Where Is Ford taking the Lincoln Motor Company?

savetheland · July 2010

MKZ is not so much different from Fusion. It puts limitations to what can be done to MKZ to make it luxury car. And it basically takes place of discontinued Mercury Milan. Nobody in his right mind will choose MKZ over Lexus ES or Audi A4 for similar price. Yes it will be heavily discounted to sell. Ford can also limit production and make more Fusions. And it seems to be the case. There almost no MKZs available in Bay Area dealerships despite the fact I did not see the new MKZ yet on road. They simply refuse to make them, as well as other Lincolns. May be Ford is preparing to discontinue Lincoln as a brand? If you search for Audi A4 you will find order of magnitude more available cars for purchase in local dealerships.

lemko · July 2010

What's worse is that they seemed to have decontented the MKZ. It used to have a beautiful light woodgrain dashboard reminiscent of the classic 1961-64 Continentals. I also liked the Zephyr name a lot better. The original Zephyr was a lower-priced Lincoln from the 1930s like the MKZ is today.

Shoot, it almost seems as if Ford plans to discontinue Lincoln. What have they but two truncated, wimpy V-6 cars and a couple of stupid cross-overs and SUVs cloned from Ford vehicles. About the only thing in Lincoln's portfolio that would serously attract my dollars is the archaic Town Car, if I can still get one.

brucelinc · July 2010

I agree Lincoln does not have the image or product (compared to the competition) that it once did. Better days are coming, Lemko, but it won't be back to the '60s.

As for the Zephyr name, most of us kids like me (50ish) think of the Zephyr as the Fairmont clone of the '80s - not the classic Zephyr of the '30s. Many of us also think the interior of the new MKZ is far better than the blocky look of the Zephyr interior. I am not a fan of the lettering scheme but "Zephyr" didn't bring back fond memories for very many people.

As for wimpy V6s, an MKS ecoboost would rocket past any other Lincoln ever built so fast, it would make your head spin. Even an MKZ with its naturally aspirated V6 is quicker than an old 460 Town Car or even a Mark VIII with the 32 valve 4.6 engine.

Lincoln is in catch-up mode, for sure, but finally I think the right management is in place and they have the will to return Lincoln to its former glory. Actually, the current product line-up is better than it has been in years and in several cases, the products are impressive. The image needs an overhaul almost as much as the product. It will take even better, more exciting and more dramatically styled products along with strong marketing to rebuild the image.

akirby · July 2010

I agree GM is improving a lot. My issue is they still have more overhead than they need and could be even better if they did more consolidation. Ford and GM are reasonably close in sales volume but GM has WAY more employees and (I assume) production capacity. I can see keeping Buick as long as they don't just do Chevy clones. BTW - I think Ford could have kept Mercury and done the same thing - kept it alive - but I think both could do just as well without either one. However, there is still no good argument for keeping GMC. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD. Why not just offer a Denali package on the Chevy versions? You can still let the GMC dealers sell them - just make them Chevy Truck dealers.

akirby · July 2010

Don't you love it when people diss the current Lincoln lineup (weak V6s - compared to what exactly?) and act as if Lincoln won't be improving dramatically the next 4 years? Lincoln is holding it's own with table scraps right now and they seem to have a plan that they're just now starting to execute. They have room to improve the current vehicles (as we're seeing on the new MKX) and seem to have plans for new platforms but we'll have to wait and see about that.

brucelinc · July 2010

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we would all have a Merry Christmas but......

If only Ford could have upgraded the Town Car back in 2005 with sheetmetal like the Continental concept and used the 5.4 3 valve engine along with improvements to the NVH characteristics.

If only they could have found a way to make the LS more cost effective, revised the front suspension so the 4.6 could have been used, and updated the sheetmetal.

If only they could have used the LS platform and created a Mark IX coupe.

If only Ford could have kept the Navigator competitive and different than the Expedition - supercharged 5.4 maybe and different greenhouse.

If only Lincoln had not been left dying on the vine for so long, the image today would be soooooooooo much better. Of course if they had done everything I wanted, they may have gone broke and declared bankruptcy like GM.

dandrews1 · July 2010

Just for reference, the #1 profitable car company in the world is Porsche (based on profit as a percentage of the purchase price). I believe their profit margin per vehicle is over 45% of the purchase price.

I may be a bit off on the actual numbers, but think about this:
In Canada, a Corvette starts from 67k and can run up to 142k for the top of the line (holy crud! 75k$ in options!!) GM makes a decent amount of profit, about 10% of the purchase price..

