Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options

What about the future of Ford Inc??

2456737

Comments

  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    topic, and was re-directed here...

    I think high fuel prices will hit GM/Ford where it hurts the most, in their highest profit vehicles, the SUVs...with Delta and NW Airlines in Ch 11, I make a prediction...

    By July 1 2006, either GM or Ford, maybe both, will file for Ch11...I have read that GM has over 200 Billion in long term debt, and Ford has about 125 Billion in long term debt...add to that they both have pensions underfunded by at least 5 Billion, and they will file Ch 11, jettison their pension plans, and downsize by 50%...

    The only actual prediction is the Ch 11 filing by one of them...the other thoughts are suppositions...
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Bill will buy his stock back and become a private company before he'll file.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    The Mustang won't a "one-year (or two-year) wonder." Remember that prior to the 2005 model the Mustang was still selling at the rate of well over 100,000 units per year...and that was when the car was based on an ancient platform. No doubt Mustang demand will cool off, but the car will still be a good seller for Ford.

    The Mustang - like the Corvette - has a built-in audience, as it has reached icon status. Unless Ford really messes it up, I doubt that Mustang sales will drop to an unprofitable level.
  • chuck1959chuck1959 Member Posts: 654
    ou are definatally right it will not be a one or two year wonder. It never has been. Wait I forgot about those dark "Mustang II" days! Did those sell that well. You never seen any on the road anymore.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Despite popular belief, Ford (or GM) can't merely go to court, ask for a declaration of bankruptcy, and walk out with a clean slate. The judge - if he or she is doing his/her job properly - will carefully look at the company's cash flow, assets and cash reserves. Plus, interested parties, such as the UAW and suppliers, can file motions in opposition to the company's declaration of bankruptcy.

    If Ford's financial position does dramatically deteriorate, I would imagine that the company will have enough ammunition to finally convince the UAW of the seriousness of the situation. Then you'll see the union make concessions very quickly, especially in regards to health care costs and factory closures. Some or all of Fords' foreign acquisitions could be sold, and even Lincoln-Mercury could be shuttered.

    Bottom line - there is still a lot of fat that should be cut before Ford can even think of declaring bankruptcy.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    The Mustang II sold almost 400,000 units in 1974! Sales fell by almost half for 1975, and stayed at that level through 1978, after which the Mustang II was replaced by the Fox-platform cars.

    Even the lower sales level from 1975-78 was still well above the sales of the bloated 1971-73 models.

    So, despite the abuse that has been heaped on the Mustang II over the years, it has to be considered a sales success. It carried the nameplate through some years that were difficult for both Ford and the industry as a whole.
  • chuck1959chuck1959 Member Posts: 654
    Thnaks for the info. That sure was a higher number than I expected. After making that post I remember a friend of mine bought a fully load '78. I believe it was a Mustang II Ghia? A woman friend I kew in Longview had one in that god awful "lipsick" red (???) with white vinly top and interior.
  • mirthmirth Member Posts: 1,212
    ...have far to much cash on hand ($20-30 billion with a "B") to go bankrupt within this decade. To put it in perspective - GM had one of their worst first quarters ever this year and lost $1 billion. They could keep that loss up for another 5 years ($4 billion/year) and still not quite eat up all their cash. No, the Detroit autos won't be going bankrupt any time soon.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    I think the Fusion is a key wildcard. If it hits relatively big (challenging the CamCord for sales supremacy) they will be in OK shape.

    The other cars that I think will get legs are the freestyle and 500, once the 3.5L V6 finally shows up. They really are nice cars, and good at their defined purpose, even if they aren't dramatically styled (ala the 300C). At least they won't look tacky in a few years. Clean and elegant tends to wear better than hot and edgy.

    The Focus could use an update (to the new platform), but isn't it still selling pretty well as it is?

    The Ranger I don't understand, but they must be real cheap to make these days. If it was up to me, I would come out with a new, bigger truck (maybe a shrunken F150) to compete with the bigger mid-sizers. But, keep the Ranger for budget/fleet duty.

    With the Fusion out (soon), at least the product line is pretty fresh, except for the Ranger, and the Expedition to some extent. At least the car lines are all newish.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    In many cases, the reason companies are filing bankruptcy isn't that they are losing too much money, it is to get out of pension obligations (and I think also union contracts).

