"I'm personally in the "enthusiast" category (for instance, the fact that Ford built and sells the GT matters to me) but most people I know fall into the "appliance" category."
I don't think the market is becoming more appliance oriented. I mean Nissan was on a sales roll there for awhile and I don;t think anybody thinks of Nissan's as appliance vehicles. The Mazda 3 has been a good seller but I don't think anybody calls the MZ 3 an appliance.
If your pointing towards Toyota being an applianmce vehicle well don;t forget Toyota's has alot new entries this year: The Yaris, Camry, Lexus ES and the Lexus IS so thats why they have gained alot market share this year because of new vehicles selling well at initial launch.
But all of Toyota's new models this year are just updates of existing models. Toyota has a few of those every year (next year will include two new Scions, the new Highlander, and of course the much-talked-about, totally reinvented Tundra), so that thought can't be much comfort to the folks at Ford. Transportation sells. Maybe there are enough enthusiasts out there to give companies with new halo models an edge in the market, but I don't really think so. Everyone I know these days is an internet-oriented, point A to point B buyer. They HAVE to account for 80-90% of the market, I am sure. The days of the emotional buy, the passion-driven buy, are fading...in fact they were already fading in the 80s and 90s.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
>In the 1950s and 1960s, GM wasn't too aggressive about uncovering new market niches, but when it did enter a particular segment, it usually brought out a model that was at or near the top of the class. Since the late 1970s, however, GM has not only been late to the party, but its entries have, too often, been mediocre at best.<
Man, that is SO true. I agree with your whole post, grbeck. I forgot about the Fairlane. My Dad got a 62 Fairlane for a company car when they were first out - I remember it well. It was an ok car. The little 260 CID V-8 was a peppy little engine. The thing was, it got no better mileage than the full sized Fairlane it replaced, but people felt better about it anyway.
The Explorer I failed to mention as well - probably the biggest success Ford has had in the 90's to be sure. While not inventing the segment - they invented the mainstream SUV that took over the market.
Ford has been the most interesting company for me to watch - being a US dynasty, and a small enough company to get your arms around and watch it work, through its predictable cycles of boom and bust. It's nimble enough to react to the market, but does so badly. It creates, then abandons new niches. Management is fascinating to watch, but certainly not consistent and the family is more of a problem than a stablizing effect. The best managers who made the most progress, money and efficiency in the market, were all canned by the family for being "difficult to work with". When the 86 Taurus came out, it not only revolutionized the industry world wide, it was very efficiently made. The bumper on the original Taurus had about 6 parts - whereas the 86 Olds' bumper had about 25 parts to it. Later, Ford cheaped out the bumper, and it became ineffective.. If Ford has a chronic failing, it is in the predictable and constant "decontenting" of its cars. They call it "Thrifting", and justify it by saying they save money on a model in areas nobody will notice. Problem is, we often notice. We notice cheap uncomfortable seats replacing what was previously world class ergonomic seats. (Taurus, Ranger, Town Car, damn near every model).
Well, I gotta quit venting. I'm a Ford guy - and my car company is leaving me. Not the reverse. :mad:
>Do you really think people go into a Toyota dealership just to look at a Toyota?
Does anyone really go into a Honda dealer to look at an S2000 just so they can say they did to their friends?<
I can only speak for myself on this. Essentially, I think you're right - even a Toyota enthusiast is usually someone who loves their Toyota because it's so well made - not because there is passion for the car. Even the Supra has failed to sell as an enthusiast car.
I've been a Ford guy all my life, though I have owned most other brands at one time or another. My passion has always been toward Ford. Yet, I now am driving a Lexus after 16 years in Lincolns. I like the car very much - not because it's exciting or even has a lot of cache - it's just an excellent car. Would I consider a Lincoln again if they came out with an incredible large sedan? Yes. But the bar is high, and they would have to have NO obvious cheap outs on the car.....