Now to compare, Porsche makes models from $59k (Boxster) to a 911 GT2 RS @ $163k.. now it may make far less of them than Corvette does, but makes far more money per car.(I'll ignore the SUVs and the GT Gambella supercar for now)

I won't go on about which is a better car, as they both have their merits and appeal to different folks... but if I were a company in trouble, I may start looking to the company that has the #1 profit margin for some ideas....?

Perhaps GM can make fewer cars, stop having HUGE stocks of them siting around sucking up capital on dealer lots, and go for a more custom order type of business model.I live near Oshawa, Ontario and I see a lot of local dealers have inventories of hundreds of cars and trucks just sitting on their lot. I go into the local MB, Porsche or BMW dealer and they have a few dozen...

The truck business is more commodity based, so stock of trucks makes sense, but for cars, I think they could trim a lot of fat by making cars to order and trying out a JIT order system. Sit down in the dealership, do the car configurator thing with the sales person, and your car pops out a week later.

speculator · July 2010

A few weeks ago I was attending a conference for Ford employees and Dealers at the Chicago's Torrence Ave plant. The guess speaker was Alan Mulally. The topic of his speech concerned the fate of Mercury and also Lincoln. He said that because Ford was able to discontinue Merc, the Lincoln brand would have new and improved models to compete with Cadillac and its imported rivals. He also said that these Lincolns would not be limited to sale in the U.S. but would be global vehicles. If that is the case ,then I would hope that Lincoln would have a large rear wheel drive flagship. I did not get to ask if that would be the case though. But Lincoln would need one to be a global premiere mark. I am hopefull.

berri · July 2010

I wonder if the new Caddy coupe will sell? If so, I'd like to see a Continental coupe, and maybe a convertible version as well. As for RWD, I think Ford has a decent RWD Falcon platform down under just like GM and Holden, although Lincoln could probably differentiate itself by going all AWD.

cdnpinhead · July 2010

He also said that these Lincolns would not be limited to sale in the U.S. but would be global vehicles.

Hmmm. . .where have we heard that before? Maybe this time it'll actually happen. I think it's a good strategy. If Lincoln can make products that sell in the rest of the world, that would be a good thing. . .for someone else.

The train has left the station for me.

When I brought up the world market plan for the LS (back in the day) it was pointed out repeatedly to me that "we don't need no stinkin' foreigners buying Lincolns." We'll do it OUR way.

This will definitely be interesting to watch.

speculator · July 2010

The new Caddy coupe is probably going to sticker over 60 k . So, the sales may be limited. But that is no reason why Lincoln should not offer a competing vehicle. Ford just has to engineer the Lincoln to be a better car than the CTS coupe. As far as the rwr Falcon.
Ford is sending all kinds of mixed signals concerning the fate of it large rwd Aussie vehicle. The consensous is that the new Falcon would be based on the American Taurus platform. But then again, Ford is going to have a new rwd platform for the Mustang that would have an IRS. At least that is the rumor. So ,who knows?

akirby · July 2010

Steve - I believe Mulally has changed that mentality. There is no longer "Ford North America" and "Ford Europe" and "Ford Australia". There is Ford - period - and it operates globally. The only thing holding back Lincoln right now is a lack of existing suitable flagship platforms which was caused by neglect prior to Mulally. It's just a question of how long it will take them to correct the problem. The fact that they are now making money (before the new Explorer, Fiesta or Focus are figured in) and they no longer have Mercury or supporting marginal L/M dealers to worry about combined with Mulally's leadership tells me it will happen sooner than expected.

cannon3 · July 2010

I have been saying for the last 2-3 years Ford needs to dump Mercury and put these resources into Lincoln. Finally, Lincoln will have the resources needed to do battle with BMW/Lexus/Cadillac and the like. I see Lincoln coming out with some new models in the next 3-5 years that are going to put Lincoln in with the big boys of Luxury. Smart move Ford!

lemko · July 2010

From the Philadelphia newspaper:

With Mercury Gone, Ford Must Redefine Lincoln

savetheland · July 2010

I remember late 90-s Ford announced that it will sell Lincoln LS as a replacement for Ford Scorpio premium midsize RWD car in Europe. But then because of Jaguar it did not happen and Ford does not have premium model to offer in Europe since then. This unfortunate turn of events cemented Ford reputation in Europe as maker of cheap cars with plastic interiors, like French car companies. I do not know how Ford is going to sell Lincolns in Europe since it does not have any cred in luxury department anymore.

