Ford CEO Jim Farley Says Company Lost Billions on Sedans

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, BoomerSooner said:

Ford lost billions of dollars on sedans. So, they discontinued them.  Instead, Ford introduced its own EVs.  And, is soon to introduce even more battery powered vehicles.  Yet, according to what I've read, the e-division has lost $15 billion (with a "b") over the last three years. If ICE sedans were abandoned due to excessive losses, why is Ford doubling down on EVs? I, for one, only drive golf carts on golf courses.  I don't need a glorified golf cart for the highways and streets.  

 

But yet have you even driven an EV? Sounds like you already have your mind made up before even trying it.

So its pointless to even have this discussion with you because you assumed its nothing more then a golf cart.

 

[DeluxeStang]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

But yet have you even driven an EV? Sounds like you already have your mind made up before even trying it.

So its pointless to even have this discussion with you because you assumed its nothing more then a golf cart.

 

I always see people likening EVs to golf carts as well, it's such a lazy argument. Last time I checked, gas powered lawnmowers were a thing. Yet it would be ridiculous for me to compared a mustang GT to a lawnmower because they both share the same basic fuel type, but that's exactly what the people comparing cars to golf carts do because they're both battery powered. 

[akirby]

4 hours ago, BoomerSooner said:

Ford lost billions of dollars on sedans. So, they discontinued them.  Instead, Ford introduced its own EVs.  And, is soon to introduce even more battery powered vehicles.  Yet, according to what I've read, the e-division has lost $15 billion (with a "b") over the last three years. If ICE sedans were abandoned due to excessive losses, why is Ford doubling down on EVs? I, for one, only drive golf carts on golf courses.  I don't need a glorified golf cart for the highways and streets.  

They did not lose billions on sedans.  They just weren’t very profitable and the market was shrinking so they shifted resources to Ranger, Bronco, Bronco Sport and Maverick in addition to EVs.  EVs are still a growing segment even if it slowed down and the reason it’s losing money is its engineering new vehicles and batteries and building factories that are not yet generating any revenue.  
 

Maybe you and Joe should go share all your misinformation and EV hatred with each other.

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

Do not sell the new Ford CE1 short...just because you don't like an EV, does not mean everybody agrees with you. The losses you trot out include the costs associated with ramping up a new way of designing, building, selling and the "after sale" associated with EV....Ford was smart to break them out as separate entities, not for you to pick apart, but to honestly show investors where the gains and losses are....I see those losses going away soon as Ford puts the EV market on it's ear moving forward. 

This. People need to realize basically every business/product operates at a loss for a time, the more you invest, the longer it generally takes to recoup those losses and start turning a profit. Ford's invested billions of dollars in EVs and yet people can't figure out why it's taking years for them to become profitable, which is ridiculous. 

 

It's the same mentality as KFC spending a billion dollars on a new factory, and when they first open, and sell their first item, reporters write articles saying KFC loses a billion dollars on every item they sell. It's just not true. 

[AM222]

On 10/3/2025 at 11:34 PM, DeluxeStang said:

It's so wild to me that I see Farley being attacked so often yet Hackett always seems to get a pass when most of the issues Ford has right now are because of him. 

Because Jim Farley has been CEO since 2020, and we're in the last quarter of 2025 and bad decisions are still being made.

[fordmantpw]

4 minutes ago, AM222 said:

Because Jim Farley has been CEO since 2020, and we're in the last quarter of 2025 and bad decisions are still being made.

 

It's so easy for us to sit here and say what the bad decisions are, LONG after the decisions were made and the consequences have shown up due to the world completely changing in the past 5 years.

[AM222]

5 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

It's so easy for us to sit here and say what the bad decisions are, LONG after the decisions were made and the consequences have shown up due to the world completely changing in the past 5 years.

Ford is killing their profitable models one by one and replacing them with overpriced VW-based EVs that aren't doing well. The latest victim is the Focus and soon the Escape/Kuga will go.

 

Hyundai for example has expanded their EV lineup faster than Ford and at the same time, they have new ICE/hybrids that allow them to adjust when the market shifts. 

