Ford news

[KLang]

Ford's rebound begins.....


Ford will announce tomorrow that its Five Hundred midsize sedan will be renamed the Taurus, company officials confirmed anonymously to The Associated Press.

Unfreakingbelievable. :shakehead :saywhat:

Link (http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Dispatch/CanANewTaurusSaveFord.aspx?GT1=9114)

[dando]

Ford's rebound begins.....



Unfreakingbelievable. :shakehead :saywhat:

Is it any wonder why the Lions suck so much? :gomer:

:shakehead

-Kevin

[JoeBob]

It actually makes an awful lot of sense. There's a lot of updates hapening to the Five Hundred for 2008. What many have said is, "This is the car they should have introduced in the first place."

If they keep the same name on it, nobody notices the difference. The Taurus was a huge success for them, and the hyping return of the Taurus makes a lot more sense than trying to reestablish the 500 name.

Here's the car: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/07/detroit-auto-show-2008-ford-five-hundred/

[dando]

It actually makes an awful lot of sense. There's a lot of updates hapening to the Five Hundred for 2008. What many have said is, "This is the car they should have introduced in the first place."

If they keep the same name on it, nobody notices the difference. The Taurus was a huge success for them, and the hyping return of the Taurus makes a lot more sense than trying to reestablish the 500 name.

Here's the car: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/01/07/detroit-auto-show-2008-ford-five-hundred/

The Taurus was king of the rental fleets. This move just smells of desperation.

-Kevin

[JoeBob]

The Taurus was king of the rental fleets. This move just smells of desperation.

-Kevin

At the end, the Taurus was the king of the rental fleets.

At the beginning, the Taurus was the king of sales.

[oddlycalm]

Ooooops, Mulally's lack of experience in the consumer market is showing. No matter, he gets paid regardless of the outcome.

Changing the name on the 500 will only result in confusion in the market and won't erase the epic level of apathy and stupidity that killed the Taurus and Ford's best assembly plant (Atlanta) along with it. Ford had the best selling car in the US market, and one of the best values in stealth performance cars in the Taurus SHO, and pissed it all away because they couldn't be bothered to evolve product line. :irked:

oc

[RichK]

In announcing its big losses last month -- an annual loss that added up to a Mustang a minute -- Ford said that although it does not expect to see an improvement in the first half of 2007, it does expect losses to narrow later in the year.

:eek:

[Wheel-Nut]

Ford should go back to square one and start all over.

http://www.hfmgv.org/exhibits/showroom/1908/tbig.jpg

[nissan gtp]

I'm gonna buy one for sure now :p

[cameraman]

If they sold a new one of these I'd buy it in a heart beat.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/68/162405872_7940b8e38a.jpg?v=0

[coolhand]

Ford should go under and make room for a new better American Car Company with a better business model and lower costs. After spinning of the truck divisions though

[Sean O'Gorman]

I'd like to see Ford go bankrupt so they can shed the useless unions and re-emerge with the ability to be competitive.

[JoeBob]

I'd like to see Ford go bankrupt so they can shed the useless unions and re-emerge with the ability to be competitive.

Sean, you're falling back into your old patterns. You set your mind on an idea that is incorrect and shows only your lack of understanding of the situation - then you repeat that idea over and over, leading to your looking like a dope.

Last time I brought this up, I schooled you on how Ford's finance department was keeping key features off of cars to keep the cost of parts down. This time, let's take a look at another one of the huge problems The Big Three has... too many (and too small) dealers. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070203/AUTO01/702030361/1148


The average Chevrolet dealer now sells 583 cars a year. Ford dealers sell 631 vehicles a year on average, while Dodge dealers sell 375 on average, according to J.D. Power and Associates Power Information Network. All three are sharply down from previous years.

By contrast, the average Toyota dealer sells 1,685 vehicles, while Honda dealers close 1,289 sales on average.


Automakers prefer a smaller number of large and modern dealerships over many smaller, marginally profitable dealerships. Large, healthy dealers tend to invest in new showrooms with modern amenities and well-trained staffs, which leads to more sales and better customer satisfaction.

If Ford was entirely non-union tomorrow (and the union workforce is shrinking dramatically, as the UAW agrees to concession after concession) they'd still have pretty much every problem they have today.

[Sean O'Gorman]

I don't know about you, but where I work, if there is no reason for me to be employed, I stop getting a paycheck. What about you?

I couldn't care less if Ford ever returns to profitability, I'd just like to see the smug grin wiped off the face of the xenophobic UAW workers who feel they are entitled the world for building American cars.

[Ziggy]

When you get some skills, maybe you could join a Union

Yeah, it's the workers fault. We should all live in mud huts and ride bicycles to work. Mandatory overtime and company pets getting all the perks.

Get back with us when you have ten to fifteen years of work under your belt. Let me rephrase that, as I really doubt you work with your hands.

Your as ignorant as any Lemming. Spewing on a topic you know nothing about

Ziggy

Proud UAW member

ps - I see Ford and Chevrolet merging in our lifetime.

[nissan gtp]

When you get some skills, maybe you could join a Union

Yeah, it's the workers fault. We should all live in mud huts and ride bicycles to work. Mandatory overtime and company pets getting all the perks.

Get back with us when you have ten to fifteen years of work under your belt. Let me rephrase that, as I really doubt you work with your hands.

Your as ignorant as any Lemming. Spewing on a topic you know nothing about

Ziggy

Proud UAW member

ps - I see Ford and Chevrolet merging in our lifetime.

to be called FChevy no doubt :D

[Sean O'Gorman]

When you get some skills, maybe you could join a Union

Yeah, it's the workers fault. We should all live in mud huts and ride bicycles to work. Mandatory overtime and company pets getting all the perks.

Get back with us when you have ten to fifteen years of work under your belt. Let me rephrase that, as I really doubt you work with your hands.

Your as ignorant as any Lemming. Spewing on a topic you know nothing about

Ziggy

Proud UAW member

ps - I see Ford and Chevrolet merging in our lifetime.

Again, I ask, if your job is no longer necessary, why should you still get a paycheck? Think that Toyota and Honda would keep employees on the payroll if demand for their cars was down as much as GM or Ford has seen?

I will say that I'm against retiree benefits being cut because if you spend your entire lifetime thinking that you will be taken care of by your employer when you retire, you can't have that pulled out from under you.

My dad was a UAW member in the 70s and he said it was the worst work experience of his life. Being forced by co-workers to hide whenever business was slow so the boss couldn't find them to give them something else to do, dealing with co-workers bragging about showing up drunk, seeing the plant literally stampede out of the factory the second the whistle rang. Yeah, sounds like the unions had NOTHING to do with the decline of the U.S. automakers.

My biggest problem is with the xenophobic attitude that the UAW inspires, particularly in the midwest. The reason that Ford, GM, and Chrysler haven't done worse is because there are still people who will buy this **** because they refuse to buy cars built by "some slanty-eyed chink", therefore the Big Three were able to get away with selling unappealing cars for so long.

[G.]

to be called FChevy no doubt :DChord. (with a hard ch sound)

Just sounds dirty.

