Ford’s press release (PDF) makes no bones about the source of relatively high demand for its products. “The U.S. government’s Car Allowance Rebate System (“Cash for Clunkers”) enabled Ford to post the first sales increase of any major manufacturer in 2009,” is the word from Dearborn. And though Ford’s year-on-year sales for July did climb by 2.4 percent, July marks the first such increase since November 2007. Most of that growth came from Ford’s more fuel-efficient vehicles, as Fusion/Milan was up 66/60 percent, Escape/Mariner up 94/71 percent, Focus up 44 percent and Ranger up 65 percent. So, government-stimulated models aside, how are things looking for the Blue Oval Boyz?
Er, not so great after all. The much-vaunted Taurus is way down, shedding 57 percent compared to last July’s sales of the outgoing model. Ford’s other big hope, the Flex, sold only 3,631 units. Though that’s a year-on-year increase of nearly 65 percent, it breaks the model’s steady volume increase trajectory, having sold 4,784 units last month. And the Taurus isn’t the only recently-refreshed Ford that is failing to spark demand: the new 2010 Mustang has hit the skids, down 37.6 percent to 6,686 units. Edge is holding relatively steady, falling only 7.7 percent.
Ranger may be blowing up, but F-series is down 19 percent. Econoline/Club Wagon is doing even worse at -30 percent. Expedition is down 26 percent, but it’s closing the gap on Explorer which was down 42 percent to 3,108 units.
Lincoln is down across the board, with the single exception of an uptick in Town Car sales (up 95 percent to 1,841). That surge makes the Panther body Lincoln’s biggest volume seller, with MKX coming in second at 1,642 (down 18 percent). Milan and Mariner may be saving Mercury, but Sable (-84.8 percent to 345 units) and Mountaineer (-30 percent to 403 units) are helping drag it right back down. Meanwhile, Volvo’s S60 is enjoying an unexpected summer renaissance, up 257 percent to 1,461 units. XC90 is the biggest loser (down 45 percent) while V50 (+50 percent) and C70 (+27 percent) are hanging in there.
I move that we take Ford officially off of Death Watch.
The Taurus is down because there are none available. The largest Ford dealers in Silicon Valley have all shown zero Taurii in stock for many weeks now.
The Flex has indeed flopped.
The 2009 Taurus has been pretty much unavailable for most of July. The 2010 model has just begun trickling into dealerships this weekend.
The Flex was also in model switchover mode.
John Horner, Ford potentially faces some serious difficulties in refinancing huge chunks of debt that come due in the next couple of years. Despite their debt for equity swap, they’re still carrying a very heavy load. Any hiccups in the growth of the market or their market share would leave them very vulnerable.
Ford Sales Increase 2.4 percent, Still Down 30 Percent On The Year
Berlin wall Falls, Border Guards Lose Jobs. :P
This is great news for Ford, even better that a lot of those gains come from actual cars, not F-150s.
Based on the rise of Ford stock you would have been better of using the cost of Ford car and purchasing the stock. 25K would be over 200K. Go Ford!!! Top bad nothing they make appeals to me although I do think the Flex is funky (I currently have a R320 to haul my brood). If Ford is going to survive they need the 21 to 55 age group badly. Why cant I have the body of the 2006 Mercedes S500 with the reliable of Lexus!
Paul: The financial markets do not seem overly concerned about the prospects for Ford refinancing its debt.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32270565/site/14081545?__source=yahoo|headline|quote|text|&par=yahoo
“The much-vaunted Taurus is way down, shedding 57 percent compared to last July’s sales of the outgoing model.”
Surely you jest! There were NO 2010 Tauruses on the lots in July.
Besides that, I am not surprised by the sales results this month. The only cars that were really going to sell (in the days of Cash 4 Clunkers) are the A. fuel efficient and B. Affordable offerings.
Had the Fiesta been available, I have a feeling it would have done gang-busters…
“Fox body Lincoln’s biggest volume seller”
I think you mean Panther platform. The Fox platform of Ford Fairmont and Mustang fame is long dead.
The Sable is down because it is dead. The outgoing 2009 versions hasn’t been manufactured for many months, dealer inventories are near zero, and there isn’t a 2010 replacement.
The Flex will die. It is just not the car people want from Ford.
If the Fiesta was out I really think there would be more of a turn-around. They better get the features and packaging right on that one. If they cheap out too hard it is going to be a loser.
I think you mean Panther platform. The Fox platform of Ford Fairmont and Mustang fame is long dead.
Yup, thanks.
Still loving my 09 Flex SEL. Not a better vehicle on the road for what I paid leather and loaded ($31K OTD). The Flex figures are down because the 10’s haven’t fully established a lot presence yet, and the 09’s are all drying up and most dealers around me (OKC) haven’t had new Flex’ on the lot since the middle of June. The Taurus figures are misleading as well due to the model switch.
“And the Taurus isn’t the only recently-refreshed Ford that is failing to spark demand: the new 2010 Mustang has hit the skids, down 37.6 percent to 6,686 units.”
As mentioned above there are very few 2010 Tauruses on dealer lots (basically none on the west coast). I wouldn’t even bother with complaining about Taurus sales for another two months, you know when dealers have the inventory.
On top of that, who in their right mind would buy a 2010 Mustang, when you will end up with much better powertrain offerings available in less than a year.
The much-vaunted Taurus is way down, shedding 57 percent compared to last July’s sales of the outgoing model.
I’ve been checking regularly, and the dealers in this area haven’t yet received any 2010 Tauruses to sell. The company is winding down stocks of the outgoing 2009 model, so this decline is really not a big deal.
The Flex will die. It is just not the car people want from Ford.
I disagree. It is simply a shiatty market right now so if you say the Flex is going to die, then you are also saying a number of models from other brands will die….see: Venza.
At some point, Ford has to hold the Flex to some level of accountability. It might be a good crossover, but the sales are not there.
The Flex has sold just 23,692 units YTD. That’s less than the Explorer (27,442), which is an older vehicles that many people consider to be a tarnished nameplate in a dying segment. The Grand Cherokee and Tahoe are two other old-school SUVs that outsell the Flex.
The Enclave, Traverse, and Acadia all outsell the Flex individually. The Highlander, Pilot, and Journey all have higher YTD sales as well. The Chrysler vans and Odyssey also crush it in sales although there is a fleet contribution there.
Blaming the Flex’s poor sales numbers on a bad market means you have to ignore these much higher figures from competitors.
Something is wrong with the Flex that keeps buyers away. Ford needs to do something about it and making excuses is not the answer.
Geez, this crew wants to spin bad news out of everything. Like my mom used to say . . . “yeah, but you could get hit by a bus tomorrow.”
Wait, you can get a woody Flex? – sign me up!
The Fusion hybrid sure seems nice but I think the 09 model was better looking.
The Flex is like Cheers. It needs a while to find an audience.
I think if they kill it they are going to regret it. Everyone accounts it as a wonderful car (who has driven it). The problem right now is mostly looks and cost. People may or may not come around on the looks, but developing a reputation as a car company that takes aesthetic risks is probably good in the end for Ford. As is having a car that not everyone can afford.
I think 5 years from now a lot of cars will look like the Flex, and people’s vision will have adjusted to appreciate it.
w/o the profitability/model, no one can tell if the flex is a success or not. You’re comparing a premium CUV (flex) with lower level CUV’s and mini-vans, which I don’t think is comparible or is even the Flex’s intended market.
If anything they would be comparible to the Suburban in the 80’s and early 90’s, not alot were sold (especially in comparison to minivans, the other people haulers of the day) but they were incredibly profitable and the only thing like them available.
Profitability/Model is a better determination of success than number sold (GM could attest to that).
Well in all fairness the Flex is Ford’s 3rd best selling CUV/SUV type vehicle. Not sure what it’s going to take to move more units, especially when the vehicle has so many great things going for it. I couldn’t imagine snagging a Highlander/Lambda/Pilot over one of these.
Even with sales being what they are I doubt the Flex is going anywhere anytime soon.
w/o the profitability/model, no one can tell if the flex is a success or not.
This is true. However, I can guarantee you that Ford did not create the Flex anticipating that the Lambda triplets would outsell it 4 to 1 and it would have fewer sales than the Tahoe and Explorer.
Ford expected the Flex to sell better than it has. Even with the bad market.
The Flex has been flopping since day one. Ford screwed up their minivan replacement royally and the result is a vehicle that is simply a lowered Explorer. It has terrible cargo room for a minivan replacement, the interior is so-so, the looks are terrible and it is overpriced.
The Flex is on track to sell 40K units this year…FAR BELOW what Jimbo Farley had said it would sell (100K/yr).
TOTAL since launch, the Flex has only mustered 38,149 sales…it is selling at the same rate as the Taurus X…but yet Ford dumped millions into the Flex. The Flex…like the whole D3 platform is a money pit. No vehicle that Ford has put on that platform is worth the money…people know that and do not buy the vehicles.
The Traverse has sold more units this year (47,369) that the Flex has since launch.
Pitiful Ford…pitiful.
Ford’s numbers are down because the cars are too expensive.
Accord’s cost less than the Fusion and way less than Taurus.
Maxima costs less than Taurus and offers more space than Fusion
Civic is a better overall car than the focus.
Toyota Camry is a better overall car for the price than a Fusion or a taurus are.
So many options out there.
Ford anticipated that Flex sales would be 100K before oil did its thing last year, and way before the credit crisis.
Every single CUV has terrible cargo room compared to most minivans. Calling the Flex out as if that is the reason behind it’s glacial sales is relatively moot.
I’m not sure who the Flex is catering too, but I’d be willing to bet it isn’t the traditional Ford buyer (as the majority). I’ve come across many of these vehicles in high spec trim around the OC/LA Area. Whereas Lambdas are virtually absent around these parts.
Flashpoint:
You might want to direct yourself to build and price pages for each of the vehicles you listed because you are totally off base. On top of that I can’t imagine why anyone would buy a Camry over anything except Chrysler’s/Mitsu’s midsize offerings.
Flashpoint :
Ford has been the one automaker gaining market-share the last 5 months. Your comment doesn’t make any sense.
It has always seemed clear to me that Ford has NOT been catering to the minivan market with the Flex. Ford is aiming well up-market from the old Windstar. They are going after people who don’t want a minivan, who want a large and luxurious crossover that does not sit up way high and has a stylish and unique look. I think they were looking to be a moderately high-end mini-Suburban.
I happen to like the vehicle a lot. However, maybe the hole between the minivan, the crossovers and the Suburban/Expedition is just not a big enough market. I agree that profitability is the key – if they make money at it, volume is secondary.
That said, there are lots of minivan buyers that Ford is ignoring. I know a lot of people who got rid of Suburbans and bought Odysseys and Siennas. How many Caravan/T&C buyers would have gone to the Ford dealer had a minivan been available there?
I just saw a headline that GM was off 19%.
I would say Ford has relatively good news here, esp. as IIRC they had a stronger July 08 to compare with.
If correct this is serious bad news for Govt Motors.
Bunter
My comment doesn’t make sense?
Compare a base Accord or base Camry to a Ford base Fusion.
Compare a civic to a focus – base or loaded. Then compare a Scion to a Focus.
Compare a fully loaded Accord or Camry to a fully loaded Fusion or Taurus. Even the new Taurus is too expensive.
I specifically go with people as a financial advisor when they make their car purchases so I see first hand the buying procedure and the cost/options and payment plans.
I got so sick and tired of buying American that I moved to Mercedes Benz and I’m not looking back.
I’m shocked at the jump for Escape/Mariner.
Ford’s jump must have as much to do with not receiving a bailout as it did with CFC.
After seeing one in person, my wife and I both think the Flex is nice inside and out. I understand that the beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to say the Flex’s interior is so-so and the exterior is ugly, seems a bit over the top to me.
Man, that vinyl on that Flex Woody is F-U-G-L-Y…..makes my hair hurt just thinking about that horrid beast parked in my driveway. Surely, you can’t really BUY them like that….please tell me that’s photo-shopped….
I’ve yet to see any advertising for the Flex outside of generic Ford commercials. They haven’t done a good job of defining what the Flex is and who it is for.
Flashpoint:
You really don’t make much sense. I’m too lazy to actually compare the prices on cars but you make my argument for me with your Benz. I’ll bet that was more expensive to buy than an equivalent Ford. Sometimes, a car is more expensive because it is a better car.
Mark:
I think the Flex woody was an Edmunds April Fool’s joke.
“That surge makes the Panther body Lincoln’s biggest volume seller …”
I wonder, will ever dawn on them that cars like the Town Car are what people want in a Lincoln? Or will they continue churning out pointless models, such as every model but the Town Car, until it kills them?
Not ‘shopped, not a joke. I’ve seen a woody Flex driving around my subdivision in the Detroit ‘burbs.
In light of the recent sales results posted by the remaining makers, I can hardly see how anyone could still try to spin Ford’s numbers as negative.
John Horner: I think you mean Panther platform. The Fox platform of Ford Fairmont and Mustang fame is long dead.
However, Panther is almost as ancient as the Fox: introduced in 1979 rather than 1978. That two decades older than the long-in-the-tooth D3 platform!
Again, I wonder at all the comments about Ford not moving large volumes, yet wasn’t the meme on TTAC earlier in the year about increasing individual transaction prices up to a point where Ford was making money?
So if Ford is selling a low volume of Flex (WTH is the plural? Flexii? Flexes? Flex’s?) but selling them at MSRP or close to it isn’t that better than selling a large volume at significant price reductions (I’m looking at you GM)?
And with only Hyundai, Subaru and Ford increasing sales over last year, doesn’t that say something about the desireability of their product lines? C4C notwithstanding, even venerable fuel efficient models (Toyota Corolla and Yaris, Honda Civic and Fit) saw a fairly drastic drop in sales, yet there’s Ford increasing sales. It says to me that people are looking at Ford as a viable alternative to Toyota, Honda and Nissan, let alone their domestic competitors.
The Ford Death Watch is still in effect (and rightfully so), but it’s obvious that Ford is starting to turn things around, albeit slowly.
Can you imagine what the sales of the Fiesta and Euro Focus would have been during Cash For Clunkers? Wow.
TTAC is REALLY reaching in regards to Ford lately.
Ford was one of two companies to post a sales gain in July, and it was a bad month?
You’re complaints about the Flex don’t make much sense; of course its sales weren’t that great this month. People had the opportunity to get $3,500-$4,500 if they chose an Escape, Fusion, Focus, or Edge instead. Who in their right mind would spend the money on a Flex when they could get that money knocked off the price of most every other vehicle in the Ford showroom. You guys apparently think consumers are idiots…
As stated above the only reason Taurus sales are hurting is because there are none on lots to be sold. There are similar situations with other models, such as Flexes, Expeditions, and Mustangs. We just now (as in the past couple week and a half) got a decent selection of new Mustangs in. Ford also isn’t offering any incentives on 2010 Mustangs, so, in light of that, low inventory, rampant ‘rumors’ of new engines in 2011, a brand new Camaro, and deep discounts on Chargers/Challengers, the low sales aren’t surprising.
Ford won’t kill the Flex, but I predict a pretty radical restyling and an early midcycle refresh coming its way. The only thing hurting Flex sales right now is that most customers won’t even consider it because they think it looks like a hearse or a Scion.
@Flashpoint – A base Fusion costs less than a base Accord, even when equipped with an automatic transmission, and that is even before rebates are taken into account.