"But all of Toyota's new models this year are just updates of existing models. Toyota has a few of those every year (next year will include two new Scions, the new Highlander, and of course the much-talked-about, totally reinvented Tundra), so that thought can't be much comfort to the folks at Ford." Transportation sells. Maybe there are enough enthusiasts out there to give companies with new halo models an edge in the market, but I don't really think so. Everyone I know these days is an internet-oriented, point A to point B buyer. They HAVE to account for 80-90% of the market, I am sure. The days of the emotional buy, the passion-driven buy, are fading...in fact they were already fading in the 80s and 90s."
I don;t know about "transporation sells" since Toyota's average age buyer has gone up to at least 50 years old. I mean their average age buyer was in its low 40's around 1998. Even though Toyota has gained alot market share they knew they were in danger of what Buick is now if they don;t after their exterior styling issues. Toyota has sure gained alot of market share since the mid 90's but Toyota has payed the price for their escalating market share: a skyrockeing average age buyer. Look at the new Camry styling: Toyota knew their average age buyer was going up and they had to put some styling into the new Camry.
"Even the Supra has failed to sell as an enthusiast car."
Yeah but Japanese sports cars like the Mazda RX-7, Nissan 300Z and Mitsu 3000GT all went on the chopblock in the US market in the mid to late 90's because the price of those cars had skyrocketed too much. I mean back then you could buy an SUV for as much as those 3 cars were going for when large SUV's were starting too become big around 1996-1997.
A better example of Toyota enthusiast car not selling well recently would be the Celica and MR 2 Spyder. I think Toyota just didn't market those 2 cars enough so thats partly why the didn't sell well. They did nail it in the Scion TC though and yes Toyota did actually market a youth car this time around.
Can we go back to talking about Ford? I mean how was the Tarus an enthusiast car anyway? I mean maybe in SHO trim maybe you have a case.
Contrary to what the pundits all say, I say that buying age has little if anything to do with a car's "flair" or "excitement factor". What it really has to do with is money. Make the cars cheaper, and younger people will buy them. Someone like me defies that trend, because I like small cars which tend to be cheaper, and I will NEVER be in a Town Car or a Buick when I am 70. But for the most part, it's true.
Toyotas escalated in price after the late 90s, as the Corolla and Camry got revised, the Tercel dropped out to be replaced by the weird-looking Echo nobody bought, etc etc. Plus, Toyota truck sales were really taking off, which of course are all more expensive vehicles. Now they have the Scions, the new Yaris which is on fire sales-wise, and so on. I think we will probably see the average buyer's age drop a few points in the years to come. But they are also reaching for the stars in the number of dollars to buy the newest Lexi, which may offset the move to less expensive models at the bottom end.
Plus the population is aging, and the "baby echo" (kids of the baby boomers) are only just reaching the age where they have any meaningful buying power in the car market. We will see the boomers get older and older, and they have the money, so all the manufacturers would do well to continue to court them for another decade or so.
But none of this has a whole lot to do with my original point - the consumers are becoming more pragmatic, the days of flashy new model debuts are waning (it SURE aint the 60s any more), so I just don't believe halo models are doing a lot of good any more for the bottom line. Nice to have, of course, and keep enthusiasts like us happy, but not worth a whole lot in terms of profits.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You are so right - Ford's biggest sin has probably been the abject neglect of great car lines they start, and then just decontent them to death. The Taurus brand was so strong and world class for 10 years, and should not have been abandoned IMO. That Fusion should be the new Taurus, IMO. Fusion is a stupid name, and if the Taurus had been supported assiduously like the Camry is, Bill Ford would still probably re-named it because Faurus isn't a word, and he's convinced that alliteration sells cars. It doesn't, Bill, do you hear me??? :mad:
Jaguar-loses >$166 million/year ASTON-MARTIN: loses -VOLVO: loses, but not sure how much The curious thing: when gas hit $3.00/gallon, and ople quit buying big SUVs, FORD should have switched production over to smaller cars/SUVs. Now they are stuck with products that nobody wants to buy. I can seriously see FORD abandoning passenger cars-and just making trucks.