Jaguar could not replace Scorpio, because Jaguars were overpriced ancient cars that lost any relevance and credibility in Europe long time ago. At least Lincoln could start fresh at lower price point than Jaguar. But note that even Cadillac which is superior to Lincoln in every aspect cannot succeed in German dominated European market

nace818 · July 2010

IMO if Buick keeps on going with fine new models like the Lacrosse and Regal, they should be OK in the future. Also, I love my V8 Lucerne, one of the smoothest rides on this planet. I admit it could handle better, but that's not what it's for. It's built as a comfortable highway cruiser which it certainly is.(basically a Cadillac DTS in Buick skin) Anyway Buick keep on going in the direction you are now and you will be just fine.(Sorry for straying, I know this should be about Lincoln)

lemko · July 2010

I have the Cadillac DTS and I'm extremely happy with it.

akirby · July 2010

IMO if Buick keeps on going with fine new models like the Lacrosse and Regal, they should be OK in the future.

Yes, they'll survive with a few good products. But at the expense of Chevy and Cadillac. Maybe folks won't buy a higher end Chevy but they could certainly offer the Buicks as entry level Cadillacs. That's basically Ford's strategy - offer higher end Fords with more equipment and better styling and charge a premium, then let Lincoln take over the higher end market with just a little overlap in between. It's certainly worked for Ford - the average transaction price rose $5K for Ford models over the last 5 years.

Mercury could have been saved but it would have taken resources and sales away from Ford and Lincoln and there's no reason to have an in between brand.

If it was such a good business model to have 3 sequential brands then why haven't the imports done it (Toyota, Honda, Nissan)? Scion doesn't count - it's a niche brand and doesn't fit between Toyota and Lexus.

[Deleted User] · July 2010

Allen, there are manufacturers with more than two brands and there are manufacturers with only two brands. Both models can work well.

Ford is initially going to lose sales overall when Mercury is fully toast, but they may recoup some of that over time. It will certainly depend upon whether they can make Lincoln mean something, and not waste any more precious development dollars on models like the MKS or MKT, both of which were decent efforts, but neither being cars that will appeal to a larger luxury audience that they need.

Meanwhile, GM will keep their market share for now. They halved the number of brands they had, are rebuilding Buick nicely (and arguably doing a better and more careful job than Lincoln has), Chevrolet is doing fine, GMC is growing, and Cadillac has the sucessful CTS line and the revamped SRX, with a DTS/STS replacement in the wings and a 3 series fighter coming. Ford has gone one way, and GM is taking a different tack. No reason why both cannot achieve success. GM has a Lincoln competitor (Buick), and Cadillac has already moved upmarket from there. Ford will have to first secure Lincoln's place at a Buick level before it can take Lincoln further upmarket. I think it will work in the end for them, but right now Cadillac already has a reputation as something other than a re-trimmed Chevy.

I am glad I do not have to make these calls. The car business is a real gamble, and the target is changing all the time.

akirby · July 2010

More than 2 brands - yes. 3 sequential brands with one being positioned in between the other 2? Only GM has that now with Buick. Can it be made to work? Sure. But is it necessary? The only successful Cadillac car is the CTS. Why not replace the DTS with 2 Buick models? Wouldn't that help Cadillac and reduce overhead? Is there any reason why people wouldn't buy the Buicks for the same price with a Cadillac badge?

I can see why some would defend Buick - but GMC? How can you possibly defend keeping GMC as a separate brand?

They may have halved their brands but the question is whether they went far enough?

Ford sells almost the same number of vehicles as GM with fewer incentives and much higher profits. And Ford has 2 brands versus 4 and only half the employees.

Ford is already competitive with Chevy/Buick/GMC and Lincoln should be competing nicely with Buick/Cadillac in 3-4 years.

If you were starting a new company today with GM's current market share, would you create 3 sequential brands plus a complete clone for trucks? I hope not.

lemko · July 2010

Well the DTS and Lucerne share the same platform. I could've went with either the Buick or Cadillac, but chose the Cadillac because it is much more attractive. The Lucerne is a fine car, but at times reminds me of a Passat on steroids, especially from the rear.

[Deleted User] · July 2010

But is it necessary? Of course not. But it is a strategy (just as killing Mercury is a strategy). It is a continuum. No matter whether you have two brands (or 10 like Volkswagen...count 'em now with the recent additions of Porsche and Suzuki), you will have overlap. I am not sure why this is bothersome to you.

Chrysler has four brands: Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram. Chrysler's owner Fiat has several brands as well (and not just Abarth, Maserati and Ferrari). Alfa and Lancia overlap. Fiat is still sorting their own situation out, so I am NOT saying that I think their brand array is the best.