Edited October 7 by AM222

[fordmantpw]

28 minutes ago, AM222 said:

Ford is killing their profitable models one by one and replacing them with overpriced VW-based EVs that aren't doing well. The latest victim is the Focus and soon the Escape/Kuga will go.

 

Hyundai for example has expanded their EV lineup faster than Ford and at the same time, they have new ICE/hybrids that allow them to adjust when the market shifts. 

 

I don't disagree with you, but you do realize those decisions were made 5 years ago, right?  You say they are still making bad decisions, but those decisions were made a long time ago when it seemed like the right thing to do.  I don't think that same decision would have been made if the markets were then what they are now.  We can see the past, but they couldn't see the future.  That's why it's easy for us to say they were bad decisions.

[rmc523]

1 hour ago, AM222 said:

Ford is killing their profitable models one by one and replacing them with overpriced VW-based EVs that aren't doing well. The latest victim is the Focus and soon the Escape/Kuga will go.

 

Hyundai for example has expanded their EV lineup faster than Ford and at the same time, they have new ICE/hybrids that allow them to adjust when the market shifts. 

 

At this point, they're stuck with the VW approach until they can change over.  I would have to imagine that as CE1 gets going, that they'll transition to it instead of going with the rebadged VW products.   If not, then that's just stupid, IMO.

[AM222]

2 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

I don't disagree with you, but you do realize those decisions were made 5 years ago, right?  You say they are still making bad decisions, but those decisions were made a long time ago when it seemed like the right thing to do.  I don't think that same decision would have been made if the markets were then what they are now.  We can see the past, but they couldn't see the future.  That's why it's easy for us to say they were bad decisions.

I know Ford can make changes like cancel or delay EV projects like the 3-row electric SUV. Why can't they do the same for the cancelation Escape/Kuga? Other manufacturers have decided to keep their ICE/hybrids and sell them alongside their EVs, Ford could have done the same.

Edited October 7 by AM222
Typo correction

[akirby]

8 minutes ago, AM222 said:

That's the problem, they set things in stone so far into the future that they can't adapt to the changing market. Other manufacturers have decided to keep their ICE/hybrids alongside the EVs, Ford could have done the same.

This I agree with.  They try to do everything on a shoestring budget with existing resources instead of hedging their bets and keeping options open.   I also think high warranty costs are making it even harder.

[rmc523]

45 minutes ago, AM222 said:

I know Ford can make changes like cancel or delay EV projects like the 3-row electric SUV. Why can't they do the same for the cancelation Escap/Kuga? Other manufacturers have decided to keep their ICE/hybrids and sell them alongside their EVs, Ford could have done the same.

 

31 minutes ago, akirby said:

This I agree with.  They try to do everything on a shoestring budget with existing resources instead of hedging their bets and keeping options open.   I also think high warranty costs are making it even harder.

 

Yup, because they back themselves in a corner factory wise by operating on such a narrow window planning-wise where everything has to line up only one way, otherwise you have to blow everything up.

They don't have a plan B for CE1 production, which forces out Escape/Corsair.

 

Meanwhile, what's the deal with Cuahtitlan (I can never spell that name right)?  There's no way Mach E production takes up its capacity right?  Or is there enough additional global volume that it's "ok"?

Edited October 7 by rmc523

[AM222]

17 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

There's no way Mach E production takes up its capacity right?  Or is there enough additional global volume that it's "ok"?

Two of the latest additional markets for the Mach E is the Philippines and Vietnam. Of course, it's more of a niche premium model in those markets, so I'm not expecting high sales numbers.

[fordmantpw]

1 hour ago, AM222 said:

I know Ford can make changes like cancel or delay EV projects like the 3-row electric SUV. Why can't they do the same for the cancelation Escape/Kuga? Other manufacturers have decided to keep their ICE/hybrids and sell them alongside their EVs, Ford could have done the same.

 

Yeah, I wish they could have done that, and I think it would have made much more sense.  However, it's much easier to cancel something (just pay $$$) than it is to un-cancel.  You have to line up suppliers that may have already moved on since they were expecting to lose the business, and at that point, it may be better just to cancel and cut your losses.  Part of it may be the way Ford squeezes their suppliers so much.

[DeluxeStang]

4 hours ago, AM222 said:

Because Jim Farley has been CEO since 2020, and we're in the last quarter of 2025 and bad decisions are still being made.

But many of the bad decisions still being made, like the VW shared EV platform that lead to the lackluster Capri and explorer. That decision was made earlier in 2020, before Farley became the CEO I believe. The quality and recall issues were already bad before he took over. 

 

He's not perfect, but he's the one who put together this skunkworks team that's seeming like they're gonna really benefit Ford moving forward. He's doing more to capitalize on highly profitable commercial and software products, and he's enhancing Ford's enthusiasts lineup, which is both profitable, and a reputation booster for the brand. He's making a lot of smart moves. 

 

I question him getting rid of the edge, escape, focus, fusion, fiesta, and Tarus. But this almost feels like a strategic retreat to me, like they aren't exiting these segments forever, just until they can find a way to re-enter them with more captivating, profitable, and emotional products. 

[AM222]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

I question him getting rid of the edge, escape, focus, fusion, fiesta, and Tarus. But this almost feels like a strategic retreat to me, like they aren't exiting these segments forever, just until they can find a way to re-enter them with more captivating, profitable, and emotional products. 

Globally, it's the B-segment (subcompact) and C-segment (compact) that are the most important.
That would be models like the Fiesta & EcoSport, and Focus & Escape.

Ford has this stupid idea about reserving interesting designs for icon models and making mainstream models look bland.  Ford's design studio and Australia and China have done a much better job in coming up with interesting looking cars. 

Edited October 7 by AM222

[DeluxeStang]

42 minutes ago, AM222 said:

Globally, it's the B-segment (subcompact) and C-segment (compact) that are the most important.
That would be models like the Fiesta & EcoSport, and Focus & Escape.

Ford has this stupid idea about reserving interesting designs for icon models and making mainstream models look bland.  Ford's design studio and Australia and China have done a much better job in coming up with interesting looking cars. 

We can debate if not bringing the new Mondeo to the states is a mistake or not, but I believe not bringing the evos was a missed opportunity. Ford may have to redesign the front fascia to better suit American design taste, but the rest looks great. 

 

I agree, Ford talks about boring products and getting rid of them. I say just make your boring products cooler instead of walking away from all those segments. Like for instance, instead of giving us a new hatchback that's a generic looking blob, I've gone to bat for the idea of Ford offering a new hatchback that takes inspiration from something like the 90s escorts, but takes it even further, flared fenders, a sporty roofline, dynamic proportions, etc. 

 

It would appeal to enthusiasts but even the toned down more affordable models would appeal to casual consumers better than the focus and fiesta did by virtue of being a more pleasing all around package. 

[Joe771476]

They've lost billions on EV's and recalls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[akirby]

27 minutes ago, Joe771476 said:

They've lost billions on EVs

They invested billions on EVs that aren’t yet for sale.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

They invested billions on EVs that aren’t yet for sale.

I genuinely don't know how people struggle so much to comprehend this. I don't have the numbers, I suspect the only people who really know how much Ford makes on their EVs are Ford themselves, but I'm willing to bet Ford doesn't lose a ton of money on the mach-e or lightning, hell, they might even break even or make a small profit. 

 

The significant losses are attributed to EV development, and building factories that aren't even turning out EVs yet. Anyone who knows anything about product development knows getting started, and creating the product are the most expensive parts. Once the factories are built, and the products are engineered and being sold, if you did you're job right, you're in the way to be profitable down the road. 

[Trader 10]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I genuinely don't know how people struggle so much to comprehend this. I don't have the numbers, I suspect the only people who really know how much Ford makes on their EVs are Ford themselves, but I'm willing to bet Ford doesn't lose a ton of money on the mach-e or lightning, hell, they might even break even or make a small profit. 

 

The significant losses are attributed to EV development, and building factories that aren't even turning out EVs yet. Anyone who knows anything about product development knows getting started, and creating the product are the most expensive parts. Once the factories are built, and the products are engineered and being sold, if you did you're job right, you're in the way to be profitable down the road. 

