Ford Could Reintroduce Entry Level Vehicles Across The Globe

[Andrew L]

19 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

The average price of a new car is around $48K and if you look at current entry level products, they don't sell in the numbers like say the Escort did in the 1980s (which where most likely being fleet dumped anyways) because they are smaller vehicles that don't appeal to most buyers. The used car market will cater to the low end of the market, but even then pricing is stupid-my nephew bought an Altima that was 3 years old last year and it was 20K. I remember the days of the early 1990s when a used 5 year old car was like $1000. 

 

Luxury car pricing started at 30K about 20 years ago...now that is an entry level C class CUV like the Escape Active. 

 

Yea the used car prices have not really come down at all they are still stupidly overpriced.  I keep an eye out there for fun to see what's around and some people are asking stupid numbers for junk.  I feel lucky I got my 2004 Aviator for 5k but if it was a few years ago I could have gotten it for less probably. 

[Sherminator98]

Just now, Andrew L said:

Yea the used car prices have not really come down at all they are still stupidly overpriced.  

 

Here is the problem-they won't

 

Higher prices of new cars are driving pricing of used cars higher because of trade in values need to offset the price increase. Then add in much tighter production of new cars and fleet dumping not happening like it did back in the 1990s combined with cash for clunkers about 10-15 years ago, and you destroyed the supply of used cars. 

 

I keep my cars at least 8 years or so and I was shocked at what I got for my 2006 Mustang GT when I sold it in 2018 and I made 3x on my Fusion Hybrid (got it cheap) when I sold that, but I didn't make any money on it because I had to put $$$ into fixing the brakes on it. 

[Andrew L]

4 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

cash for clunkers about 10-15 years ago, and you destroyed the supply of used cars. 

 

 

ugh I still haven't forgiven my dad for doing that program with the 94 Ford E150 conversion van they had.  I wanted to buy it off of them but he kept saying no.  It had just crossed 100k miles but it was garage kept and had no issues with it what so ever.  Inside was like a living room big dark red leather seats, a TV, a separate rear radio, the 3rd row seat could power fold into a bed, a vacuum cleaner, massaging passenger seat, radar detector, all real wood and limo lighting.  This thing was super sweet and I was driving it a while when we had to trade cars for a few months.  It would have helped me when I moved to FL I could have put a few extra things in it.  Instead he did cash for clunkers with it, I am guessing cause he thought he would get 4500 plus trade in value on a Nissan Altima Hybrid.  He kept insisting they weren't going to crush it or kill it and that the sales manager would keep it cause he kept talking about how good of condition it was in.  I looked up the vin a few months ago and sure enough it was crushed.  Conversion vans in good condition are going for stupid money now.  Not that I would have sold it but I wish I had it still to this day.  It was the ultimate road trip vehicle. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, 2005Explorer said:

Yes, it’s important for Ford to offer products that range from affordable to expensive. They don’t want to end up like Stellantis in North America with no decent affordable products left. Stellantis is failing and the only thing they’ve got left is to increase prices more than any other automaker and hope someone will buy a loaded overpriced Jeep or RAM to keep them in business. The Dodge and Chrysler brands are dead with no affordable options to bring anyone into the dealerships. The lackluster Dodge Hornet is way overpriced and nobody is buying it. Affordable, efficient models that can still turn a profit are important as a full line automaker. They are even more important to start moving BEVs at greater volume. The high end only BEV strategy worked for early adopters, but it won’t work long term. I predict Stellantis is about to find this out when they get their new high end expensive Charger with the fancy fake engine noise speakers and it doesn’t sell worth a damn.

They do need to cover a wide price range but they don’t need to overcorrect too much.   They don’t need to sell cheap stuff with almost no profit.  They do need to stay afloat if the economy takes a downturn, but breaking even on cheap cars won’t help even if sales double.  Maverick is a great example.  Another cheaper SUV based on Maverick or Longer cheaper BS would fill a void there.

 

People don’t stop buying expensive vehicles.  They just buy less of them.

[HotRunrGuy]

20 minutes ago, akirby said:

People don’t stop buying expensive vehicles.  They just buy less of them.

 

Maybe that's the master plan. Stop chasing volume numbers, operate with less employees and fewer plants. They've certainly proved they can be profitable on lower volume.

 

HRG

[T-dubz]

I’d like to see that maverick suv too. Assuming it stayed the same length as the maverick, there would be plenty of room for a 3rd row which would make it unique in the compact suv segment. 
 

1. seating for 6-7 people with ample legroom in the 3rd row

2. class leading storage/cargo space, especially with the seats folded down 

3. affordable price tag

4. Easier to park than larger full-size vehicles

 

i think a lot of people would be interested in something like that

[2005Explorer]

1 hour ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Maybe that's the master plan. Stop chasing volume numbers, operate with less employees and fewer plants. They've certainly proved they can be profitable on lower volume.

