artificial price increases can do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

It’s amazing what artificial price increases can do. 

 

For sure. Ford for example artificially raised prices on its products multiple times in 2022 including a nearly 40% increase on certain F-150 Lightnings, only to end the year with earnings well below expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

For sure. Ford for example artificially raised prices on its products multiple times in 2022 including a nearly 40% increase on certain F-150 Lightnings, only to end the year with earnings well below expectations.


They made over $10B from vehicle sales.  The loss was from Rivian stock.  Stop twisting the facts.

 

The only things you’re allowed to post on this topic from here on are Tesla vehicle prices by year, Tesla annual profit/loss and amount of revenue from carbon credit sales since 2010.

Those are undisputed facts that cannot be argued.  Anything else is way off topic.  And even this is borderline but since you brought it up - no arguments only facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know.  I never had a lot of faith in Farley, still don't.  There was a fair amount of double talk in that presentation, and what I got out of it was he is creating a 'good Ford' (Ford E) and a 'bad Ford' (Ford Blue).  Basically saying Ford as we know it now is doomed and whatever negative situations develop from this point they will be attributable to the 'legacy' part of the business.  But the thing is Ford needs that legacy business (ICE products) to fund the transition, and Farley knows this.  The big issues are the production inefficiencies and high warranty costs/poor quality of Ford's ICE products, and there is no excuse for any of it.  If Ford Blue can't produce Ford E is in jeopardy, no matter what picture Farley wants to paint about the BEV business.  I also do not believe Ford is #1 among legacy auto manufacturers in BEV technology (I think they are about #3, still not bad).    

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 7Mary3 said:

I don't know.  I never had a lot of faith in Farley, still don't.  There was a fair amount of double talk in that presentation, and what I got out of it was he is creating a 'good Ford' (Ford E) and a 'bad Ford' (Ford Blue).  Basically saying Ford as we know it now is doomed and whatever negative situations develop from this point they will be attributable to the 'legacy' part of the business.  But the thing is Ford needs that legacy business (ICE products) to fund the transition, and Farley knows this.  The big issues are the production inefficiencies and high warranty costs/poor quality of Ford's ICE products, and there is no excuse for any of it.  If Ford Blue can't produce Ford E is in jeopardy, no matter what picture Farley wants to paint about the BEV business.  I also do not believe Ford is #1 among legacy auto manufacturers in BEV technology (I think they are about #3, still not bad).    


He’s just laying the groundwork to make Ford E different.  Remember he’s also speaking to Ford employees.  These inefficiencies and added costs in Ford Blue are taking money away from Ford E investments.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Tesla did not "lose money on car sales every year until 2 years ago", nor is it the case that "all that changed is that low supply jacked up prices for everyone and allowed Tesla to increase prices by up to $8k".

Tesla not advertising has saved them billions. Hard to imagine a legacy automaker doing that.

In 2021, Ford invested $3.1B in advertising (worldwide). $1.98B was spent on advertising in the US.

Edited by AM222
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

There was a fair amount of double talk in that presentation, and what I got out of it was he is creating a 'good Ford' (Ford E) and a 'bad Ford' (Ford Blue).  Basically saying Ford as we know it now is doomed and whatever negative situations develop from this point they will be attributable to the 'legacy' part of the business. 

 

Good points 7Mary3. I don't think Farley and Lawler are creating a 'good Ford' and 'bad Ford' with Model e and Blue, that duality simply reflects the current state of a global automotive industry that is transitioning to 100% electric vehicles. The ultimate goal for Farley, Lawler, and other Ford executives is to no longer straddle the old and new worlds of the auto industry (to paraphrase what Jim Hackett said a few years ago). Hopefully in the next few years we'll hear about Ford's strategy to wind down and/or spin off Ford Blue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


It’s not like they changed their design at all to make them simpler to build at all. It’s amazing what artificial price increases can do. 


Remember the part in the article where Farley wants to eliminate bracket engineers and make pieces/fasteners have multiple uses? This is what he's talking about and TSLA is far ahead of everyone else on reducing manufacturing cost because of things like this, even if you guys don't like the company. https://electrek.co/2021/10/05/tesla-building-model-y-bodies-single-front-rear-castings-manufacturing-first/

  • Like 1
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...