[Ziggy]

Being forced by co-workers to hide whenever business was slow so the boss couldn't find them to give them something else to do, dealing with co-workers bragging about showing up drunk, seeing the plant literally stampede out of the factory the second the whistle rang. Yeah, sounds like the unions had NOTHING to do with the decline of the U.S. automakers.

Sounds like a managment problem to me. The Union is not there to put people to work. Im pretty sure the salary folks are in the design department. The guys and gals who have come up with this junk and "vision" are to blame. Not the worker. They just make and bolt the bits together. None are in the design department that I know of.

My biggest problem is with the xenophobic attitude that the UAW inspires, particularly in the midwest. The reason that Ford, GM, and Chrysler haven't done worse is because there are still people who will buy this **** because they refuse to buy cars built by "some slanty-eyed chink", therefore the Big Three were able to get away with selling unappealing cars for so long.

Sounds to me like a personal problem. The Chevy truck I own has been a wonderful vehicle. I will buy another, and soon. Most folks I know are not forced to buy anything. Most of us realize that buy buying American made products, we only strenghten the American position. Its called support. If you dont like the products the big three make (and there are several I would not own) dont buy them. Pretty simple.

but

The very fabric of America is the middle class. They are trying to eradicate us. This "global" economy crap is a very slippery slope. Why buy a dustpan made in America for seven dollars, when Wal-Mart has it for a dollar? Well, the tooling cost for the plastic injection mold, not to mention the mold base and the tooling engineering can not be done cost effectivly in the US. You will find very few tool makers in America working for five dollars a day. None I would imagine. Now in China, you will get that. If they train you, and you dont perform, they might take you out back and beat you (or worse) but's to you I guess that is OK. We are a Nation run by big business, and big business is infatuated by the bottom line. Dont let what they pay themselves come into play:gomer: and dont think that for one second they dont waste more of their own money by inept decisions and/or designs:gomer:

tis the workers fault

Hang on to that data entry job SeanO, you will be managed by an Indian over the phone and your check will be direct deposited.

You will love it.

ps - Im for putting tarriffs on all products NOT MADE IN THE USA

***** the World, building our own country back up should be job #1

[Dr. Corkski]

IBTL.

[Spicoli]

I'd like to see Ford go bankrupt so they can shed the useless unions and re-emerge with the ability to be competitive.

just cause you didn;t make it into the union? Sheesh.

bitterness gets you nowhere.

"Claims, this is Sean, please hold for your trained representative."

[Tifosi24]

SOG, there are poor workers in whatever business you go to, whether it be union or non-union. The UAW is not the cause of this problem, building cars that people don't want is the problem. Let's keep in mind that the company also signs those contracts, it isn't a one way street. I just started my job and I am unionzed, there are several jobs at my work that are obsolete, but you know what I do my work and I don't worry about my co-workers. When they retire they just won't fill those positions any more. I agree with Ziggy that people being idiots at work is also representative of the quality of management.

[Spicoli]

Chord. (with a hard ch sound)

Just sounds dirty.

chord, rhymes with choad.

{can we say that here boss? }:D

[Ankf00]

is it that time of year again?

[devilmaster]

My dad was a UAW member in the 70s and he said it was the worst work experience of his life. Being forced by co-workers to hide whenever business was slow so the boss couldn't find them to give them something else to do, dealing with co-workers bragging about showing up drunk, seeing the plant literally stampede out of the factory the second the whistle rang. Yeah, sounds like the unions had NOTHING to do with the decline of the U.S. automakers.

Wow. I hope you don't honestly believe what you have written. That is the most naive viewpoint I have ever seen.

Do those things happen? Absolutely. Does every man and woman on the line engage in those things? Hell no. I've said it before and I'll say it again for those who have never set foot on a shop floor - the majority of people who work on the line are decent folk who just want to put in their 8.5 a day and make money for their families.

I've seen your examples in the Navy and I know for a fact that they don't have a union. People leaving right at the whistle when their shift is done?!? For shame! How long should they wait Sean? 5 minutes more? 10? How long do non-union workers wait at their job? How long do you wait at yours?

That last bit right there shows you know nothing about what you shouldn't be talking about.

[coolhand]

ps - Im for putting tarriffs on all products NOT MADE IN THE USA

***** the World, building our own country back up should be job #1

How about matching the cost of foreign stuff? Through Automation

[coolhand]

SOG, there are poor workers in whatever business you go to, whether it be union or non-union. The UAW is not the cause of this problem, building cars that people don't want is the problem. Let's keep in mind that the company also signs those contracts, it isn't a one way street. I just started my job and I am unionzed, there are several jobs at my work that are obsolete, but you know what I do my work and I don't worry about my co-workers. When they retire they just won't fill those positions any more. I agree with Ziggy that people being idiots at work is also representative of the quality of management.

Why has it been so long for the American Companies to build a car people want? There is enough design talent out there, they are easy to fire and replace. How long have GM and Ford cars been in the drain?

[Stu]

Why buy a dustpan made in America for seven dollars, when Wal-Mart has it for a dollar? Well, the tooling cost for the plastic injection mold, not to mention the mold base and the tooling engineering can not be done cost effectivly in the US. You will find very few tool makers in America working for five dollars a day. None I would imagine. Now in China, you will get that. If they train you, and you dont perform, they might take you out back and beat you (or worse) but's to you I guess that is OK. We are a Nation run by big business, and big business is infatuated by the bottom line. Dont let what they pay themselves come into play:gomer: and dont think that for one second they dont waste more of their own money by inept decisions and/or designs:gomer:


Wrong. We are a nation run by the market. If people would rather pay 1 dollar for a dustpan made in China than 7 dollars for one made in America, then that is their right. People are not stupid, they realize that when they buy something that says made in China on it, that it is being made in a country that does not have labor standards that we do. They are the ones making the choice to buy the cheaper product. Some people make the opposite choice, to pay more and buy American, but they are in the minority. The beauty of the 1 dollar dust pan of course is that I still have 6 dollars left over. My income is more valuable to me if the cost of the things I purchase go down.

With cars, people choose to make a purchase based on the value of the car. To Sean, I, and others we appreciate the following:

1. quality
2. performance
3. functionality
4. efficiency
5. price

To the rest, they appreciate things like:

1. brand name
2. domestic vs. foreign

It doesn't make much sense to me, but people do it.

[Ziggy]

Automation is fine, but it's not as great as one might think. Im not in the Auto Industry, but I understand that robotic welders and other automated machinery work quite well. Detroit utilizes these machines where ever possible.

America is no longer in the machine tool business, so I doubt they are in the robotic business either. They could be, but again it's cost prohibitive. We used to make everything. Our machine tools were second to none. This started going out in the late 70's. There are several reasons, for which I do not have time to disscuss right now.

There are several automated gear grinders here in town. The late great Railbird was on a project to remove bugs from these new machines when he went away. I have lost track of how the project was coming along, but they were very high tech and human hands never touched them from forging to finished product. All the insepction was done in process, by machines.