A Taurus SEL is less than a Maxima as well.
Why do you consider the Camry a better car than the Fusion? Every review I have read has the Fusion winning hands down vs. the Camry. Interior materials are better, you get more features for the money, and reliability is just as good. The only area in which the Camry wins is resale value, and if the Fusion keeps racking up wins, that could easily change.
Can they keep the gains going while easing off the pedal on rebates? If they can execute there then the economics of Ford ownership are on the improve, which will help them immensely.
Ford may best the most innovative and dynamic car company in the world right now. As a new convert to Ford products(foreign car family before) it is good to see them doing so well. A few years ago I was in Dearborn and had the chance to visit the new F 150 plant. The new plant is “green” with an empahsis on both production and a commitment to the environment. I left the plant thinking that Ford was moving the right direction. Glad to see that I was right.
However, Panther is almost as ancient as the Fox: introduced in 1979 rather than 1978. That two decades older than the long-in-the-tooth D3 platform!
And I would bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Lincoln Town Car took in more profits ON IT’S OWN…than all of the D3 platform flops combined. Factor in the CV and MGM profits and you have Ford’s most profitable platform.
Lets see, in June Ford sales off only 11 percent while Toyota sales were down by a third and Nissan down 23 percent. This month Ford is up while Toyota sales off 11 percent, Honda off 17 percent and Nissan sales off by 25 percent. Personally I find it ugly but the Focus was the top selling Cash For Clunkers car. Yes, it all makes sense to me now, Ford is just flat pitiful.
I’m no Ford fan boy but some just can’t stand to see Ford or the other domestics do good. Anytime Ford has some good news most folks here dig hard for a way to dump on it. Now that is truly pitiful.
First, a bright spot…for me.
The Mazda 6 ROSE this month!
Mazda6 2,517 2,470 1.9%
I know, I know…1.9%.
But hell, I will take it.
I have a personal love for this car and have been saddened by its piss ass sales.
Next, all of the larger, higher gas consuming cars didn’t have a chance this month.
The GOVERNMENT is in full swing managing the consumer pocketbook.
Want a new car?
Well, if you take the one you WANT, you can’t get thousands from your neighbor.
Finally, here is what Ford should do.
Another on B&B had this suggestion over the weekend:
Make the Flex and MKS available ONLY with the Ecoboost.
This will separate them from the Edge and Taurus competition and lessen the confusion for the consumer.
P71… Truth hurts, don’t it.
Audi A6 sold only 511 cars?
The A3 335.
Total for Audi jus a little above 6,000!
Look, EVERYBODY who visits a Ford or Lincoln dealer is asking to see the new Taurus or MKS with Ecoboost.
None to see or touch.
Nadda.
Zippo.
Nuttin.
Just a big promise and “everybody here wants to see them.”
So give them a break because they are competing
against themselves right now.
Its like shadow boxing.
P_71, Ford is own its way to replacing GM as the #1 automaker in the North American market.
My comment doesn’t make sense?
Compare a base Accord or base Camry to a Ford base Fusion.
Compare a civic to a focus – base or loaded. Then compare a Scion to a Focus.
Compare a fully loaded Accord or Camry to a fully loaded Fusion or Taurus. Even the new Taurus is too expensive.
No it doesn’t. If you would have done a little research, you would have found that a base Fusion is cheaper than both the Camry and Accord.
The Civic DX is cheaper than a Focus but it doesn’t come with A/C, a radio, no keyless entry, it’s missing ESC. In order to get most of that stuff you have to step up to a DX-VP which is going to cost you more than a Focus S.
The Taurus is a large car for one, and two if you eliminate options that you cannot get on an Accord (which is a lot) it is priced similarly. Ditto that with the Fusion. In fact the Fusion can be equipped with options not available on Camry and Accord and it’s still cheaper.
OK, Chrysler and GM are a national joke, something that the world can poke fun at. But Ford is no Chrysler and GM.
They are managing to get past their financial obligations without my tax money. They have a plan going forward which is better than telling us to get over the perception gap thing.
I’m not sure we need a deathwatch for these guys anymore.
I do second a Chapter 7 watch for GM and Chrysler though.
“P71… Truth hurts, don’t it.”
Not to me. Ford being down 30% makes no difference in my life.
They are managing to get past their financial obligations without my tax money
FALSE!
Ford has taken 5.9 BILLION from the government.
And it is quite clear that they benefited from the terrible C4C program…which was funded by the government with our tax dollars.
P71_CrownVic
That’s 5.9 billion. I know .9 billion doesn’t go very far these days, but there it is.
And YES it’s a loan. A 25-year no-to-low interest loan. As we’ve discussed many a time, I reckon the D.O.E. loans are a back door bailout.
In any case, federal funds Ford’s filched. OK, not filched, but alliteration must.
Again with the DOE loan program??
Assuming that Nissan, Ford and Tesla have their share of those funds that leaves 17B left. Assuming that those funds go to Toyota, Honda, Subaru and VW ….. it makes wonder how much of a deal is going to be made of it then?
Besides it’s not like these funds are there to fund day-to-day operations, they are there to retool plants that might have closed (i.e. Louisville). So again what’s the big deal here?
PennSt8
Again with the again?
Ford will use the money to retool factories. The money they would have used to do so can be used for keeping the lights on.
Note: we gave GM stick for factoring their as-yet-unrealized share of the DOE program into their cash flow projections.
AND I’ve opposed ANY federal handout to any automaker.
If Ford needs that money to just pay the bills, then I would consider the DOE loan a backdoor bailout. If the money is actually going toward retooling, it is no worse than any of the other low interest loans that the government endorses. Students, houses, and renewable energy are three.
Also, cash for clunkers is having an effect. For Ford, the only CUV that passes the 22 mpg mark is the Escape. It is the only one with a large gain in sales. Every car with lower sales has lower than 22 mpg: the Taurus, Crown Vic, and Mustang.
Well i suspect that when more money is awarded that we will hear about it often and regularly around here eh? Regardless of manufacturer….
On a side note I suppose if the gov’t hadn’t granted the loan Ford could have just as easily shuttered Louisville and the folks in that region could have dealt with the economic fallout.
Ford took government loans to retool and prepare for drastically increased CAFE standards. Given that Ford is financially viable, gaining market share and sales, and still has a few major product launches ahead (Fiesta, ecoboost 4 cylinders, new class competitive (or even class leading) V8s for Mustangs and trucks, Kuga, full size Transit, etc) there is no reason to assume Ford won’t pay all of the money back. There is a huge difference between that and GM/Chrysler’s ‘We need lots of cash to keep from going out of business, and even after you give it to us, we’ll probably go bankrupt anyway, but at least then you’ll have invested so much that you can’t just let us fail’.
Please do not insinuate that it is somehow my responsibility to keep people employed building cars without actually buying one.
Call me a capitalist, but while I’m willing to give a helping hand to unemployed workers with my tax money, I prefer to sponsor direct employment as a consumer.
As for other companies receiving D.O.E. loans. again, I’m agin’ it. And yes, we cover all automakers’ sucklage. It’s what we do.
NulloModo
The DOE loans were specifically designed to take the cost of meeting CAFE regulations off of the domestics’ books, to help them stay afloat. In two cases, it didn’t work. But in all cases, it’s ridiculous.
How about the feds give me a zero percent to three percent twenty-five loan to pay any and all tax increases necessitated by the stimulus package and the cost of bailing out the banks, GM, Chrysler, GMAC, etc.?
Don’t forget: over 70 percent of American voters were against GM and Chrysler’s nationalization (i.e. second bailout).
I called it first – the new Taurus is all show and no go when it comes to foot traffic and sales.
People will look and then walk away when they see the Sticker Price.
That spells doom for the Lincoln MKS, which is nothing more than twin to the Taurus, but with fewer available options than the Taurus, actually, while costing 15k more than the Taurus’s already steep price.
P71_CrownVic
That’s 5.9 billion. I know .9 billion doesn’t go very far these days, but there it is.
Thank you and text amended.
I called it first – the new Taurus is all show and no go when it comes to foot traffic and sales.
People will look and then walk away when they see the Sticker Price.
That spells doom for the Lincoln MKS, which is nothing more than twin to the Taurus, but with fewer available options than the Taurus, actually, while costing 15k more than the Taurus’s already steep price.
Nailed it.
The Taurus itself is overpriced (over $45K for a Ford Taurus??? Since when did a Taurus EVER come with such an outrageous price). But then you factor in the price for the Lincoln Taurus…it is almost robbery.
The Lincoln Taurus–at the high end–is 10 GRAND more expensive than the equally gimmick laden Taurus. The only “advantage” the Lincoln Taurus has over the Taurus is a bigger moonroof, different seat coverings, park assist, and…?
The Lincoln rebadge of the Taurus is a horrid value no matter how you cut it.
“Please do not insinuate that it is somehow my responsibility to keep people employed building cars without actually buying one.”
Really?
That was far from an insinuation, it was merely a counter argument. I didn’t say that the loans were right or wrong, nor that I disagreed with your take on government handouts. I merely commented on the way it was delivered. How about we not jump the gun here.
P71:
No one is forcing anyone to spec out a Taurus SHO to the hilt. The fact that the non-SHO Taurus options out right there with an Avalon and Maxima is pretty telling that it is priced where it should be.
Some interesting tidbits in these numbers. Retail sales going up 9% is a good sign. Being outsold by Toyota, after edging ahead last month, not so good. (Has anyone seen retail sales #s for Toyota and GM?)
The strong sales figures for the Fusion and Focus bode well, reestablishing some presence in the top volume segments (even if the Camry is still outselling the Fusion about 2 to 1). The aging Escape outsold both the RAV-4 and the CR-V last month, which is rather remarkable. And look at how the F-150 is comparing to the Tundra–outselling it nearly 6 to 1.
The Flex numbers are mediocre but not as bad as some of you (no need to name names) are making them out to be. Ford is on track to sell about 40-45K Flexes this year. That is far from the original 100K goal, but then again the whole market is down more than 30%, with large CUVs particularly hard hit. Still, there’s no denying that the Traverse clobbered the Flex in July, 6,690 to 3,631.
After a string of truly dismal sales numbers, Volvo finally has a small rebound, up 26%. One month doesn’t make a trend, but any genuine firming of Volvo sales will certainly help the sale price Ford can fetch.
“Still Down 30 Percent On The Year”, and a picture of the most ridiculous Flex ever. You guys are better than that.
As far as the DOE loans, in a real capitalism CAFE wouldn’t exist. MPG averages would be decided by the consumer, in the current environment those producing fuel-efficient cars would prosper, those making the guzzlers would fail and all would be right with the universe.
Instead what we have is the government fixing the game. Setting a standard that must be reached. The kind of innovation by dictum the Soviets used to attempt. The trade-off is cheap loans to the automakers. Quid pro qou, politics as usual and all that. The fault is with the government not the auto-makers. If R.F. was actually offered that loan he was talking about, would you blame him from taking it?
I called it first – the new Taurus is all show and no go when it comes to foot traffic and sales.
People will look and then walk away when they see the Sticker Price.
That spells doom for the Lincoln MKS, which is nothing more than twin to the Taurus, but with fewer available options than the Taurus, actually, while costing 15k more than the Taurus’s already steep price.
How in God’s name do we know that? The new Taurus isn’t even in large scale production yet The plant that builds them in Chicago quite literally just started building them this week. (the local news here in Chicago ran a story about the plant tonight)
Unless you have some magical divining powers about a model that hasn’t even gone on sale yet, then I suggest you retract your statement.
What an amazing result from Ford. Look around at the carnage and spot the last man standing. Lets list the companies that did not post a sales increase:
Toyota
Honda
VW
GM
Chrysler
Nissan
Need we go on!
Ford is on a roll. They will repay their LOAN (Robert and P_71 – please lets move on from this now – the evidence is plain for all to see) and as Taurus begins to hit showrooms in numbers together with the 4 EcoBoost vehicles, Ford is in a good position right now to really get going.
BTW P_71 – The new Taurus has an entry sticker price of exactly the same as the previous generation car, $25,995 – that is an amazing value story and one you should focus on.
BDB: I think Ford DID beat GM in July sales. When you subtract Pontiac, Saab, Hummer and Saturn sales which GM includes in their numbers even though they are owned by Motor Down The Drain Corp (or whatever the name of Old GM is that remains in bankruptcy), their sales are only about 160K for July, while Ford (including Volvo which it still owns for now) is about 165K.
It will be interesting to see if the MSM calls GM on its practice of including sales from “non core brands” in its sales figures. They are so non-core that they are not even GM any more.
When you subtract fleet sales ford is up 9% from July 08, that is probably the most impressive stat from all of this.
2010 Ford Taurus begins TODAY, so it’s not a failure yet. Calm it down haters.
As for the MKS. Since most Lincoln dealers are twinned with Ford dealers there will be some cross shopping and the price difference will be hard to justify, considering the Lincoln has no unique features vs the Ford. However, Ford/Lincoln/Mercury buyers are an odd bunch, and cross shopping theses identical cars between brands really doesn’t happen that much, even in the same showroom. You would be surprised how many people would buy a Mercury Milan over the Fusion because Mercury’s are heavier and ride better?! The loyal buyers do perceive a difference where none exists, which is why Ford keeps all 3 brands.
Presenting your new, 2010, cloth seated, no navigation, not nearly loaded, $30,000 Ford Taurus:
http://fordnr.rizzacars.com/vehicleDisplay.php?carID=81481
Ford is not financially viable. Mulally borrowed twenty-something billion dollars before the financial crisis. He’s smart, no question, but he’s also the luckiest bastard in the world due to the timing of his loans. He mortgaged the company to the hilt, putting up as collateral not only tangibles like tooling and plants, but also intellectual property such as the blue oval and the name F-150.
I’m glad to see Ford’s sales increases as well as their much-needed improvements in quality. But Ford is not out of the woods; indeed, they are at a disadvantage compared to GM and Chryco. Most of GM/ChryCo’s debt was erased in their bankruptcy. In fact, I would not rule out a bankruptcy for Ford, due to their crushing debt.
That Taurus may not be loaded out, but it sure looks to have alot of features. And 1 car listed at 1 dealership does not prove your arguement.
Presenting your new, 2010, cloth seated, no navigation, not nearly loaded, $30,000 Ford Taurus:
OMG…but it has teh SYNC!!!!!11!!!!!!!11eleven!!!1!1
—-
Pftt…$30K for a car and you get…nothing.
Hey, if someone made a car with “nothing”, I’d seriously consider it and get plates that say Luddite. Vinyl seats, rubber floors and trunk, column shifter, AM radio (I listen often), abd steel wheels.
SEL is the mid-line, not the Limited or SHO model. Sync, dual climate, AM/FM/CD changer, power seats/mirrors, good-sized wheels…that’s what most people would end up buying and really use. Leather is a waste in most climates, sunroof might be nice and that’s about it.
Not a bad deal for such a big car. Yes, it’s more than a Taurus or even a Crown Vic used to be. Heck, I was surprised when a family member recently paid $41k for a new Acura TL…not many years ago they were around #31k OTD and that was sticker. $30k is only the starting point, and thats alot of car for the money.
VW did post a sales increase. Not a lot at 0.7%, but it’s an increase. And it was mostly because of the TDI, especially with the Jetta wagon. Imagine that, people want diesel powered cars!
http://media.vw.com/index.php?s=43&item=477