The only successful Cadillac car is the CTS. The CTS is a whole line now: sedan, stunning, stunning coupe and wagon. You are also forgetting the new SRX, which is doing really well right out of the gate. The XTS looks to be a potential success. The plan for a 3 series fighter is a good one as well. Oh, and don't forget the Escalade. It is doing way better than the Lincoln, and Cadillac has plans to remake it for the heavy duty CUV crowd.

I am not knocking Ford in any way, but no way does Ford sell as many vehicles as Chevy/Buick/GMC combined. All of those brands are building. None of them are pausing at this point at brand building. I hope that Lincoln is competitive with Buick soon. I cannot imagine that they will have the wherewithall to cover the range that Cadillac plans to cover any time in the next few years, and let's remember, Cadillac has no plans to pause and let anyone catch up with their own continual improvement. Plainly said, Lincoln does not have the desirability that somehow Cadillac has been able to retain even through the GM debacle of debacles.

you were starting a new company today with GM's current market share, would you create 3 sequential brands plus a complete clone for trucks? I hope not. I truly don't know. But that is beside the point. GM has built-in over umpty zillion years some brands (with an s) credibility. They shed many of them, so I cannot judge that going all the way down to four is still a bad decision. It seems clear they do have more capacity to expand with their greater number of employees. So I guess we'll see. What is telling is how quickly after bankruptcy and shame, they began trouncing Ford sales again.

Drive a new Regal and see if this is a company who cannot bring LOTS of great products to market. As I said before, I am glad I am not making the big decisions for any of these companies. But why you are so bothered by GM's decision to keep more than two brands begins to suggest you are a little defensive about Ford's decision to only keep two. And you shouldn't be.

akirby · July 2010

These multiple brands were created when domestics controlled almost the entire market and GM had over 50% market share. They were all competing with each other and could easily support 3 or 5 or 7 brands or more. Today they're competing with imports who don't have the same overhead.

You're thinking just like GM - trying to justify keeping status quo. Ford could have done that with Mercury and given it great new products, but Ford bucked tradition and decided it was better off without Mercury. What I like about the move is that Ford no longer has to compromise the Ford brand to differentiate Mercury. This allows Ford to make the best vehicles possible. They'll get there with Lincoln too.

Keeping Buick prevents Chevy from making their best vehicles because they don't want to infringe on Buick. Likewise Cadillac loses good entry level vehicles. You end up with 3 mediocre brands instead of 2 great ones.

And please explain GMC. There is no way you can defend keeping a 2nd truck brand with nothing but Chevy truck clones. Even Ford never did that.

My issue is GM could be doing so much better with just Chevy and Cadillac. Until a year ago the only successful Caddy was the CTS sedan. The new SRX, wagon and coupe CTS just came out.

As for sales - GM sold 194K in June, Ford sold 170K. I'm guessing GM had more fleet sales and higher incentives but I don't have those figures. And that's without the new Fiesta and Explorer and redesigned Focus all due within the next 6 months or so not to mention new F150 drivetrains.

So Ford sold 88% of GM's volume with half the employees. Ford made almost $5B profit the first half of 2010 - without any government help or loans. How did GM do with assistance?

I can't believe you even mentioned Chrysler as any type of good example. They're even worse than GM.

I want to see GM compete with Toyota, Ford, Honda and Nissan. And I don't think they can do it with 4 overlapping and redundant brands.

themacguy · July 2010

excellent post! lincoln should have built the mark 9 (i'd have skipped one and called it the 10 though), out of the LS, with a 2 door. it wasn't car of the year in 2000 for nothing. we bought one of the last v-8 LS models, and it's been a good car through 50k now, and it's a keeper (like forever). little wizzy widget stuff that's normal has been a niggling complaint, but no problems on the power delivery. i don't care for the long distance lack of comfort in the seats though. what's up with that?
i was brought up in a lincoln family, starting out in 72, then on to our first mark in 77, then t my dad's last one in 81-82 (bill blass model, which i've kept with only 60k on it). back then you either were lusting after cadillacs and lincolns. we wisely chose lincolns.
anyway, marketing types always screw things up, and ford had plenty of that to go around over the last coupla decades. what i think will happen, thanks to ford not having taken bailout money due to all the family heirs' involvement, is that they'll come out of all this MUCH stronger than gm (cadillac). if they use there cachet wisely, then we're in for some fun in about 3-4 years. they need to flush some of the stuff they're shoving at us now - lack of sales will do that. then they'll be moving folks into position that are CAR people in order to save it. cadillac did this about 10 years ago. ford did it with the mustang group as well.
look at how long gm was in the doldrums with both cadillac and the corvettes (i've owned a bunch of them over the years), now building some spectacular performance cars with both of them. ford can, and likely WILL do the same thing with lincoln.

