Last month, Toyota sold more vehicles in North America than Ford. Understandably, The Blue Oval Boys have refrained from public hand-wringing over their displacement in the US sale charts. But there is no underestimating the development’s damage to Ford’s corporate psyche. Newbie CEO Mark Fields was already deep into crisis management. Now, suddenly, it’s obvious that Ford’s turnaround cannot rely on pushing (deeply discounted) products and hoping and waiting for a Hail Mary pass. A brand new plan is set to be hatched at the end of the third quarter. The way forward is now in fast forward.
Like GM, Ford is downsizing to match market share. According to Harbour Consulting, Ford used 79% of its production capacity in 2005 (FYI: Toyota’s plants ran at 106%). Originally, Ford planned to close fourteen plants (including seven vehicle manufacturing facilities) and “cut” (a.k.a. buy out) 30k union jobs within six years. The new plan: lop a couple of years off the timeline. Speaking to industry analysts yesterday, Ford manufacturing chief David Szczupak promised that FoMoCo will use 100% of its production capacity by 2008.
The clock is ticking. Although Ford has a $23b cash hoard (Health Care fund included), the company needs $16b to keep the assembly lines rolling until the next product cycle. No wonder Ford is thinking outside the Oval. The sale of parts bin diva Jaguar and reliability krypton Land Rover is reportedly only a buyer away from happening. [As Mazda and Volvo account for some 75% of Ford’s current value and provide mission critical product integration, their sale is highly unlikely.] Ford Motor Credit and bailed-out parts supplier Visteon may also be in play.
With so many cards on the table, Ford has followed GM’s lead and turned to a high profile consultant for advice: Kenneth Leet. In 2003, President Bush asked the 18-year Goldman Sachs vet to be his undersecretary for domestic finances. That gig didn’t pan out. But when Billy Ford called Leet for similar guidance, Leet showed why bullshit walks (exact contract unknown). The mergers and acquisitions guru is reported to be on the prowl for alliance(s) with other automakers.
Nissan is the most likely target. Despite the initial rise in stock prices prompted by a possible partnership with GM, a Ford – Nissan alliance makes more sense. (Not much, but more.) Although the UAW would rather accept the bubonic plague than see Carlos Ghosn prowling Ford’s HQ, his arrival on the scene would certainly shake up the joint, and give Blue Oval’s Brass insight into Le Cost Cutter’s management style. Renault and Nissan would gain access to Ford’s distribution networks.
Yes, well, the Ford family holds 40% of FoMoCo’s voting rights. With such an oligarchy at the tiller, any outsider seeking a merger or alliance would be extremely wary. The set-up has triggered some fanciful talk. Rumors have the Ford family purchasing 1.9b shares needed to take the company private. For roughly $13b, Ford could find the way forward without the hassles of the SEC, the press or interim profit reports. While FoMoCo stock may appear cheap at the moment, it’s highly unlikely that the Fords would want to raid their personal portfolios for such an enomrous gamble. What does that tell you?
Well, listen to this from today’s Detroit News: "The market for subcompact autos in the United States could reach 600,000 units annually by the end of the decade, according to Mark Fields, president of Ford Motor Co.'s Americas group. But he says Ford will not enter this growing domestic segment until it has something different to offer consumers." At the very moment Toyota’ small cars are eating up the US market, at the very moment Ford should be rushing a killer B-segment car to market, Fields is publicly declaring a “wait and see” approach.
This from the same man who admitted that America’s bold move to more fuel-efficient vehicles is not a passing fad. "I'd rather be proactive than wish things would go back to where they were,” Fields told analysts and reporters. “Because I don't think they will.” Don’t look for much fuel conscious proactivity over the next six months. Yes, nine new Ford vehicles are set to hit the market in that time frame. But we’re talking about a Mustang variant (based on the Hertz edition GT-H), a four wheel drive Fusion and Milan (same car, different wrapper), an F-150 with greater towing capacity, the Edge crossover, a refreshed Ford Expedition (thirsty) and Expedition EL (extra thirsty).
It’s two steps way forward, one step way back. Although Fields remains publicly committed to putting Ford back in the black by 2008, it’s hard to imagine how he could achieve the goal. Ford will announce its accelerated restructuring plan by the end of the next month— at the same time its third quarter results hit the street.
Ford manufacturing chief David Szczupak promised that FoMoCo will use 100% of its production capacity by 2008.
Well, DUH! When you’ve swapped your milk bucket for a teacup, it isn’t too hard to fill it up!
“The market for subcompact autos in the United States could reach 600,000 units annually by the end of the decade, according to Mark Fields, president of Ford Motor Co.’s Americas group. But he says Ford will not enter this growing domestic segment until it has something different to offer consumers.”
