"Joel, you wanna know something? Every now and then say, 'What the fuck.' 'What the fuck' gives you freedom. Freedom brings opportunity. Opportunity makes your future.' Of course, we here at TTAC say WTF on a regular basis, albeit in a more quizzical context. But it behooves Ford CEO Alan Mulally to put on those clear glasses of his (sunglasses would be metaphorically appropriate, but there you go) and deal with the fact that automaking is a risky business. Ford's amazingly talented engineers lack freedom. The engineers' freedom is Ford's opportunity. And opportunity can make FoMoCo's future. As a proud American, I am disgusted at the decline and fall of The Big 2.8. GM; I don't need to say anything about GM today. Chrysler is run by a man who already pocketed $200m for running a company into the ground. But Ford clearly know what they should be doing. Bold Moves? Yes please. But they aren't doing it. I blame Mulally. Mulally is the beancounter GM CEO Rick Wagoner thinks he is. Great. Good for him. Toyota-away I say. BUT DON'T BUILD TOYOTAS. Build something uniquely American and completely spectacular. And then, if you have to, go bankrupt. But do not do so building Camcord clones in Mexico.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
BUT DON’T BUILD TOYOTAS. Build something uniquely American and completely spectacular.
Thanks for this Robert.
If the Detroit automakers need any suggestions on what this means, I’ll be glad to help.
Here is what I don’t understand about this. You are telling Alan to build something uniquely American, to not build Toyotas, and admonishing him for being a bean counter.
Fine.
But 3 hours ago, another TTAC contributor pans Chrysler’s new Challenger for being retro and blah blah, and basically asking for Detroit to move on. This despite the tremendous buzz surrounding the Challenger, and the huge response on pre-orders.
So which is it? Build Toyota’s or build something uniquely American? You can’t criticize both ways. Chrysler does something uniquely American and receives criticism. Ford does Toyota and receives criticism. It would seem that someone needs to make up their minds around here.
Well build something with American style inside and out but otherwise build Toyotas?
The American aspect:
Styling, design, amenities
The Toyota aspect:
Quality, economy, durability, reliability and efficiency.
Put to two together and Bingo! Perhaps thats what RF means.
Robert: Its very easy to have a balls to the wall attitude…to muster up every bit of testosterone possible and say “Team—lets go big or go home”
Whats needed at Ford RIGHT NOW is discipline—setting the foundation for success through clear strategy and commitment against the fundamentals.
In my experience—-I have seen more business and brand turnarounds with this approach than throwing every chip on the table hoping you beat the dealer.
If Ford doesn’t first fix what has been f’d up for the last 30 years—you will never get to the end goal. I think Mulally can fix the foundation (big progress has been made on the quality front) and further believe that the engineering and design talent will be better off if they can utilize their creative freedom in a much more focused and strategic way.
There is nothing more demotivating for a designer or engineer than to come up with a great idea only to be told it cannot move forward because it is off strategy or cannot be funded.
Last, I believe ideas above the Camcord are there (eg. Verve and Flex)—–I will be the first to stand up and say more ideas have to come sooner in order for Ford to survive. I just have more confidence than you that Mulally’s disciplined approach will get them there.
Caveot: I do not work for Ford—have never worked for Ford—have no relatives that work for Ford—and do not live in Michigan. Inother words—I have no skin in the game other than rooting for an American Icon to get off of the mat and succeed. Without focus and discipline—I am afraid that will never happen.
Alex Rodriguez :
So which is it? Build Toyota’s or build something uniquely American? You can’t criticize both ways. Chrysler does something uniquely American and receives criticism. Ford does Toyota and receives criticism. It would seem that someone needs to make up their minds around here.
Hands-up: that was me slating the Challengargerarostang. But a few points…
1. The Chrysler 300 was something uniquely American. And a huge hit. Until they did nothing with it. That– although not specifically that– was both the potential starting point and the template for the rebirth of the American car.
2. Ford does Toyota and receives criticism. Yes. As one of our best and brightest said, the Fusion does NOTHING better than its competitors. It is a Camcord clone. Meh.
3. I made up my mind a long time ago that America CAN build the world’s best cars. We have in the past. And we do now. It’s just that American car companies are not, in the main, building them.
A few years after Chapter 11 rides into Motown, pistonheads will see a flowering of automotive talent that will leave them breathless. It may or may not involve The Big 2.8, but it will be spectacular.
umterp85 :
Whats needed at Ford RIGHT NOW is discipline—setting the foundation for success through clear strategy and commitment against the fundamentals.
Check the balance sheet. Clock the market share. It’s too late. I repeat…
“Joel, you wanna know something? Every now and then say, ‘What the fuck.’ ‘What the fuck’ gives you freedom. Freedom brings opportunity. Opportunity makes your future.’
It not now, when?
Robert, I hope you are right about the potential rebirth of Detroit in the future.
I just think that if you want uniquely American products to come out of Detroit, then it disingenuous to pan and criticize Detroit for making uniquely American products, even if they are “retro”. Challenger is exactly that, it could not possibly be more American.
And 300C is going to refreshed for 2009 with possible new interior, at least that’s what I’m hearing.
“The Chrysler 300 was something uniquely American. And a huge hit. Until they did nothing with it.”
I know it seems like the 300 has been out forever, but it just came out in the 2005 MY! That means the 2008 MY is only it’s 4th for this version. Even Honda & Toyota don’t redo the Camcord that often anymore.
Granted, Chryberus should have something lined up for 2009MY to get ahead of the curve, but probably won’t. But even if they don’t drop a new generation 300 until 2010MY it still wouldn’t be any worse than Honda or Toyota, so cut them some slack on that one.
Robert—we are talking about running a company not getting into Princeton. I do not think creative thinking and discipline are mutually exclusive notions.
btw—loved that movie—brings back my youth—Fields could play Guido the Killer Pimp
Nobody wants American. It’s not a perception in quality gap, or decades of poor product and an unforgiving generation, it’s just an unpopular thing to do.
What is the definition of an American car? It’s big, it’s bold, it’s in-your-face. It’s also politically incorrect, evil, and it’s been morphed into a representation of everything wrong with the planet.
Global warming? We think Suburbans and H2’s, not Sequoias and G-Wagens. That old man in his Buick or Grand Marquis? He must’ve voted for Bush and supports the war in Iraq. Sophisticated and worldly? Not if you have a Cadillac in your driveway. It’s a derrogatory slight when we consider Toyota to have, “gone American” when they introduced the new Camry and Tundra.
It all boils down to the simple math that it’s much safer to build a CamCord clone than it is to build a 300/Charger clone. Nobody want’s American, it’s just not the ‘in’ thing to have anymore.
I agree with this piece. The key to salvation for American automakers is not building knock-off Camcords, importing little Korean or Chinese cars and hoping they sell or reshaping their once proud brands into me-too copies of foreign brands that we already have.
It’s re-examining what made their brands famous in the first place, what they were known for, the styling and nameplates that are famous to these brands, then applying a 21st century twist to it. TTAC published a few great pieces about GM’s storied brand history, that’s one major part of engineering a sustained comeback.
Cars like the Mustang, Camaro and Challenger are vital to brand image, but so is making all cars with as much passion and style that went into the muscle cars.
Buick needs a stylish and thoroughly modern Riviera reminiscent of the great Rivieras of old, not some Asian-looking concept designed in Shanghai. It needs a new Regal, LeSabre, and RWD Park Avenue with as much verve as the Enclave recieved.
You could apply what I just said to every major American brand and see how much potential there is for greatness. If only Big Three management could do the same, often I think they all have no idea where they came from and certainly have no idea how to go back.
another Thank You to RF
Sophisticated and worldly? Not if you have a Cadillac in your driveway.
Damn. I guess I had better forget the three other languages I speak along with my love of classical art and music just because I happen to really like the Cadillac sitting in my driveway.
This discussion of branding and whatever Detroit should do is getting ridiculous. It’s simple, really, they need to make cars people want to buy, period. Personally, there are number of Detroit products I would buy right now if I were in the market. However since my CTS is still going strong, that won’t be for another year or so and ony then because I’ll want to buy a new car rather than need to buy a new car.
Buick needs a stylish and thoroughly modern Riviera reminiscent of the great Rivieras of old, not some Asian-looking concept designed in Shanghai. It needs a new Regal, LeSabre, and RWD Park Avenue with as much verve as the Enclave recieved.
Today’s younger folks have no memory of those old Buicks and care even less. Buick is finished. When my kids travel in the car with me, they notice Audis, Nissans, BMW’s etc. and pay no attention to domestic cars except for Buicks. They look for the grey (gray) hair behind the wheel and say, “Look there’s another OFB” (Old Fart in a Buick). According to them young people don’t buy Buicks and they don’t drive them either unless they borrowed grandpa’s car. The best thing GM could do is give Buick a decent burial with full honours and move on.
oboylepr:
I consider my self young (23), and I’d have no probelm driving around in a Buick. A nice GNX…I’ve seen what those things can do first hand. Hell, last time I went to Ennis, I watched one blow away a SC’d Viper.
i have yet to understand why GM has pulled its plans to do RWD cars. why does RWD mean they cant comply with the MPG standards?
Pulling from there history is not a successful strategy. The people that remember when GM was the top dog and made the best stuff on the road probably wont be driving for to much longer. They need something totally new and different. something people will look at, for better or worse. look at how much exposure the 1st gen scion xB got, just because it was different.
yournamehere: “look at how much exposure the 1st gen scion xB got, just because it was different”
I think the same will be true for the new Ford Flex….right Robert Farago ?
I consider my self young (23), and I’d have no probelm driving around in a Buick
Yes, God Bless You, you are young. I’d have no problem driving one either but then I’m an old fart myself!
Of all the people within the company to be blamed, Mulally is probably pretty low on the list. As many anecdotal stories of name changes and product edicts as we’ve heard, they betray the fact that Mulally is not a micromanager of departments below his direct reports.
Mulally is shaping things so that each inidividual group can execute on a specific plan effectively. He delegates, not dictates, and in return gets upward feedback that forces groups to be transparent or fail. Mulally doesn’t determine how much freedom engineers are given – that would be someone like Field’s job and now Farley’s job. Mulally says give me products and checks up on the progress – but Fields, Kuzak, Farley and Mays drive that progress.
I will mention one example of freedom at Ford and that is SYNC. Some engineers came up with the idea away from the dictations of Fields and old Bill in 2006 and 15 months later cars rolled off the assembly line with SYNC. Management said, “cool,” product was developed, SYNC is fairly successful.
I agree completely with umterp85 that what Ford needs is discipline. That doesn’t mean lacking ingenuity or creativity or freedom, but focusing it to get some results out of your innovative moments.
I certainly understand and agree with your call for more distinctly “Ford” products. Without an identity, Ford as a brand is useless. However, without some sort of discipline – fiscal, operationally, organizationally – no car, no matter how “distinctly American” it is will help Ford turn around (see 300C). I would like to tell everyone to believe that those products are coming, that Ford couldn’t create a brand new line-up in 12 months, but no one, I’m sure, will listen.
However, a product cadence is beginning at Ford starting with the Flex that will see a huge amount of turnover in their line-up. Within 24 months of the launch of the Flex, the Verve, Focus, Fusion, Taurus, Mustang, Edge, F-150, MKS, MKZ, MKX, MKT and Navigator will all be new or heavily updated (I’ve left Mercury off). There are also other big things on the horizon with less certain timelines (the new Explorer, global Ranger, Transit Connect, C2 Escape, global RWD and a host of other things that I’m sure we don’t know about).
With Farley at the marketing helm, Mulally directing the operations overhaul, access to $45 billion in cash and this product line-up on its way, I am far more optimistic of Ford’s future than I was just about six months ago. But, despite that, I can understand why you and many others don’t see it that way.
I agree, I think Ford will make it.
umterp85 :
@yournamehere: “look at how much exposure the 1st gen scion xB got, just because it was different”
I think the same will be true for the new Ford Flex…
To its credit, the 1st gen xB was also a 15k car that got over 30mpg, without the added bulk and poor visibility of the gen2 xB. The Flex will cost double and get barely over half that mpg. OTOH, the upcoming Nissan Cube looks to slide right into the square hold the original xB left behind.