Most people do not realize the amount of quality that goes into everyday products. How many cars have steering failure? Rear-end failure? Take into consideration of just how many units are built each and every day. Same goes for the Gas Turbine engine, the second most regulated industry next to the manufacture of drugs. There is a ton of science that goes into manufacturing. It is something America was once good at. The trend towards cheaper labor, and our out of control medical costs has spun our world upside down.

Even in the tech sector we are being beaten. Maybe not in the development, but for sure in the manufacturing of these tech products. I saw on the TV that they sell an IPod every eight minutes...... and I would about imagine that the huge number of tools used to produce these devices are not inside of US borders, and if they are they are a subsidiary of a foriegn owned company.

Is that bad?

In a word, no. We are however, very lopsided in what we can make and what we can make competitively in a free market.

America's capitol is being spent overseas. These companys are building factory after factory on foriegn soil. They are after the cheap labor and virtually no health care or pensions.

This is an alarming trend. China is a huge manufacturing giant. It is the buzz word that all business covet. "Got to get your foot in the door in China".

You think the problems in the Middle East are bad? Wait till you start building up all those folks in China. They start getting a taste of a better life. Then, much like SeanO's line of thought, when the water wont come out of the tap fast enough, it's going to be America's fault. "Those American dogs are keeping us down" "They must pay"

then we are really, really screwed.

They need America to feed, and nothing else. It's mind boggeling how screwed up it is, with foriegn interests owning tons of land in the US, and how they could throw our banking system into a tizzy if they called in all the dough we owed them.

Big Business stole our Government

not good, and I would really like to know who and how someone is going to stop it.

Hillary:yuck:
Barrack BinLaden:yuck:
Kerry:yuck:
Cheaney:yuck:
McCain ;-(

Abolish the two party system, lets get back on track before it's too late

dont get me started

[WickerBill]

People don't want Fords and Chevys because they are Fords and Chevys, currently. A bad decade or two of GM quality, and people will buy an ugly car named Honda on the grille instead of a beautiful car that is branded Chevrolet. Trust me, if Honda dumped out a decade of cars like GM did in the 90s -- all cookie cutter, rattle traps with horribly declining fit and finish -- people would stop buying their cars. Period!

How long will it take GM or Ford to A. make great cars and B. regain the trust of the buying public? No idea.


I worked in "management" at a GM facility in Speedway for a few years. I saw my share of really, really, really bad union workers -- and nothing could be done about them. Also saw hundreds that worked hard and cared about what they did. Now I work at a non-union large company, and guess what... remove the word "union" above and it is the same deal. I feel that the UAW in particular had the pendulum of power too far on their side in the 70s and 80s, and that hurt Detroit... but it isn't what killed Detroit.

[nrc]

Abolish the two party system, lets get back on track before it's too late


Please leave politics out of the discussion.

[Sean O'Gorman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again for those who have never set foot on a shop floor - the majority of people who work on the line are decent folk who just want to put in their 8.5 a day and make money for their families.




I worked in "management" at a GM facility in Speedway for a few years. I saw my share of really, really, really bad union workers -- and nothing could be done about them. Also saw hundreds that worked hard and cared about what they did. Now I work at a non-union large company, and guess what... remove the word "union" above and it is the same deal. I feel that the UAW in particular had the pendulum of power too far on their side in the 70s and 80s, and that hurt Detroit... but it isn't what killed Detroit.

I wont argue that there aren't alot of good workers in unions (again, my criticism is directed towards the xenophobic workers who feel entitled to their jobs because they think the problem lies with the consumer, not the employer), but wouldn't you both agree that unions make it easier for the bad employee to get away with that kind of behavior?

I notice too I still haven't gotten an answer as to why a struggling company should have to continue to pay workers that it no longer needs...

[Ziggy]

I dont know SeanO, if it were up to me, I would pair it down. Were I work, they did just exactly that a couple of years ago. They have now installed a two tier wage system with no retirement from the company. Lower starting wage with a lower ceiling. I guess that's a step in the right direction

yet

we have layers and layers of middle managment. Folks who are either inept or to afraid for their own jobs to make timely decisions. We have "vice presidents" of the most ridiculous departments you could dream of. It is all rather silly when you get right down to it.

Yes, there are lazy good for nothing employees. Not unlike non union shops I have worked at. There are a few redundant positions, where somebody is just punching in. If you would put them to work, I would imagine they would retire.

[Tifosi24]

I notice too I still haven't gotten an answer as to why a struggling company should have to continue to pay workers that it no longer needs...

They shouldn't have to, but since the company signed a legal labor contract to employ these workers they get to have the pleasure of doing that.

[Brickman]

Being forced by co-workers to hide whenever business was slow so the boss couldn't find them to give them something else to do, dealing with co-workers bragging about showing up drunk, seeing the plant literally stampede out of the factory the second the whistle rang. Yeah, sounds like the unions had NOTHING to do with the decline of the U.S. automakers.

Sounds like a managment problem to me. The Union is not there to put people to work. Im pretty sure the salary folks are in the design department. The guys and gals who have come up with this junk and "vision" are to blame. Not the worker. They just make and bolt the bits together. None are in the design department that I know of.

My biggest problem is with the xenophobic attitude that the UAW inspires, particularly in the midwest. The reason that Ford, GM, and Chrysler haven't done worse is because there are still people who will buy this **** because they refuse to buy cars built by "some slanty-eyed chink", therefore the Big Three were able to get away with selling unappealing cars for so long.

Sounds to me like a personal problem. The Chevy truck I own has been a wonderful vehicle. I will buy another, and soon. Most folks I know are not forced to buy anything. Most of us realize that buy buying American made products, we only strenghten the American position. Its called support. If you dont like the products the big three make (and there are several I would not own) dont buy them. Pretty simple.

but

The very fabric of America is the middle class. They are trying to eradicate us. This "global" economy crap is a very slippery slope. Why buy a dustpan made in America for seven dollars, when Wal-Mart has it for a dollar? Well, the tooling cost for the plastic injection mold, not to mention the mold base and the tooling engineering can not be done cost effectivly in the US. You will find very few tool makers in America working for five dollars a day. None I would imagine. Now in China, you will get that. If they train you, and you dont perform, they might take you out back and beat you (or worse) but's to you I guess that is OK. We are a Nation run by big business, and big business is infatuated by the bottom line. Dont let what they pay themselves come into play:gomer: and dont think that for one second they dont waste more of their own money by inept decisions and/or designs:gomer:

tis the workers fault

Hang on to that data entry job SeanO, you will be managed by an Indian over the phone and your check will be direct deposited.

You will love it.

ps - Im for putting tarriffs on all products NOT MADE IN THE USA

***** the World, building our own country back up should be job #1

Ziggy hits one out of the park.

:kudos:

[JoeBob]

I notice too I still haven't gotten an answer as to why a struggling company should have to continue to pay workers that it no longer needs...

Why don't you give us an example of one, that way we can officially reach the point in this discussion where you need to just stop talking.

