And The Award For Worst CEO Goes To...

[jpd80]

Interesting discussion point:
If Ford was completely about profit, it would shrink the business to just F Series and large SUV plants

and skip the rest…….maybe keep Explorer/Aviator, Transit and T6 products.

The business would be highly profitable with a very small manufacturing and engineering footprint

so why don’t they?

 

Edited December 20, 2025 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

14 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

so why don’t they?

 

CAFE and other tax on engine sizes in other parts of the world. 

[akirby]

16 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Interesting discussion point:
If Ford was completely about profit, it would shrink the business to just F Series and large SUV plants

and skip the rest…….maybe keep Explorer/Aviator, Transit and T6 products.

The business would be highly profitable with a very small manufacturing and engineering footprint

so why don’t they?

 

Sunk costs, dealers, Bill Ford, potential future EPA regs, UAW

[Biker16]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Interesting discussion point:
If Ford was completely about profit, it would shrink the business to just F Series and large SUV plants

and skip the rest…….maybe keep Explorer/Aviator, Transit and T6 products.

The business would be highly profitable with a very small manufacturing and engineering footprint

so why don’t they?

 

 

To be clear, reducing Ford to only these vehicles would not increase profits but would increase margins.

 

This could only be true if every vehicle Ford produce except these lost money.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

 

To be clear, reducing Ford to only these vehicles would not increase profits but would increase margins.

 

This could only be true if every vehicle Ford produce except these lost money.

And to be clear back to you, most of those other vehicles add little profit beyond

recovering the already spent development and production costs. And then warranty costs on top.

 

Opportunity cost.

If Ford didn’t have to spend money on developing and producing those other vehicles,

it could invest the money  elsewhere for a better recovery, like paying down other debts…

Edited December 21, 2025 by jpd80

[Texasota]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

CAFE and other tax on engine sizes in other parts of the world. 

Exactly, and this got much worse during the previous 4 years with the CAFE requirements escalating to a point which was designed to force manufactures and buyers to EVs (a backdoor mandate). Plus having to buy carbon credits from Tesla and Rivian.

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

Sunk costs, dealers, Bill Ford, potential future EPA regs, UAW

As we’ve seen, ford can cast off $19 billion in costs when to wants to….

[ausrutherford]

The car companies reacted to Government direction, which was not the direction the market wanted. 

 

I do not blame Ford, GM, Stellantis, VW, or any other automaker for investing where they were told to invest. 

 

I blame the politicians and bureaucrats in DC and certain states that made it happen. That is where the true fault lies. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, ausrutherford said:

The car companies reacted to Government direction, which was not the direction the market wanted. 

 

I do not blame Ford, GM, Stellantis, VW, or any other automaker for investing where they were told to invest. 

 

I blame the politicians and bureaucrats in DC and certain states that made it happen. That is where the true fault lies. 

Exactly, but you can blame Ford for how they went about it.  Not doing proper due diligence with Rivian, choosing ugly 3 row utilities over edge and nautilus, overbuilding BOC for T3......

[jpd80]

6 minutes ago, akirby said:

Exactly, but you can blame Ford for how they went about it.  Not doing proper due diligence with Rivian, choosing ugly 3 row utilities over edge and nautilus, overbuilding BOC for T3......

I’m convinced that Ford senior management don’t do proper risk assessment and planning.

Everything seems ot be a binary choice, this or that when the real plan probably required

a more balanced approach. Yes, Explore BEV options but don’t cripple ICE products and drive

mor customers away.

 

One of the biggest blunders with BEV was assuming that lots of buyers would gladly pay

premium prices for BEVs when they were still in the early adopter phase. 

 

Edited December 21, 2025 by jpd80

[akirby]

7 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

I’m convinced that Ford senior management don’t do proper risk assessment and planning.

Everything seems ot be a binary choice, this or that when the real plan probably required

a more balanced approach. Yes, Explore BEV options but don’t cripple ICE products and drive

mor customers away.

 

One of the biggest blunders with BEV was assuming that lots of buyers would gladly pay

premium prices for BEVs when they were still in the early adopter phase. 

 

They certainly don't do proper risk assessment and mitigation.  They'll swing for the fences hoping for a 10% roi with no backup plan rather than settle for a solid double with 5% roi with a viable backup plan until you're sure it will succeed then go whole hog.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

They certainly don't do proper risk assessment and mitigation.  They'll swing for the fences hoping for a 10% roi with no backup plan rather than settle for a solid double with 5% roi with a viable backup plan until you're sure it will succeed then go whole hog.

This.

And my suggestion of Ford cutting Production back to just F Series and a few other vehicles

was to show in a hyperbolic way the kind of corporate thinking going on where the

accumulation of Profit from a wider range of vehicles seems to be no longer valued.

 

 

Edited December 21, 2025 by jpd80

[akirby]

23 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

where the

accumulation of Profit from a wider range of vehicles seems to be no longer valued.

A lot of that was driven by detroit owning the market and having to pay UAW workers whether they were working or not (Jobs bank) and CAFE compliance.   It was good business to have lots of models and no foreign competition.  The Asians really changed the market as did stricter CAFE regulations.  Labor cost is better but volume without profit no longer works.

[Biker16]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

A lot of that was driven by detroit owning the market and having to pay UAW workers whether they were working or not (Jobs bank) and CAFE compliance.   It was good business to have lots of models and no foreign competition.  The Asians really changed the market as did stricter CAFE regulations.  Labor cost is better but volume without profit no longer works.

 

How does this work if the UAW builds no C2 vehicles, and Ford imports these vehicles exclusively from China and Mexico 

 

It feels like an excuse, not an explanation.

[fuzzymoomoo]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

A lot of that was driven by detroit owning the market and having to pay UAW workers whether they were working or not (Jobs bank) and CAFE compliance.   It was good business to have lots of models and no foreign competition.  The Asians really changed the market as did stricter CAFE regulations.  Labor cost is better but volume without profit no longer works.

Jobs bank hasn’t existed in at least 15 years 

[akirby]

39 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Jobs bank hasn’t existed in at least 15 years 

I was referring to the 80s and 90s and I said it got better.

Edited December 22, 2025 by akirby

[Biker16]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I was referring to the 80s and 90s and I said it got better.

 

Thanks for the clarification 

 

How is what you said relevant to today's issue?

Edited December 22, 2025 by Biker16

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

 

Thanks for the clarification 

 

How is what you said relevant to today's issue?

I was explaining to jpd80 why automakers no longer want to make tons of cheap vehicles.

[Sherminator98]

15 hours ago, akirby said:

Overbuilding BOC for T3......

 

Well we finally got that extra plant Ford has may or may not needed for the past 20 years or so...

 

Till they shut down another older plant instead. 

[rmc523]

On 12/20/2025 at 2:49 PM, akirby said:

  We keep saying that over and over but you guys don't hear it.  But that's water under the bridge at this point - the question is how should Ford respond?

 

 

lately, Ford’s response has been

 

step 1 - cancel product 

step 2 - announce future product that will be canceled before launch

step 3 - ???

step 4 - profit

 

On 12/20/2025 at 4:23 PM, jpd80 said:

Interesting discussion point:
If Ford was completely about profit, it would shrink the business to just F Series and large SUV plants

and skip the rest…….maybe keep Explorer/Aviator, Transit and T6 products.

The business would be highly profitable with a very small manufacturing and engineering footprint

so why don’t they?

 

Farley may be reading this now saying “hold my beer!”