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    one more point. From what I see, it seems that Ford is doing a much better job designing higher quality product, and building them better too. Initial reviews of the Fusion have been very positive, both in how well they work (especially the driving experience), but also how well they are put together.

    It wasn't too long ago that no one would be complimenting the build quality of any of the domestics. Now, Ford and Chrysler at least seem to be screwing them together bettter.

    Not only does putting it out right to start with help sales (hopefully), but should save lots of $$ on warranty work.

    Given this, I am actually waiting to look at the Fusion before I decide what to get (leaning toward an Accord at this point). A couple years ago, no chance I would be shopping at a domestic store.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    I vote with the Euro model outlet plan. Actually, I thought GM should do the same with Saturn (once they blew away Oldmobile).

    Bring over the cars that might be too expensive to sell as mainstream Fords, and keep the European flavor. They could also have a bit more pizazz, especially since they won't be expected to sell in huge volumes.

    Actually, at this point, I don't even know what Ford offers overseas, so who knows if it would be worthwhile, but it's worth a shot if you want to differentiate Mercury from Ford.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    where IS that new engine anyway?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,670
    The other cars that I think will get legs are the freestyle and 500, once the 3.5L V6 finally shows up.

    Uh... the Freestyle is already a goner, Ford has announced it'll be replaced with another model, the one that looks like a Range Rover with corrogated sides (can't recall the name) in 2007.

    To my eyes the Five Hundred as already starting to look a bit frumpy and old fashioned but the Fusion does look promising.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    always looked a bit frumpy and old fashioned, didn't it? For its market I don't think that matters anywhere near as much as not having the bigger engine ready at launch - now it has had a whole year to earn the rep as the Ford that can't get out of its own way, strains on the freeway and up long hills. Not a good thing, for a big family car. If it had had stellar fuel economy with the smaller Duratec, that would have been one thing, but it doesn't. It is beaten by all the competition except the Chevys with the V-8s. In some cases, much older models with 10-20% more power are beating the Five Hundred by 10%+ in the fuel economy department.

    It is also a bit of an odd choice to offer mainly CVTs in such a model - they should prepare the consumer for the CVT gradually, working it slowly up from smaller models to larger ones. Why not put the 6-speed auto in all Five Hundreds?

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • mschmalmschmal Member Posts: 1,757
    Um, Ford already tried this with the excellant Merkur (Mercury in German) XR4TI, the so so Merkur Scorpio, both from Germany and the aweful Mercury Capri (the 2 door roadster from down under, not the rebadged Fox platform Mustang.)

    Except for the new Focus platform that is used over here in the Mazda3, and something of the Mazda2/Ford Fiesta platform, there isn't much Ford sells elsewhere that I could see selling here.

    I really think Ford made a big mistake to stick with the current Focus platform. The Mazda3 built on the new platform is generally considered to be the best compact car available in the US (at least until the new Civic hits showrooms). Maybe if Ford sold a Focus built on the new platform they wouldn't be throwing $2,000 rebates at it all the time.

    Mark
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The Freestyle will disappear from Ford showrooms, that is true - but it will reappear as a Mercury. It's too good to sell at Ford prices and be profitable.

    I agree, the 500 is a dog inside & out stylewise. Real shame too, because I believe it's a well designed and engineered car. I don't even mind the engine in it, especially at these prices. But it's so doggone invisible.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Brian Johnson, an auto analyst with Sanford Bernstein & Co. in New York, thinks so. In a note to investors Wednesday, he suggested they return to private ownership as part of its restructuring. In a detailed analysis of the option, he wrote, "We think Ford should distribute Ford Credit to shareholders, buy out Class A shares (with Hertz, real estate and PAG sale proceeds) and retire Ford unsecured bonds -- leaving Ford as a private company owned by the Ford family."
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Carlos Ghosn, who led Nissan Motor Co. from losses to record profits, rejected an overture to join Ford Motor Co. for the second time in three years, people familiar with the situation said. Ghosn, 51, turned down becoming a top executive last month because the Ford family controls 40% of voting shares and could limit his influence. Ghosn, who runs Renault SA and Nissan, plans to improve the performance of the two companies. Bill Ford first approached Ghosn in 2002 after he ousted CEO Jacques Nasser. That could be a beautiful thing for Ford if they had been able to pull it off.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    With the Five Hundred, offered a car with lots of steak, but not much sizzle. Which is different from the way Detroit usually did things - offer lots of sizzle, but not much steak.

