Find Reviews by Make:
Bloomberg is reporting that anonymous sources tell them
[Ford’s] top executives are preparing a proposal to kill Mercury to be presented to directors in July
The rumor has yet to be confirmed, but the decision is clearly a sound one. We’ve written at length about Ford’s premium-brand problems, and Mercury is easily one of the weakest brands on the market. With Lincoln said to be going global, it makes plenty of sense to kill off Mercury. In fact, axing the purposeless entry-luxe brand might just be one of the single smartest moves Ford could make right now.
UPDATE via Twitter’s @davidshephardson(also of the Detroit News): “Mulally says he didn’t read Bloomberg report on Mercury. Says Ford has ‘nothing new to announce.'”
95 Comments on “Wild Ass Rumor Of The Day: Ford Killing Mercury?...”
Read all comments
If Mercury dies, it is due to a lack of definition. Ford could have made something unique of Mercury, but I guess they didn’t have either the imagination or the money.
The MKS and the MKT mark the height of “Lincoln” luxury. I’m not impressed.
The quality of Ford interiors needs to be improved to “Lincoln” quality (minus the slabs of wood of course) and Mercury needs to be something different. How about a 350HP Mercury Cougar? How about all Ford’s luxyr hybrids in the Mecury namebadge?
Lincoln needs to be raised to Infiniti quality interiors.
Now if they could just make Lincoln into a Lexus analog.
Very smart, but still too bad; Mercury should’ve been the American Audi.
Do they just add Lincoln to existing Ford dealers? Offer existing LM dealers conversion options? Close them en masse, potentially jeopardizing Lincoln?
All questions we’ve debated here in the past, and still unclear.
You see the odd imported Mariner or Milan here; they’re interesting just because Ford doesn’t sell Mercury in Canada anymore.
That said, I like Mercury. Totally agree that it just comes down to a lack of imagination/money/effort.
Killing Mercury is an admission by Ford that it does not have the resources, or sadly the imagination to fix what was once a core brand. I do agree that they need to concentrate on Ford, keep rolling out great products and stay profitable. Still would be sad to see Mercury go. Now the important question….what do you do with Jill?
Jill can sell Fords. Or any make for that matter. :)
Mercury has never really been a core brand. It has been an afterthought for the vast majority of its existence.
Aside from the potential dealership issues, I have no sadness. I can’t remember the last time I noticed a Mercury.
The dealerships have been dropping like flies the last five years at least. At less than 2% of overall sales there is absolutely nothing that justifies Ford wasting money it doesn’t have on what is really the weakest brand sold in America.
Like GM all the resources Ford focuses on brands other than Ford is taking the eye off the ball and at Ford’s own detriment. Ford will never go anywhere without the Ford brand carrying it there. Ford is also demonstrating that people will pay good money for Ford vehicles with premium trim and features as well. No different than Chevrolet back in the 1960s with fullsize cars like the Impala and Biscayne. It’s also questionable whether Ford should really be wasting money doing anything different with Lincoln as well.
GM needs to trim itself of Buick and GMC in America, I’m still shocked they haven’t. Further shocked that they are dumping a lot of money and product on Buick which is their Mercury (only in slightly better shape).
Suzuki and Saab both probably have bragging rights on that Weakest Brand label as well. Oh yeah, and Mitsubishi!
In our area, most Ford dealers are also Lincoln/Mercury. It’s not going to make all that much difference.
So. Make ’em all Ford/Lincoln dealerships. Keep your high-end products as Lincolns, make the rest Fords, and eliminate platform overlap. Then, if you still believe that trim differences (at the level that used to distinguish multi-brand platform variants) are needed to move metal, keep those variants under the same brand and make ’em trim level options — think Dodge Dart, Dodge Dart 330, Dodge Polaris 500. Finally trim level differences will be more noteworthy than seat materials and sat nav, without diluting the brand at all.
Dodge Polaris? I didn’t know Dodge made snowmobiles. Try Polara!
Uhhhh … see avatar for a ’63 Dodge “Polaris”, er, “Polara”
(snark off………)
I still like the idea of keeping Mercury around exclusively for fleet sales. This would help with Ford resale values while still allowing profitable channel stuffing to keep the factories busy.
Actually, that makes a lot of sense. Give ’em a more durable, cheaper-looking appearance (60s Plymouth Valiant vs Dodge Dart) and more durable interiors, too. Although it would make it harder to dump surplus consumer vehicles into fleet sales, so maybe it’d have to keep on being a simple badge-change thing.
Ford, just do it.
(We’ll always keep a special place in our hearts for the ’49 and ’50 models).
I actually owned a Mercury — a 1990 Sable when it was a (little) more than a badge-engineered Taurus.
Ride with the cat at the sign of the cat!
Ride with the CAT!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yT6W5sRPiJo
It’s about time. Every single Mercury is just a rebadged Ford, and “near-luxury” is a segment that has been nonexistent for over 20 years now. Save the money to pay down debts and give better product to Lincoln. Maybe there’s someone with a brain cell left at GM who can propose the same with Buick.
They should have done it right or ended it years ago. Ford should not have sold Volvo to the Chinese and killed Mercury. Volvo could have had their dealership network perhaps.
The only distinct Mercury that I can recall from my (almost) middle-aged life is the 70’s Cougar. Anything else that Mercury has sold is just a Ford with a bigger grill.