you don't ever want to lose your halo cars...

jack b :-) in midland, tx usa

[Deleted User] · July 2010

Ok, you are right. Three mediocre brands instead of two great ones. Yes, Chevy is mediocre what with not one but TWO Fiesta competitors in the pipeline, the Cruze to go against the Focus, the all new Malibu in 2012 (and the current one ain't bad at all), the Traverse (which is trouncing the Flex), Equinox, the Tahoe, the Suburban, the Camaro, the Volt, the new Silverado Heavy Duty. All crap. Nobody apparently seems to like or buy the new Buicks. Nobody buys or seems to want the GMC brand. And Cadillac is no doubt mediocre. Further, Cadillac errs bigtime, I guess, by not wanting to have cars starting at $28K in their lineup. Nope. Allen has it right. Everyone should use Ford's model or admit they have indefensible game plans. I stand corrected.

speculator · July 2010

I agree with much that you have written. Lincoln could have Introduced a modified MKR concept vehicle using the Mustang platform with modifying it to have an IRS. It could have used many of the Mustangs V 8 power plants as optional packages.The 5.4 litre supercharged V8 would have been a great package with optional awd. They could have also have used a variant of the MKR platform on its higher end Mustangs. They also would have had a new rwd police vehicle. But instead ,Ford decided to go with the FWD MKS.

akirby · July 2010

Ok, forget the cars for a minute - how do you justify GMC?

It's not about sales volume. GM was #1 and needed a bailout to survive.

Why is Ford making so much more profit on fewer sales with half as many employees?

GM does finally have decent products - some better than Ford, some not. But until they stop acting like they have 50% market share and get serious about cutting overhead they'll continue to struggle.

smarty666 · July 2010

That is easy to do when you have the highest incentives and fleet sales month after month. GM will never be able to compete with the import brands if they continue to have the highest incentives and highest percent of fleet sales. Those two things need to change. Sad thing is when GM loyalist make excuses why its okay. They just don't get it's not. Hyundai has the largest fleet sales/incentives of the import brands I believe and they could go to lower those things as well.

smarty666 · July 2010

Excellent post. Couldn't agree with you more. After growing up and having GM products for over 25 years, and finally seeing the light several years ago, GM still doesn't get it. The Volt's pricing just proves that to me even more. GM doesn't understand that times have changed since all those decades ago. I mean, its good that they streamed line their company but I still think they could do more.

I tend to agree with you about GMC being rebadged Chevy's. Personally, I never saw the differences but I know a few people personally with small businesses who use pick-ups and they say there is a difference between Chevy and GMC so who knows.

Buick was a mistake to keep here. I don't care how well it does in China. Here, it will always be a poor man's Caddy. Almost every Enclave at my local GM dealer has between 45-50k on the window sticker. No thanks, I'll be in a Caddy before ever paying that for a Buick. They could have scrapped the 3 models from Buick all together and just added one new entry-level model at Caddy that started around 27-28k and that would have been good enough.

I understand GM getting rid of Pontiac b/c they were just rebadged Chevy's but they should have kept them and completely did 4-5 distinct sport models that could have competed with Scion, Mazda, Nissan, etc. They didn't need two luxury divisions, a poor's man's pretend luxury (Buick) and a real luxury division (Caddy).

Hopefully with Mercury going by-by, Ford now will be able to spend a lot money and attention on Lincoln which it is in bad need of. Ford is making better decisions still then GM.

marsha7 · July 2010

"Here, it will always be a poor man's Caddy."

While I originally thought they should do away with Buick, maybe a "poor man's Caddy" will sell well here, too...

As far as Mercury, I see no reason for it to survive...aside from a slightly different dashboard and taillights, they are identical to Ford...OK, one exception...the Mercury Marauder had the 300 HP 4.6L, while my Crown Vic and the standard Grand Marq had the 239 HP 4.6L engine...

euphonium · July 2010

a newly crafted/designed Town Car. 300 h.p. and seats 6 with 4 doors???

brucelinc · July 2010

Probably not reasonable but how about an MKT with 355 HP, seating for 7 and 4 doors?

akirby · July 2010

I do expect Lincoln to have a flagship sedan in a few years but it would be more like a Mercedes S class or Lexus LS than a Town Car.