So let’s just stand by and give the entire market segment to Toyota and Honda on a silver platter. Where do they find these people? Do they grow them in some cave somewhere, or do they actually put “help wanted – one village idiot needed for top position at auto company” ads in the local papers?
If either Ford or GM could do a turnaround, I expect Ford to pull it off. Not that I am a Ford fan, my family has had too many bad experiences with them to get me back in the seat again for a while. I just expect Ford to do a better job of doing the things necessary, when they think it is necessary.
I’ve rented Fords in England and Europe. Similar sheet metal totally different feel when driving the car. They have tight suspension, crisp shifters and even the engines feel smoother. It ain’t rocket science. I currently drive an 89 Mustang LX 5.0 vert. There now have been two major revisions of the mustang and I have not replaced mine. Why? Because when I sit in the new ones the inside looks the same (except the quality of the plastic is not as good as my 17 year old car).
Does Ford have a chance? I don’t know. I would suggest that Ford Corp buy 100 Honda V6 4 door Accord sedans and force upper level management to drive the Honda one week and a Ford 500 the next week. Keep that up for a year and maybe management would get a clue.
Howard
It really saddens me to see FoMoCo this way. In the ’80’s they made a good go of it, with the Thunderbird, Taurus, Escort, etc. Well, the American Escort wasn’t that good. But since then, what has happened? Did they really expect to go all trucks, all the time?
I can’t fathom Ford’s management’s public statements. Why are they waiting to introduce a small car? How different do they think it has to be? Aztek different? Or ‘Star Wars’ land speeder different?
Between Mazda and Volvo they have some incredible engineering ability. The European Focus would be a great stopgap from what I understand. By the time the Focus has done it’s time, so to speak, they could have another contender ready…
I guess I will have to stay tuned…
With the European Focus, lots of great Mazdas and the Volvo S40/v50 Ford has plenty of good options for small cars. What is stopping them from bringing in European cars and modifying them to US standards? Why not push Mazda and Volvo’s far superior mid-sized sedans? If Mazda and Volvo are worth 75 percent of the company’s value, doesn’t that show where their concentration should be? Sure, a Volvo is more expensive than the Accord, Altima, Passat and Camry, but once you start adding features you can get pretty close in price. With Volvo you have accepted ideas of safety and quality (okay questionable) which can easily compete with the other companies. And Mazda’s cars are looking great lately- isn’t the way forward already here, just not with Ford right now?
Unlike GM, which doesn’t seem to have the cars, everyone is shouting at Ford, short-term, hopefully-successful ideas.
So let’s just stand by and give the entire market segment to Toyota and Honda on a silver platter. Where do they find these people? Do they grow them in some cave somewhere, or do they actually put “help wanted – one village idiot needed for top position at auto company†ads in the local papers?
I think they’re stuck, thanks to lack of foresight years ago. Does Ford have any products they could, say, captive import in 1 to 2 years? I doubt it.
The DetNews article mentioned that the orignal plan was to bring up a cheap South-American market Fiesta-based SUV, which in the face of Yaris & Fit sound like sending the cheapo Ford to the slaughterhouse, further worsening the reputation of Ford that the Festiva started years ago. Looking at overseas markets, bringing the Ka, Fiesta, and EuroFocus would be too expensive given the current exchange rates. In Asia, there are were previously rebadged Mazdas but they don’t appear to be around anymore, save a rebadged last-gen Protege. I don’t know if the Mazda2 (basically a JDM Fiesta) or Verisa (ironically previewed at NAIAS) can be modified any faster than developing new models on the new B platform.
Of course, when you’re up against Toyota, you’re racing against time. The Scion tC took 13 or so months, starting with the EU Avensis platform, putting a new body on it, sticking the Camry 2.4L drivetrain, and certifying it for US sale.
And GM seeks to cut $1 billion from their mid-sized platform R&D costs? Good luck!
While I enjoyed the article I can’t say I’m down with your economics. Production at greater than 100% capacity results in lower margins per vehicle. (That’s the definition of 100% capacity.) Production at 90 or 95% is obviously better than 80%, but when you’re hoping for growth in sales volume, it seems that the last thing you want to do is trim away all your excess production capacity (even if you don’t necessarily use it.) This is why statements promising production at 100% capacity are pure PR fluff.
wstansfi
What if you don’t expect growth in sales, because you aren’t producing anything new or interesting in the near future?
I just hope Volvo and Mazda jump ship somehow, they at least have interesting products.
kasumi:
GM, like Ford, has the cars, just in the wrong market.
GM is bringing over the Opel catalog, but very slowly, as Saturns.
But we’re not really discussing GM here. RF has a whole ‘nother column for that, 86 sessions long…
“And GM seeks to cut $1 billion from their mid-sized platform R&D costs? Good luck!”