Good riddance.
Given the incredibly long painful and complete destruction of the Mercury brand Ford doesn’t really have an alternative. As far as brand destruction goes Lincoln is about a half step behind Mercury, all but irrelevant to most U.S. car buyers. Lincoln going global? Good luck with that. Ford couldn’t make any money with Jaguar which we all know was a well known global brand before they bought it. Maybe there is a demand for MK whatevers somewhere else on the planet but I highly doubt it.
I sold L-M 76-93 and in that timeframe Mercury had a fairly well accepted model line up, the Cougar (for the most part), Sable and Grand Marquis always sold well.
As well as Ford has done with the Ford brand they’ve done equally poorly with L-M. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Ford is completely clueless when it comes to luxury brands-total idiots. With special kudos to J. Mays and Mark Fields, Ford’s version of Lutz and LaNeve.
Alan Mulally will go down in automotive history as the moldbreaker who understood that volume carmakers don’t need “luxury” brands. The conventional wisdom in this business is wrong, dead wrong. GM: take note.
If that were true Lexus for one wouldn’t exist.
The fact of the matter is Ford is completely clueless about how to profitably run a luxury brand. Jaguar, Land Rover, Aston Martin, Volvo and Lincoln/Mercury are all testimony to Ford’s ineptness with luxury brands.
Can’t wait to see what the L-M dealers do at this news! My guess they start suing and/or dying.
SJ
Doesn’t Ford, or any Mfr, have this dissolution power written into dealership franchise agreements?
It would seem suicidal not to, since your business model should allow for your greater needs.
From what my dealer friends tell me, there are real restrictions over their businesses.
Bottom line, this is not only OLD and predicted by many on TTAC, I think its all good, both for Ford and Lincoln.
Now, one last suggestion to Ford…STOP the Taurus SHO and instead make it a Fusion SHO AWD.
Give it a stick as well as the new dual clutch auto and you will have a winner.
Keep the difference between Ford and Lincoln similar to Lexus and Toyota.
It is typically not the franchise contract that is the problem – it is the state laws that grant certain protections to Frachisees from having their franchise closed down if the are not in breach of the franchise agreement (i.e. in practice make it very expensive for a Franchisor to close that shop without paying out the Franchisor).
Today’s news: Rumor has it Ford finally opted to kill a nameplate that’s nothing but a near-luxury pretender brand, that’s been a drag on the bottom line for the past 10 years.
Meanwhile, rumor has it Gov’t Motors will add yet another badge-engineered CUV to what is nothing but a near-luxury pretender brand, that’s been a drag on the bottom line for the past 10 years.
Gov’t Motors: Doing the same thing and expecting different results ain’t insanity… if you get the taxpayers to pay for it!
Lincoln has a long way to go before it comes back to mainstream acceptance again. The current design language featuring the swooping 1930’s style grilles is just plain ugly.
Mercury – Ugly plastic grafted onto Ford’s which cost more than a Ford and aren’t as well appointed as a Lincoln.
Ford mailed it in with Mercury far too long and now the brand has no identity. Lincoln currently holds the position that should be Mercury’s. Rebadged upscale Fords, while Lincoln should be a true luxury brand with high end products with less of a direct relationship to the Fords they come from. With the exodus of the other members of the Premier Automotive Group, you would think Lincoln would be free to venture into their territory, with Mercury in place to take its spot back from Lincoln, but at this point that would probably be as futile as calling a 70k car a VW was.
I wonder what if Ford will brand any Premier cars in the future, all I can think is that Ford already has had a 140k car, the GT, Shelby Mustangs sell at Ford dealers for a ton of money, and the SHO is clearly in the luxury territory, maybe Ford doesn’t need Lincoln either
“I wonder what if Ford will brand any Premier cars in the future, all I can think is that Ford already has had a 140k car, the GT, Shelby Mustangs sell at Ford dealers for a ton of money, and the SHO is clearly in the luxury territory, maybe Ford doesn’t need Lincoln either”
Don’t forget the huge prices some F-150s and Expeditions carry. Yes, Ford could probably ditch Lincoln too and no one would notice.
This is smart, and a lesson GM could well learn –
Do one thing at a time, do it well, and then move on.
If you can’t make ONE decent brand, what makes you think you can make four?
I was one of those who, while understanding that Mercury had been starved of product and resources in recent years, still felt that Alan Mulally would have gotten around to fixing Mercury as soon as the main Ford brand was healthy. I honestly felt Mercury was a placeholder until the mother ship had enough cash to do the job. With the spinoff of the European luxury brands, I thought Ford could work well with three brands. Heck, GM still has four brands in the U.S. What a missed opportunity.
It is true that Mercurys had become, for the most part, Fords with a bigger grill and a bit more chrome. The great irony is that, now that Ford is bringing in many of its European models to the U.S., there could have been some excellent products on which to attach the Mercury logo. Even now, I can honestly say I like the looks of the Milan better than the Fusion. And there have been other Mercurys – some unique, others built on Ford platforms – that I think were home runs: The 1967 Cougar. The 1970s Capris (from Germany). Even the last versions of the Cougar from about a decade ago were pretty nice cars (and unique). They simply needed more power. And I applauded the company’s efforts with Merkur.