 

HRG

That seems to be the model Stellantis is going with, but I think Farley is correct that you need a wide range of models from affordable to expensive. Remember affordable models can be quite profitable. You need volume if you want to remain a relevant player in the market or you just end up with jokes like the Dodge Hornet.

 

I understand that people on this message board are not interested in affordable vehicles. Most of you can pay cash for an $80-100k vehicle and are happy to do so, but if you look at demand for attractive vehicles $35k and under it's high right now. The lots are full of very expensive full sized trucks and the affordable vehicles are flying off of them. A proper mix is important.

[akirby]

35 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said:

 

I understand that people on this message board are not interested in affordable vehicles. Most of you can pay cash for an $80-100k vehicle and are happy to do so,

Nope that’s not it at all.   It’s looking at it from a business perspective not a consumer perspective.  If you have finite resources the question is how much profit can you generate from those resources.  If you’re able to sell 300k vehicles from one plant at $4K net profit each why build 300k vehicles that only yield $1k net profit each?  Now maybe if you have excess capacity you can justify lower profit vehicles to fill in.  Or if you can’t sell enough of the higher margin vehicles.  The imports get by with cheap cars because they have global volume, lower production costs and they’ve amortized the shit out of their car platforms by making minimal changes over several decades.  So where they can make a 3% net margin on a $24k car, Ford loses money.  Partially due to legacy labor costs but also due to poor cost control on the platforms.

 

Thats why you need products like Maverick and BS where they don’t have to compete solely on price so they can maintain margins even at lower price points.  But to just throw a cheap car out that is viewed as a commodity and only sells on price is silly.

[tbone]

6 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

 

I understand that people on this message board are not interested in affordable vehicles. Most of you can pay cash for an $80-100k vehicle and are happy to do so, but if you look at demand for attractive vehicles $35k and under it's high right now. The lots are full of very expensive full sized trucks and the affordable vehicles are flying off of them. A proper mix is important.

I’m personally not interested in the affordable vehicles, but I do believe they’re important for Ford and for my kids. I’m still a firm believer that if you have a positive experience with a car purchase, the probability of you giving the first shot to that particular brand as higher.  I’m not suggesting they need to lose money on them, but they need to figure out a way to produce a desirable entry level vehicle they can make money on.  

[jpd80]

On 6/11/2024 at 10:00 PM, silvrsvt said:

 

Well the Maverick was (dismissively) a parts bin special-Escape/Kuga drivetrains and the Transit Connect "frame" improvements. 

 

If Ford wanted a cheaper C2 utility, they'd be far better off starting with the Bronco Sport with a new top hat and keeping it FWD only with just a hybrid or 1.5 I3 only. Maybe AWD, but use the cheaper/not as capable Escape system. 

As I understand it the Maverick Utility was scrapped just before design lock in

when Ford thought it could cover the market ok with just the  Pickup…

I could be wrong in this but the Utility is an “easy” derivative off more than

50% of the existing body structure…

[jpd80]

7 hours ago, T-dubz said:

I’d like to see that maverick suv too. Assuming it stayed the same length as the maverick, there would be plenty of room for a 3rd row which would make it unique in the compact suv segment. 
 

1. seating for 6-7 people with ample legroom in the 3rd row

2. class leading storage/cargo space, especially with the seats folded down 

3. affordable price tag

4. Easier to park than larger full-size vehicles

 

i think a lot of people would be interested in something like that

I’m getting a kind of Ford Flex mini me vibe, I could be on a wrong tangent here

but certainly a much better look than a 3-row Transit Connect passenger van…

[AM222]

On 6/8/2024 at 5:25 AM, joseodiaga4 said:

Those kind of products aren’t commodities? 

I think the "commodities" comment was mainly aimed at the US and Canada. The reality is many American models are too large and expensive for the rest of the world. 

Subcompacts for example are important in many parts of the world like in Europe, South America and Asia. Ford's rivals continue to build these types of vehicles. 



 

[akirby]

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

As I understand it the Maverick Utility was scrapped just before design lock in

when Ford thought it could cover the market ok with just the  Pickup…

I could be wrong in this but the Utility is an “easy” derivative off more than

50% of the existing body structure…

I don’t think they knew exactly how popular the truck would be and also how popular Bronco Sport would be.  Remember they’re all in the same factory so if you can sell 350k between the two then there is no capacity left for another utility.  Plus new Escape volume was unknown at that time.

 

I still think they should have added a second C2 plant in Mexico then they would have many more options including Edge and Nautilus.

[akirby]

12 minutes ago, AM222 said:

I think the "commodities" comment was mainly aimed at the US and Canada. The reality is many American models are too large and expensive for the rest of the world. 