[Deleted User] · August 2010

Now the news is that the MKT, like the Ford Flex, will be going away in 2013. No second iteration for either one of these relatively new efforts. Ford has had no luck lately with these people movers/minivans/CUV-like wagons. Neither the Freestar or Freestyle caught on. The Taurus X was no better sales-wise. The Flex has largely been a sales flop too. Not that any of these were/are not good vehicles, but they have not been able to catch the wave of some of the competition.

The 2011 Explorer has its work cut out for it. This former sales leader has been dying on the vine for years, and it is still another (heavily reworked) iteration of the the Freestyle/Taurus X/new Taurus. It is longer and wider than the 2010 Explorer, yet if anything looks a bit more compact, and the third seat is in fact less roomy. Starting at around $30K may work against it, especially when given an obvious competitor, the new Kia Sorento (former rear wheel drive body on frame, now front-drive based unitized) costs so much less to start.

I keep hoping Ford knows what it is doing here, but meanwhile (to get back to the thread topic), the prediction is for an Explorer-based vehicle for Lincoln. We have lately seen how that did not work for the MKT, which went from polarizing, but eye-catching concept to a long, relatively dowdy wagon. I keep thinking those incessant focus groups are carefully rejecting the very features that would make any vehicle a real standout in the marketplace.

Anyway, I am just wondering...do you think a vehicles like the 2011 Sonata or Kia Soul or the new Mini were focus-grouped to death before coming to market? I don't know, but I don't think so. Heck, I don't know if the Explorer America concept would have sold well (I think it would have, but what do I know?), but the 2011 Explorer, with its awkward details (nice interior though), bears no relationship to the concept.

We will never know what Ford could have done with the 427 sedan concept, or the 2002 Continental concept or the NaviCross for Lincoln, but we should know by now that carefully dumbed down things like the Five Hundred, the 2008 Taurus, the MKS, the MKZ, the cool Fairlane concept turned into the too-long, too expensive Flex...such efforts don't really work out. Thank goodness for the F150, the Mustang, and now the Fiesta. But what does Lincoln have that will light a fire in the salesroom? Nothing, even though all their vehicles are decent efforts.

I am sad that the MKT is such a dud. I had such hopes for it when I saw it in concept. In real life, it compares very well with competitors like the Audi, but so what if the buying public doesn't see it? The Aviator concept that preceded the MKX was the same way. The significant details lost in preparing it for market lost the attention-getting part that the 2011 Sonata found. Yes, sweat the details that have nothing to do with looks (Hyundai is doing that now), and then give it the looks too.

Ford is on a roll with the F150, Mustang, Fiesta, Fusion, and probably the 2012 Focus (though the competition in this class is really heating up next year). Lincoln has no standouts. None. I hope whoever approved the MKS design many years ago now (we shouldn't count the MKZ, a stop gap effort after Bill Ford actively tried to starve Lincoln), has gotten the boot. Caution has been nothing more than wasting precious resources. Following will not keep this boat afloat. Meeting the competition will not keep this boat afloat. The world does not need Lincoln. Lincoln needs to pull a 1961 and blow everything out of the water.

akirby · August 2010

That story was bogus. Ford is actually working on a Flex refresh that insiders say is stunning (whatever that means) and the MKT won't go away until they have a better replacement. The market that the MKT competes in is small anyway so it will never have huge numbers. But both have high ATPs and the Flex has high conquest rates so they're still valuable.

I don't disagree with the state of current Lincoln products, but I just don't understand your lack of faith in future Lincoln products. You seem to think Ford needs to be GM to compete which I REALLY don't understand given their financial performances to date.

[Deleted User] · August 2010

I don't think Ford needs to be GM. You seem to think GM needs to be Ford. Under the circumstances, I think they are both fine with the plans they have adopted, given their respective situations.

Yes, I do question why I should have faith in future Lincoln products. The MKZ, MKX MKS, MKT have been incremental stabs at reviving Lincoln. The MKT was supposed to be a solid effort from the newestLincoln thinking. There is no reason Ford could not hire the talent to make Lincoln a competive division. But something isn't translating in the process. I don't know what the problem is at this point, but they need to fix it. They do not have unlimited time in which to keep missing the mark.

lemko · August 2010

The MKZ, MKX MKS, MKT have been incremental stabs at reviving Lincoln.

The MKZ, MKX MKS, MKT have been like trying to restart a cardiac arrest victim's heart with a foot of telephone wire and a AAA battery.

THIS is what Lincoln once again needs to be!

akirby · August 2010

The MKZ, MKX MKS, MKT have been incremental stabs at reviving Lincoln. The MKT was supposed to be a solid effort from the newestLincoln thinking. There is no reason Ford could not hire the talent to make Lincoln a competive division. But something isn't translating in the process. I don't know what the problem is at this point, but they need to fix it. They do not have unlimited time in which to keep missing the mark.