Yeah… they’re going from selling Saaburus to building Saalibus. But as geozinger pointed out, that’s a topic for another column.
i think Ford and GM have to diff problems. it all breaks down pretty simply…GM is Overweight and Ugly…Ford is Ugly, but has a few good looking relatives that live in Europe…The Euro Focus would be a Home Run for Ford. The Yaris, Fit, xA, Versa already prove there is a market for the Ka…yet Ford lets Europe have all the fun…The longer they wait the deeper the hole they need to climb out of. Its going to be ironic when in the end they bring the EuroFocus over here, unchanged, and 5 years old already and put there hands in the air and wonder why it didnt sell well. While in the mean time Honda and Toyota have updated there small cars…Also i dont think to many ppl know that Ford owns Mazda and Volvo, it would probably be best for those to not to be associated with Ford.
Release the damn Euro Focus in the US, morons. Work on a diesel based Escape, morons. Kill Mercury off, morons.
I’m sure things aren’t that simple, but how come it’s so plain to see what needs to be done, yet they just go the opposite direction…Wouldn’t it be better to cut your losses on certain things (Expedition) and just re-FOCUS?
Edited to add…
I love the entire line of Mazda vehicles. The Mazda 3 is a homerun as far as I’m concerned…and you know damn well Ford knows it, while their brand chokes. Makes you wonder what’s going on in the boardrooms there…
geozinger-
I think GM has great opportunities with Opel (and even Holden). What I would do is create an all new Opel brand (see Scion and the rebirth of Mini in the US). Replace all Saturn and Saab dealerships with Opel. Why screw around with all this badge engineering – just start from scratch.
However, in the case of Ford and GM there have to be alot of people very protective of the current system. They’d hate to have to admit maybe these little Euopean and Japanese companies they own might know how to do it better…
K.
Being a former Sable owner I went through the head gasket replacement and got out before the transmission was able to go. Not only are todays Fords weird looking but there is no way I would trust all of these new engines and models being built by unhappy UAW workers. I wonder where the common failure is going to crop up at? I hear the triton V8 is blowing spark plugs out of the #3 hole necessating a new head and 4K in repairs. As usual Ford insists the owners are at fault, even when the plugs have never been removed or the dealer did the work.
After 52 years of owning Fords my father bought a Hyundai. My F-150 continues to amaze me with how poorly it is built and how often it breaks when I hardly use it. A Ford is most definately not in my future. If Hyundai builds a pickup based on their SUV chassis I’m interested.
Ford needs to find it’s niche. I think bringing diesel engines into their small/mid size car line-up (converting a mazda 3 and new Volvo c30 to diesel and Americanizing the styling while maintaining the interior quality).
I did a brief look on a government fuel economy website, I forget the name. And the thing that stood out to me was that a Jetta TDI got as good or better MPG than the Fit, Versa and so forth. Not everyone who wants to save money wants a sub-compact or hybrid.
Ford has access to these platforms I don’t really see the problem of producing them under the Ford brand. Mazda 3 and 6 are winners and the S40 and S60 do well. Between them you have access to proven platforms, two AWD systems and turbocharging (just use FMIC for petes sake, Mazdaspeed 6 could have been so good, such a shame…).
And while they are at it bring a version of the Reflex concept to market.
kasumi,
Your idea about GM has a lot of merit. (I would include Daewoo in that list of little companies that ‘could’) It would be a nightmare for their PR department however.
You are also correct that that many people have their ‘hooks’ into the entity that is Ford Motor Company. I was a big(!) fan of Ford in the ’80’s, they brought over some of their good cars from Europe (that I drove in the ’70’s). But somewhere in the ’90’s they decided to become the F150/Explorer company in the States, IMO.
Ford’s lack of quality control is another issue, the one that has burned me so badly, I don’t even look at them anymore. One of my co-workers has a 500. It’s a nice car, lots of room, quiet ride, looks like it would be a good highway cruiser.
I thought about it for half a minute (the lease on our Pontiac was up), but then remembered my previous Fords that had many mechanical failures, oil and coolant leaks, no starts, etc., all early in the payment book and I thought: No thanks, Bill (Ford). I’ll take my chances with Rick Wagoner again. I think they’re in a better position.
I finally understand why the domestics like NASCAR – the way forward is a never-ending series of left turns.
You can say you’ve covered a lot of ground, but at the end of the day you’re back at the same place you started from, doing burnouts like a 12-year old who just snuck the keys to his dad’s car.
Ford does actually have the cash to turn itself around, if only it could get past it’s corporate culture.
Just as GM, Ford must lose a ton of dead-weight to get back in the race. The problem with all jumbocorps is that doing that executive liposuction requires a machete and a shop-vac. It would also be far less messy if the patient did not need to be restrained during the procedure.
While Ford’s power fiefdoms spread neither far nor wide as the unmanageable disasters of GM, they still are tough to reign in. IE, the short-sighted ‘managers’ that kept the Econoline Van series alive 5 years beyond any possible reason, are not going to be axed any time soon.
The internal message is always the same at these companies. Inability to read the market is not a problem. Inability to create competitive product? No sweat. Sure we’re only making money on one tiny little niche market, but hey we’re making money so it’ll never change. Whaddya think, the price of gas is going to triple er sumpthin’?
Here’s a novel idea, a few well-publicized firings. Not reassignments, not off to pursue other opps or interests, just fired. Toasted, 86’d, fried, shotgunned, booted, sent packing, given the big adios, hasta la bye-bye.
Nothing says “priorities really have changed this time” than very publicly getting rid of a few of the old deciders of priorities. It’s amazing how quickly you will actually garner some credibility with the troops, and they will actually be much more amenable to changing direction – because they believe something might actually happen this time.
Maybe instead of hiring consultants who spend too much time going on Expeditions of the Contours of their personal Escorts (and Aspire to nothing more than achieving Fusion of their own Probes), Ford should Focus their Tempo on building the best cars in the Galaxie.
With all the comments from not only the brilliant commentators and writers at TTAC, when are they going to start making changes? These companies have to know (I hope they do) that it isn’t getting better tomorrow and taking drastic measures now is sure a lot better than filing for bankruptcy in the future. If they see bankruptcy as their salvation, that is not going to win them any fans. The leadership seem so out of touch with reality (not as bad as project Moonraker) but do they really believe they can wait out the small car market? Is something going to happen we don’t know about? Will oil prices suddenly go down? After recently buying a V70, I sure wish I had stood my ground and we bought a Rabbit instead. Come to think of it, maybe VW was right with their three-wheeled motorcycle idea.
I think we’ll always have Ford and GM, but if they think sales are slow now, can you imagine anyone walking into a Chevy dealership the day GM files?
“I’ve rented Fords in England and Europe. Similar sheet metal totally different feel when driving the car. They have tight suspension, crisp shifters and even the engines feel smoother. It ain’t rocket science. I currently drive an 89 Mustang LX 5.0 vert. There now have been two major revisions of the mustang and I have not replaced mine. Why? Because when I sit in the new ones the inside looks the same (except the quality of the plastic is not as good as my 17 year old car).”
Sounds like another foxbody stang fan, maybe you should post your thoughts on JL’s Mustang GT droptop review.
Anywho, I remember Fields and Co. saying they will delay their new small car since they didn’t feel it looked American enough. That could be true, but its a subcompact, not a muscular Mustang or trucky F150.
How Korean does it look? You can redesign it later, but Ford needs that small car right NOW, not years from now.
Unfortunately, even after 4 years in production in Europe, when the “American” Ford Focus will be out in 2008, it won’t be based on the C1 platform that is used in the European Ford Focus, Volvo Vxx and Mazda 3/5. Instead, it will be based on the 10-year old C170 platform.
As the experience with the American Focus showed Ford, they can’t just take a Euopean car and assemble it in US. The American Ford Focus had/has way too many quality problems related to production. Ford knows they’re incompetent and they don’t want to risk it again.
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/003064.html
(there is even an online petition to get Ford America to move to the C1 platform)
The 2005 Ford Focus was supposed to have many improvements over the previous, so I test drove it and still didn’t like it. The salesrep dropped the price for a fully loaded 5 door hatch from $24k CDN MSRP to $19k with 0% financing. It had more features (heated seats, mp3) than my $25k MSRP with 4.9% purchase financing Mazda 3 (managed to get $700 total in discounts). I didn’t even bother with Dodge/GM’s offerings.
1 Year later, 23000 kms, 4 oil changes, 0 problems and I haven’t regretted my decision one bit. The engine could use a bit more low rpm oomph, but I ate a lot of SUVs/Trucks (flooring their V8s on flat sections and breaking to a halt in the corners) over the weekend going to Whistler and back. Gear down just before the corner and the tranny puts the engine right around 4000 rpm and kick it just outside the curve. My in-laws swear I have a turbo under the hood.
If Ford was selling the European Focus here in Canada, I would have bought the it since it has even tighter handling than the Mazda. And guess what? in 5 years, when I need a family car, I’ll be looking at the Mazda 5, the 6 wagon or the CX-7/9.
Anyone at Ford who has been there more than 20 years should be shown the door. Give ’em an Explorer, Expedition or F150 (their choice!) and throw them out.
Hire some people who actually like cars and have a clue that there is way to make the company competitive again. Limit the number of MBAs allowed to 1 per 10,000 employees.
Then shut down Mercury, the answer to a question nobody asked.
Kick out the UAW and do like Toyota and Honda do and run without a union.
Then do the same at GM (they just get a different vehicle choice as their exit prize) and you kill off Buick and Hummer–for starters. Or sell the whole wretched mess to Toyota.
Ford has a tiny window of opportunity. They need to reskin the Focus with an slightly more aesthetic body and interior, interior, interior!
The Fusion won’t sell in the numbers to produce the turnaround, the 500 is a flop, and as said by many here, Mercury could disappear tomorrow, and noboby (except a few die-hard nostalgists) would even notice.
I still think GM has a better shot of turning things around than does Ford, and the reference to NASCAR is funny because things look as bad for them in NASCAR as they do out here in the marketplace (see Robert Yates fiasco).
I thought American cars were actually American, and not just foreign platforms with what Ford management considers “American” styling cues.
If you get what I’m saying, they are killing off what makes an American car unique – the actually traits, for some shiny exterior styling. An American car has been reduced to just another marketing ploy.
I want relatively low tech, V-8, rwd with durability. Of course, even the Panther could use a powertrain, styling, and interior update – it is 28 model years old.
Instead we’ll get styling cues on European and Japanese bread boxes.
No thanks.
Hey, GS650G?
If you are sick to the back teeth with Fords (I certainly got to that point oh, about 10 years ago, after not having had a Ford since a new 1975 Pinto but I digress) then perhaps you might be interested in knowing that KIA, which is 50% owned by Hyundai, may well offer a pickup based on their on-frame Sorento SUV, once and if they decide to produce it. Due to our “chicken law” (more about which later), trucks must be built in North America or be subject to a 25% tariff. So it will be years before KIA (and even Hyundai) offer a pickup.
You could consider a Toyota pickup. Look at the quality, ask Toyota truck owners, go drive one.
The “chicken tax” was a penalty against the West Germans in the 1960’s, due to West Germany adding a tariff on US produced poultry for food, since the German farmers could not get close to the efficiency of our big farms. So, in retaliation, the US Government put a 25% tariff on imported pickup trucks, specificially aimed at penalizing Volkswagen’s few sales of VW Bus-based pickup trucks, the sales of which obviousl ceased after the tariff was implemented.
Isn’t it just like a Government to leave a punishing tariff in place 40 plus years “after the fact”?
It is ironic that our wonderful Guv-mutt leaves an outdated tarriff in place that has resulted in Toyota and Nissan manufacturing scads of trucks in the US employing US workers while the American brands build trucks in Canada and Mexico.
If it ain’t broke, the Guv-mutt can fix it ’til it is.
This is brilliant, simply brilliant:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4777303.stm
Jon.
“The market for subcompact autos in the United States could reach 600,000 units annually by the end of the decade, But he says Ford will not enter this growing domestic segment until it has something different to offer consumers.”
somewhere he is depriving a village of an idiot!
I’ll see your BBC article and raise you a Clarkson Review of a Ford…
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12529-2299276,00.html
It’s the management. None of the ideas that could save Ford will be implemented by the current regime.
Oh sure, there’s the fun of home-self-immolation-video aka ‘www.bold moves’, but how does that play on level four of the 7-layers-of-dumb management?
It doesn’t. Everyone goes on there merry little way to protect their fiefdom, and Ford continues to head straight for the iceberg.
Meanwhile, maybe a couple of guys on the bridge get it. But the rest of the crew simply doesn’t listen.
Nothing of any substance will (or can) change at the Big 2 without several hundred managers being pinkslipped en masse.
This is the way big corps all work. Even when the leadership has a clue, there are so many layers of incompetance left over from the last six regime changes one has to make some serious changes in overhead staff to get the average staffer to buy in, or even be able to buy in to the new vision.
I think it’s quite possible that ford could be recategorized as a “hobby expenditure” by u.s. tax law soon. A company needs to make a profit once every 7 years to be considered a business.
It seems like the simple thing for ford to do with their excess production capacity would be to subcontract out the space. With japanese automakers building factories in the united states, would it be that hard to simply relive them of that stress?
For those who say Ford should just bring over its European cars, would their contracts with the UAW allow them to do that? I can’t imagine that the union would be happy about seeing Ford get rich selling imported cars while the assembly lines remain idle. As for the idea of manufacturing the Euro-spec cars in US plants, is that even possible?
I do remember that when I was stationed in Germany (87-89) I was surprised to see thousands of “Fords” that had nothing in common with their American counterparts except for the nameplate.
Personally, I’m waiting for Ford’s and GM’s North American operations to be reclassified as “non-profit organizations.”
“This is the way big corps all work. Even when the leadership has a clue, there are so many layers of incompetance left over from the last six regime changes…” – gbh
Sometimes it’s the lowest levels that actually have a clue but can’t get a hearing from the top.
Happy to see Ford go. Sad that they are taking Mazda with them. RIP, Ford.
