Yeah but I just read somewhere that drivers are complaining about a few issues. If anybody has some free time, post a link.

Ya think? I forgot to mention that the lady at the Dale Earnhardt Foundation did also reply and said she sent it up the corporate ladder. Well it started as a hobby, but I have 30 songs copyrighted. I'll keep trying.

Correction: Googled it, its actually 201.9B, so 13B less revenue with the current regional models replacing the global models.  They are losing customers. Former Ford families are now multi-brand families because some people in the city want smaller vehicles that aren't trucks and Ford is killing these vehicles one by one. I mentioned this before, the next biggest segment in the USA are compact SUVs, and there are three of them in the top ten, and none of them are Fords. Some people will argue, but you can make more money out of a single pickup, but that one pickup can't be sold anywhere else, this explains why 99% of them stay in North America. Advantage of having compact SUVs, it can be marketed globally.  American companies are reverting back to how things were, the whole "I think we're doing ok in the USA, so let's let the brand die out in global market"/ Compare this to say Toyota or Hyundai who gives importance to its global markets. Just to clarify, the 2025 sales figure of the Escape, Bronco Sport and Maverick combined (440,454 units) is still less than the RAV4's 479,288 units. Global 2025 sales numbers for the Escape/Kuga + Bronco Sport + Maverick = 627,551 units Global 2025 sales numbers for the RAV4 =1.18B If you look at economies of scale, Toyota developed a compact SUV it could sell in more markets and at the same time beat its main Ford rival in the USA. Ford has to understand, it's not the segment, it's the vehicle. People just want something better. Ford's problem is if other brands beat them in a segment, they bail out and blame the segment.  

True, it's $10B less in revenue, but if it cost them $20B LESS to achieve $10B less in revenue, isn't that a win?  I mean the point of a business is to make money, and you just increased your ROI.   So, I run my own business and I charge $X / hour.  If I could charge $X*2/hour, I would work less hours as my demand goes down.  Lets say my number of hours worked is cut in half, so instead of working 2000 hours per year, I now work 1000 hours.  I'm making the same amount of money on less sales.  I call that a win! If I want more money, then the goal is to increase my number of hours AT THAT SAME RATE.  Not sell myself at the lower rate, because it's costing me more hours to make less per hour.  Sure, you want to sell more product, but each product has to carry its weight.  If I can work half as many hours and make the same money, I'll take it! Will you lose some customers?  Yes, but part of business is knowing which customers to lose.  Not all customers are good customers.   As a Ford fan, it hurts, because we hate to see models cancelled or lost.  However, it's also cool to see fun, new, exciting products coming (eventually).  It hurts to not see Ford at the top of the sales charts, but it's awesome to know there are Ford vehicles I desire to own!

I'm a consumer, not a Ford executive, employee, shareholder, or investor. I care more about the products that are available not by how much profit they were able to squeeze out of the 60th variant of their F-series. I still think Ford should have given importance to the compact SUV segment, with the F-series they're pretty much boxed in because they are almost exclusively for North America. The Escape has opportunities to grow elsewhere. If you combine the three top selling compact SUVs in the top 10, it amounts to 1.2M+ units. The difference is these can be marketed globally and further boost Ford's profits and restore its presence in global markets. In 2015 Ford had a full lineup of vehicles globally, they owned 7.3% of the global market, now their market share has dropped to 4.3%. Annual revenue in 2015 was $149.6B ($201.9B in 2025 dollars) Annual revenue in 2025 was $187.3B, that's $13B less. Isn't this what happens when you replace global models with vehicles primarily sold in the North American market like the Lightning, Maverick (91.5% are sold in the USA & Canada), and Mach E (76% are sold in the USA & Canada)?  

Think about what I say a while back, my impression was a  front more like Transit Connect with the stumpy nose rather than a windshield that blends into the forward part of the hood…

Aussie prices from Brisbane in the state of Queensland (North East)   Aus $1.50 / liter to $1.70/ liter = US$3.70/gal to $4.20/gal   Diesel is about AUS$2.00/liter or US$4.92/gal

I really hate it when they do this. This isn’t going to be anything like the current Maverick so what is the point? Make another model that stands on its own and generates its own buzz.   I’m with you on this. I’m not particularly fond of the design of the blue one.  The white one is more appealing to me and does seem more consistent with the airflow images. The air flow image makes me cautiously optimistic about this model. The silhouette reminds me of something but I can’t put my finger on it.    This doesn’t have to appeal to a traditional truck buyer, because they likely aren’t the target audience.  I’ll be surprised if this ends up being $30,000, but it would be pretty awesome if it is. 

From Auto Forecast Solutions, via Autoline Daily (January 27th).   We’ve got some good intel on Ford’s UEV, the universal EV platform, known as CE1. Autoforecast Solutions reports that the first model built on that platform, with the code name P833, will be called the Maverick EV. 

I think ExplorerDude also said it would be called Maverick.