All we can hope for now is that Ford gets serious with Lincoln.
Mercury reminds me of the bad old days at Infiniti. While the Camry/ES and Accord/TL were always close cousins, The Infiniti I30 WAS a Maxima GLE, just with a more conservative grill pasted on and an analog clock.
The I30 only ever made sense used, because it was easier to find (and often cheaper) than a loaded Maxima.
Mercury’s entire lineup is basically comprised of I30s. Take Ford, paste on conservative grill, include more standard equipment.
People now think of Mercury as a boring brand. Even if they make new (not Ford) product, will people buy it?
This is no surprise, and in fact long overdue, but still a little sad. In the mid-60s a friend of my Dad’s got the Mercury franchise and out of loyalty to his friend Dad switched from GM for a few years. We went through two or three Colony Parks, a Cougar, and an S-55 428 (or 429?) coupe. They were all handsome, well built cars, and the latter two were a lot of fun for a new driver. In those days Mercury seemed to offer a real step up from Ford, even though of course they weren’t any different under the skin — but that was the key to building a brand and charging a premium. During the last few years, the only thing about Mercury that remotely appealed to me was Jill Wagner. RIP.
GM (Gov’t Motors) has no one smart enough to learn lessons!
When they decided to discontinue the Sable, I knew the writing was on the wall. People dismissed the rumors about Plymouth, Oldsmobile, Pontiac too as just gossip. Too bad ’cause they put out some mighty fine cars, even if they were Ford knockoffs, they had a glamor factor Ford didn’t.
The irony is that they did a better job disguising the fact that Mercurys were just Ford knockoffs before the 1980’s, when the consumers were less sophisticated than they are now. After the late 1970’s it was almost as if they didn’t even try to make the Mercury much different.
What GM is doing with Buick is absolutely the right thing to do and would have worked with Mercury–Use the same platform, but give someone a totally different driving experience. I think Mullaly’s blown this one.
It was blown way before Mulally got there. The right thing is to kill it. Ford dealers want everything being developed so there’s no way Mercury was ever going to get an exclusive product or even feature.
Maybe coulda been a contenduh. But the right thing is to maintain Ford’s global momentum and take Lincoln there too. I mean when the best thing about your products is the spokesperson, your chances are slim at best.
You’ve gotta take Mercury off your list!
“nothing new to announce” is a tacit admission that the story is true. If it wasn’t true, Mulally would have said so and at least mentioned future Mercury’s. He doesn’t want to lie and say that Mercury is safe, so he deflects with “nothing new to announce.”
Ford doesn’t need Mercury. With the Ford brand moving upscale and Lincoln spreading down, there is no room anyway. This eliminates the lame badge and grill jobs, which is a good thing. Maybe now Ford can afford a real RWD chassis for Lincoln. Perhaps a tie-up with Honda! Couldn’t they use a RWD chassis for Acura??
Maybe not, but remember the rationale for Mercury was to drive traffic in order to make a Lincoln dealership viable. The gold standard for luxury cars from the customer standpoint is Lexus. Walking into a Lexus dealership, at least around here, is like going to Nordstroms. The kind of niceties you get there are, everything from the oriental rugs in the waiting area to the walnut paneled walls, are part of the brand aura you are creating for the customer. I simply don’t see how you’re going to do that by pairing up Lincoln with Ford, and getting the Ford dealership experience, unless you simply don’t want to be a luxury brand anymore.
Think of your typical county seat Ford dealership … usually operating out of a metal Butler building. Where is the snob appeal?
And to repeat ………… GET RID OF THOSE 1930’S GRILLS ON YOUR CARS!!!
True, the few remaining Lincoln/Mercury dealers would be hurt, but there are not many of those left. Most have been combined with a Ford store. And now that that is true, it is all the more important for Lincolns to be separate from Fords. Its too easy to see the cheap badge job when they are sitting side by side.
But how are you going to offer the other niceties that the lux customer gets by going to a BMW Dealer? Are you going to have separate waiting rooms? Is your suit-and-tie customer going to want to be in the same waiting room as your farmer getting his F-150 serviced? Are you going to offer everyone loaners and Starbucks coffee. Waiting in the same sitting area as the farmer personally doesn’t bother me, but I do think there is something to be said for the overall experience reinforcing a brand!
Maybe they can do like the Lexus dealership here and just have a showroom with detached service areas located off-site (a concierge takes and picks up your car if you drop it off at the showroom). That would keep from mixing up the brands and maybe you can keep an “upscale” showroom for Lincoln while keeping the more chaotic experience inside the Ford showroom? Remember, snob appeal is why the higher-income communities throw a hissy fit every time Walmart wants to locate there, but you don’t hear a peep when Target wants to come in.
This is EXACTLY the problem the Big 3 have had with vehicles and branding for decade. American automakers have always felt that customers deserve to be treated only as well as what they are buying. If you’re in a Ford or Chevy dealership, your “dealership experience” is crap – everyone’s a farmer. Here’s an idea – why not treat ALL your customers like they are buying Lincolns!
Personally, I’d be pretty pissed to be dropping $50k on a SHO or Expedition and have to sit in a dealership that looks and smells like a rest stop bathroom.
Somehow, Audi dealers in the US can manage to sell A3’s and R8’s out of the same showroom, BMW dealers in Europe can sell 116i’s and 750iL’s out of the same showroom, all with no problem.
Ever since the demise of the original Cougar, Mercurys were just uglified Fords. Witness:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/curbside-classic-outtake-1970-mercury-montego/
Ba Bye!
If this is true, it shows that Ford is well on its way to being a healthy brand. Mercury hasn’t been defined or developed for a long time, and there really isn’t any reason to do so.
Judging from Fords actions (or lack of) the plan to kill Mercury was made years ago.
Mercury has had no real reason for existence since the last of its full-size 1978 sedans and coupes – which for many years had a notably longer wheelbase than the equivalent Fords – rolled off the line. For ’79 the new Marquis was just a slightly redecorated LTD.
I’m sure it needs to be done. Perhaps it will allow Ford to take the handsome grille from the Milan and replace the ugly as sin, overchromed monstrosity on the Fusion.
All of these brands, Lincoln, Buick are all doomed if the manufacturers can’t manage at least minimal differentiation. An ES300 has some sheet metal differences from a Camry, and Audi-VW manage this as well. It can be done, while sharing platforms and even engines.
I actually owned a Mercury — a 1990 Sable when it was a (little) more than a badge-engineered Taurus.
I have to say I disagree with this statement. The GenI Sable was very distinctive from the Taurus (wraparound back window, light bar grill), the ’92 refresh a little less distinctive, and the ’96 make-over even less.
The last Sable was most definitely badge-engineering.
I had great hopes for the rumored plans for Mercury to get a small number of Euro-rebadged Fords…
But, yes, with Lincolns becoming the uprated Ford, sadly Mercury would serve no purpose….
One grandparent would drive nothing but Buicks. The other, nothing but Mercurys. Can’t be too flashy now, can we?
At best the Sable was a Taurus with a nose job and tush lift.
A personal coneyance named after its inventor, an assassinated ruler, a character from Greco-Roman myth, and a small furry mammal.
The original Sable was enough different from the original Taurus to sell well. Many buyers preferred the C pillar window, wraparound taillights, front light bar and bodyside cladding on the LS model (which was 90% of our Sable sales). Even though they were the same drivetrains (SHO excluded) and platforms there were enough distinctive differences that both vehicles had their own markets. Same could be said for the Cougars/T-Birds and Marquis/LTD of that era. The L-M store I worked at had a Ford dealership with adjoining property and rarely would customers cross shop the Ford and Mercury models. At that time although you could easily say Mercurys were rebadged Fords there was enough differentiation to make Mercury a very viable brand.
The original Sable sedan shared no sheetmetal with the Taurus.The wagon was the same from the cowl back.
Well documented by Car and Driver and other rags from the period.
GenI Sable also had a unique interior – except for the steering column (not the steering wheel), the gauge cluster, the carpet, the headliner and part of the console, the rest of the GenI Sable interior was unique to the Sable. I has an ’86 Sable – seats were sewn in a completely different style, fabrics and patterns were unique to Sable,the door trim panels wouldn’t line up with the charter lines in the Taurus dash, the actual instrument panel was completely different from the Taurus, the Sable has real rear seat headrests that were adjustable, and the package tray trim was different. On top of this, the trunk on the Sable was larger than the Taurus – 18.5 cubic feet to Taurus’s 17 cubic feet.
And even then, people accused Ford of badge engineering.
There is a place in between the average/medium segment and the premium one which seems very dangerous for marketeers. On paper one thinks customers are there because they want a better product/image than the average, but they can’t afford a premium vehicle. Also there are customers that can afford a premium vehicle but they look at saving money and want something cheaper but not the average. On paper sounds OK but in reality the life in this area is very tough as Saab and Volvo could be good examples.
Mercury is a totally different situation thou. Marketeers forced the image of Mercury into this so called “entry luxury” segment but the company offered products at the Ford level (because they were rebadged Fords). Talking about discrepancy between what you say and what you do! Certainly, customers were not fooled.
One of the few products successful in this segment was the third generation Maxima (1989-1994)a step above the Accord and Camry but bellow the 3 series. The big difference here: Maxima was a model within a brand and it delivered, Mercury is an entire brand and it doesn’t.
Too bad an other automotive brand with so much history behind goes away. If this is the price Ford has to pay to save itself, yes it needs to do it.
The last chance for Mercury was back in the eighties with the Merkur experiment. Ironically, it was the rebadged Sable that was a big part of the Merkur Scorpio’s failure. It was tough to sell a $30k Scorpio (and this was 1989 dollars, too) right next to a nearly identical Sable that was selling for nearly a third of the price.
After that, the only notable vehicles were the short-lived Cougar and Marauder. Everything else was just more expensive Fords with different grilles and tail-lights.
The only thing they had left that was selling was the Grand Marquis to the geezers (and that was only since the Crown Vic was relegated to strictly fleet sales). Now that the Panther platform will soon be history, well, there’s not much left for their rapidly aging market.
It’s a shame because a nice, retro 1969-style Cougar based on the Mustang (but with a formal roof) might have been a great comeback story for the marque.
The Maurader was just an option package tossed on top of a Ford Police Interceptor.
If you consider the DOHC 4.6L Cobra engine (unavailable in any other Panther, including the PI) ‘just an option package’, you are correct.
The sad part was even the Cobra version of the 4.6L, in a car as large as the Panther, was severely torque-challenged and couldn’t move those tanks in any meaningful way (unlike the way the good ‘ole pushrod 5.7L Corvette engine could motivate the last rear-drive Impala). The Marauder didn’t sell well.
It’s a pity because, if it had, there was a chance that the handsome Marauder convertible concept might have made it to production, bringing back a stalwart of past domestic automotive legends – the large, full-size convertible.
The Scorpio had a lot of problems but the Sable wasn’t one of them. The cars were in two different market segments. The Scorpio’s biggest problem was its hatchback design, something U.S. buyers don’t like especially in a luxury car. It also had some fairly serious mechanical problems (engine cooling and HVAC) in the first year and by the time Ford rectified the problems they and the hatchback design combined to make the car toast. The Scorpio was also underpowered for its market segment, the 2.8L V6 was not nearly enough power for the U.S. market.
The Sable wasn’t even close to being nearly identical to the Scorpio. The Scorpio was a RWD four door hatchback and had a much larger interior especially the backseat. The Scorpio interior was also a much higher level of trim than the Sable. The Scorpio actually had Connolly hides (same as Rolls Royce) for the leather seating surfaces.
The Scorpio’s problem was in part that it was the same size as a Sable while being a massively higher price. Price was a bigger issue than the hatchback.
Mercury was trying to compete with BMW while not having the brand cachet, dealer network or any of the other elements essential to doing the job. Merkur was one but one of many Bob Lutz half-baked hatchet jobs.
John, in theory you make a good argument about the Sable being a reason the Scorpio wasn’t successful. In reality the success of the Sable had nothing to do with the demise of the Scorpio. The dealership I worked for was both the largest Lincoln and largest Merkur store in the U.S. Sable buyers weren’t Scorpio buyers and vice versa. That is a fact. Because they were similarly sized has nothing to do with it any more than a 3 series being similarly sized to a Camry does. The Scorpio and Sable were in two entirely different market segments. People than can afford and want a 3 series don’t buy a Camry because it costs about $20k+ less. People who wanted a moderately priced four door FWD sedan don’t buy upscale four door RWD imported hatchbacks. I never once had a buyer compare a Sable to a Scorpio or vice versa.
That the Scorpio was a half baked idea we can agree on.
Say what ye will but Ford Lincoln-Mercury was a heckuva’ postman!!!
rudiger: No, I don’t think Ford would have spent the money required to fit (or to have an outside contractor fit) a folding top to a full-size car, even if the Marauder had been a success; the show car version of the convertible had no folding top at all. (As the owner of a ’66 Bonneville convertible, 1974-91, I quite agree that something important has been lost with the passing of such cars. The Sebring is sure as heck no substitute.)
Ford wasn’t the only one producing big convertible concept cars back then. About the same time, GM had a beautiful retro-1957 concept convertible called the Bel Air. I think it was mainly a response to the Thunderbird (but with a back seat) and remember seeing a picture of Lutz sitting in it.
Unfortunately, in another typical GM bonehead move, they shelved it and the money went to building the lame-ass SSR instead.
Ford is doing what GM didn’t have the brains/balls to do: focus. While there are a lot of good reasons to keep Mercury going, there is an even better one to drop it; Ford.
Putting all of the Mercury spend into making Ford/Lincoln into better brands and better cars, allows the Dearborn gang to better compete with the rest of the world.
Well, Mercury’s death made the front page of the Wall Street Journal this morning. I’d say this story’s progressed beyond “wild ass rumor.”
Good riddance.
The ‘entry luxury’ concept is faltering because the standard features on even economy cars is rather substantive. Trying to truly differentiate Mercurys from Fords just results in dangling of feature sets that frustrate buyers.
Toyota does well selling the Yaris in the same dealership as the Avalon.
Ford can sell a Fiesta and a top of the line Taurus. Consumers are not confused by this.
@FleetofWheel
I partially agree. Sometimes the differences are subtle and it takes driving a car for you to appreciate them, but I do think there is a higher level of refinement in a luxury car that people do appreciate. For instance, the Lexus ES is derided as a tarted up Camry, but it rides/feels/sounds nothing like one. I got a screaming deal on a new Volvo S60 for my mother a few years ago (basically got it for the price of an Accord). The way it drives–the way it feels unified as one solid piece of machinery while driving, took a while for me to appreciate, but I do appreciate those subtle things that make these entry-lux cars different from the Camcord cars.
I am sad to see the demise of the Mercury, but not surprised. When I went to my local auto show in January, I have never seen such a lifeless new model display as I saw with Mercury.
Ford now joins the modern world. Toyota/Lexus, Honda/Acura, Nissan/Infiniti and now Ford/Lincoln. Now about Lincoln . . . .
But I digress. According to the WSJ today, Mercury was down to under 100K in sales last year. This is what the Chrysler brand sold in the 60s when it was one of the weakest sellers in a much smaller market. I have often said here that the only reason I saw for Mercury was to put food on the plates of L-M dealers. The big question is what to do with the dealers.
I think that the right answer is a flagship Lincoln. This, added to some nicely badge-engineered Fords could be a viable brand. And of course, Ford will be just fine. I would hate to see Lincoln merge into the Ford dealers, because then Lincoln loses the snob factor (to the extent that such a factor exists with Lincoln) that allows Lexus to sell all of those profitable re-badged Camrys. There is no reason to pursue a course that will turn Lincoln into the new Mercury.
The WSJ article included a statement that also cast some doubt on the continued existence of the Lincoln marque: “Ford officials also are engaged in an intense review of the future of Lincoln, which has struggled as well despite its fairly new line-up. A separate person familiar with the company’s thinking said all options are under consideration for Lincoln…”
I agree that merging all Lincoln dealerships into Ford ones would be a bad idea, but (now that there apparently won’t be Lincoln/Mercury dealerships for much longer) I also don’t see independent Lincoln dealerships thriving, unless the brand can be reinvigorated Cadillac-style. Frankly I don’t see that happening. The LS sedan of 10 years ago, with its available manual shift and choice of V6 or V8, was analogous to the sporty Cadillac sedan now in its second generation (I can’t recall which combination of three letters they call it – it’s the one with the new coupe), but the LS was done on the cheap and didn’t succeed. Maybe a second attempt at a sports sedan will be made, but I doubt it. Lincoln was always more dependent on the Town Car than Cadillac was on its DeVille/DTS (and the rear-drivers that preceded it), so what will bring in the buyers when the Town Car is retired? Not much in the current line-up…
If Ford is serious about Lincoln as a stand-alone, it should finally produce a retro-Continental RWD/AWD sedan instead of just preparing show-car prototypes. The Taurus-based fancy sedan doesn’t cut it, nor does it seem to be selling well – but something emulating the Continental of the 1960s and ’70s might work, and could be a suitable Town Car replacement as well. But it has to look right. (No more high beltlines, dammit.)
Ford will face the same financial challenges with L/M dealers that GM did with Oldsmobile dealers when Olds was discontinued if they discontinue Lincoln at the same time as Mercury. On the other hand if they let Lincoln linger on and keep the former L/M dealers as Lincoln only stores most of those stores will go out of business. 25 years ago when Lincoln sold far more cars than they do today Ford did an internal study of all L/M dealers to ascertain how viable a stand alone Lincoln dealership was. Only one store in the nation was determined to be able to survive selling only Lincolns, it happened to be the store I worked at which at the time was the largest Lincoln (not Lincoln and Mercury) dealer in the country.
From a practical standpoint it would make sense to end the Lincoln brand but from Ford’s financial standpoint if they let Lincoln twist in the wind a while longer the problem with the dealers will for the most part take care of itself. IMO Ford does need to get out of the luxury vehicle business and concentrate on what they do best, the Ford brand.
Ford has been combining LM and Ford dealers for quite some time (part of way forward). The comparison to GM isn’t fair, Ford has been executing a long term plan in a way that is financially viable for them and the impacted dealers while GM did it half ass and paid. AM’s plan was intended to fix Ford first (without them LM doens’t matter) and provide lincoln with models they can sell, once Ford is fixed (they are getting close) then they will turn thier attention to lincoln and the money that was being poured into JLR and volvo will be used for lincoln. Once again compare to GM.
“IMO Ford does need to get out of the luxury vehicle business and concentrate on what they do best, the Ford brand.”
Agreed. Lincoln (and Cadillac) have lost any snob appeal they might have had at one time. Now, they seem to be the choice of rappers and crass nouveau riche showoffs one paycheck away from bankruptcy. The dependable, older, cash-buyer of Town Cars and Continentals is fading out of the market. 10 years ago the Town Car outsold by a wide margin every single Lincoln in showrooms today (in fact the Town Car in 2000 sold about as many as the entire seven model lineup in 2009). That car and that buyer were Lincoln.
Alternatively, Ford could keep a stretched MKS (just call it “Lincoln”) in its fleet portfolio for the limo/sedan market.
Since I left the retail automotive business five years ago and besides the local news media use only TTAC to keep me abreast of it I wasn’t aware Ford had been consolidating LM stores into Ford stores. In the metro Detroit market there hasn’t been a single consolidation although several LM dealers have gone out of business. In smaller and rural markets LM has always been combined with Ford.
IMO Ford does not have the capital or the ability to resuscitate Lincoln. As I said in my first response on this thread I view Lincoln to be only a half step behind Mercury. I think the only way that Lincoln could again be a viable brand is with an entirely new line up of vehicles exclusive to them and competitive with Lexus/BMW/Audi/MB and that is cost prohibitive for Ford. Ford also lacks the design and marketing talent to restablish Lincoln. The market for luxury cars today is obviously vastly different then it was in Lincoln’s heydays in terms of what kind of vehicles luxury buyers want to buy and Lincoln hasn’t managed to come up with even one model that fits the criteria. I just don’t see Lincoln starting from scratch and becoming a serious contender ever again. Ford IMO would be much wiser to devote their resources to the Ford brand where they have a current string of successes rather than Lincoln where they have none and haven’t had any for a decade. IMO the Lincoln brand is completely irrelevant to 99% of todays buyers.
jpcavanaugh: I believe that even Chrysler sales exceeded 100,000 units after 1961, thanks to the demise of DeSoto and the disastrous downsizing of the 1962 Plymouth and Dodge. But even after “real” big cars returned to both marques in 1965, Chrysler sales remained well over 100,000 units annually. The mid- and later 1960s were very good years for Chrysler Division.
For a “mainstream” brand to sell less than 100,000 units a year in a larger overall market is very troubling.
I do believe that there is a place for Lincoln…interestingly, prior to World War II, Lincolns were sold out of Ford dealerships, which hampered the marque’s competitive position with Cadillac and Packard. The Lincoln-Mercury Division wasn’t formed until after World War II.
It may just be “back to the future” for Lincoln and the Ford Motor Company.
You are correct. My memory was playing tricks on me – Chrysler indeed averaged around 200K units annually in the 60s-70s, and periodically hit 300K. And this was with the fewest models of any brand (Newport/300/New Yorker which was really just one car. Cordoba came in 75.) This is an even more damning comparison with Mercury’s current situation.
What I find interesting is that the few times Mercury was given a really unique product, it sold well. The 49-51 models did fairly well, and the 67-68 Cougar and the 70s Marquis were both huge hits. (57-60 was an exception, but the problem here was stretching way up-market in a bad economy.) But every time the wind blew, Mercury went back to being a badge-engineered Ford.
I wonder why they stopped using the messenger god in Mercury’s branding. I think he was gone by the early 70s. It is my understanding from my teenagers that greek and roman mythology is sort of cool these days. And Mercury would not have had the same political correctness issues as Chief Pontiac (whom I also miss).
The final nail for Mercury is not surprising. If I were a person of importance at Ford, I’d be a little concerned about Lincoln, as it is next in line for some hard decisions or big investment. In 2009, Mercury sold 92k units in the US, Lincoln 82K. By compare Caddy did 106k. To me, the focus on the Ford portfolio has paid off, but I fear it is only serving to intensify the insiginificance of Lincoln. Especially as we see Lincoln and Ford in the same store, justifying the premium will get more difficult.
OK. So soon my wife’s Mercury will join my and our son’s Pontiacs as cars from dead brands.
Where can I order bumper stickers “I lived through the Carpocalypse and all I’ve got was three cars from dead brands” ?
+1 My girlfriend has a Pontiac Vibe and there are a few classic Oldsmobiles I wouldn’t mind owning. How bout a bumper sticker that says: “Dead brand walking.” or “My other car is also from a marque that doesn’t exist.”
educatordan says “How bout a bumper sticker that says: “Dead brand walking.” or “My other car is also from a marque that doesn’t exist.”
Another sticker idea: “Because I can’t afford an Edsel”
“My other car is a Studebaker.”
“Gas, grass, or parts: Nobody rides for free.”
On a side note the funniest bumper sticker I ever saw was on an Escort with a younger woman driving. It said “My other ride is your boyfriend”
Wow, there’s just so much here. I’d agree that a WSJ front page story makes this more than just an internet meme. Clearly FoMoCo is putting out trial balloons on Mercury.
Except for Jerry Flint and Elena Ford, who cares about Mercury in a modern context? Collectors, enjoy your ’49 coupes, your ’67-’73 Cougars, your Marauders, your Steve McGarrett big-ole’ sedans, but the jig is up.
Mercury started withering away once the big pre-Panther Marquis left us in ’78. There was a bad period until about 1983, when Ford had better product and there were plenty of Americans alive who wouldn’t even consider a Japanese car. And look at a Camry or Accord from 25 years ago. They weren’t as “mainstream” as now. Given how awful GM product was during the EIghties, many Olds and Buick buyers became Mercury customers — or Ford or Lincoln.
A lot of that — plus the monster success of the original Taurus/Sable — kept Mercury viable into the Nineties. Then the mistakes happened, starting with the failed 1996 Taurus/Sable redesignt. Concurrently, Ford shifted product development away from passenger cars to trucks/SUVs. Mercury got no distinctive truck product when that market was hot. While Lincoln made some bling-bling hay with the first Navigator, all Mercury got was an Explorer with a different grille.
While this was going on, all the hot luxury brands offered “near-luxury” stuff (Lexus ES, Acura TL, Mercedes C-Class )equipped and priced in a way that paralleled what Mercury offering in the Seventies and Eighties. It didn’t help that they bought Volvo and put a lot of resources into Mazda, not to mention the cash drain of the Premiere brand frenzy/nightmare.
On the buyer side, there was a whole generation that only knew Japanese. Their aspirational brands were German or upscale Japanese.
They simply wouldn’t consider old man brands like Plymouth, Olds, Buick or Mercury. Meanwhile, loyal Grand Marquis buyers were dying off 10-15 years ago. Now even more are dead, and no one will take their place.
Finally, Jill came along, but it was way too late to help stop any of the above. Maybe if the product were as exciting to look at as Jill….
As for Lincoln, the other posters may be right that Ford really can’t build the product or give that the right marketing, but I’d say we’re at least two years off before that decision is made.
While I think focusing on the global Ford brand is the right approach, there are things about the NA market product mix that I don’t get:
– Too many CUVs. Escape makes sense, maybe something smaller, and the Expedition EXL is great for the whopper boat-towing crowd. But the in-between is confusing. Aren’t the Edge, the upcoming Explorer and Flex cannibalizing one another? And if they’re going to offer these semi-monsters, will we be seeing more fuel-efficient drive trains? 2016 isn’t that far away.
– Complicated, heavy AWD wasteland. When the Crown Vic/Grand Marquis/Town Car goes away, does Ford really expect the Taurus platform will take over that market? The big Lincoln MKS doesn’t really hold up in the livery field. I think the AWD Taurus police setup is going to be a maintenance nightmare. Charger, Caprice and that new company will make fleet sales gains on that miscalculation.
– What about a four-door Mustang? OK, it would be named something else (Fairlane, Falcon, Futura, take your pick). The idea I have is for a sedan built on a Mustang platform with 5-7-inch longer wheelbase, simple rear-drive, live-axle with V-6, Ecoboost and V-8 options plus hybrid and diesel variants. Bring the weight in at 3700 lbs. or less, size it between Fusion and Taurus, and you’ve got something both distinctive and relatively cheap to build/develop. And if it takes off, then build Lincoln limo, wagon, Ranchero type variants.
I can’t be the only one who has thought about this.
Canada socializes health care, then kills Mercury.
America… well, you can see where this is going.
Go piddle your bulls**t elsewhere. Ford is making the decision to kill Mercury, not Canada. Canada’s healthcare system is far more solvent and less expensive than American health care costs. Now stop hijacking the thread.
Judging from the latest reports, Canada is also running into an economic wall regarding health care costs. The trouble with health care is two things: 1) it’s prepaid; and 2) the government bundles a lot of services in there that you wouldn’t pay for if you had to pay out of your own pocket.
Prepaid has the same effect as a smorgasbord or a motel room. Since you already paid for your room, you don’t really care how high you run the AC. And bundling is like when I worked at MCGraw-Hill, their policy covered dermatology. When I had a wart that had to be frozen off, I went. Now that I pay for dermatology myself, I cut the wart off myself (except if one were to grow on my pretty face, that is).
Mercury’s dead. It’s been really a long way coming, the phasing out of the Panther needs by all accounts to mark the end of Mercury as well.
There is a reason why there is much nostalgia for the Panther platform and the Mark coupes, with clubs, collectors, and restorers all waxing those cars out there right now as you’re reading this. Those were the days when Ford was still “getting” the luxury car concept. The Mark VII and Mark VIII spanked anything made by GM from 1985 to 1998, and the Town Car/Grand Marquis were superior to the DeVille/Seville bunch. Albeit brand engineered, the Marks and the Panther had enough to distinguish themselves from the base crowd, much more than just some chrome trim slapped on top. The Marks had the air ride, and the Town Car could never be confused with a Crown Vic. Not to mention all those cars were rugged as hell, which is how some of us have put them through about 200k miles and still drive them.
Today when I see a Lincoln I usually see a Fusion or a Taurus with different taillights and waterfall grilles. Sad.
I do hope they somehow find a way to save Lincoln though. To do that, however, they would need NEED NEED to bring back the “legacy” names, and that just ain’t gonna happen, we all know. I heard somewhere about there being developed a new RWD to replace the Town Car… well, the idiots that Lincoln management have proven themselves to be they will probably call it the MKR. They would need to completely redesign the Towny exterior while keeping the name, ditch that fugly MKS atrocity, put all of the MKS options on the new Towny, redesign the MKZ exterior while staying on the same platform, maybe give it the air suspension and call it a Continental. Taurus will sell itself and doesn’t need a Lincoln sibling.
Also, given the abundance of BMW and Infiniti coupes out there, it’s time to bring back the Mark IX idea. I’m still undecided on if keeping the hump trunk for that one would be a good risk to take, but it can’t possibly do much worse than what they’re selling right now and most likely would sell better. And PLEASE could these idiots switch to AWD across the board already, with some RWD in the mix – luxury cars have no business being FWD, none whatever.
Oh well, none of that is going to happen, Lincoln will most likely keep limping along as a second-tier luxury brand… rant over.
That this is happening now may speak volumes. We knew Ford had slowly over the years set the deck to encompass the folding-up of Mercury as a possible play. That they’ve chosen now to play these final cards may indicate a lack of confidence in the financial rebound they were just recently embracing. Further hunkering down and simplifying / streamlining the product portfolio provides illumination on corporate strategy. Aww, the wrathing and churning symptoms of a company free to fight for survival. It doesn’t get much better
Though many will disagree, I think this is a bad idea. There is a place for Mercury, just as there is a place for Buick. It’ll be sad to see the Grand Marquis disappear. Sadder yet will be the inevitible loss of jobs from the closing of the Mercury division, as is the current downward movement of Lincoln to a near-luxury division. This is going to come back to bite Mulally in the face. These mistakes are similar to 1980s General Motors.
There’s something to be said for focus, no pun intended, but it sounds to me like obtuse gearhead thinking. Ideally, you would differentiate Mercury, making it look and drive different from a Ford. But if all you’re going to do is change the front grille and some badges, and you sell 100,000 more units to people who wouldn’t otherwise buy a Ford, I don’t see how that’s bad, either.
(I’ve never liked the Mercury Milan, but I have to say that lately it’s grown on me. Same with the Honda Accord. Am I getting old?)
Mulally is a Toyota fanboy so he wants to copy everything they do. But much like the what led to GM reversing the closings a lot of rural dealerships, Ford is going to find that conventional wisdom isn’t always correct. Mercury costs them virtually nothing to run. If it makes it easier to sell Lincolns, they should keep them around.