Subcompacts for example are important in many parts of the world like in Europe, South America and Asia. Ford's rivals continue to build these types of vehicles. 

 

Subcompacts in North American are simply the cheapest transportation, while full sized trucks are super desirable and plentiful.  But in Europe and other parts the full sized truck market is non existent and subcompacts are desirable.

[AM222]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Subcompacts in North American are simply the cheapest transportation, while full sized trucks are super desirable and plentiful.  But in Europe and other parts the full sized truck market is non existent and subcompacts are desirable.

Pretty much. 

Ford recently started production of the right-hand drive c-segment Territory; it replaces the more expensive Escape/Kuga in some markets.  
Ford needs smaller more affordable models below it. Many rest-of-the-world markets rely on C-segment and smaller vehicles.

Edited June 13, 2024 by AM222

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I still think they should have added a second C2 plant in Mexico then they would have many more options including Edge and Nautilus.

 

But in the grand scheme of things, would they be able to fill another 250K+ of C or CD sized products in a plant if they did that? At least in North America or South America. 
 

I think Ford has figured out that they rather sell all what they can make vs increasing market share by building another plant to add another 200K or so of capacity. 

I'd expect in the future some plants get realigned with new plants that are being built now for EVs. 

Edited June 13, 2024 by silvrsvt

[ice-capades]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I still think they should have added a second C2 plant in Mexico then they would have many more options including Edge and Nautilus.

 

Ford decided against the new, additional plant in San Luis Potosi but should have immediately explored the option of resurrecting the agreement for the plant once the UAW negotiations lead to the recent strike. If that site is no longer available, Ford should be exploring expansion of their existing plants in Mexico or other suitable locations in Mexico. Unfortunately, it will take years to expand an existing plant or build a new plant for expanded production of existing or new models.   

[ice-capades]

17 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But in the grand scheme of things, would they be able to fill another 250K+ of C or CD sized products in a plant if they did that? At least in North America or South America. 
 

I think Ford has figured out that they rather sell all what they can make vs increasing market share by building another plant to add another 200K or so of capacity. 

I'd expect in the future some plants get realigned with new plants that are being built now for EVs. 

 

With the construction of new plants dedicated to BEV production, at some point Ford is going to have excess plant capacity from ICE plants that are idled or producing far fewer vehicles. 

[akirby]

28 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But in the grand scheme of things, would they be able to fill another 250K+ of C or CD sized products in a plant if they did that? At least in North America or South America. 

Absolutely.  Edge/Nautilus plus a Maverick utility (or LWB fwd Bronco Sport) could easily fill 2 shifts with room for Escape and Corsair if they want to free up Louisville.  Plus Zephyr and Zephyr Sport if they don’t want to put them in FR.

[rmc523]

21 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But in the grand scheme of things, would they be able to fill another 250K+ of C or CD sized products in a plant if they did that? At least in North America or South America. 
 

I think Ford has figured out that they rather sell all what they can make vs increasing market share by building another plant to add another 200K or so of capacity. 

I'd expect in the future some plants get realigned with new plants that are being built now for EVs. 

 

I think that's where the additional product would come into play - the lower volume models like Evos, Zephyr, etc. that are already designed in ROW but aren't here because of plant space.

[Andrew L]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

I think that's where the additional product would come into play - the lower volume models like Evos, Zephyr, etc. that are already designed in ROW but aren't here because of plant space.

 

They could go to Flat Rock though they should be short enough.  Flat Rock is under utilized

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Andrew L said:

 

Flat Rock is severely under utilized

FTFY.  Seriously - make it a full model capable plant and use it or move Mustang and close it already.

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, Andrew L said:

 

They could go to Flat Rock though they should be short enough.  Flat Rock is under utilized

There were mentions of some other product, but Fuzzy said he hasn't heard really anything about in in recent months. So whatever that is, it's probably been canceled, or it's something so special that Ford is gonna do whatever they can to keep it under wraps. 

 

Farley is openly discussing multiple mustang body styles at this point, so it could be something pertaining to that, or it could be the c2 Mondeo. Perhaps something else entirely, most likely car based. 

[rmc523]

13 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

There were mentions of some other product, but Fuzzy said he hasn't heard really anything about in in recent months. So whatever that is, it's probably been canceled, or it's something so special that Ford is gonna do whatever they can to keep it under wraps. 

 

Farley is openly discussing multiple mustang body styles at this point, so it could be something pertaining to that, or it could be the c2 Mondeo. Perhaps something else entirely, most likely car based. 

 

I wonder if they'll do a Fox-body style liftback (or Evos/4-series GT, for more similar reference) as a Mustang "sedan" instead of a traditional sedan.  This would let them keep the same profile while retaining some practicality.