What’s the difference between a Flex and the Taurus X? Not much other than the sheetmetal, from what I can tell. Engine, drivetrain, interior layout – the same. The originally planned for sliding doors would have been interesting but were cost-cut. Will those changes be sufficient in face of the financial crapstorm 2008 is turning out to be? At least it’s not a Toyota clone, although one could make the argument that the drab-looking but extremely competent Sienna has the Flex spanked in almost about every other way.
starlightmica…I predict the Taurus X is history within a year of the Flex arrival so that is a moot point.
The Flex will be Ford’s 3 row entry in the crossover segment. It will compete with the GM trio—not the XB—net the Flex is aimed squarley at families.
I saw the Flex in person when i traveled to Detroit last weekend and was impressed more in person than what I have seen in pictures. It is pretty cool looking (I like the white roof) and from what I saw of the interior—the design seems strong. I don’t think it will be for everyone—-but the Flex brings some “coolness” to family transport. I think our own Mr. Farago has given the Flex a thumbs up in his initial look.
BTW—-the Flex should come in at 24-25 highway MPG—-much better than the “half the mileage of the XB” hyperbolic statement you made.
“I will mention one example of freedom at Ford and that is SYNC. Some engineers came up with the idea away from the dictations of Fields and old Bill in 2006 and 15 months later cars rolled off the assembly line with SYNC. Management said, “cool,” product was developed, SYNC is fairly successful.”
That’s not quite how things progressed. Fiat had an exclusive one-year deal to offer Sync in the EU starting March 2006. The deal with Ford did not come until later.
umpter85:
BTW—-the Flex should come in at 24-25 highway MPG—-much better than the “half the mileage of the XB” hyperbolic statement you made.
I’m glad to hear that the Flex looks & feels good, because that’s all it’s got over its well-regarded but slow-selling predecessor. Perhaps the Range Rover look will do the trick.
2008 Ford Taurus X FWD avg mpg 19 (16/24)
2006 Scion xB auto avg mpg 28 (26/31 by 2008 method) stickered avg 31 (30/34)
19/28 = 68%, two thirds > half; okay, you got me there.
You’d never believe by reading this site that the Fusion actually sells well. Ford making Toyotas (ie; a car that gets a top reliability rating from CR) seems to be working well.
Chrysler’s lousy quality hasn’t helped the 300 any.
Ford’s actually sell pretty well by the numbers
Ford had 8 cars that sold over 100K units last year
starlightmica: “I’m glad to hear that the Flex looks & feels good, because that’s all it’s got over its well-regarded but slow-selling predecessor”
Differentiating style and high quality / well appointed interior have sold alot of cars in the past…agreed ?
Also—I can assure you—the marketing plan surrounding this launch will be exponentially bigger than anything you have seen from Ford especially when compared to the 500/Taurus marketing debacle.
The Flex + F150 launches will also be Farley’s to own. Given his history with Lexus and Scion—I am confident that these launches will not only have mega $’s—but also effective communication.
umterp85 :
Bummer for Farley & Co. – Ford’s launching the F-150 into an economy that’s not looking good, and that product matters far more than the Flex. Best of luck to to them.
Flex will make the Taurus X pointless. And based on the pictures on Ford’s website, Flex should be a hit. For one thing, Ford has remembered that for the people riding inside, a box shape beats the egg shape. The second-row seating accommodations look great. I could get very, very interested if there was a Flex-like vehicle a foot shorter and 500 pounds lighter.
A Lincoln-ized Flex would be a terrific VIP-hauler and livery car. There’s easy in/out, a cooler for beverages and a screen for stock market reports, and room for La-Z-Boy inspired thrones. Make the car a three-box design and the Town Car is reborn!
Startlightmica: Are you suggesting that they don’t improve and market the F150 becuase of a down economy?
You can’t control the economy—you can control improving your product. The pick-up segment may be declining—but it is still huge and profitable. The F150 will be best in class on a number of dimensions….this will give Farley plenty to market