), so that thought can't be much comfort to the folks at Ford.>
I'm sure it isn't - but I find it interesting that Ford is the undisputed Gold Standard of trucks for everyone. Nissan has copied the F-150 to an embarrasing level for their Titan, and Toyota has grudgingly finally admitted that their Tundra is still not full sized, and are going to fix that. But the original Tundra was so much like an F-150 inside, you could get confused at the time.
Clearly, everyone thinks the Ford is the one to beat. Now, they have some real competition coming. So far the Titan hasn't seemed to set the world on fire, and problems with those trucks have been myriad. Eventually though, even Nissan will fix that stuff, and the Titan will be better thought of than it is now.
The one thing Ford did exceptionally well, is trucks. And that edge is now slipping away.
I would suggest to drop Ford brand and keep only Lincoln and Mercury as car brands in NA. They still can keep Ford name for trucks and for cars in Europe and other world markets.
The reason is that many people are determined not to buy anything anymore called "Ford". I heard it many times from different people. They think anything that carries Ford badge is a junk. By using Mercury or may be new name similar to Saturn, e.g. Venus - next planet after Mercury It may fool many people that these cars are made by Asian manufacturer and they will feel confident to buy it. And actually Mercuries unlike Fords have are more reliable and have higher quality.
nv: it did not matter back then that the 260 CID did not get any better mileage in a smaller car because gas was under 35 cents and no one cared...:):):):):)
save: they could name it after any planet they want, say, Pluto...oh, wait...after all these years of SCIENCE telling me, now they have decided that Pluto is no longer a planet...I would be careful about naming anything Neptune at this stage of the game...:):):)
She was an insecure, uneducated, divorced real estate saleslady looking to buy an upscale luxury sedan. She really liked the Town Car until she found the word "Ford" in too many places on the car. She bought a "gently worn" Benz.
I think i failed to convey the point I was trying to make.
There are plenty of people out there that have AFFECTION for Ford and would definately buy a Ford if a competative model was available. I think Ford can regain lost ground if future models are competative and appealing.
The people that oggle a GT500 is an example of this affection.
How "upscale" is the TC these days, with so many in livery service? I rarely see a new one with private plates, but now and then I do see a cared-for old one.
LOL at naming a brand "Venus"...uh that would be a disaster unrivalled by any goof in automotive history.
" "Venus"...uh that would be a disaster unrivalled by any goof in automotive history"
I can argue with your statement. Remember Edsel? I do not argue that after several years Ford will let Venus down (as it happened with Saturn in case of GM). But American companies and their CEOs do not keep focus longer than a few years. Bill Ford is a good example. Of course he is able to keep focus on foreign brands like Jaguar for 20 years, but not on core domestic brands. Say Lincoln LS never was updated and was unprofitable and it was dropped in the end! Jaguar has never been profitable, but was constantly updated, poured money into with no results and still there are no talks about dropping or selling it. God forbid even think about it. What is the benefit for core brands from all money spend on Jaguar? None. All technologies developed by Jaguar stay with Jaguar.
IMHO the reason for such strange behavior is Bill Ford and other executives love import cars (who does not love them?) and have a great disdain to American brands which normally are technically unsophisticated and are products of cost cutting. So now you see it is a vicious cycle – they demand cost cutting on domestic brands and as a result hate them. I cannot imagine Bill Ford coming to dealership and buying Lincoln when he can easily afford Mercedes or even Aston Martin.
I'd rather have a nice old one than a new one...they just scream "airport car" to me. Strangest thing...when I see the new front, I assume 'livery'...but the older cars speak more to private ownership.
Of course, I'd rather have a 61 Conti than any new Lincoln, too.
I think the Venus name would be its own death sentence. I don't wanna go into more detail in fear of offending oversensitive readers or hosts. I was just kind of joking.
But yeah, Ford sure has a knack for decontenting a name to its deathbed. Short term focus indeed has to be a big factor in this.
"I would suggest to drop Ford brand and keep only Lincoln and Mercury as car brands in NA. They still can keep Ford name for trucks and for cars in Europe and other world markets."
You're either crazy or you're not serious. Ford is the most honest brand they have. The fastest way to Packardland would be to do this, not to mention the dealer mayhem....
As to your comments that "nobody" will buy anything Ford anymore, that is a ludicrous statement as well. There are those who are Ford bigots, however there are an equal or greater number of disgruntled GM bigots (of which I am one) out there - Lots of people will buy Fords - if only they produce an attractive car again. I am one of those too.
Bill Ford can drive home a different car every night if he wishes - Henry II did, so did Iacocca. But Gentle Bill usually opts for an F-150. Maybe a Mark LT.
"As to your comments that "nobody" will buy anything Ford anymore, that is a ludicrous statement as well"
Try to tell folks here in CA that you want to buy a Ford – they will look at you as if you are out of your mind. Of course people still are buying Ford trucks but cars – hardly. I saw only couple of Fusions on the street since they started production and it is the most popular Ford car. During last month I did not see any Fusions at all, even rental ones. Normally if you see Ford it is a rental car.
In Vegas, normally if you see a Buick, it's a rental car. California is anti-domestic in the extreme, especially with cars and small trucks. Large trucks, until recently, there wasn't much choice. But across the rest of the fruited plain, Ford has as good a reputation as any other domestic. The smaller the town, the better they like 'em. I once took my Toyota Van into a gas station in Gabbs, NV, because the Oil light was on. The attendant there just told me to drive on. He said, "We don't fix them foreign jobs here". Of course, he was the only garage in town.
I can tell you more - I see more Honda Rodgelines than Ford trio combined (Fusion/Milan/Zephyr). And New Toyota truck FJ is all over the place even though it was introduced much later than Fusion. Remember that CA sets the trend and trend.
owning a Ford or GM is that most small towns in the South (GA, AL, MS, etc) do have a GM or Ford dealer simply because of the trucks many own here down South...not a science, mind you, and there are towns with Honda/Toy/Nissan dealers, but getting a Ford or GM fixed would probably be easier in a small town...once you reach the big city, however (Birmingham, Jackson, Atlanta, Macon to name a few), I am sure the imports are sold, all the way up to MB...don't forget Ford tractors...:):):)
Gotta agree the cost to change branding is painfully expensive. Not to mention Mercury makes less profit margin as a division than Ford. Here in the midwest lots of towns have separate Ford and Merc/Lincoln dealers.
Multiple brands are OK as long as they stand for something. This is where GM has failed...Pontiac (the excitement division) with a minivan and Buick (the we don't know what it stands for division).
"I can tell you more - I see more Honda Rodgelines than Ford trio combined (Fusion/Milan/Zephyr)."
I don;t see more Ridgelines than Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and in New Jersey there alot of import branded cars around/
"And New Toyota truck FJ is all over the place even though it was introduced much later than Fusion."
I don;t see more FJ's than Fusions here either unless I;m not looking in NJ.
"Remember that CA sets the trend and trend."
No I think each region(Midwest/east/west coast) has its own trend of cars that are popular. Its hard to belive in CA imports looked to be more popular than in Jersey from the way it looks. The Ridgeline and FJ are not popular for example in NJ.
Mercury's purpose is to suplement Ford what it successfully does. People who buy Mercury will not buy Ford because Ford has more blue collar image and lower quality. GM has a good range of divisions but they are clueless how to take advatage from it. E.g. Pontiac could be truly sport division - similar to Mazda. But instead it makes boring family sedans with numb electric steering and pushroad engines (where are I4 turbos?)
A Black Mondeo actually passed me on the highway a couple of weeks ago. It was streakin.... I tried to catch up to it for a second good look at it, but after several miles of blasting over 100mph in my SUV, I gave it up.......Why it was here I don't know. Never seen one before, and was shocked to see MONDEO on the back...... Perhaps it was here for testing? Ford and others do like to test their cars in Vegas because you can go from 2000 feet and 110 degrees to 8000 feet and 65 degrees in one hour here...