[Sean O'Gorman]

Why don't you give us an example of one, that way we can officially reach the point in this discussion where you need to just stop talking.

http://classroomedition.com/archive/06may/auto2_jobsbank.htm


In Flint, Mr. Mellon also sees change on the horizon. "I understand the Jobs Bank needs to have an end to it," he says. "I mean, they've paid me like $400,000 over six years to do nothing, to learn to deal blackjack.

[Ziggy]

Dont believe everything you read on the Internet

We severed ties with the Job Bank, and here in Indy it has been defunct since about 2000 or so. This was the last chance GM employees had to transfer out.

It is my understanding that this program is no longer in play. It's not 100K I can assure you, as base wage is the best you can hope for. Base pay is around 59K. Now if your a hot shot writer and need to get your point across, then you put a dollar figure on the benefits package and trot out the inflated numbers.

but I am not an authority on all GM/UAW programs. I do know it is no longer in use, and is non-existent in my UAW plant. (and flowback rights are next)

[dando]

At the end, the Taurus was the king of the rental fleets.

At the beginning, the Taurus was the king of sales.

While I agree that the Taurus in the beginning was a decent design, Ford milked the cow by making it cheaper and cheaper, ultimately relying on fleet sales to keep it on top. In the meantime, they replaced it with the Explorer and the mini van du jour. :(

-Kevin

[G.]

It's not 100K I can assure you, as base wage is the best you can hope for. Base pay is around 59K. Now if your a hot shot writer and need to get your point across, then you put a dollar figure on the benefits package and trot out the inflated numbers.
This is pretty standard accounting practice in the business world, and really isn't inflated at all. We've analyzed the kneejerk number for where I work, and came up with about the same as they told us. It was a reasonable average.

I'm just sayin'.

Other than that, yeah, don't believe everything to read on the internet. "Cept Spicoli. The man speaks the TRUTH. And Bill Gates. I'm sure my check is in the mail, since I forwarded the email to 100 people. I think I copied you, Ziggy.:gomer:

[dando]

Sean, you're falling back into your old patterns. You set your mind on an idea that is incorrect and shows only your lack of understanding of the situation - then you repeat that idea over and over, leading to your looking like a dope.

Last time I brought this up, I schooled you on how Ford's finance department was keeping key features off of cars to keep the cost of parts down. This time, let's take a look at another one of the huge problems The Big Three has... too many (and too small) dealers. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070203/AUTO01/702030361/1148


If Ford was entirely non-union tomorrow (and the union workforce is shrinking dramatically, as the UAW agrees to concession after concession) they'd still have pretty much every problem they have today.



Ford tried to solve this problem a few years back with the regional dealer/sales hub concept, which went over like a fart in church with the dealers. :\

-Kevin

[nrc]

Some perspective from 1987.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1PDR-NX9OVI

Back in 1987 Ford was doing well. The Mustang, the Taurus, the Thunderbird, even the Escort - as archaic as they seem now they were competitive in the 1987 marketplace. During the '90s Ford became so focused on the big profit SUV segment that their auto product line literally wilted away.

The Taurus became a rental fleet queen because it went largely unchanged for almost a decade and Ford started relying on fleet sales to keep them "competitive" for the top sales position while otherwise ignoring the auto market.

Ford's initial reaction to their predicument has been tepid at best, face-lifts and name-plate changes. Next year the US Focus gets a Korean styling refresh on the same basic 8 year old platform. Europe is on their third Focus platfrom over that same time.

Hopefuly Mullally will take a hard look at Ford's position in NA compared to Europe and Australia and recognize that much of the problem lies in Dearborn.

[KLang]

People don't want Fords and Chevys because they are Fords and Chevys, currently. A bad decade or two of GM quality, and people will buy an ugly car named Honda on the grille instead of a beautiful car that is branded Chevrolet. Trust me, if Honda dumped out a decade of cars like GM did in the 90s -- all cookie cutter, rattle traps with horribly declining fit and finish -- people would stop buying their cars. Period!


I think WB hit upon one of the biggest issues. The perception many of us have of the domestic brands just isn't very good. In my case, the only exposure I've had recently to these vehicles is through rental cars and most are POS compared to what I usually drive.

Management short-sightedness is probably the primary problem but I do believe the demands of labor through the 70-90's also bear some responsibility.

No idea how they are going to bail themselves out. :confused:

[JoeBob]

Hopefuly Mullally will take a hard look at Ford's position in NA compared to Europe and Australia and recognize that much of the problem lies in Dearborn.

Apparently, that's exactly what he has planned. The goal is to use platforms worldwide (with centralized, not regional sourcing) with sheetmetal tweaks for each market.

[nrc]

On the topic of Union vs. Management finger pointing, there's plenty of blame to go around. Both suffer from the same basic disfunction, the short-sighted desire for instant gratification. Public companies operate with a focus on profit this quarter and this year. Analysts and share-holders don't focus on market share five years from now.

Unions tend to focus on securing their own piece of the pie in the short term without much regard to what that means to the company or future workers. I worked scab duty for two weeks while Union leaders fought for time-off and benefits that the majority of their members would never see. Now they're enjoying a comfy retirement while most of the rank and file hit the bricks years ago.

Clearly makers like Toyota, Nissan, and Honda are doing ok manufacturing in the states, but that doesn't identify a specific culprit because they're doing it with their product lines and non-union labor. This story (http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/26/news/companies/pluggedin_taylor_ford.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007012611) points the finger at union labor and work rule costs, but I don't entirely buy that either. Most of the models built by foriegn makers in the US don't compete on cost, they compete on quality and value. So the question is whether if Detroit had the lower labor costs that savings would show up as a better product. Experience suggests no.

Ford's Mexican built Focus is an example. The Focus started out as a competitive small car and was allowed to fall behind on both quality and content. If there were cost benefits to building in Mexico Ford certainly didn't plow those back into keeping the model competitive.

[FTG]

http://www.slate.com/id/2159071/


The shift lever falls readily to hand for one R. Kuttner, who road tests the Pontiac G6. He doesn't like the door-lock releases. Or the steering. Kuttner concludes the problem wiith GM isn't its workers--or unions--it's GM's incompetent designers and executives:

You might blame GM's woes on poor American workmanship or the cost of American labor. But Japanese total labor costs are comparable, even with Detroit's higher health insurance costs. Increasingly, Japanese cars are being assembled in the USA, and the quality holds up just fine.

So what's wrong with GM? The cars. GM is famous for being run by bean counters and ad men. Toyota is run by engineers.'

This is a common viewpoint, I've found, among my Democratic friends--Jon Alter, this means you!***--who would never actually buy a Detroit product but who want to believe the UAW can't be blamed. The argument seems to be roughtly this: a) American cars are now reliable enough, having closed the gap with the Japanese brands, so b) the workers are doing their job; therefore c) if Detroit cars like the G6 are still obviously inferior--tacky and cheap, with mediocre handling--it must be because they're designed badly by white collar professionals, not because they're built badly by blue collar union members.