Ford made $5B the first half of 2010 and there is no reason to think they'll earn any less in the 2nd half with the Fiesta hitting full stride. They're making so much money now that they're paying down debt in huge chunks. And they're able to do this while still investing heavily in new vehicles. So please explain to me why Lincoln is in so much danger and can't take 2-3 years to get its act together like Ford did with the Ford brand? Unless Ford starts losing money again (which seems impossible at this point) then I don't see the problem.

The MKT is the only clean sheet Lincoln at this point. The exterior is questionable and it's in a very small market segment so it's hard to judge it based on sales volume. The MKS and MKZ are still holdovers with only minor tweaks done in the last 2 years - they're nowhere near their potential once they get a clean sheet design. The Navigator will only be a niche product now (as are all full sized SUVs) but has to wait for a new F150 based platform along with the Expedition - can't justify a unique platform for such small sales potential.

The MKX is the closest thing to a clean sheet design from Lincoln other than the MKT but it still must share a greenhouse with the Edge until the full redesign (this was just a mid cycle refresh). But the new interior is stunning and blows away the SRX especially with MyTouch and other features as do the drivetrains. Exterior styling is a draw - I like both. But I think the MKX also has more interior room. We'll have to wait and see how it sells compared to the SRX.

Let's count the Cadillac duds in the interest of full disclosure:

Escalade EXT
XLR
DTS
STS
first gen CTS
first gen SRX

The next gen Lincolns will have no excuses - they're fully funded now and with Mercury (and Volvo and Jag and AM and LR) out of the way there should be no excuses.

You really can't judge Lincoln on what it's done so far - the question is what does it do now that it's getting the attention, funding and resources that it's been lacking for years.

GM is "getting by" with lots of fleet sales and huge incentives. Ford is making money hand over fist with half the brands, only slightly lower sales volumes, half the employees, lower incentives and fewer fleet sales.

Ford fundamentally changed how they do business. GM has not.
Ford is building one vehicle that can be sold globally with minor variations. GM is taking Opels and putting Buick badges on them (again).

I'm still waiting for you to explain the business rationale for keeping GMC. That to me is the single most glaring evidence that GM still doesn't get it.

marsha7 · August 2010

" In real life, it compares very well with competitors like the Audi, but so what if the buying public doesn't see it?"

And there's the rub...if the buying public does not see it or does not want it, it dies...

I always thought that the Lincoln LS was a beautiful, understated car, that was well made (never had one)...yet, just today in conversation about cars, one guy mentioned he had a friend who owned an LS that was pure junk...he referred to things like, "if she was lucky enought to have it start and run, she could go to work that day" and "it spent more time at the dealer..."...

Maybe it was only that one car, but it was not what I was expecting to hear about the LS...

brucelinc · August 2010

The 2000 - 2002 LSs had a number of issues, but as far as I know from 2003 on up they were pretty good. I know of a number of people who had early LSs who basically swore off Lincoln forever. Some because of problems and others because Lincoln abandoned the sport sedan segment, altogether.

The Aviator had some engine problems, too, and that has not helped Lincoln's reputation. Of course, at least one poster here had an early LS and an Aviator but I don't think he has given up on Lincoln.

In my opinion, today's Lincoln products, MKS, MKX and MKT in particular, are far better than they are given credit for. The image of the brand is very tarnished, however. I don't know of many people who would aspire to own a Lincoln. While the current products are good, they just aren't distinctive or special enough to overcome the boring, stodgy, "just a gussied up Ford" image. The XYZ naming has been a source of confusion, too.

akirby · August 2010

I like where Lincoln is headed - finally. And I do look forward to owning another one someday.

[Deleted User] · August 2010

I like that I can throw in some opinions here and get some discussion going. Lincoln needs people to talk about it, good or bad. Subaru for chrissakes gets about 100 times as many posts on edmunds...talk about a boring brand. I don't care if people agree with me. I will still get to work (I wish I never had to work another day in my life), and will still enjoy my evening martini.

Even though Lincoln really does suck as a brand, it was still my favorite luxury car when I was at an impressionable age. I don't think anyone can blame me for thinking or saying that a lot of people who make a lot more dough than I do, really screwed up what was once an actual luxury brand. And now that there has been an effort to really turn things around, they are still issuing bonehead decisions that lead to no increase in sales. Ford can make all the money it wants (and I hope it does), but if they cannot figure out how to make Lincoln relevant, the brand will still be toast.

akirby · August 2010

Gregg - I really do respect your input even if I disagree with it. And I don't think anybody will disagree that Ford really screwed the pooch on Lincoln the last decade or two. And Ford cars for that matter. It's taken Mulally over 3 years to fix the Ford brand and fill in missing voids like the Fiesta with best in class products. That will be almost complete early next year with the new Focus and Explorer.