    At least the platform is solid, and the interior is roomy and classy. With the 3.5 V-6 and a facelift, the car will come alive.

    Of course, Ford should have had the new engine ready from day one, and one wonders why the company hired all of that styling talent when it apparently only wanted them to trace VWs and Audis and put a blue oval in the middle of the grille.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    that the cash positions of GM and Ford are not sufficient to properly fund their pensions and health care without major concessions from the union on employees paying a portion of the premium...

    However, the thought of taking Ford private never crossed my mind...good thinking, nvbanker...

    Remember, that long term debt, which far exceeds their cash by a very high multiple, is what will be jettisoned in a Ch 11, along with union contracts and pension obligations...

    They just do not seem to make as much money as when they entered into the agreements on the union contracts and pensions...one can argue that a deal is a deal, but if the $$$ is not coming in, call it a breach of contract, call it what you will, they will do what they have to do to get out of the agreements, as $$$ does not grow on trees...

    Moral: never depend on the corporation, it may backfire on you...I think it will soon be apparent with Delta and Northwest employees and retirees...I have also been known to be wrong... ;);) :shades:
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    I don't think u r wrong marsha7. Bob & Bill have 2 be considering some way 2 shrink their monstrous dealer network and fund pensions. The unions are a huge hinderance to profits and quality in North America. Emplöyees benefit, but if the compäny can't compete, they will provide no jobs at all soon. When you have to idle a plant due to poor sales, and still pay the workers, that just sucks the life out of the company.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    It's interesting to compare the latest economic downturn to the one in 1980-82. During that recession (which was far more severe in its impact on auto sales than the recent recession), Ford closed several plants and permanently laid off many workers (both blue- and white-collar).

    It was brutal, but by 1983 the company was once again earning healthy profits, and by 1987 it was outearning GM. Granted, new products helped (1983 Thunderbird/Cougar, 1986 Taurus/Sable), but the restructuring played a large role by helping the company become leaner and more efficient.

    Fast forward 20+ years, and Ford is still floundering after four years of lackluster results. William Clay Ford, Jr., is prepared to announce ANOTHER restructuring scheme, four years after he announced the last one. All because the UAW and Ford dance around the real problem - there is too much capacity in the auto industry in general, and at Ford and GM in particular. It's time to bite the bullet and close some plants and accept that permanent layoffs may be coming. Real concessions must be made on health care. The jobs bank also has to go.

    I hate to see anyone lose his or her job, but the bottom line is that NO ONE is guaranteed a job in today's economy. Sooner or later, UAW members will have to accept this just like the rest of us have. Losing a job is a scary prospect, but it's getting to the point where the no-layoff and no-plant-closure clauses in the UAW contract are threatening to sink the entire corporation (same for GM).
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    Ford is going to sell Hertz which will bring in a lot of money.

    Ford needs to build the Australian Ford Falcon here. Ford of Australia has their own performance division (FPV...Ford Performance Vehicles).

    check this link

    FPV

    The vehicle shown is a Ford FPV GT-P. The stripes can be deleted.

    image

    Brembo brakes come standard on the FPV GT-P.

    image

    Ford should build the Shelby GR-1 using parts from the mid-engined 550 hp GT.

    image

    Mercury should make a new rwd Cougar using the new Mustang's chassis, but without retro styling.

    Ford's new 3.5 liter DOHC V-6 should have good power.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    " Losing a job is a scary prospect, but it's getting to the point where the no-layoff and no-plant-closure clauses in the UAW contract are threatening to sink the entire corporation (same for GM)."

    Worse than that, grbeck - the UAW is sinking the whole industry in America - and soon none of their members will have jobs. How is that going to serve their people? This isn't a union thread - but it seems the agenda of the UAW is to see that the UNION survives, not the companies that employ their members. At least, that's how it looks to me. If I were a Ford employee, I'd be pretty concerned about who the enemy was - Ford or the Union.

    I've been in a position to be laid off, and to lay people off. There is nothing more unsettling in life to me. It threatens everything in your well being. But the company must survive, or NOBODY has a job. Sad, but true.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    Something has to give. The next round of contract talks should be very interesting. There WILL be plant closures and concessions on health care...the UAW will have to accept reality.

    And I look for Mercury and/or Lincoln to go by the end of this decade. I read recently that James Padilla said that the corporation needs to find a direction for Lincoln.

    If Ford hasn't found a direction for Lincoln by now, the brand is toast. Buyers aren't waiting with baited breath for Ford to bring back Lincoln. There are too many good alternatives available in today's market.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    And I'm one of those. I've been in Lincolns since 1990 - but have a Mercedes on order now because I want a Sedan next go around, and Lincoln doesn't make an attractive large sedan anymore, IMO. The last great Town Car was the 97, the LS is a great car, but too small for my needs, and not very good looking. Will I ever be back - I can't answer that. Even if Lincoln started bringing out some killer models, once you've traveled across the Atlantic or the Pacific for your autos, you rarely come back home. You get used to either the performance of Europe, or the reliability of Asia, and find a home there. Lincoln has kept me quite satisfied up until now, and I am very happy with my Navigator - but don't want another SUV when the lease is up this winter.

    My attorney drives a Lexus LS-400. He asked me once, why America can't build a car like that. My answer? We can. We just can't do it for the price Japan can do it, and overhead, perpetuated by UAW contracts is a big reason why.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    I see your point, but I disagree...while I do not have their financials in front of me, there are a number of factors different from 1980-1982...

    1. I believe their percentage of profit was higher in 1982 because rebates and "employee cost" and zero percent financing did not exist...you paid a standard percent on your GMAC or Ford Credit loan, and they were not giving up profit thru rebates, etc.

    2. Their health care costs were miniscule in 1982 compared to now...

    3. In the 23 years since 1982, they probably have may more retirees on pensions, than the number who have died in the last 23 years...in other words, the actual number of retirees has probably grown manyfold, especially with early retirements, etc.

    4. The Big 3 owned the market in 1982, as the Japanese influx was just beginning, so their market share, combined, was probably over 90%...

    5. Their highest profit cars, Caddy and Lincoln, which formerly put billions in the company's coffers, now compete with Infiniti, Lexus, Mercedes, Audi, so, while they still make money for GM and Ford, their market share of high-profit luxury vehicles has decreased...

    6. Their pension funds were not underwater (underfunded) in 1982...now, being $5-10 billion short, this is money to come from profits that no longer exist...

    7. ***They did not have $125 billion and $225 billion in long term debt in 1982...

    8. More long-term debt, underfunded pensions, skyrocketing health care costs, a union in denial that refuses to share in health care costs, smaller market share overall, much smaller market share of the high-profit luxury vehicle market...

    9. Just how much longer can they postpone the inevitable???...how else can they ever break the union contract and take back control of whatever is left of the company???

    10. Just a few of my random thoughts...
  • john_324john_324 Member Posts: 974
    I've wondered if Ford isn't doing a "Mustang" with the Ranger right now...keep the current, somewhat antiquated one going a little longer to give it time to come up with a totally new redesign.

    That's pretty much what it did with the retro-future 1994-2004 Mustang...basically a freshened design on top of a modified Fox platform with a newish but proven engine. Fairly cheap to make, and allowed them to concentrate on designing the now current model.

    Speaking of which, I rented a new Mustang recently, and wow...what a great job compared to previous ones. The quality is what I'd call "Euro-Ford"...somewhat cheap materials but well made and solid. This is what Ford ought to be aiming for across the line.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    the difference is, people kept buying the Mustang, whereas Ranger sales are now sinking slowly but steadily. It was once the segment's sales leader, a position it held for more than a decade. Oh well. Ford got caught out spreading the love a little too thin, so something had to give.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    Well the trouble for Ford is just that alot of bad things have to happened to them:

    1.) The 1996 Tarus was a styling disaster.

    2.) The Escort that was released after the 96 Tarus didn't do well either. It was too bizzare in the styling department.

    3.) The 2000 Focus came out and was a hit with younger buyers. Again bad things happened: the 13 recalls that followed that car. During its first few years on the market it was one of the best 10 selling cars in the US. Not only does the Civic outsell the Focus but so does the Corolla. It will be interesting because I think a nect generation Focus and Corolla will debut at the same time.

    4.) The Exploding tires on the Explorer in 2000-2001.

    5.) Intead of redoing the Tarus in 2000 they just revised it a little bit. Still in 2003 they had the same Tarus that they had basicaly in 2000. A new Camry out in 01-02 and a new Accord came out in 02-03. So they were basically 2 generations behind the Camry and Accord.

    6.) Their failure to redo Lincoln. They need a new LS to compete with the Infinti G35, Acura TL, and BMW 3 Series. The Current LS is 6 years old. Also, Lincoln has no competitor to the Acura RL, BMW 5 Series, or Cadillac STS.

    I do agree Ford needs a new styling theme. Well the Fusion isn't bad looking. Also Ford needs to totally redo Lincoln's styling theme. Honda managed to redo Acura;s styling theme. Alot of buyers complained about bland styling with Acura on the 96-98 and 99-04 RL, 96-98 and 99-01 TL so Honda redid their styling theme on their Acura line. Ford needs to follow a similar thing with Lincoln;s styling. I don;t think Ford needs an "Art & Science" like Cadillac for their styling theme but just something that sticks out in a good way.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,670
    [This is a copy of my post in the "future of the Manual transmission" topic]

    According to Automotive News FoMoCo has contracted with Getrag to build sequential shift twin-clutch transmissions similar to the DSG offered in some Volkswagen and Audi models. They are automatic transmissions that can be operated in a manual mode and offer seamless transmission of power and lightning fast shifts.

    Ford becomes the second large automaker to offer this torque converter-less gearshift promising increased fuel economy.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    WOO HOO !!!!

    It's about TIME!!
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    A merger between VW & Ford is in the offing.....
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    I see that Thecarconnection has spy pics of the new Ford "Edge" which is yet another crossover to be produced along with the Lincoln version - the Aviator.

    I still don't understand why they're getting rid of the Freestyle if it is a success. So it cut into Explorer sales, Ford had to have known the the traditional SUV goldmine wasn't going to last forever.

    I don't know what to say about Lincoln. It has become the single more irrelevant and forgotten luxury brand on the market. They don't have a single import worthy compeititor. They are never compared with anything anymore, its been years.

    Ford and VW would never merge. That would define the term chaos.

    Imagine Ford, VW, Aston-Martin, Bentley, Skoda, Seat, Jaguar, Volvo, Land-Rover, Lamborghini, Audi, and Bugatti all under one corporate structure. Ford is having enough trouble trying to turn around all their sick brands, as is VW, so to merge them wouldn't make any sense. Talk about a hospital. Even Ford and VW themselves aren't doing too good, thats even before you get into the "cases" about each of their captive brands.

    I can see VW and Ford cooperating more, but merging....never.

    M
  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    I can see VW and Ford cooperating more, but merging....never.

    yeah, I can see the new Audi DSG in a Fusion....sweet!
    :-)
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    yeah, I can see the new Audi DSG in a Fusion....sweet!

    Or how about a Mustang GT or any Aston-Martin. I'm actually surprised that this tranny hasn't appeared in more cars already.

    M
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    "I still don't understand why they're getting rid of the Freestyle if it is a success."

    They're not killing it so much as sending it over to Mercury so they can charge more for it. Apparently, the Freestyle is a bit too costly to sell for Ford money.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    Makes sense that the Freestyle might be expensive. it isn't that much different than the Volvo XC-90 it shares a platform with, but lists for a good 10K less (or more).

    Merging with VW sounds scary. In any case, given the Ford ownership structure, it would almost have to be a complete purchse, and I don't think the Fords would sell out entirely to VW (old Henry would spin over that one!), and I doubt that Ford has the resources (or desire) to buy VW.

    Besides, they already bought the last generation VW styling bucks, so they might not have any cash left :)

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    Or how about a Mustang GT or any Aston-Martin. I'm actually surprised that this tranny hasn't appeared in more cars already.

    hmmm...nice
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,360
    is something that you we should see more of. It is a trade off between keeping the good stuff for yourself (competitive advantage), and getting $$ for selling to other makers.

    Heck, Honda sold V6 engines to GM (how embarrasing is that for the general?), so why shouldn't VW sell the DSG to other makers?

    Diesel engines also seem to be a big swap item for some reason.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • martianmartian Member Posts: 220
    Unlike GM, FORD has a large number of good small cars that deliver high MPG. Also, FORD runs its factories more efficiently than GM ever did-proof of this is the better commonality of parts. John DeLorean noticed (in the 1960s) that FORD was able to do a model changeover much faster than GM.Also, FORD has substantial cash reserves, and is profitable in Europe and japan (Mazda). So i rate FORD as a better prospect for survival.
    What about the other soon to be dead car companies? FIAT (Italy) comes to mind-it hasn't beenprofitable in years, and is kept alive by the italian government-are they the next giant to fall?
  • ratbertratbert Member Posts: 22
    My own opinion: Ford and GM have all ugly cars. In the 15 years I've been buying cars, not once have I seen a Ford or GM vehicle that I liked (that was in my price/fuel economy range).

    Honestly. If they made an attractive car in my price range with the features I want, I'd buy it. They already have the price and features (most). Only problem is that they're all ugly. What are my options: Focus, Fusion, Taurus, 500. All ugly. No Ford for me.

    I'm not saying that the unions don't comtribute to the problem. I'm just saying that their cars simply don't have the first impression wow factor that even Chrysler has.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    The Freestyle is going to be a Mercury next year - fits more into their lineup pricewise - they need it (they need something) so we'll see if it will sell over there. It's a nice rig, and a good idea. It just didn't sell well outside of San Francisco, at that price point.
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    ...are Mercurys really more expensive than Fords? I thought they sell for pretty much the same price these days. I don't see how Ford is going to get a higher price for a Mercury-based Freestyle.

    Don't get me wrong - I like the Freestyle, and am somewhat mystified by its low sales (although Ford sure isn't going out of its way to promote it). But I don't see how rebadging it as a Mercury will enable it to fetch more money. The Mercury brand just doesn't have more prestige than Ford these days, at least to those under 50 (who, I would assume, constitute the target audience for this vehicle).
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    Diesel engines also seem to be a big swap item for some reason.

    From everything I've seen they are way too expensive for most to develop. Only those European companies that can sell a lot of them seem to want to spend the money to build them. So far the Japanese have only done the 4-cylinder variety, leaving the 6, 8 and 12 cylinder diesels to the Europeans.

    Its kinda like with Hybrid technology. Toyota has had a good business of selling parts and pieces of it to others, but with BMW/DCX/GM I suspect their pride got bruised so they're going to do it themselves.

    M
  • varmintvarmint Member Posts: 6,326
    I suspect a loaded Ford Freestyle would cost the same as a loaded version of the Mercury. However, by moving the vehicle to the Merc name, they may be able to cut the number of base models they have to sell, and focus on the high-profit/high-content trims instead.

    I'm not saying it will work... I'm just guessing that may be what they're thinking.
  • nvbankernvbanker Member Posts: 7,239
    Plus - Mercury needs cars to sell. They need Product. I think what they're thinking is the Meestyle may find an audience at a Lincoln Mercury showroom where they don't have so much other product, wherin it's not really noticed at Ford stores. BUT, whoever said it before is totally right. As usual, Ford has done nothing to promote the car. Not that it always works, as was evidenced by the GMC Envoy XUV. GM promoted the hell out of that truck, and they still only sold 100 of them. I've only seen one in my life.
  • marsha7marsha7 Member Posts: 3,703
    between Ford and VW would be a riot, considering that Henry Ford was offered VW after WWII, for about a dollar, by the German gov't, but he turned it down because they didn't make anything he thought was worthwhile...

    Now imagine the world today if he had accepted it, and VW would have been a free subsidiary of Ford sitting in Germany, making all those Beetles for the last 50 years... :D :shades:
  • carguy58carguy58 Member Posts: 2,303
    Wooh! Ok I understand the Tarus looks kinda dated but the Focus did sell well in its first few years on the market. The Fusion not my cup of tea at at least its different from what it is out there. Yes, the 500 is bland but in Ford's defense its competion in that class is bland as well: Avalon and LaCrosse. Your right about GM they have styling problems and thats why their cars have struggled to fly off lots in the 90's to present day.

    Your right sort of right that GM and Ford do not have a better product than Chrysler. Although, the Focus is a better car than the Neon. GM does sell more SUV"s than Chrysler/Dodge though I think.
This discussion has been closed.