Guest Sixcav Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Sadly, you have made the mistake of assuming that a person is what he posesses, or what formal education he has completed. Yeah that's me!!! LMAO, what a moron. Don't ever go into demographics Richie, you suck at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 The average household income in America is $40,000. So right out of the gate Ford is overestimating the financial capabilities of the "average" American, their proclaimed target demographic. As a result, they price their vehicles too high to accommodate that false demographic, as I've said many times before. This might bite me in the ass, but you're thinking "all Americans"; Ford only cares about "Americans who can buy a new car." If you think that the guy who spit in your burger at McDonald's -- making $9k a year -- can go out and buy a new car, I'd like to hear it. There are a few reasons why used car lots exist: One, some folks say, "screw the markup - a new car loses half its depreciation once I drive it off the lot" and go used. Two, some folks say, "I want a big car for my needs but I can't buy that new $30k Impala or Camry." and Three, some folks need a ride but can't afford the $10k for the cheapest basic new car. If you think Ford is pricing their vehicles too high, then would you agree that if Ford cut the costs of producing vehicles (cutting plant worker labor from $70k a year to $30k a year, for example) it would be acceptable? In other words, you talk about lowering prices but where would you cut from? Cut from the overall quality to lower the price, and the already negative public will say, "oh no, Ford is crap - I'll buy Toyota" Cut from the workers, and the UAW will raise its fists. Move plants to Mexico for the cheap worker and you lose the "Buy American" appeal that apparently gives Mr. Lust4Life (Ford's previous target buyer) a desire to buy. I really don't know how your fight for lower prices wouldn't result in a lesser product, which is exactly what Ford does not need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 (edited) Ford Motor sells roughly 1 million cars a year. In 2005 their net profit was 2 billion. You do the math. I understand that some of it will result from "other than car sales" sources but damn. Additionally, I'm not singling out Ford in this. I think across the board new cars are just flat out too damned expensive. Look I know they do a lot of good for the communities they are in and all that. Thanks, we appreciate it. But think about it. How much does it cost them to sponsor all of these various race teams, for GM and Ford and Toyota and so on. Everything from NASCAR to Rally Racing, they dump many, many millions into it. Where do you think they get the money for that? And that's just racing. Think about all the other stuff they sponsor. How much does it cost Pontiac to give away a brand new G6 to everyone in Oprahs audience? Hannity is giving away a car everyday from GM on his program over the next few weeks. On and on. They can afford this easily. How? I'd really, really like to find out just how much it cost's an automaker on average to make a given car and then how much they mark it up when they move it to a dealership. I know that at the dealership the mark up isn't much. But the mark up from the factory to the dealer? How much is that? I've tried to find that information on the net and I haven't been able to. For instance, how much does it cost Ford to make a Mustang and then how much do they sell it to the dealer for. One thing I know for sure and this is this, the labor hours invested are the same from the base V6 Mustang right on up to the GT500. I know this from watching the video on the GT500 where they clearly stated "It can't take any longer to build a GT500 then it does to make a base model Mustang." So right there I know the labor hours are the same no matter what. So how much does it cost FOMOCO to make a Mustang and how much do they mark it up when they sell it to XYZ Ford dealer? I'm guessing at profits of 2 billion a year off of 1 million or so sold cars, the answer is a lot. Edited October 23, 2006 by Sixcav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 (edited) Ford Motor sells roughly 1 million cars a year. 1 million cars. Give or take 6 million. Margin of error of +/- 600% Don't you go into demographics either. BTW Pioneer, Ford spends more on gas for the vehicles it sells, than on Mulally's salary. Unless Ford routinely ships out vehicles with less than $5 worth of gas in them, on a global average. And that's just his first year salary. It goes down after that. And most of that $35M isn't even in cash money. Maybe it's more like a dollar a car in cash. Actually, I think it's even less. Argue inequality of compensation using any metric but its effect on the cost of goods sold. Edited October 23, 2006 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roadrunner Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 << Think about all the other stuff they sponsor. How much does it cost Pontiac to give away a brand new G6 to everyone in Oprahs audience? >> Half of a sale is from advertising and image pandering. That's not based on anything, but advertising is a necessary evil. Think about it: If the G6 had not been given away on Oprah, would people even consider the G6? Oprah + car = good mental image for product's target buyer. The investment Ford has in NASCAR Cup racing is dubious considering it is the weakest competitor of the three in the sport, IMHO, however they need to sell their cars to a market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) 6 Million cars Richie, really? Did you think I wouldn't check man? In 2006 their total car and truck sales was 2,286,809 and in 2005 it was 2,498,717. That's a far cry from 6 million Richie. If you're going to lie about something make sure it's something that can't be verified. By the way Richie, since you think you're so smart and know so much about this company, why don't you tell us all the per unit cost to Ford to build a Mustang? Got any idea? How much is Ford marking it up to the dealers? Just as an example. Edited October 24, 2006 by Sixcav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Worldwide vehicle unit sales of cars and trucks by automotive business unit (in thousands) 2K5 2K4 The Americas 3,779 3,915 Ford Europe and PAG 2,542 2,476 Ford Asia Pacific and Africa/Mazda 497 407 So, Sixcav, in 2K5, 6,818,000 vehicles were sold. Why, that's almost 7 MILLION vehicles, lol. Richie wasn't lying after all, bunkie. You have such a small mind, and such a barren spirit. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilge Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 So how much does it cost FOMOCO to make a Mustang and how much do they mark it up when they sell it to XYZ Ford dealer? Have seen this statement several times, couple in this thread and other threads. If Ford sells the vehicles to the dealer, then in my pea brain, the dealer is Fords customer. And the end buyer is the dealers customer. If the dealer does not have to buy the vehicle and pay interest, the dealer lot is just a holding tank for the product and the dealer employees should work for FoMoCo, not XYZ dealership. Think Ford might want to ask the dealer, which is Fords customer, what they would like to purchase from Ford based on what the dealer has learned from their customer... just mumbling. Thinking this theory is only good for high dollar products. A real estate agent usually does not own the homes they are trying to sell. But Best Buy or grocery store probably does have to purchase all the products it sells before the retail market buys the product, but the markup for Best Buy or grocery store is more than the markup on homes or cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 If the dealer does not have to buy the vehicle and pay interest, the dealer lot is just a holding tank for the product and the dealer employees should work for FoMoCo, not XYZ dealership. Yeah I think that idea has been knocked around before. I'm not sure who was against it most, the dealerships or Ford. But still no answer to the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Yeah I think that idea has been knocked around before. I'm not sure who was against it most, the dealerships or Ford. But still no answer to the question. I thought there was some sort of law that prevented this from happening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilge Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I thought there was some sort of law that prevented this from happening? Didn't Ford buy a bunch of dealerships back in the late 90's, seems like around Denver or maybe KC? Then proved that they could not run dealerships at that time and had to sell em all back to private ownership. Would think that would teach Ford to listen to the dealer because Ford doesn't know much about the dealerships customer satisfaction, except to send em a questionaire that asks about the 'sales experience'? instead of sending a questionaire that asks about the customer view of the product and what could be done to make the product more appealing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 The dealerships should be an extension of the company, which would give direct control over customer service and other intangibles that can make or break a carmaker in any given market. There are three Ford dealers in my immediate area...and I won't give two of 'em the time of day after having to deal with 'em. While this speaks well for the third (Rich Ford in Albuquerque), it means that 2/3 of Ford's distributors in my area need improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Didn't Ford buy a bunch of dealerships back in the late 90's, seems like around Denver or maybe KC? Then proved that they could not run dealerships at that time and had to sell em all back to private ownership. Would think that would teach Ford to listen to the dealer because Ford doesn't know much about the dealerships customer satisfaction, except to send em a questionaire that asks about the 'sales experience'? instead of sending a questionaire that asks about the customer view of the product and what could be done to make the product more appealing. But on the flip side of this you have greedy salesmen who only piss off your customer and add a huge mark up on limited production/hot vehicles. Its not a pretty site. Thankfully getting A plan cuts though most of the BS you have to deal with getting a new car. How hard is it to go in order a car and get it at MSRP or even slightly cheaper? No it has to become this long drawn out process where it seems like your getting fucked no what what you do. I think people at import dealerships take it up the ass since they want that Import experience :banmolest: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sixcav Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 What about combining the two? What if when you open a Ford dealer the service department belongs to FOMOCO, it's employees are paid by Ford and it's controlled by Ford to address the sort of bad service issues like Zana had and those that are rampant throughout many dealerships and not just Ford dealers. The sales side of the dealership still belongs to the private owner. This gives Ford the company the advantage of dictating where dealerships will and won't be opened because they control the service department. If they feel theres no need for another Ford dealer in Sante Fe for instance then they just say, "Nope we aren't going to fund a service department there and without one of those you can't open a dealership." Now I know it's not a perfect plan, it's just an idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Changing state and federal franchise laws is all but impossible. The NADA lobby is far too powerful, and individual dealerships are often forces to be reckoned with in their respective state legislative districts. You can forget about 'forcing' any change at all onto this system. It's not going to happen. Save your breath. And Ford is not buying dealerships. GM had to pay millions to shutter Oldsmobile. Short of bankruptcy protection, Ford can't do otherwise, in closing Mercury or Lincoln, or buying out dealerships or service departments (parts and service is where most factory dealerships make their big profits). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 (edited) IIRC, last year, GM paid out 900+ million $ to settle with Olds dealers. Ya gotta wonder. If GM had spent that money a decade ago on an engine family to replace the 90° 3.8 Buick-derived V-6 that was obsolete even then, maybe Olds would still be around. In RWD apps, it was great, but ghastly in FWD. Finally, in 2006, they have a 3.6 that seems to be adequate. Just think of the money they saved. Edited October 25, 2006 by Edstock 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.