You can’t just dismiss Ford’s EV losses as no big deal. As JPD80 has pointed out they have reached at least $11 billion. This has hurt Ford badly and I’m sure is a major reason new products (C2) are so slow or nonexistent. A lot of the costs of the EV program (factories for example) are capitalized over many years. I’m not an accountant and don’t know over how many years the auto industry depreciates fixed assets, but Ford likely has recognized less than 15% of the new factories costs to date. ‘

Edited October 20 by Trader 10

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Trader 10 said:

You can’t just dismiss Ford’s EV losses as no big deal. As JPD80 has pointed out they have reached at least $11 billion. This has hurt Ford badly and I’m sure is a major reason new products (C2) are so slow or nonexistent. A lot of the costs of the EV program (factories for example) are capitalized over many years. I’m not an accountant and don’t know over how many years the auto industry depreciates fixed assets, but Ford likely has recognized less than 15% of the new factories costs to date. ‘

It’s not a big deal IF the new EVs pan out with decent volume and profits.  It’s a gamble on the future.  We know there is a market.

 

There are a lot of expenses related to EV development that’s not capitalized.

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

It’s not a big deal IF the new EVs pan out with decent volume and profits.  It’s a gamble on the future.  We know there is a market.

 

There are a lot of expenses related to EV development that’s not capitalized.

Took a 1.9 billion charge last year due to cancellation of 3- row utility, people are suggesting that more write downs will be coming next year but hard to know if thats just paper write down or a serious loss in actual value of assets. Either way, I suspect For will look for every tax write down it can get.

 

Always find it funny when a CEO says Ford lost billions on sedans, as if it was a victim and the  customers faults that they didn’t like what was being manufactured. In saying that, I am surprised at how rapidly GM gapped Ford on producing utilities in Mexico while shuttering car plants in USA. In comparison, Ford looked like it was standing still…

Edited October 20 by jpd80

[Enviro5609]

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Took a 1.9 billion charge last year due to cancellation of 3- row utility, people are suggesting that more write downs will be coming next year but hard to know if thats just paper write down or a serious loss in actual value of assets. Either way, I suspect For will look for every tax write down it can get.

 

Always find it funny when a CEO says Ford lost billions on sedans, as if it was a victim and the  customers faults that they didn’t like what was being manufactured. In saying that, I am surprised at how rapidly GM gapped Ford on producing utilities in Mexico while shuttering car plants in USA. In comparison, Ford looked like it was standing still…

 

Absolutely re: self inflicted wound vs being a victim.

 

How much of those billions are attributable to the PowerShift transmission in the Focus and Fiesta, when they could have just used a regular 6 speed auto like the European models and eaten the 1 mpg hit to CAFE at the time?
 

Ford pushed a defective by design transmission that no one actually wanted, killed their sub compact and compact brand values, kept trying to sell those cars even once it was known the automatics were not good, and then just axed the Fusion because its also a car, apparently. Killing the Taurus and Fiesta to pair down to the Focus and Fusion would have made sense, and probably still freed up enough space for Bronco Sport and Maverick if they did it strategically. Now they've also killed the Edge and the Escape, and have no replacement vehicle to offer anyone who doesn't want a full size or off road SUV (or a Mustang). 

 

A series of self inflicted wounds. But no, it was the market that killed the cars. Not Ford. 

[jpd80]

On 10/8/2025 at 12:18 AM, rmc523 said:

 

 

Yup, because they back themselves in a corner factory wise by operating on such a narrow window planning-wise where everything has to line up only one way, otherwise you have to blow everything up.

They don't have a plan B for CE1 production, which forces out Escape/Corsair.

Ford is making a big hoopla out of CE1 because its mass roll out plan for  BEV F150 is looking decidedly over blown.

Nobody really knows if enough buyers will be interested in the new mid sized BEVs but really what else can Ford do?

 

 

On 10/8/2025 at 12:18 AM, rmc523 said:

Meanwhile, what's the deal with Cuahtitlan (I can never spell that name right)?  There's no way Mach E production takes up its capacity right?  Or is there enough additional global volume that it's "ok"?

Back  when Ford delayed the three row BEV the first time, that was to give Mache more production space and to give battery production capacity over to e-Transit.

Edited October 20 by jpd80