The trouble with this comforting liberal argument is labor costs. When Kuttner says "Japanese total labor costs are comparable, even with Detroit's higher health insurance costs," he is--as is so often the case--talking through his hat. Look at this chart. GM pays $31.35 an hour. Toyota pays $27 an hour. Not such a big difference. But--thanks in part to union work rules that prevent the thousands of little changes that boost productivity--it takes GM, on average, 34.3 hours to build a car, while it takes Toyota only 27.9 hours. ** Multiply those two numbers together and it comes out that GM spends 43% more on labor per car. And that's before health care costs (where GM has a $1,300/vehicle disadvantage).

If you're GM or Ford, how do you make up for a 43% disadvantage? Well, you concentrate on vehicle types where you don't have competition from Toyota--e.g. big SUVs in the 1980s and 1990s. Or you build cars that strike an iconic, patriotic chord--like pickup trucks, or the Mustang and Camaro. Or--and this is the most common technique--you skimp on the quality and expense of materials. Indeed, you have special teams that go over a design to "sweat" out the cost. Unfortunately, these cost-cutting measures (needed to make up for the UAW disadvantage) are all too apparent to buyers. Cost-cutting can even affect handling--does GM spend the extra money for this or that steel support to stabilize the steering, etc. As Robert Cumberford of Automobile magazine has noted, Detroit designers design great cars--but those aren't what gets built, after the cost-cutters are through with them.

Look at the big Ford Five Hundred--a beautiful car on the outside, based on the equally attractive Volvo S80. But thanks to Ford's cost-cutters it debuted with a tinny, depressing interior that would lose a comparison with a subcompact Toyota Scion. Ford wants $30,000 for the Five Hundred. Forget it!

Is it really an accident that all the UAW-organized auto companies are in deep trouble while all the non-union Japanese "transplants" building cars in America are doing fine? Detroit's designs are inferior for a reason, even when they're well built. And that reason probably as more to do with the impediments to productivity imposed by the UAW--or, rather, by legalistic, Wagner-Act unionism--than with slick and unhip Detroit corporate "culture."

[Wheel-Nut]

I try to buy American made products as much as possible but it isn't easy to do.

[FTG]

"GM spends 43% more on labor per car. And that's before health care costs (where GM has a $1,300/vehicle disadvantage)."


GM and Fords problem is that all the people on the Internet who say there's nothing wrong with unions, don't want to pay thousands of dollars more for a union made car.

[Spicoli]

On the topic of Union vs. Management finger pointing, there's plenty of blame to go around. Both suffer from the same basic disfunction, the short-sighted desire for instant gratification. Public companies operate with a focus on profit this quarter and this year. Analysts and share-holders don't focus on market share five years from now.

Unions tend to focus on securing their own piece of the pie in the short term without much regard to what that means to the company or future workers. I worked scab duty for two weeks while Union leaders fought for time-off and benefits that the majority of their members would never see. Now they're enjoying a comfy retirement while most of the rank and file hit the bricks years ago.

Clearly makers like Toyota, Nissan, and Honda are doing ok manufacturing in the states, but that doesn't identify a specific culprit because they're doing it with their product lines and non-union labor. This story (http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/26/news/companies/pluggedin_taylor_ford.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007012611) points the finger at union labor and work rule costs, but I don't entirely buy that either. Most of the models built by foriegn makers in the US don't compete on cost, they compete on quality and value. So the question is whether if Detroit had the lower labor costs that savings would show up as a better product. Experience suggests no.

Ford's Mexican built Focus is an example. The Focus started out as a competitive small car and was allowed to fall behind on both quality and content. If there were cost benefits to building in Mexico Ford certainly didn't plow those back into keeping the model competitive.


Hey Boss:

This sure sounds like politics to me. :D Yeah, its union/management politics, but as Tip O'Neil said "All politics is local".

just pointin that out to ya. :p

:runs:

[Ankf00]

I try to buy American made products as much as possible but it isn't easy to do.

yep. if something's above board then great, I'll pay extra for it especially if it's local, but not for a completely inferior product.

and as boss says, it's both union politics & mgmt holding Chord back, both are too busy bickering to move forward with a solid plan. the airlines have managed to resolve union issues, especially American, to mutual benefit but Chord can't seem to figure it out.

[Andrew Longman]

A lot right being said on both sides of the conversation.

I've worked in and around the auto industry, and other industries for years and there is so much blame to go around.

I went to college with a kid from Detroit who spent his summers driving cars off the line to the Teamsters to haul. The Teamsters had a bar in a trailer for their drivers hangout while they waited for their trucks to be loaded. My friend totalled three Continentals in one summer by hitting light poles in the parking lot while drunk on his way to dropping them off. He not only didn't get fired, he got his job back every summer.

At the same time he was paid for two weeks, at $17/hour, for not working because management hadn't figured out how to get tooling in place to run the line.

But that was the late 70s and things are much better now all around. I helped implement the Modern Operating Agreement at Chrysler in the mid 80's and saw a lot of enlightened self interest and commitment by UAW worker at many plants. And I also didn't see a lot of it.

Still, just two years ago an engineer at a big three company who I was trying to help with a transmission problem told me, "Toyota is in the business of making cars. We're in the business of making money". Now he was a good guy and he wanted to do good work, but his culture told him something else was important at his company and that's means there is a crisis of leadership.

When Ford (or any of them) makes decisions to leave off important features, or make the numbers by dumping into the rental fleets, or to cheapen a part by a few more cents, it (and thousands of other decisions) sends a message all down the line about how to approach your work.

The big three, as mentioned, also have huge structural problems. They have excessive (by industry standards) health benefits being paid (as promised) largely to people who don't even work for them anymore They have too many, too small, too unimpressive dealers, with too much clout in the business. Their product line is uncompelling and muddled and overly reliant on SUVs and trucks. They have too much capacity. The rely too much on rebates and customers wait for them before buying.

They have allowed their brands to badly erode. Taurus is a shameful example and sadly they probably made the right choice the first time to kill it. Compare it to the Camrey or Accord which were launched about the same time. The big three instead are so lost from a brand perspective that they are forced to roll out old brands like Charger, Challenger, Mustang and Camaro to get any excitement.

Interestingly, there are some people who will still by them simply because they are American nameplates and who would never buy a foreign nameplate. By brother-in-law is one of them. I've never had the heart to tell him that my two Alabama and Ohio built Hondas have as much domestic content either his current Dodge truck or the one he replaced because it dropped its transmission at 80K.

The sad and real fact is that big three engineer was right. They are in the business of making money, not cars. Each of the big three make more money from their finance arms than they do from making cars. In fact they almost gladly over produce so they have assets on the books they can use to finance loans to consumers. In other words, they are banks that give away cars instead of toaster with their loans.

[nrc]

Hey Boss:

This sure sounds like politics to me. :D Yeah, its union/management politics, but as Tip O'Neil said "All politics is local".

just pointin that out to ya. :p

:runs:

I understand that some folks have a hard time separating business management and economics from their party affilliation. Fortunately we have a "delete" button and a lock button to manage that problem.

[Spicoli]

I understand that some folks have a hard time separating business management and economics from their party affilliation. Fortunately we have a "delete" button and a lock button to manage that problem.


:laugh:

just funnin boss.