I think Taxman is onto something here. What ford does well, they do in spite of their intentions. This explains the wither and die philosophy of the focus, taurus, etc etc… They simply do not take seriously the refinement of otherwise workable designs like the focus, freestyle, and 500. Refine refine refine….
Would the fleets/police refuse buy crown vics if they could buy an improved product?
Would the 500 sell better with an decently efficient AWD V8 sans the CVT? Heck, they should work like hell to refine the V8 to a solid 30mpg as that alone would be a significant achievement for the American marketplace. How about a Freestyle without the CVT that could tow a moderate load? Or maybe a Fusion that could achieve 40mpg?
These current vehicles arent necessarily bad offerings, but they need the level of refinement that prosepective buyers are looking for, AND the FoMoCo employees who DO put in an honest days work deserve. These are decisions that the other successful companies made earlier and committed to. I hope Ford will commit to sell seriously refined AMERICAN cars and not try to offer us the next camry.
The weird part to me is how close Ford is to not being awful.
Mustang — winner
Freestyle — winner with NO advertising at all.
Focus — so close — raise the price by $1,000 and fix the damn interior. Also, it looks like a Five Hundred, so reskin it. And sell an SVT version.
Escape — Winner, but is in desperate need of a redesign
Fusion — Winner looks wise, but could be bolder overall
Crown Vic — Loved by many. Don’t kill it, redesign it.
Five Hundred — Enormous loser. Kill it now. Put a new Crown Vic in its place.
Explorer — Snore
Sport Trac — As bad as bad can be.
Lincoln — copy Cadillac
Mercury — copy Plymouth
dhathewa,
“Sometimes it’s the lowest levels that actually have a clue but can’t get a hearing from the top.”
Don’t get me wrong. I will state till the day I die, that American engineers and designers and workers can be as talented and qualified as any in the world. Bar none.
I wasn’t trying to suggest for a moment that the lower/bottom ranks were not capable of ‘getting it’.
What I do suggest is that in order for any drastic changes to take place (and if Ford/GM don’t need drastic, I don’t know who does) there has to be a real atmosphere of change.
In other words, department heads must roll. VPs must be vanquished. Blood (metaphorically) must be spilled wide and visibly.
Yes, after a shake-up things take a minute to settle. Who cares? Like another month or three of disorganization is going to put this ship in more dangerous waters? The management in place has proven that it cannot get the job done. Or that it cannot step up to the plate when others are choking and call them on it. Lack of leadership, lack of direction, lack of vision.
No shortage of spinning bovine dung.
Promote some new people. Like a few hundred. What’s the worst that can happen, a V10 Focus? Return of an upsized Excursion? Another pointless appearance package for the Mustang?
Sure, the guy at the bottom of pecking order might get it. But if his boss is the same a-hole that still thinks we should all drive SUVs, guess where his motivation goes. That’s my real point. Ford can be saved, but real changes have to be made. (And by ‘real’ I mean people are held accountable for getting Ford here in the first place, and summarily removed from the machine.)
If the guys on the 14th floor really want to hear from the troops, they can anytime. But they don’t want to hear.
Jonny, you gonna buy us all drinks with those Ford checks?
(semi-sarcasm, but I’m beginning to wonder)
gbh,
I point you to the five FoMoCo products I have reviewed recently.
to refresh your memory
Mustang
Mariner Hybrid
Freestyle
Sport Trac
Focus
Obviously I’m on their payroll.
I guess that’s what I don’t get. In your reviews you point out multiple fatal flaws in all of those vehicles. Why do you then go on to call them ‘winners’?
Sure, maybe with a few years of work, they can be in the ballpark, but none of them are close to ‘winners’ as they stand.
If they were, they’d be selling better, no?
Having driven all of the aforementioned Fords recently (sans Mariner), I would tend to agree with most of your assessments – I guess I just don’t get the conclusion. Mustang doesn’t handle well, brake well, have a decent interior, get mileage, but it does have a loud paint job and 300 HP?
That’s all it takes for you to like it and think it’s a winner? Huh?
The focus platform is a winner — one of the best handling cars I’ve ever driven. The problem is the engine and the interior — easy, easy fixes.
The Mustang handles just fine and brakes just fine — however, if you treat it like an Elise or a Boxster, it fails. If you treat it like what it is, it is close to perfection. It has not fatal flaws.
And, for the record, the Mustang is selling extremely well.
However, besides lack of advertising on Ford’s part, I cannot understand why the Freestyle is not selling better.
I was badly screwed by Ford once and swore that I would never, under any circumstances, buy a Ford again. Even if I relented, as I was tempted to do recently, my wife hates Ford for that incident even more than I do, so the following is entirely academic… …
I’m also surprised that Ford’s not doing better. Their product line actually strikes me as decent.
In particular, I don’t understand why the Five Hundred doesn’t sell well. It’s attractive. That’s a subjective thing but it has clean lines and a recognizable shape. Lots of interior room. Big trunk. The technicals are, seemingly, there; four-wheel independent suspension, DOHC 24 valve engin, 6-speed automatic. Is it the smallish motor? Does everybody who would even consider a Ford require NASCAR-like performance in every vehicle? It’s one of the two Fords I could be tempted to buy.
The other being the Escape. I admire Ford for delivering an effective hybrid in an attractive and useful package. Could it be better? Sure, but it’s good enough and not terribly expensive. Friends with conventional Escapes have expressed great satsifaction.
Is it quality/reliability issues? Before I buy a car, and I buy most of mine used, I check CR and Edmunds. The Focus looked pretty good until I looked into the reliability and then I went scurrying back to Toyota.
So, in other words, it’s like Ford has the ingredients right, they have the recipe right, but they keep pulling the cake out of the oven an hour too early?
dhathewa: I agree with you about the Five Hundred. I think it is a reasonably decent looking car for a full-size sedan. I suspect the biggest reason it sells poorly is that it came out at the same time (or thereabouts) as the Chrysler 300, and it looks invisible next to one.
If Ford wants to sell the Five Hundred they should make it rear-wheel drive and drop a 500 cu. in. V8 in it. They’ll have to make it a limited edition to avoid killing their CAFE number though. Kinda defeats the purpose…
I was looking at a Focus wagon before I bought my Forester, and I couldn’t believe the number of recalls and issues with the car. I wouldn’t touch it with the proverbial 10′ pole.
Jonny: I think you are generally right about the near-goodness of the Ford product line. As the comments show, however, enough people have been burned by Fords that they won’t even entertain one. And if they want to sell Freestyles they need to put a Fusion grille on it (coming, I think?) and make it a little more visually appealing. Come up with a hybrid version and they’re gold.
“In other words, department heads must roll. VPs must be vanquished. Blood (metaphorically) must be spilled wide and visibly.”
It seems as though no one has the courage to do just that. Either that, or the execs could simply care less. Hard to change the direction of a company whose top men already have their golden parachutes at the ready, managers fiercely protecting their fiefdoms, a labor union that’s hostile to unconventional methods and workers who are only looking towards their next check. Empathsis has been taken off making the cars better and placed on pet causes (Ford’s stand with homosexuality), lost causes (Ford’s large SUV’s) and further parachute packing.
The only thing that could possibly save Ford is being sent through the bankrupcy grinder, only to be gobbled by a no-nonsense auto manufacturer willing to remove the dead weight. Any suggestions as to who’d step up to the corpse?
I previously left a post on Ford Death Watch 1 –
“Quality Leadership ? Cheap shot by Ford Motor Company”
I can now write they have countered nicely!
Yesterday the State of Michigan announced a deal that will offer Ford Motor Co. $151 million in Michigan tax breaks in order to spur $1 billion in Ford investments and save aprox. 14,000 jobs in Michigan.
http://qualityg.blogspot.com/2006/08/quality-leadership-cheap-shot-by-ford.html
“Well, listen to this from today’s Detroit News: “The market for subcompact autos in the United States could reach 600,000 units annually by the end of the decade, according to Mark Fields, president of Ford Motor Co.’s Americas group. But he says Ford will not enter this growing domestic segment until it has something different to offer consumers.” At the very moment Toyota’ small cars are eating up the US market, at the very moment Ford should be rushing a killer B-segment car to market, Fields is publicly declaring a “wait and see†approach.”
Let’s see, assuming a flat US Auto market through 2010, 600,000 vehicles in a 17 million vehicle market is 3.5 percent of the total market for subcompacts. That’s hardly a huge market segment, especially considering it is the very bottom of the market with little or no profit margin. As I said in another post on this site, I don’t see a large percentage of 200 plus pound American men folding themselves into subcompacts any time soon. Sure, this market is growing fast, but that’s because it started from less than the share of 2 seat sports cars a few year ago. Also, I think subcompacts will loose some momentum after the first few press reports showing the unrecognizable Yaris that has just been flattened by an Expedition EL.
Considering even the best of these vehicles by the best manufactures have very thin profit margins, I agree with Ford for not rushing into this market without very careful planning and development. Does Ford even make any money on the Focus in North America? So how are they going to make money on an even smaller, cheaper car?
Toyota succeed for several reasons.
Consistency!
Global Awareness
Long term planning
Understanding risk
I don’t think that Ford lag so far behind in any of these respects, it’s just that Toyota have been working this way for the last 30 years+.
There are all kinds of reasons why Ford can’t simply build the C1 or any B cars in the US.
But there are all kinds of reasons why they should.
Would Toyota?