Funny how the Mondeo has been so loved and is seen as so competent (if not boring) in Europe, but the bug filled Contour version we got here was pretty dreary save for a few trim levels. My sister had one...admittedly she did ride it hard and put it away wet, but it sought revenge on her countless times. She got like $300 in trade in for it, generous in my eyes. The Focus that replaced it is up to about 49K trouble free miles in 27 months.
The trend in the past in this country was to equate SIZE with luxuary.
Case in point, the MINI this car is available with just about every luxuary feature you could want, yet no one would call it a luxuary car because it small and doesn't have Porsche on the back.
I think this trend is changing as the GenYers don't see massive size as such an advantage anymore.
That is what killed the Contour though and why the current Euro Focus would never survive here. People would take one look at at $19,000 Focus, then buy a Fusion.
I'll get more real world data this year when the new Sentra starts to arrive.
This car will be fully loaded with things that Ford never thought of, like Bluetooth and Intelligant key beautiful perforated leather for around 19k. Styling is bland but we'll see.
"Contrary to what the pundits all say, I say that buying age has little if anything to do with a car's "flair" or "excitement factor". What it really has to do with is money. Make the cars cheaper, and younger people will buy them."
"Toyotas escalated in price after the late 90s, as the Corolla and Camry got revised, the Tercel dropped out to be replaced by the weird-looking Echo nobody bought, etc etc."
Those 2 statement contradict each other because the Echo was designed to be a youth car but never sold well overall or tho the youth. I think styling as you said what tyou described as the Echo being weird looking didn't help the Echo's cause.
You don;t think Toyota's worried about an escalating average age buyer? I;m sure they are because thats the reason for the Scion brand being present like it is in the US right now to get Toyota younger buyers. I mean from 1998-2004 Toyota's average had gone up by 1 year with each passing model year for 7 years straight. What that tells you is Toyota is gaining less amd less new buyers each year. The Camry's average age buyer is 55 I think(this was before the 07 came out.) I should also add once Toyota executives saw the 06 Honda Civic before it came onto the market Toyota decided to put the 08 corolla back in the styling oven after the 08 Corolla was a finished product. Toyota had said with the 08 Corolla even before the current Civic had come out that there were going to focus on styling more. Toyota knows they are having an escalting average age buyer problem. There are even articles on the internet about it.
Ok, so every car company has an escalating age issue to deal with, but there is another variable I never see an article on....
If a kid wants a new car, there's a limit to what they can afford, erg; the used car market for young drivers. They keep raising their prices, and force younger drivers over to the used side for a few years.
Secondly, why does everybody worry about the "aging" car buyer? I'm one, so are you, so is everybody. Where exactly am I gonna go, assuming Lexus remains so good, when I get 63 instead of 53? I think they have me served....what's the problem?
"If a kid wants a new car, there's a limit to what they can afford, erg; the used car market for young drivers. They keep raising their prices, and force younger drivers over to the used side for a few years."
Again I agree the car market has escalated new car prices but...look at my next response to your upcoming paragraph. I should also add there are cheap compacts like the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, and Nissan Versa that are cheap but heavily in demand and demand drives up dealer transaction dealer prices which is a strike against a first time car buyer.
"Secondly, why does everybody worry about the "aging" car buyer? I'm one, so are you, so is everybody. Where exactly am I gonna go, assuming Lexus remains so good, when I get 63 instead of 53? I think they have me served....what's the problem?"
I understand what you are saying afterall I am 5 years removed from my last car purchase but Buick and late 90'/early 00's Caddy is a prime example of what happens to a brand when their buyer ages. I mean Caddys average age buyer was like in its late 60's around 1999-2001. Today its 54 years old. What that tells me is Caddy is gaining alot of new buyers. However I think caddy;s average buyer will stay around the early to mid 50's set because car buyers in their 20's and even maybe 30's don't have money for a new Caddy.
Last I read Mazda, VW, and Scion have the lowest average age buyer which is 42. Honda's average age buyer is 48 as is Nissan's. I'm surprised whow Honda's average age buyer has escalated but alot of young people don't like the current generation of Accord Sedan in terms of exterior looks. Toyota's average age buyer is 50 which is right on the industry average I think. These numbers were were published from different 04 internet artcles that I read however. Toyota has the oldest average age buyer of any Japanese Car make in the US.
To be fair there have been articles in which I read that have said the average age car buyer(when you combine all nameplates (European, Japanese, and Domestics)in the US has gotten older.
I really miss my Contour. I bought a '96 in '98 w/20k or so, put on anohter 130k or so. I had a 2.5 V6 w/a 5spd. It had really deep supportive bucket seats (my friends used to say it was like getting a hug everytime you sat in it), it was loaded, handeled well, got reasonable mileage, was cheap to maintain, it was a great car. I bought it used so I wasn't worried about trade in value since I was already on the good side of the curve and I basically drove the wheels off it. Actually I used that car for amature track events in California, where it was competitive in its class. I kind of felt slighted, the 98-2000 ones were rental cars, they made the interior look and feel cheaper and got rid of a lot of the nice features that mine had. They also got rid of the sport package that mine had with the good seats and suspension. Eb, bygones...but the new Mondeo does look nice, kind of Acura TL-ish, but the hatchback look doesn't seem to work well in the states.
...see the irony of this paragraph from The Detroit News story:
"The big thing in Europe is now SUVs, the fastest growing segment, and Ford has failed to do anything, leaving it to Land Rover and its Freelander. But the Freelander was too upmarket and Ford was left high and dry in a sector they dominated in the U.S. but have nothing in Europe. That's almost criminal. In another age Ford management would have been taken outside and shot," said Bhaskar, warming to his theme."
In the U.S. Ford relied too much on SUVs to drive sales and profits...in Europe, Ford apparently ignored the segment.
The entire country is getting older, as people live longer and people have fewer children. The only factor that could reverse this trend is immigration, but I doubt that most immigrants are in a position to afford a brand-new car.
Also, in the 1960s and through the early 1970s, it wasn't impossible for a young person working at a relatively low-wage job to afford a brand-new car (usually, of course, he or she was still living at home). Now it's very hard for someone making a low salary to afford a new car, especially once insurance, maintenance, inspection costs and licensing fees are added to the mix.
If I recall correctly, the average age of Ford buyers wasn't too high, primarily because of the Focus, Mustang and Ranger. Of course, the geniuses in Dearborn are letting two of those three wither on the vine, while other competitors are moving in with newer offerings.
"The big thing in Europe is now SUVs, the fastest growing segment, and Ford has failed to do anything, leaving it to Land Rover and its Freelander. But the Freelander was too upmarket and Ford was left high and dry in a sector they dominated in the U.S. but have nothing in Europe. That's almost criminal. In another age Ford management would have been taken outside and shot," said Bhaskar, warming to his theme."
Unbelievable!! No wonder Ford is in such bad trouble.... Nice kick Bill - you're wrong everywhere....
F ord Motor Co's Super Duty unveiling was an event of Texas-sized proportions. Mark Fields, president of Ford's Americas group, descended into the midst of Ford's arena in the cab of one of the automaker's brand new F-450 Super Duty pickups, lowered by a construction crane as hard-hatted workers maneuvered it into position with guy ropes.
"Now that entrance was a bold move," Fields declared when he emerged from the pickup, wearing cowboy boots and a suede jacket. "We had the lawyers really worried about that one."
Fields also got some up-close advice from Ford's truck pitchman, country singer Toby Keith.
In his unscripted remarks, Keith praised Ford's new Super Duty lineup, but suggested the automaker could do more.