[Gnam]

I was driving around San Jose last weekend. There were so many German and Japanese cars on the road, you'd think they won the war.

If Ford or GM went bankrupt, would they be able to shed their union contracts?

[JoeBob]

They probably wouldn't be allowed to shed them, however they would be allowed to renegotiate them. If a negotiated solution couldn't be reached, a judge could give them the ability to impose contract terms. (A really good way to hurt labor relations for a very long time.)

As The Big Three and the unions are already renegotiating things, pretty much all bankruptcy would do is put the pensions in the government's lap, and give the automakers more leverage in their negotiations.

[nrc]

Apparently, that's exactly what he has planned. The goal is to use platforms worldwide (with centralized, not regional sourcing) with sheetmetal tweaks for each market.

I wish him luck. It's been tried before. Eventually someone pushes through the "that's not right for our market" (Mondeo) or "that segment isn't worth the investment" (Focus) arguments. He's going to have to tear down some fiefdoms to be successful.

[Ziggy]

FTG writes on another page

"GM and Fords problem is that all the people on the Internet who say there's nothing wrong with unions, don't want to pay thousands of dollars more for a union made car."

Horsefeathers. Come to the near west side of Indy, and I can show you several large parking lots full of US built cars :D

ps - my last new car was German ;)

[ChampcarShark]

If they sold a new one of these I'd buy it in a heart beat.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/68/162405872_7940b8e38a.jpg?v=0

It would be nice to have one or two of those with a new souped up engine.

[Sean O'Gorman]

The shift lever falls readily to hand for one R. Kuttner, who road tests the Pontiac G6. He doesn't like the door-lock releases. Or the steering. Kuttner concludes the problem wiith GM isn't its workers--or unions--it's GM's incompetent designers and executives:

Hmm. I had a G6 when I was in Milwaukee for a couple of days this past summer, and aside from the hideous beige paint scheme, I thought it was a great car.

I think another huge problem that comes to mind when talking about the domestic automakers is how they market the cars. Aside from cars like the Corvette, Mustang, Viper, Solstice, etc., the majority of vehicles they make should be sold on the basis of practicality. So why is so much effort put on making the cars emotionally appealing? Recycled names like Charger, commercials showing cars sliding around in water, etc. That doesn't sell a family sedan.

[Andrew Longman]

I wish him luck. It's been tried before. Eventually someone pushes through the "that's not right for our market" (Mondeo) or "that segment isn't worth the investment" (Focus) arguments. He's going to have to tear down some fiefdoms to be successful.

Works better when you share major and minor components. Tooling for stamping is very expensive but panels make up only a small portion of the parts in a car and contribute little to the overall quality of the car.

For example the Neon shares a transmission with Chrysler minivan and IIRC the Pacifica. The 300 has the same transmission and drivetrain as a Mercedes S-Class. Many parts, from ignition switches to ERG valves are even common across many Japanese manufacturers.

The huge advantages here are reduced complexity and associated cost, but also much improved quality and customer satisfaction. But using the same parts across many, many models and many years, the parts are tested in use over a much larger sample size. That means problems keep getting forced out of both the use of and manufacturing of the part until it is fully optimized.

It also means there is an incentive to fix quality problems. I've seen countless quality problems at Big 3s not addressed because they knew the part was going out of use in X years and it was cheaper to just pay the warranty claims (if you don't both to put a price on angering customers or dinging your quality image).

I've also seen engineers push aside a quality problem because they knew the payback would not come on that component until they were likely rotated out of their position. Hence, it actually would make them look better if they pushed the problem to their replacement. I have not seen that at Honda and Nissan because they don't rotate people every few years and they place relatively less weight on financials when measuring their engineers' performance.

[Andrew Longman]

Horsefeathers. Come to the near west side of Indy, and I can show you several large parking lots full of US built cars :D

I once took my brother-in-law to the CART race at MIS. On the drive from DTW to Jackson he could not believe how many American cars he saw... and how few Japanese cars. Coming from Jersey, he just loved it.


ps - my last new car was German ;)

The UAW looks like girlscouts compared to German auto unions. And that doesn't even factor in the labor law on their side.

[G.]

Random thoughts:

I read an article discussing the projected Toyota takeover as number 1 in the world vs. GM. One point the author made was that GM as a whole (but especially the Buick division) has better overall quality right now than Toyota. The prediction is that GM is going to sink a bit lower, then rebound in a big way. It was a pretty good read, didn't seem to be cheerleading. Took GM to task HARD. But gave them winning grades.

I'm in the market for a new vehicle. I REALLY want to buy an American brand (not just built here). I'm just having a really hard time finding anything that I want in the US. If you made me decide, right now, it would be a Chrysler Pacifica, but I would spend the next 5 years wondering when the trans is going to go. Next couple of months I'll start to kick some tires and see what I can find...

[WickerBill]

My Equinox was in the shop for some repairs recently, and the dealer put me in a 2006 Impala. My first thought, of course, was "Uggghh".

It wasn't brand new -- had 26k on it -- so I absolutely knew two things: 1. it would rattle like a toddler's toy chest, and 2. being a rental, the engine noise and accompanying road noise would be bad, too.

Shocked was I to find that it was almost unbelievably quiet and I could drive down Thompson Road (southside Indy folks will understand -- it's like driving through a minefield) and not hear a *single squeak* inside the car.

I've since read that GM's semi-partnership with Honda has seen them gain quite a fair bit of knowledge on ride quality and noise levels (as well as gaining them a very nice 3.5L 6 and transmission for their Vue and Outlook).

So things could very well be looking up, but how long will it take for the consumer to notice? My guess is "too long to save GM".

And that stinks, IMO.

[Spicoli]

So why is so much effort put on making the cars emotionally appealing? Recycled names like Charger, commercials showing cars sliding around in water, etc. That doesn't sell a family sedan.


you're serious?

when you are spending that much money, it better be an emotional thing. as much time as people spend in their cars anymore, of course they want it to reflect/direct who they are. its more than just transportation, to most people.

I guess i can see where you are coming from, which is why you drive a *********.

[Andrew Longman]

G.: Things may have changed but two years ago when I was consulting to Chrysler the Pacifica ranked dead worst within the company in warranty claims. OTOH I can speak highly of the 300 which, (with a little of my help) was one of their best launches quality-wise.

Wickerbill: You might be interested to know that the American Automobile Labeling Act considers the Impala an Import based on content and assembly.

[Ankf00]

My Equinox was in the shop for some repairs recently, and the dealer put me in a 2006 Impala. My first thought, of course, was "Uggghh".

It wasn't brand new -- had 26k on it -- so I absolutely knew two things: 1. it would rattle like a toddler's toy chest, and 2. being a rental, the engine noise and accompanying road noise would be bad, too.

Shocked was I to find that it was almost unbelievably quiet and I could drive down Thompson Road (southside Indy folks will understand -- it's like driving through a minefield) and not hear a *single squeak* inside the car.

I've since read that GM's semi-partnership with Honda has seen them gain quite a fair bit of knowledge on ride quality and noise levels (as well as gaining them a very nice 3.5L 6 and transmission for their Vue and Outlook).

So things could very well be looking up, but how long will it take for the consumer to notice? My guess is "too long to save GM".

And that stinks, IMO.

in the past 2 months I've been in new solara, 6, and malibu. obviously price points differ but they were the 3 company rentals I was put in. Malibu was an absolute piece and a boat, the 6 was smart and a joy, and the solara while not my thing was smooth & inviting. The mazda is the closest thing to an american car I'd consider buying.

[Insomniac]

yep. if something's above board then great, I'll pay extra for it especially if it's local, but not for a completely inferior product.

and as boss says, it's both union politics & mgmt holding Chord back, both are too busy bickering to move forward with a solid plan. the airlines have managed to resolve union issues, especially American, to mutual benefit but Chord can't seem to figure it out.

Maybe that's because they'd have a hard time filing for bankruptcy? It wouldn't drop the union contracts, but the implication is basically negotiate a contract that makes sense or you'll be responsible for running all of us into the ground. (If that is indeed the burdon on Ford.)

[Ankf00]

AMR successfully renegotiated their union contracts without ever filing for bankruptcy.

[Insomniac]

Does anyone have a GM card? That's a good way to keep people buying your cars. $3,500 off the price of a car after 7 years isn't too bad.

[Insomniac]

AMR successfully renegotiated their union contracts without ever filing for bankruptcy.

Was there a threat or potential for bankruptcy? I don't know for sure, but I'd think Ford's financing division would make that difficult.

[Ankf00]

Was there a threat or potential for bankruptcy? I don't know for sure, but I'd think Ford's financing division would make that difficult.

no more than Chord with their losses

[Sean O'Gorman]

you're serious?

when you are spending that much money, it better be an emotional thing. as much time as people spend in their cars anymore, of course they want it to reflect/direct who they are. its more than just transportation, to most people.

I guess i can see where you are coming from, which is why you drive a *********.

How emotional do you get about your vehicle on a daily basis? You don't take your truck to a show, you don't race it, you don't offroad, etc. Its just a vehicle that gets you from point A to point B.

If I could afford to own multiple vehicles, my second car wouldn't be a sports car like the MR2, it would just be something basic.

[Duroc]

GM ≠ Team America. Only 45% of it's worldwide sales were in the domestic US market. Buick sells more cars in China than they do in the states. 2006 Asia-Pacific business sales grew 18% and Latin America, Africa and Middle East region sales grew 17%.

I expect the Big Three (& UAW) will be successful in lowering domestic production costs by pushing health care onto Uncle Sugar. I doubt they'll plow the savings into a mature domestic market. There are better returns available than shoveling money at Toyota for a point or two in the US.

[RaceGrrl]

Sean, were you paying attention in class? Basic rule of marketing- make people want to buy what you're selling. The way to do that: emotional response.

[Gangrel]

GM ≠ Team America. Only 45% of it's worldwide sales were in the domestic US market. Buick sells more cars in China than they do in the states. 2006 Asia-Pacific business sales grew 18% and Latin America, Africa and Middle East region sales grew 17%.

Not to defend the American car companies, because personally I can't remember the last time I wasn't disappointed by any of their products, but GM selling cars in offshore markets is also called "exporting," which last economics class I took, was good for the US Economy. What makes a car manufacturer "American" or "foreign," depending on who is defining the terms, is where the car is manufactured or where the company is headquartered, but where they sell their produts has very little to do with it. I am inclined to go with where it is manufactured, which makes Toyota largely an American manufacturer...however, if the parts are manufactured here and sent to, say, China for assembly at a GM plant, a good case could be made for this being an American manufactured product.

[Spicoli]

Sean, were you paying attention in class? Basic rule of marketing- make people want to buy what you're selling. The way to do that: emotional response.

Which is why Sean0 has come so far in such little time here on planet Earf.

:rofl:

[TKGAngel]

I was driving around San Jose last weekend. There were so many German and Japanese cars on the road, you'd think they won the war.

So, it was over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? ;)


Sean, were you paying attention in class? Basic rule of marketing- make people want to buy what you're selling. The way to do that: emotional response.

However, emotional response will only get you so far if there is the perception (or reality) that your product is crap.

[Sean O'Gorman]

However, emotional response will only get you so far if there is the perception (or reality) that your product is crap.

Not necessarily crap, just useless. A 5.7L V-8 in a midsize sedan? 330 hp Impalas? Who is asking for this stuff??

Tell me, Spicoli, what emotions come to mind when a consumer looks at an Accord or Camry? Are they thinking about rock songs and e-brake spins and high horsepower numbers? Because thats what comes to mind when you see the typical GM commercial for such a product.

[Ankf00]

Corolla owners are all about the heliski

http://www.arlinc.com/images/KentDropZone-high_rez.jpg



:gomer:

[Gnam]

So, it was over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? ;)
Maybe in 50 years, my grandkids will be driving around in an Iraqi Babylon. ;)

I remember the Taurus being a big deal when it was new. So Ford should do that again. Step 2: get featured in another blockbuster: :p

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/3229/38037amtrobocoptc3.jpg

[WickerBill]

The Taurus and Tempo (recoil in horror here) were really unlike anything else out there, looks-wise. Ford used to play a commercial showing the Tempo, Taurus, and a few other concept cars, and the tagline was "You can buy this one next month" (I think the Tempo was first). The Taurus looked like a spaceship compared to the GM cookie cutters of the day:

http://www.carrosyclasicos.com/nuke/imagenes/historia/chevrolet/20-celebrity1983.jpg


Chevrolet Celebrity, anyone?

[Spicoli]

Not necessarily crap, just useless. A 5.7L V-8 in a midsize sedan? 330 hp Impalas? Who is asking for this stuff??

Tell me, Spicoli, what emotions come to mind when a consumer looks at an Accord or Camry? Are they thinking about rock songs and e-brake spins and high horsepower numbers? Because thats what comes to mind when you see the typical GM commercial for such a product.

:rolleyes:

An Accord or Camry? SAFETY baby. Suburban mediocrity. Resale value. keeping up with the Joneses. And yes, that is the emotion some people will buy into. Conservativeness. My next car might be a Lexus 330.

[digress]

Have you noticed the new TV spot for the Honda mini-van? They describe the Odyssey as a 5-speed with all kinds of bells and whistles. You need to HANG ON! cause its not really a minivan underneath all that!:irked: They are going after the dad that needs a minivan but doesn't want one. I guess nobody wants a Tiger Woods mini-van anymore. :laugh:

[Wheel-Nut]

Hopefully the Granada will be next.

http://www.americangranada.com/gallery/75_brochure-3.jpg

[oddlycalm]

I REALLY want to buy an American brand (not just built here). I'm just having a really hard time finding anything that I want in the US. Yep G., that's the bottom line today. If nobody wants your products your cost of production doesn't matter. Ironically, all three have the ability to build a good product now and there is a way to turn the situation to the advantage of the US builders.

If I was Mulally sitting at Ford and I have a relationship with all the top composite people in the world from my time at Boeing, I'd already be in development with a lightweight product. The next Taurus would weigh less than 2200lbs and have a 125hp turbo diesel engine. The overall size and accommodations would be the same as the original Taurus and be a true four person car.

As a racing forum we are in a somewhat unique position to understand what modern diesel technology (Audi R8 & Peugeot) and modern composite chassis technology (weight & crash strength) can do. In high volume production carbon fiber, and CF/aluminum layered hybrid material, would be much more affordable. Aerospace and racing don't have enough volume to demonstrate these economies of scale, but they have sorted out the material and process issues over the last 20yrs so that it could be done in large scale production.

Winning The Oil Endgame (http://www.oilendgame.com/Contents.html) is a book that addresses solutions to the global oil issue but Lovins has four lightweight car proposals uses F1 chassis technology to demonstrate what is possible with composite materials. It was partially funded by the Dept. of Defense and the forward is by George Schultz and it's not some pipe dream fantasy. This can actually be done with existing technology.

There is no doubt in my mind that the opportunity is there and Mulally at Ford is in a unique position to be the first to make it happen. The headline value alone would be beyond anything any marketing program could ever afford and would restore considerable luster to the Ford name. Of course the product would have to live up to the promise, but that is within their control.

One thing for sure arguments over how the same old pie gets sliced and who gets how much are losers. Time to bake a whole new pie.

oc

[Sean O'Gorman]

An Accord or Camry? SAFETY baby. Suburban mediocrity. Resale value. keeping up with the Joneses. And yes, that is the emotion some people will buy into.

All of which are related to practicality. I suppose I could've stated my opinion more clearly, but I think you get what I'm saying.

[Spicoli]

All of which are related to practicality. I suppose I could've stated my opinion more clearly, but I think you get what I'm saying.

practicality is not an emotion? sure it is.

[Ankf00]

practicality is not an emotion? sure it is.

for the purposes of this discussion it sure isn't. rational vs. emotional. head vs. heart. style vs. substance.

[Ziggy]

Good post oddlycalm

a foil

The tooling and start up proceedure for this type of vehicle would be a nightmare. I can only imagine all the government regulations that would have to be jumped through in order to build a factory that could mass produce these types of cars.

comment on panel stamping. The entire inner skelton of a vehicle is still made out of stampings. They hang the plastic/steel sheet onto an exoskelton (inner:gomer:) like they have done forever.

America needs to think long term. Especially about the dependency on oil. They have paid it lip service for so long, I dont know if we as a country can ever get out of this mess. Gas today was back up to $2.36 a gallon. That's stupid, as it takes more and more of my money that I would use on other goods and services. The entire thing will colapse from inside itself (economy that is)

ps - Sean, while this thread has turned into a pretty good time, you are in back pedal mode. Did monkeywrench shut his board down:rofl:

[Sean O'Gorman]

1) I posted my response to JoeBob, and he was supposed to "remove me from the thread" or whatever his smug threat was, but I have yet to hear from him.

2) Who is monkeywrench? :confused:

[FTG]

"Toyota is in the business of making cars. We're in the business of making money".

Toyota is very profitable. They make money by making cars. GM and Ford can't make money making cars. The only question is whether that's because it costs GM $2,000 more to make a car, or because American managers are "stupid."

Apparently, some think "the cost of production doesn't matter." As long as "people want your car" you can sell it for less than it costs to make. You would think that 100,000 laid off union members would make them take a second look at their math, but I guess old habits die hard.

[Spicoli]

for the purposes of this discussion it sure isn't. rational vs. emotional. head vs. heart. style vs. substance.

whatever. go pop your collar.

[Kiwifan]

I purchased a FORD Fairmont Ghia late last year. Built in Aussie with all the bells and whistles you would expect from a top of the line car. Retails at $NZ64000, got it for 54 and it's BLUE. ;)

http://www.fastlane.com.au/press-release-current-and-archived/ford-news/fpv-bf-range-10-05-colours.htm

If the Aussies can build a good FORD, well.....should you import or try harder? ;) Just joking guys, although it is the best car I have ever driven.

Rusty.

[Ziggy]

That is a decent looking car. Can you convert those rubbels or whatever it is that you guys spend over there into U.S. dollars :p

:D

Now Ghia, there is a company with some name recognition. An Italian firm if memory serves me correct. We all remember the VW Karman, and I think they did a few Alfa's and Fiats as well. They even did a Maserati or two :eek:

Makes you long for those Chryslers of the mid 90's dont it :yuck: Those retards show up sometimes at Maserati get togethers and they wonder why nobody takes them seriously.

Rusty, I think that car is kind of cool looking. Certainly better than anything I have seen at my Ford dealership (and I admit, I have not been to one in a couple of years)

[Stu]

Sean, were you paying attention in class? Basic rule of marketing- make people want to buy what you're selling. The way to do that: emotional response.

Not always and especially not for people who try to make a decision based on logic.

[Rob]

Well, not only is the Five Hundred name being dropped in favor of Taurus, but the Mercury Montego will be renamed the Mercury Sable. Also, the Ford Freestyle will be called the Taurus X.

http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070207/FREE/70207002/1063/RICHCEPPOS

[Spicoli]

I purchased a FORD Fairmont Ghia late last year. Built in Aussie with all the bells and whistles you would expect from a top of the line car. Retails at $NZ64000, got it for 54 and it's BLUE. ;)

http://www.fastlane.com.au/press-release-current-and-archived/ford-news/fpv-bf-range-10-05-colours.htm

If the Aussies can build a good FORD, well.....should you import or try harder? ;) Just joking guys, although it is the best car I have ever driven.

Rusty.

nice car. :thumbup:

certainly better than the crap we see over here (except the trucks, of course. :p )

[dando]

My Equinox was in the shop for some repairs recently, and the dealer put me in a 2006 Impala. My first thought, of course, was "Uggghh".

It wasn't brand new -- had 26k on it -- so I absolutely knew two things: 1. it would rattle like a toddler's toy chest, and 2. being a rental, the engine noise and accompanying road noise would be bad, too.

Shocked was I to find that it was almost unbelievably quiet and I could drive down Thompson Road (southside Indy folks will understand -- it's like driving through a minefield) and not hear a *single squeak* inside the car.


I had the same experience with an Impala rental. I drove one from Cbus to Detroit Metro, and I was impressed with the overall performance, ride, handling, mpg, etc., despite being predisposed against it in the first place. Oh, and I was hauling ass @ ~75 in light snow, drifting/blowing snow, and temps in the teens. Not exactly ideal for driving a new car.

-Kevin

[Insomniac]

How emotional do you get about your vehicle on a daily basis? You don't take your truck to a show, you don't race it, you don't offroad, etc. Its just a vehicle that gets you from point A to point B.

If I could afford to own multiple vehicles, my second car wouldn't be a sports car like the MR2, it would just be something basic.

If it was just about Point A to Point B, no car would cost over 10k.

[Insomniac]

That is a decent looking car. Can you convert those rubbels or whatever it is that you guys spend over there into U.S. dollars :p


About 37k USD today.

[Ziggy]

Dang, Kiwifan is rich!!!

You a kangaroo roper or something:rofl: