Ford S-Max Voted 2007 Car of the Year

[Edstock]

http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/count...car-of-the-year

 

The all-new Ford S-MAX has been awarded the prestigious title of 'Car of the Year 2007.'

 

The 'Car of the Year' is an international award, judged by a panel of 58 top motoring journalists from 22 European countries. Its objective is to acclaim the most outstanding new car to go on sale in the 12 months preceding the date of the title. It is organised by a group of seven leading European publications: Auto ( Italy), Autocar (Great Britain), Autopista (Spain), Auto Visie (Holland), L'Automobile Magazine (France), Stern (Germany), and Vi Bilagare (Sweden).

 

The Ford S-MAX was declared the winner following a closely fought competition in which 41 contenders for the award were reduced to a shortlist of just eight -- the Citroën C4 Picasso, Fiat Grande Punto, Ford S-MAX, Honda Civic, Opel/Vauxhall Corsa, Peugeot 207, Skoda Roomster and Volvo C30.

 

Follow link above for full article.

[ZanatWork]

Gosh...the van I've said would make a fantastic Mercury since I first saw pics of the concept?

[pcsario]

Well... DUH?

 

If you have a family, all you need is a test drive to seal the deal with something like this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

...and the reputation for excelent handling and NVH are already there, so this is a no brainer.

Edited November 13, 2006 by pcsario

[ANTAUS]

Wow, a car that people and enthusiast might probably enjoy driving...Unfortunately the logistics don't allow it to be a feasable product for the U.S. Although GM seems to be turning that way...eventually Ford catches up...

[RichardJensen]

5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1

 

And we have liftoff.

 

The official, "Why don't we have that here" chorus has started.

 

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

 

Ford needs to direct this level of attention to detail to products designed IN THE US for SALE IN THE US. They do not need to bring over strangely styled EU vehicles.

 

Meanwhile, Ford also needs to do better advertising in the EU. Pardon me, but if I'm an Italian, I don't particularly care to see "Your Life" at the top of an ad in Italian.

 

Maybe that's the reason why Ford's got all these award winning products in EU, but their market share is flat and their profits are almost non-existant.

[pcsario]

Well lets see... what would I rather like?

 

Make money, be respected and desired, or lose billions, be avoided and laughed at?

 

Sorry Richie, I know you needed to spin things quickly on this one, but that was the wrong damage control for this.

 

At least you finally admit we are right and america needs this level of attention to detail, not the half-assed efforts you pass off as flawless. ("Bububu good enough and OMG it looks like crap but it's real aluminum!!11!1")

 

Thanks to Mulally's "You guys were right, RJ was wrong"-like statements, I guess these baby steps are to be expected.

 

LOL

Edited November 13, 2006 by pcsario

[RichardJensen]

Well lets see... what would I rather like?

 

Make money, be respected and desired, or lose billions, be avoided and laughed at?

 

Sorry Richie, I know you needed to spin things quickly on this one, but that was the wrong damage control for this.

 

At least you finally admit we are right and america needs this level of attention to detail, not the half-assed efforts you pass off as flawless. ("Bububu good enough and OMG it looks like crap but it's real aluminum!!11!1")

 

Thanks to Mulally's "You guys were right, RJ was wrong"-like statements, I guess these baby steps are to be expected.

 

LOL

1) I think it's rather too early to be crowning the FoE rebound a success. Their products are far from 'desired' in many quarters, and their margins are razor thin, and they do not consistently turn a profit

 

2) The attention to detail in the Galaxy and S-Max were backed up by someone else on this board. I'm not taking your word for anything--given your willingness to distort facts and photos to 'prove' your own opinions, and you would be hard pressed to find me stating that Ford does not need to continually move things forward on interiors.

 

3) You would also be hard pressed to find me stating that Ford should keep geographically isolated architectures.

 

I think YOU'LL be in for a surprise, when Mulally refuses to bring over the FoE vehicle lineup wholesale.

[SysEng]

Make money, be respected and desired, or lose billions, be avoided and laughed at?

 

 

In this case, RJ is right. For instance, the 500 screams Eurotrash and the results are in. This S-Max is "nice", but it exudes losermobile. NOT to say that the concept couldn't be carried over with a few adjustments to the NA market mind you...

[Gnostic]

5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1

 

And we have liftoff.

 

The official, "Why don't we have that here" chorus has started.

 

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

 

Ford needs to direct this level of attention to detail to products designed IN THE US for SALE IN THE US. They do not need to bring over strangely styled EU vehicles.

 

Meanwhile, Ford also needs to do better advertising in the EU. Pardon me, but if I'm an Italian, I don't particularly care to see "Your Life" at the top of an ad in Italian.

 

Maybe that's the reason why Ford's got all these award winning products in EU, but their market share is flat and their profits are almost non-existant.

 

 

I would buy one. I looked at the Mazda5 but it was too cheap. I think the price was around $20k. But I would have spent $5k more for a nicer interior and a bit more power. I think there is a market for this type of vehicle, its not huge, but still its there.

[waymondospiff]

I would buy one. I looked at the Mazda5 but it was too cheap. I think the price was around $20k. But I would have spent $5k more for a nicer interior and a bit more power. I think there is a market for this type of vehicle, its not huge, but still its there.

Yes, a Mazda5 is quite affordable, but it's essentially an economy car with a really big backpack. I love mine. Nothing else comes close on price, features, room, and, dare I say, style.

 

This will come as no surprise, but I'm firmly in the camp of "bring it here!" Obviously pricing would be important, as this could sell in the $20-25K range - maybe with DVD & leather $28-30K or so. As far as "American" looks, detail changes to the front & rear fascias & head/tail lamp assemblies would be more than enough to make the difference - and since those are plastic pieces it would be quite simple (read "cheap.")

 

As far as market - sedans are seeing a resurgence in the market as people trade out of SUVs. A three-row, chair-height, sedan-mileage, SUV-roomy, sporty handling vehicle is exactly what the market is looking for. Three years ago "small cars" were off on the horizon. Today, small cars are the "in" thing with Fit & Yaris selling for PREMIUMS over their sticker price (why?) Looking into the horizon today, "Microvans" could quite possibly be The Next Big Thing. Mazda5 & Kia Rondo. Coming soon Honda's whatever-it-is-called. Wouldn't it be great for Ford to be LEADING a market trend instead of following or ignoring a trend?

 

This is a big opportunity. I hope Ford doesn't miss it.

--------------------------------------------------------

For anyone wondering what an S-Max is, go here:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSraxeUO-mE

 

Top Gear, People Carrier Comparison (Ford S-Max, M-B B-Class, Vauxhall Zaphira)

 

Good times.

 

Scott

 

Editted to add the youtube link.

Edited November 13, 2006 by waymondospiff

[marc-o]

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

 

I disagree: Honda first thought the Fit wouldn't sell here, plenty of people thought the Mazda5 wouldn't sell here, plenty of people thought there was no market for the Sprinter.

 

While the extent of the success of these vehicles may be debatable, they all have clear potential and it is clear in all cases new markets have been carved out.

 

This kind of vehicle would qualify as a "bold move".

[RichardJensen]

This thing is basically the Euro Ford Edge. It has only two rows of seats standard, and the optional third row is less accomodating than the Galaxy, and is built on the Euro midsize architecture (EUCD).

 

Which do you think would sell better here? The Edge or this thing?

 

IMO the answer's easy: The Edge.

 

The Edge was designed and engineered around the tastes and preferences of a core group of American consumers. The S-Max was not. Assuming Ford did its homework properly on the Edge (which seems pretty reasonable given dealer demand for the product), the Edge is a better fit for this market than the S-Max.

 

To simply assume that a product that sells reasonably well in Europe to critical accolades from European journalists would sell to similar demand and recognition stateside is to continue to play the same old Detroit game, the "Hey, market research is a bunch of baloney, I think this car is cool therefore we should build it and sell it" game that has served Ford, GM, and Chrysler oh so well over the last three decades.

Edited November 13, 2006 by RichardJensen

[waymondospiff]

The Edge was designed and engineered around the tastes and preferences of a core group of American consumers. The S-Max was not. Assuming Ford did its homework properly on the Edge (which seems pretty reasonable given dealer demand for the product), the Edge is a better fit for this market than the S-Max.

 

To simply assume that a product that sells reasonably well in Europe to critical accolades from European journalists would sell to similar demand and recognition stateside is to continue to play the same old Detroit game, the "Hey, market research is a bunch of baloney, I think this car is cool therefore we should build it and sell it" game that has served Ford, GM, and Chrysler oh so well over the last three decades.

 

Because the market research pointing towards lots of space & boring exterior design for the midsize market has served the Ford Five Hundred so well.

 

I understand your apprehension, RJ. I really do. But all the consumer clinics in America wouldn't yield a demand for a Microvan vehicle. Why? Because consumers don't know what it is. What do consumers want? How about:

Space & room? Yes, even the smallest cars in the US need to be roomy to sell.

Capacity for seven? Yes, even the most worthless back seats (Rav4, XL7) are desirable...even though they aren't used often, people place a value on the utility offered by the 7-passenger seating.

Fuel efficiency? Yes, fuel efficient cars are selling more strongly today then they have in years.

Competent handling? Yes, the demand for good handling cars is quite strong. Even Lincoln misjudged by making the Zephyr "too soft" (MKZ's sharper handling.)

"Alternative" styling? The tall-body look is in vogue - Camry, Focus, Fit, Caliber and many, many others have grown taller recently. The additional space (& comfort) is quite attractive...especially to an aging baby boom population.

 

These all point to the demand for vehicles like the microvans. The Edge is quite nice, but probably pricier than an "Americanized" S-Max, much heavier, taller & weaker handling, and much, much thirstier. I doubt people would cross-shop an Edge & a S-Max. It's just a different demographic. There is room in the lineup for both a "microvan" and a "stylish two-row CUV."

 

Is the S-Max a "bold move?" Yes. Is it risky? Yes and no. Ford wouldn't loose money on the development - it's already done. Federalizing a European vehicle isn't difficult these days. The risk is setting up a stateside assembly & supplier base. But, if the cost is spread between different products, like, for example, a joint S-Max/Volvo production line, the risk is minimized. It's just one example of quickly utilizing strengths from around the world to prop-up the NA lineup. Mulally has said NA is Job #1 - here's an easy way to create buzz & prove Ford is ready to take risks to bolster it's business.

 

Scott

[RichardJensen]

Because the market research pointing towards lots of space & boring exterior design for the midsize market has served the Ford Five Hundred so well.

 

I understand your apprehension, RJ. I really do. But all the consumer clinics in America wouldn't yield a demand for a Microvan vehicle. Why? Because consumers don't know what it is. What do consumers want? How about:

Space & room? Yes, even the smallest cars in the US need to be roomy to sell.

Capacity for seven? Yes, even the most worthless back seats (Rav4, XL7) are desirable...even though they aren't used often, people place a value on the utility offered by the 7-passenger seating.

Fuel efficiency? Yes, fuel efficient cars are selling more strongly today then they have in years.

Competent handling? Yes, the demand for good handling cars is quite strong. Even Lincoln misjudged by making the Zephyr "too soft" (MKZ's sharper handling.)

"Alternative" styling? The tall-body look is in vogue - Camry, Focus, Fit, Caliber and many, many others have grown taller recently. The additional space (& comfort) is quite attractive...especially to an aging baby boom population.

 

These all point to the demand for vehicles like the microvans. The Edge is quite nice, but probably pricier than an "Americanized" S-Max, much heavier, taller & weaker handling, and much, much thirstier. I doubt people would cross-shop an Edge & a S-Max. It's just a different demographic. There is room in the lineup for both a "microvan" and a "stylish two-row CUV."

 

Is the S-Max a "bold move?" Yes. Is it risky? Yes and no. Ford wouldn't loose money on the development - it's already done. Federalizing a European vehicle isn't difficult these days. The risk is setting up a stateside assembly & supplier base. But, if the cost is spread between different products, like, for example, a joint S-Max/Volvo production line, the risk is minimized. It's just one example of quickly utilizing strengths from around the world to prop-up the NA lineup. Mulally has said NA is Job #1 - here's an easy way to create buzz & prove Ford is ready to take risks to bolster it's business.

 

Scott

1) market research is a tool. It is only as useful as the hands that use it.

 

2) "all the consumer clinics in America wouldn't yield a demand for a Microvan vehicle". See comment 1, market research is a tool. It is not a magic machine that predicts what customers will want. It is a tool for taking prototype designs and evaluating their likely success in the market.

 

3) It is rather questionable to say that the Edge would be more expensive than a putative American S-Max. Euro vehicles are almost always more expensive for their size than U.S. models, even after you factor out the VAT.

 

4) Yes, the S-Max and Edge would draw totally different demographics. This is NOT what you want from a focused brand. In the end, you are selling that blue oval on the front of the vehicle. In order to command any kind of premium in the market, that blue oval has to MEAN something, and having a lineup of vehicles with no clearly defined relationship between them (as in the Edge and this S-Max) dilutes the value of that blue oval. When you dilute the value of that blue oval, you reduce the price you can command for any product bearing that badge. People should buy into the message of your brand before they buy into any of the products you sell. For too long Ford has emphasized individual products at the expense of the brand (F-Series, Mustang, Explorer), they need to stop doing this, or they'll never be able to sell anything but F-Series, Mustangs, and Explorers.

 

5) There are no 'easy ways' to fix Ford NA. Brining over unproven product from Europe is bad business. If it fails it wastes money and if it succeeds, it reinforces irresponsible behavior.

 

The only way Ford can get turned around stateside is by overhauling the PD process here, and creating an unified global PD structure. There are no easy fixes. The only way out is through hard work.

[mackinaw]

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

 

Don't know about this. Could they move 25,000 S-Maxs' a year in the U.S. and Canada? Probably so, but I don't know if that volume would make it profitable. I got to believe that if Mr. Mulally gets his way, at least some future vehicle programs will be "internationalized."

 

There are vehicles being produced by Ford in other parts of the world that would sell in the U.S. and Canada. Indeed, look at Volvo. To my knowledge the sell the same vehicles all over the world. It can work, if you do it properly.

[RichardJensen]

Also, the S-Max is rated at about 17-18 MPG city (per the EU testing regimen which is different from the EPA's). That rating is for the 2.5L 223hp 5-cylinder unit, which is best placed opposite the 3.5L 265hp unit in the Edge.

 

Don't know about this. Could they move 25,000 S-Maxs' a year in the U.S. and Canada? Probably so, but I don't know if that volume would make it profitable. I got to believe that if Mr. Mulally gets his way, at least some future vehicle programs will be "internationalized."

 

There are vehicles being produced by Ford in other parts of the world that would sell in the U.S. and Canada. Indeed, look at Volvo. To my knowledge the sell the same vehicles all over the world. It can work, if you do it properly.

Regardless of whether they 'could' move any amount of S-Max units, they should not further dilute the brand image that they are building here. The reason why VOLVO can sell vehicles built in Sweden here is because they are pereceived and understood to be an import brand. BMW and MB are perceived as an import brand, which is why they can sell vehicles here that they build here.

 

Ford could sell here an NA spec C1 Focus built in Europe, if it 'looked' American, if it matched the brand identity of Ford NA. But they could not and should not sell an American built vehicle that was desinged for the European market. It just doesn't work.

 

Vehicle architectures will most certainly, and should absolutely be internationalized. But design of the 'top hat' must be region specific.

[matthewq4b]

I disagree. I don't think they could be made fast enough.

 

 

I tend to agree with you.

 

This is the perfect Mercury. The price will push it above the Ford offerings and the interior is far superior in fact I think it is better than the NA offerings, it has just enough flair to diferentiate it from the Ford products. Re work the nose to make it look a little less Focus looking and stuff the Mercury water fall grill in it and your off to the races. Extrior wise that is all I would change. And to be honest it really does not look European

 

I can think of 3 people right now who buy one. If it was offered here.

Get it here with the diesel and you would really have some thing.

 

The Ford brand has a direction and an identity Mercury on the other hand is kinda ruddlerless at the moment.

 

This is the perfect vehical to get Mercury off to the races and it would fit nicley with the other Mercury's.

 

25K units should not be an issue I think the total sales would be more in the 30k plus range as long as it was not way over priced and Ford er Mecury agressivly advertized it.

 

 

Matthew

[RichardJensen]

If Mercury is rudderless, how does importing an oddly styled vehicle that looks nothing like any other Mercury inside or out give it a direction? All it does is add to the confusion.

[NLPRacing]

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

 

I'm going to jump on the "bring it here" bandwagon too. I like the Edge a lot, but with a third kid on the way, this S-Max really appeals to me (and my wife). I also love the fact that it has an available manual tranny with a Turbo I-5! Now if Mazda could just build us a Mazdaspeed5!

[RichardJensen]

Yeah. Confusion. It doesn't look like a re-badged For. :rolleyes:

Don't care how you slice it, that thing makes about as much sense, in current form, for Mercury, as a self-powered riding lawn mower.

 

Take EUCD, and put a body on it that's designed for the U.S., don't take the lazy way out and bring over EU spec cars.

 

It's a function of 'can't-do' sprit and Euro-envy that says a vehicle that was not designed for this market would sell better than a vehicle designed for this market.

 

More realisticly, Ford's product designed for this market may not sell all that well, but their products designed for somewhere else would sell even worse.

[mackinaw]

Ford could sell here an NA spec C1 Focus built in Europe, if it 'looked' American, if it matched the brand identity of Ford NA. But they could not and should not sell an American built vehicle that was desinged for the European market. It just doesn't work.

 

Vehicle architectures will most certainly, and should absolutely be internationalized. But design of the 'top hat' must be region specific.

 

Considering the European C1 Focus' somewhat conservative styling, it probably would sell in significant numbers in the U.S.

 

Im stlll of the belief that European-looking Fords' could be successfully sold in the U.S. and Canadian markets. Maybe not in great numbers, but enough to make it economically viable. BMW has had (relatively) great success with the Mini, and I bet Ford could have like success with the next generation Ka. The key here is not to try and sell a mass-market, high-volume car like the Mondeo sedan, but a niche vehicle of some sort (the next generation Mondeo wagon comes to mind).

[RichardJensen]

Considering the European C1 Focus' somewhat conservative styling, it probably would sell in significant numbers in the U.S.

 

Im stlll of the belief that European-looking Fords' could be successfully sold in the U.S. and Canadian markets. Maybe not in great numbers, but enough to make it economically viable. BMW has had (relatively) great success with the Mini, and I bet Ford could have like success with the next generation Ka. The key here is not to try and sell a mass-market, high-volume car like the Mondeo sedan, but a niche vehicle of some sort (the next generation Mondeo wagon comes to mind).

The big question always remains: What does it do to the brand image? Does it reinforce how people perceive Ford, or does it confuse the way people perceive Ford?

[waymondospiff]

3) It is rather questionable to say that the Edge would be more expensive than a putative American S-Max. Euro vehicles are almost always more expensive for their size than U.S. models, even after you factor out the VAT.

I spoke of cheapening the S-Max for the US market. There are a lot of high-end options on the S-Max that would (sadly) need to be left off to achieve a sellable price here. So my reasoning of the S-Max being cheaper than the Edge was that it would HAVE to be to make a business case for it. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

 

Also, fuel mileage. I'm not going to look up the numbers, but the ~225hp version is a Turbo 5-cyl - and Turbos are generally awful on EPA city cycles. Spool up the 'charger and the gas goes quickly (but at least it leaves a big grin on the driver's face...) While I'd love to see the Volvo 5-cyl here, we'd most likely get the 2.3/2.5 MZR (maybe a turbo'd version of that) and/or the 3.0/3.5 Duratec, assuming it'd fit. It might lack of bit of excitement compared to the Swedish 5-cyl, but it would be much more efficient. Example, Mazda6i 2.3L/5-Speed 25mpg City vs. Mazdaspeed6 2.3Turbo/6-speed 19mpg city.

 

4) Yes, the S-Max and Edge would draw totally different demographics. This is NOT what you want from a focused brand. In the end, you are selling that blue oval on the front of the vehicle. In order to command any kind of premium in the market, that blue oval has to MEAN something, and having a lineup of vehicles with no clearly defined relationship between them (as in the Edge and this S-Max) dilutes the value of that blue oval. When you dilute the value of that blue oval, you reduce the price you can command for any product bearing that badge. People should buy into the message of your brand before they buy into any of the products you sell. For too long Ford has emphasized individual products at the expense of the brand (F-Series, Mustang, Explorer), they need to stop doing this, or they'll never be able to sell anything but F-Series, Mustangs, and Explorers.

Oh of course. I forgot, could you tell me again the brand image shared by the Focus and the F-250 Super Duty? What mystical brand aura does Ford have that wouldn't be incorporated by a S-Max. I've already acknowledge the Euro-face would go, but that's just the plastic front fascia and that's a cheap-n-easy change. You could even add the chrome bars to the new face. I'd prefer the F-150 black mesh, but the bars would work. Or, even better, the Mercury waterfall would fit nicely.

 

5) There are no 'easy ways' to fix Ford NA. Brining over unproven product from Europe is bad business. If it fails it wastes money and if it succeeds, it reinforces irresponsible behavior.

I agree. That's why I'm promoting the idea of bringing over The Next Big Thing a couple of years before the competitors do. Get a jump on the market, help define it, and hopefully Ford can run roughshod over the competition for years. See Explorer, F-150 SuperCrew, Taurus - each of these defined a market and sold well for years, often being the best seller in the category. Because Ford was there early and defined the market. Why not do it for People Movers?

 

The only way Ford can get turned around stateside is by overhauling the PD process here, and creating an unified global PD structure. There are no easy fixes. The only way out is through hard work.

I agree. But why re-engineer the wheel when Ford's product portfolio already contains a world-class entry? What would an American-designed "people carrier" have that the S-Max doesn't? Size? Not really, as going larger is a different class (See "Fairlane.") In fact, the S-Max could make a great "little brother" to the Fairlane. "Ford, completely redefining how we move people around. The 2008 S-Max* and Fairlane*. Have you driven a Ford lately?" *-names subjet to change.

 

I'm thinking outside the box. It's very nice out here. But I'm totally thrown by how the S-Max would confuse what Ford means because there is an attractive, efficient, market-changing way to carry 7-people. I guess if Ford means to be 1. inefficient, gas hogging vehicles, 2. trucks, trucks, and SUVs, 3. previously-defined product niches, 4. styling snoozes, and 5. not worth considering over Toyota or Honda then yes, I guess the S-Max would be out of place. But I see Ford as an innovator, bringing high-quality, daring products to the marketplace.

 

Maybe you & I just see Ford differently.

 

Scott

[matthewq4b]

If Mercury is rudderless, how does importing an oddly styled vehicle that looks nothing like any other Mercury inside or out give it a direction? All it does is add to the confusion.

 

 

Hmm I see to recall similar comments made about the orginal Taurus and Sable.

 

The S max is not oddly stlyed. I fall in to the old school range on auto styling and I find the S Max not bad at all.

 

Mercury is styling cars more Euopean than Ford and has done so for years now. The S Max fits Mercury to a Tee. It will not infringe on Edge sales and fits in line with the current consumer base for Mercury (GM excpeted of course).

 

And why decontent it.

 

Leave it as is, Mercury can offer Upscale smaller cars. It will compete more directly with Mazda but that is not a bad thing either. As most Mazda buyers will not move in to a Lincoln but one of the Jap luxo cars. But there is a chance of moving Mercury buyers in to one.

 

Mercury had good sucsess with the XR4TI and the Scorpio in the first couple years until the poor quality of these products was wide known. Even with an almost unpronoucable name, a terrible ad campaign and little in the way of the dealer support they still sold a mess of the extremly oddly styled (for the time rember the XR4TI was on show room floors in 84) Euro things.

 

Richard at times you are all over the map. You do not belive in providing traditonal products for Ford NA. Nor do you accept the concept of using suitable European stuff.

 

NA has always been a few years behind in stlying compared to Europe but that gap is closing.

 

Just what exactly do you expect Ford to sell?

As it stands now only 1 auto platform in the stable is a NA specific unit. Every thing else began life for and in other markets.

 

There is no reason the concept would not work here. Maybe not so much in the U.S but In Canada it would be a big seller, As it stands now Mazda Delaers can not keep the 5 on the lot.

 

This will be the perfect car for the Urban family that does not need nor want a full size Minivan SUV or even CUV (like those have been a great sucsess so far) The S Max has great potential in NA given the proper exposure.

 

Generally as a Rule (and you know this) I do not think any Off Shore Ford import will work here. The S Max is the exception. I see no plausible or logical reason not to import it under the Mercury Badge.

It iwll not compete with Ford's as you have statd many times different demograghic's, for one and Ford has currently Nothign in the stable that it would steal sales from.

 

Some times I just shake my head at your reasoning on some things.

 

 

Matthew

[Biker16]

This product would not sell here. Not as a Ford. Probably not as an anything.

Why not?

 

what is wrong with it? in your opinion?

 

You have nothing to back up your opinion AS usual. You say we should be a customer Focused company you have not clue of what that really means. you spout your opinion as Fact, like you have all the answers, when you don't know shit. how can one man profess to know how an entire country feels about ford or any ford product.

 

You criticize the media, but they unlike you they actually talk to people that work for Ford.

 

You spin everything, even when you are dead wrong you spin it to make yourself look better. you are using this board as you own Phallus symbol, you are too off center to be a moderator. why would bother calling people out simply because they don't agree with you?

 

You should not be a moderator, because you are not impartial, and you are too damned vain.

 

In closing the S-max and every FoE product would sell here, the question is would they sell enough to make money.