Ford focus Bioflex
At an average cost of around 19,000 euros (approximately £13,000, which is 350 euros – around £250 – more than a model with a classic engine), the fuel tank of a “flex-fuel” vehicle can take standard petrol derived from fossil energy (oil), but also E85…
see
http://www.viamichelin.com/viamichelin/gbr/tpl/mag5/art20060801/htm/tech-ford-bioflex.htm#
I want to defend the present US Focus.
We have three Focus (Foci?) in our family; a 2003 ZX5 with the Sport package, a 2004 SE four door, and a 2004 SVT. These cars have been workhorses with the ZX5 and SE racking up over 100,000 and 80,000 trouble-free miles. These are great handling cars (the SE was retrofitted with the ZX5 sport suspension while the ZX5 was fitted with the SVT suspension – $285 from Ford Racing), offer very good performance and comfort in their price range, and I think have pretty decent interiors. These are solid, comfortable cars.
I have also driven the Mazda3 and Volvo S40, whose platform the New Focus is based on. These are much improved cars that are sold at a premium. Comparing these cars to the old Focus isn’t really fair. But I’ll take an old Focus over a new Cobalt anytime.
Conversely, is there any good reason why Ford doesn’t sell the Freestyle or 500 in Europe?
Years ago they used to rule the large sedan segment with the Granada.
They killed this off with the fugly Scorpio. Surely wouldn’t do any harm to test the water.
Oh, and when is the Capri going to get a revival?
I don’t think the large sedan segment is big enough in Europe. Honda still offers the Accord, but Toyota pulled the Camry as unsuited for the market.
Yeah like BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Volvo, Jaguar, Lexus, etc
Of course there’s a market for large sedans in Europe, it’s the home of the large sedan.
Even Peugeot and, lately, Citroen are trying to get back in the game.
Lancia and Alfa Romeo have also had a go and even VW produced the inexpensive Skoda Superb.
Ford NA has large, inexpensive, sedans which, to my mind, would find a niche in Europe. The exchange rate is favorable and dealers would be eager for new product.
The products are straightforward and not trying to “be” something they are not. The Freestyle is especially suited to EU tastes. If it had a diesel it would surely be a winner.
Is it not better to shift an extra 50,000 units of your own product than design a Jaguar made from Ford parts which both damages the premier brand and fails to meet unrealistic sales forecasts.
Chrysler are finding acceptance of the 300 and Magnum, even in Germany.
Even Buick could have some success in this market!
tyoung9, the 500 and Freestyle would be eaten alive, in their current configuration, in Europe. These cars would have to be ‘re-engineered’ by Ford of Europe in order for them to sell well.
I’m no expert but I lived in Germany for 8 years recently until 2003. The problem when US cars go there is they double in price for some mysterious reason. I was back in Holland recently and a $29k 300C was starting at 48k euros – about $60Gs. Insane.
As for euro Fords/GMs that could be brought here and sold, there are plenty. Better yet, why not just build the things here in the UAW plants. From what I understand Toyota employees et al are paid similarly to UAW folk, but are requireld to be able to perform more tasks and the like. That means pay is not the issue, but employee skills and flexibility.
Anyway, I and my family have personally had great experiences with Ford products and have taken each of them up to a few 100k miles with few problems (knock on wood). I love my current 02 F150 save the mileage, but the Tundra didn’t get better mileage and cost more. I have also strayed into a Honda (made in Japan) and paid the price … literally … for that. I may buy another one, but I would be weary. Also had a crappy Audi and a POS BMW and came back to Ford because they are solid, they start, and they don’t cause problems. So it stands to reason I am a Ford customer and want to stay one.
If I had to choose today there is not one Ford offered in the USA that gets me going. I dont want another truck or an SUV due to the gas, the 500 is geared toward grandpa, the Fusion is unimpressive and boring to sit in, the Mustang is unpractical, and the USA Focus is a joke. The upcoming Edge is maybe interesting but the mileage is scary (as with the CX-7). I would probably end up in a Mazda 6 or 3, both of which look damn good and offer excellent value, so Ford would lose me.
If however, Ford offered the Aussie Focus XR5 Turbo (see link below) I would go to my dealership this very minute and buy one.
http://www.ford.com.au/range/focus/models/xr5turbo.asp
PS – first post here so I hope that link works.
off on a tangent
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jm/07chryslerpreview.htm
Is Chrysler pulls a Caddy – new Durang-based SUV for Chrysler. Lots of new interior bits, but the shape of the vehicle, the lines from the hood back, all scream “Durango!”
Also some more pictures of the new Sebring and Pacifica.
I’m tired of Ford & GM financial bean counters/MBA pontificators who want to drain organizations of innovation, creativity and passion. Condense it all to the bottom line, in the box, or better yet, “paint by the numbers and don’t go outside the lines.†Boundaries cause employees to stop working, and worse yet, worry about what each other is doing as opposed to concentrating on what matters most to the customer!
Too much gym fighting, step outside and fight the real battle.