We've only seen bits and pieces of the new Lincoln so far. The Ford team knows exactly what is required to make Lincoln competitive and based on what happened with Ford so far I have no doubt that they'll make it happen as quickly as possible. But cut them a little slack - they've only just begun.

[Deleted User] · August 2010

I really hope Lincoln is beginning work on that rear drive flagship. Buick is gunning for Lexus (in addition to being a very big name already in the world's largest car market, China). GM is introducing the rear drive Caprice here as a police special only, but in time that chassis will be used here by Buick. Buick's plan is for a rear drive flagship based on the Zeta platform (a version of which underpins the Caprice and the Buick Park Avenue in China). Lincoln could have something to market soon after Buick, and if so, little would be lost in the sales wars. The newest thing often gets the sales boost, and coming online not long after the Buick could be an advantage. Of course, it has to be pretty. Safe efforts like the (anonymous) MKS apparently don't rebuild a damaged brand very well.

akirby · August 2010

The MKS refresh is said to be stunning. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

speculator · August 2010

My friend who owns a Cadillac ex Hummer dealership has told me that Cadillac is going to again proceed with its rwd flagship. It would be styled similar to the Cadillac 16 show car. with a direct injection 420-450 HP V8 as standard with optional awd. Right now it would base sticker at about 75 K . Lincoln should not worry about Buick unless Buick is going to go really upscale. Lincoln should be competing with Cadillac, Mercedes, BMW, Infinitie and Lexus as Mulally has promised.

speculator · August 2010

More importantly the new gen version is supposed to be completely re-engineered. If the new gen version is to have a modern rwd configuration then it would probably be wise to change its name because the previous gen is associated with fwd.

[Deleted User] · August 2010

I don't think the MKS will change to RWD. Ford has committed its car platforms to FWD/AWD--other than the Mustang, which they already know from the Ford Probe experience cannot be made FWD without losing its Mustang-ness. What I hope happens is that they do design a rear drive flagship for Lincoln. Then each brand would have a halo RWD car.

Meanwhile, Lincoln will have to compete with Lexus (and Buick) before it can go anywhere else. Car sales are in the doldrums, but Lincoln is worse than that. Buick has only three models (if you count the just introduced Regal and the outgoing Lucerne as one), but Buick still sold three times as many cars as Lincoln in July, not to mention the greater number than that sold in other markets (which Lincoln is not in at all). Meanwhile Cadillac also managed to sell 15,000 units in July to Lincoln's 5600. Thank goodness the Ford brand is doing so well.

With Buick, think Lexus from now on. Cadillac will be (and has) gone upmarket from that. Cadillac has a ways to go, but its sales are climbing already. Lincoln may eventually get back to being a direct competitor with Cadillac and Mercedes and BMW and Audi and Jaguar, etc., but first it must start to sell well in the heart of the $40,000 - 50,000 range. That cannot be done all at once, given how far the brand has fallen.

madlock · August 2010

It's not an either/or proposition. With a RWD platform successor to Falcon/6 and Mustang in development, a "driver's car" competitor to G37/3 Series/C Class would be very valuable to Lincoln provided Ford can complete the consolidation of the remaining freestanding LM stores into multipoint FL outlets, and Ford can scale back Lincoln once it no longer has to sustain an entire store by itself. Ford can then make the individual per-vehicle investment required to make the Lincoln brand more than just different sheet metal stamping, leather, stereo, and noise insulation. Heck, for all intents and purposes, Taurus is more feature-rich than MKS as things stand.

speculator · August 2010

The problem with lincoln is is that it doesn't have a come hither model. It needs to do something that would set the brand into orbit. Something similar to what the Mk 3 did in 1968. Right now these cars are dowdy. Dowdy as in Volvo. For all of its attributes Volvo just doesn't set one's heart afire. I was told in 01 or 02 that Lincoln was going to have distictive platforms all for its own models. Now look at what has happened. The smart thing would be for lincoln to engineer a rwd platform that it could share with the stang. Some tell me that the new gen Mustang will be decidedly upscale because of its new platform that is suppose to have an irs. Also that Ford willl have an export version of the Mustang. a modified Mustang platform for Lincoln may be on the books. At least it is a hope.

Where Is Ford taking the Lincoln Motor Company?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles