NEW FORD S-MAX TO BE PRODUCED AND SOLD IN CHINA

[RichardJensen]

Sure as hell is a lot less than what they are losing by not offering it.

Kinda doubt that. I don't think one vehicle that (optimistically) would sell in the 60,000 units per year range would pay for the cost of building an EUCD supply base here, along with adding EUCD production to a stateside plant.

 

Ford should not do EUCD here until they have an entire plant's worth of EUCD product. That means more than just the S-Max.

[matthewq4b]

Kinda doubt that. I don't think one vehicle that (optimistically) would sell in the 60,000 units per year range would pay for the cost of building an EUCD supply base here, along with adding EUCD production to a stateside plant.

 

Ford should not do EUCD here until they have an entire plant's worth of EUCD product. That means more than just the S-Max.

 

 

You have to start some where and if the plant is in low cost Mexico (heaven forbid) then it could supply SA as well. I'm sure they would have no problem selling them there.

 

The plant capactiy is here in NA and eventually a line up would be added. The D3's and CD3's did not spawn a whole line up right away. Spend now or spend later.

 

Matthew

[RichardJensen]

The theory, at this juncture, is that CD3 and D3 will be replaced by EUCD2, so Ford can build all midsize/fullsize vehicles globally (probably about 20 vehicles total*) on just one architecture.

 

Since that's what Ford is aiming at, it makes sense to take the plunge then, as opposed to building/refurbishing a plant for EUCD now. If Ford built an EUCD facility now, they'd be selling three mid/fullsize architectures stateside: EUCD, CD3, and D3. Furthermore, when Ford consolidates onto EUCD2, you would have this extra capacity that you might not need, once the other plants are moved to EUCD2.

 

Ford should have three plants running EUCD2 and two plants running C2, or a combination of C2 and EUCD2 (Depends on whether the Escape trio moves to C2 or EUCD2). The three EUCD2 plants would be Hermosillo, Chicago, and OAC. The two C2 plants would be Wayne and Kansas City's Escape line.

 

*Mondeo, Fusion, Milan, "Fairlane", Five Hundred, Montego, MKS, Edge, MKX, "Lincoln people mover", "Lincoln E-Class", XC90, S80, XC70, V70, LR2, Galaxy, S-Max, Mazda6, Mazda CX-9, S60?, Freestyle?

Edited November 19, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Blueblood]

Here's a thought.

 

You call up Mulally, and you tell him you want the S-Max so bad you'll cut him a check for $1,000,000,000.00 so he can retool a plant here to build the thing.

 

Reality check, people. You can't import the S-Max from Europe without losing money on the exchange rate, and it would cost a billion dollars to setup a factory here (with a supply base) to build it.

 

This is going to be done eventually. Before Mulally came on board there were execs that wanted to rationalize Ford's global architectures (CD3 was supposed to underpin the S-Max). Now it's a near certainty.

 

 

But until that time, like I said, let's not pretend that Ford can 'just' start manufacturing cars here like they do in Europe. It will cost about a billion dollars per plant at Wayne, KC, Chicago, OAC, and Hermosillo.

 

 

Maybe that's the problem with Ford, they aren't willing to make investments in the future, and they won't make competitive or class leading products because it would cost "too much". While I keep seeing other companies spend the money, and not make excuses. Why can any other company decide to bring over some foreign car and I see them on the streets months later, yet even if Ford were to do it it would take 5-6 years?

 

How can they sell them in China but not here? How can they sell the new Euro Focus ST in frikking Mexico!!!!! Only 100 miles to the south of me, yet they can't sell it here?? You're telling me the poor ass Chinese and Mexicans can afford these cars but we can't?

 

Is Ford intentionally trying to piss off their most loyal fans? What gives? Do I even need to bring up what they'vedone to SVT and the complete abandonment of anything resembling fun to drive/sporty cars besides the Mustang??

[Biker16]

exactly.

 

And, let's say that next year you are going to spend $18,000 on house payments and property taxes.

 

Well, why not just pay the $18,000 on the first of January?

 

After all, it's money you're going to spend eventually......

The source you quoted does not state what it would cost to change the models assembled there.

 

 

Answer the Question where did you get your $1billion form?

[pcsario]

 

Maybe Ford should stop selling PAG vehicles in NA, the F150 in Canada, Mexico, SA, etc, and cancel the S-Max for China.

 

They weren't designed here/there, to be sold here/there.

 

While we're at it, cancel the Mondeo too. It was designed in Germany, obviously no one outside Germany would want a car that wasn't designed in their country, to be sold in just in their country. People from Span would never buy anything less than a car designed there, to be sold there, in the same way americans never buy a car that's also sold in other regions.

 

Cancel the current and upcoming '08 Focus too, and the entire Mazda lineup (same problem).

Edited November 19, 2006 by pcsario

[RichardJensen]

Maybe that's the problem with Ford, they aren't willing to make investments in the future

What? Because they won't follow YOUR timeline?

 

And I got the $1Bn number by halving what Ford spent individually at Chicago, OAC, and Hermosillo. If it's less than that, whopee!!!

[Biker16]

That is exactly half of what Ford spent to expand Hermosillo.

?

 

where did you hear it cost 2 billion to expand Hermosillo?

 

why would it be half as much to add 60,000 units of S-max production?

[Blueblood]

What? Because they won't follow YOUR timeline?

 

And I got the $1Bn number by halving what Ford spent individually at Chicago, OAC, and Hermosillo. If it's less than that, whopee!!!

 

 

To build what though? The boring un-innovative 500 triplets that aren't selling?

 

Oh, but just wait 2-3 more years, Ford will have a handful more boring, FWD, under-powered geriatric mobiles ready for sale...... :boring: :boring: :boring: :boring:

 

I'm still waiting for any bold products... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Edited November 20, 2006 by Blueblood

[Biker16]

What? Because they won't follow YOUR timeline?

 

And I got the $1Bn number by halving what Ford spent individually at Chicago, OAC, and Hermosillo. If it's less than that, whopee!!!

Chicago assembly

 

Approximately $800 million was invested by Ford Motor Company and its suppliers in the assembly plant, the supplier manufacturing site and Chicago Stamping Plant, which provides stampings for Chicago Assembly.

 

 

where did you get 1 billion dollars from?

 

Hermosillo

 

The Futura is the first iteration of a vehicle platform that will form the basis for up to 10 new products and 800,000 units of volume across the Ford, Lincoln and Mercury brands in the next several years. Total program investment, including platform development, will be in the range of $1 billion USD.

 

where did you get 1 billion dollars from?

Edited November 20, 2006 by Biker16

[foxrun]

What? Because they won't follow YOUR timeline?

 

And I got the $1Bn number by halving what Ford spent individually at Chicago, OAC, and Hermosillo. If it's less than that, whopee!!!

 

So how close is this car to the Mazda-5?

[Biker16]

So how close is this car to the Mazda-5?

see this review

 

It is alot larger than the MZ5

 

187in long

112in Wheel base

63.4in tall

74.2in wide

 

 

its larger than the Fusion.

 

EDge

Overall length 185.7"

Wheelbase 111.2"

Vehicle width (excl. mirrors) 75.8"

F. Height (incl. roof rack) 68.9"

 

Mazda5

Wheelbase (inches) 108.3

Length (inches) 181.5

Width (inches) 69.1

Height (inches) 64.2

[RichardJensen]

Pioneer, I never questioned your statements regarding the cost of Hermosillo.

 

Get your memory fixed Mr. "I'm an electrician working at an ACH plant that assembles driveshafts for the Ford Ranger" :P :P :P to you!

 

--

 

Further, if I have no idea what Ford would pay to add EUCD2/C2 capacity (recall I said that the $1B was a rough estimate), Biker16 sure as shooting doesn't either which means the whole discussion is a waste of time. I'm done with it. You don't have any reliable statistics to base your arguments on, and I don't either. It's a stupid argument.

Edited November 20, 2006 by RichardJensen

[Biker16]

Pioneer, I never questioned your statements regarding the cost of Hermosillo.

 

Get your memory fixed Mr. "I'm an electrician working at an ACH plant that assembles driveshafts for the Ford Ranger" :P :P :P to you!

 

--

 

Further, if I have no idea what Ford would pay to add EUCD2/C2 capacity (recall I said that the $1B was a rough estimate), Biker16 sure as shooting doesn't either which means the whole discussion is a waste of time. I'm done with it. You don't have any reliable statistics to base your arguments on, and I don't either. It's a stupid argument.

 

When you put up false numbers support your POV, you are a bullshiter.

 

please in the future don't post False numbers, again. Try to use ~ or use a range of numbers like 300-800 millon.

 

To me you have lost your credibility, much like those fluff jounalist you hate soo much

 

When you look at the costs of bringing EUCD1 or 2 to NA, look at as a holistic thing. the cost will be high no matter when you spend the money.

 

Your supply base For EUCD# will be shared with C2, you can either have EUCD program establish the supply base or C2 program estabish the supply base. With Ford each program has to pay its own way including for its own supply base and plant retooling. This would burden which ever program initiates the supplier base the cost of setting it up. Would you prefer C2 carry the burden or EUCD1. either way the program that starts the supply base will not make a profit. We would hope the bean counters would not repeat the ways of the past and decontnent products to cover inflated development costs.

 

although Your logic of waiting for EUCD2 is the most logical, waiting 5 years for good products may not be affordable, or desireable. Closing plants is very expensive, firing workers is very expensive.

 

I would begin EUCD production in NA in 2009, at the new "low cost" plant For Export and domestic, add C2 Focus production in late 2009. EUCD2 should debut in 2012.

[RichardJensen]

Try to use ~ or use a range of numbers like 300-800 millon.

A range of numbers with no foundation is as pointless as a single high end number with no foundation that was plainly stated (when first referenced) as an absolute spitball figure.

 

Also, under the 'every vehicle pays its way' philosophy, the cost of establishing the EUCD2/C2 supply base would be spread among all the NA vehicles that use those common components.

 

The reason for waiting is also so that the investments in OAC, CAP, and Hermosillo can be amortized through production there.

 

I frankly see greater cost savings to Ford through platform architecture sharing, and greater flexibility for new products, as opposed to sales increases of note through the use of 'better' architectures. Any sales gains through adoption of anything other than C2 for the Focus will be incremental. CD3 and D3 are not so far behind EUCD in terms of refinement and driveability that Ford can expect stratospheric sales gains from them. Ditto CD2 for the Escape/Mariner/Tribute

 

What's more, the improvements to the '08 Focus in terms of interior quality and NVH may well address the biggest complaints American consumers have with the current Focus, such that the C2 Focus when it arrives will not result in significantly higher sales numbers.

[Biker16]

A range of numbers with no foundation is as pointless as a single high end number with no foundation that was plainly stated (when first referenced) as an absolute spitball figure.

 

When throw out a number soo ubsurd. it is better to leave yourself more room for error.

 

Also, under the 'every vehicle pays its way' philosophy, the cost of establishing the EUCD2/C2 supply base would be spread among all the NA vehicles that use those common components.

 

The reason for waiting is also so that the investments in OAC, CAP, and Hermosillo can be amortized through production there.

It is well known that Flex plants take 1-2 model changeovers to pay for Flex plants. you are not going to change all those plants at the same time. there has to be a point where we change direction, and the days of incremental change and loss of momentum, because we want to "amortized costs". instead of better products now, that can make a big difference, we have better products later when the competition has better products already on the market.

 

I frankly see greater cost savings to Ford through platform architecture sharing, and greater flexibility for new products, as opposed to sales increases of note through the use of 'better' architectures. Any sales gains through adoption of anything other than C2 for the Focus will be incremental. CD3 and D3 are not so far behind EUCD in terms of refinement and driveability that Ford can expect stratospheric sales gains from them. Ditto CD2 for the Escape/Mariner/Tribute

 

What's more, the improvements to the '08 Focus in terms of interior quality and NVH may well address the biggest complaints American consumers have with the current Focus, such that the C2 Focus when it arrives will not result in significantly higher sales numbers.

 

How would anyone know ho far we are behind EUCD unless we have driven both cars.

 

Do we know For fact that Ford's Gamble on the coupe will ever pay off? becuase it is Hideous IMNSHO.

[RichardJensen]

instead of better products now, that can make a big difference, we have better products later when the competition has better products already on the market.

I don't think EUCD products would make that big of a difference in sales, they will make a big difference in costs, but in sales.... Don't you get it? Ford's core customers aren't Euro-freaks. Any EUCD vehicle sold stateside would have handling and steering comparable to the Fusion's, as the Fusion's ride, handling, and steering was adapted from the Mazda6....... There would be no difference worth mentioning for most customers, and certainly no gigantic boost in sales. Just a FINALLY rationalized product structure and global manufacturing methods.

[retro-man]

.... Don't you get it? Ford's core customers aren't Euro-freaks.......

 

Richard, you keep mentioning "Ford's core customers"....... As far as I can tell, judging by Ford's current market share, all 6 dozen of them are here on BON. And 5-1/2 of that 6 dozen think the S-Max would do well here - many of them can actually imagine buying one. Are there other customers out there that are not reflected in Ford's current sales figures? If so, how can they be called "customers", let alone "core customers"? Please enlighten us (you know - if you don't mind yet another attempt at that): What do you mean by "Ford's core customers"?

Edited November 20, 2006 by retro-man

[grbeck]

Richard, you keep mentioning "Ford's core customers"....... As far as I can tell, judging by Ford's current market share, all 6 dozen of them are here on BON.

 

LOL...that is priceless, and right on the mark.

[RichardJensen]

Richard, you keep mentioning "Ford's core customers"....... As far as I can tell, judging by Ford's current market share, all 6 dozen of them are here on BON. And 5-1/2 of that 6 dozen think the S-Max would do well here - many of them can actually imagine buying one. Are there other customers out there that are not reflected in Ford's current sales figures? If so, how can they be called "customers", let alone "core customers"? Please enlighten us (you know - if you don't mind yet another attempt at that): What do you mean by "Ford's core customers"?

Ford sells about 3 million vehicles a year in the U.S. Of those 3M vehicles, about 2.5 million are Ford brand. Of that 2.5 million, about 75% are retail, giving you a total of about 1,875,000 Ford retail buyers every year.

 

And of those nearly 2 million retail buyers, Ford's core is certainly not reflected in this board. Do not confuse Ford 'loyalists' with Ford's core customers. An analogous (and politically neutral) situation would be the Democrats and the extreme left, or the Republicans and the extreme right. The true 'core' of both parties is far closer to the center than the extremists that tend to dominate discourse, and which are frequently mistaken as the 'core'. Mistaking the most extreme supporters of your product (even if your 'product' is a political party), as representative of your customers as a whole does not generally lead to good results. Just ask the smarter Republicans, or any Democrats old enough to remember 1994.

 

While Ford should pay attention to the rantings of dedicated fans, such as ourselves, they are far better served consulting existing customers before making product decisions.

 

And for the record, only one person here has stated definitively that he would've bought the S-Max had it been on the market a year ago. No one else has stepped forward and volunteered to provide 'effective demand', as the economists say.

Edited November 20, 2006 by RichardJensen

[ZanatWork]

Tell you what...bring the S-Max to the US show circuit, and let the US customers see how the other side lives. I'll say happily that if it'd be more useful than the Freestyle, I'd go that way.

[retro-man]

Thanks Richard. That's specific enough. 3,000,000 vehicles a year and they're still losing money though...

[RichardJensen]

Thanks Richard. That's specific enough. 3,000,000 vehicles a year and they're still losing money though...

Well when they've got enough people on payroll to design and build 4,000,000 vehicles a year............

[swenson88]

I agree with others that say Ford "should" sell this vehicle here, but I also agree with the concern over whether the actual vehicle "would" sell here. Traditionally the mini-minivan market has not done well in NA, there were several 80's examples that are all gone now. I like the look of the Mazda5 and the practicality, but in all honesty I don't see myself buying it or the S-Max. Heck, the Mazda MPV has always been a dismal failure due to its size in comparison with the larger minivans. I don't know. I think it would make a fantastic addition to the Mercury lineup, but as a Mercury the sales volume would probably be far too small to justify it. I just hope over the next ten years that we see much more commonality with other parts of the world instead of the crazy fragmentation we have now.

[ZanatWork]

And again, this has gone to stupid places it didn't need to go.

 

It's a desirable vehicle made by Ford that could possibly be of use here, where the company is lambasted for aging and/or unoriginal product.

 

Just that. Just there. Don't go into business cases, points of production blather, or anything else. THAT'S NOT THE JOB OF ANYONE HERE.

 

(Good thing too, the way that talk gets almost as vicious as political crap)

 

My point is simply that it may be worth consideration. It SHOULD be added to the car show collection, and Ford's representatives would be able to see Middle America's reaction firsthand. If that led to anything, so much the better...but getting it in front of the crowd at NAIAS would be the first step.

 

Keep it simple. It might be a global success, so show it globally and test the waters. Production ramp-up and everything else come AFTER easily-attained public opinion.

 

Some o' you guys sure work hard to put the "anal" into "overanalyzed".

Edited November 20, 2006 by ZanatWork