"I personally drive a 250 everywhere I go and it might be the best looking 250 on the planet. In fact, you guys oughtta come and look at my 250 if you want to see what a bad truck is," Keith said. "It's sharp."
Most in the Motor City assume Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford Jr. and former Ford CEO Jacques Nasser aren't the best of friends. After all, Bill Ford fired Nasser in 2001. That's why BizInsider's eyebrows were a little elevated by the sight of the two men enjoying a pleasant lunch together at the Ritz-Carlton in Dearborn a couple of weeks ago. But informed Ford sources tell us that the two men still enjoy a collegial relationship -- and lunch about once a quarter. Who knew?
I have read recently that ford is trying to pay some of its dealers to shut down or get into another business. I would like to know what is the logic behind this action?
Having too many dealers is like having too many customers, i cannot see how Ford finds this to be a bad thing. More dealers (whether they are close together or not) means more choices for the consumer, and more people to buy your product, since the dealers must stock inventory.
How many times have you been in a situation where one dealer is giving you an outrageous price, but you go to another dealer and they help you out. Less dealers mean thats a problem.
Also, less dealers mean less exposure to the FORD brand. You may se a mustang commerical but its when you are driving by and see a ford dealer that you remember that commerical.
In the 80's Ford understood all of this, and worked to make its dealer network the envy of the intustry. Since then, toyota and nissan both copied fords model, and now look where they are.
I think this is a disastrous mistake, ford should work to have MORE dealers not less. I have heard people buying a certain brand of car because another brand (say toyota) does not have a dealer close enough for service. Now ford is going to do a 180? Less dealers guarantee less customers, unless your product is so crazy that they will travel far to get it. I don't see that. I see good, but not that good.
In this market, consumers have too many choices to give it a second thought. Thats not a bad thing, either.
"Funny how the Mondeo has been so loved and is seen as so competent (if not boring) in Europe, but the bug filled Contour version we got here was pretty dreary save for a few trim levels."
I have a 2000 SVT Contour that is anything but boring! It is wrecked, and sitting in a garage awaiting resurrection. There lies one of Ford's problems; that was the last real sports sedan from Ford, and that was SEVEN YEARS AGO! Ford needs to do as GM is, and import some of the great cars they make in Europe and Australia, especially the Aussie Falcon. This is a nice mid-size 4 door sports sedan that can be had with a dual-turbo 4.0L I6, or a 5.4L DOHC 32 valve V8, and either can be had with a 6 speed manual! Now why can't we have this car?!? http://www.ford.com.au/range/falcon/models/
I concur, the SVT Contour was a great ride. Even the regular one with the 2.5 and a 5spd was a lot of fun. I think there is a mentality that makes a car that appeals to everyone, or at least doesn't offend anyone (Toyota Camry, Beringer white zin, Baskin Robins Vanilla...) but isn't particularly outstanding in any one area. This isn't the way the market is going. It is going to be nitch markets. They need to figure out a way to make $$ on relatively low volume cars that meet a particular market need. Thats what the SVT Contour was, thats what the Mazdaspeed6 and Mazdaspeed3 are as well. BMW doesn't have any super high volume cars and they are considered to be the most profitable car company in the world right now. A beer can Fusion with a zetec and a manual isn't terrible but its not exactly a sports sedan either.
Comments
I don't think the market is becoming more appliance oriented. I mean Nissan was on a sales roll there for awhile and I don;t think anybody thinks of Nissan's as appliance vehicles. The Mazda 3 has been a good seller but I don't think anybody calls the MZ 3 an appliance.
If your pointing towards Toyota being an applianmce vehicle well don;t forget Toyota's has alot new entries this year: The Yaris, Camry, Lexus ES and the Lexus IS so thats why they have gained alot market share this year because of new vehicles selling well at initial launch.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Man, that is SO true. I agree with your whole post, grbeck. I forgot about the Fairlane. My Dad got a 62 Fairlane for a company car when they were first out - I remember it well. It was an ok car. The little 260 CID V-8 was a peppy little engine. The thing was, it got no better mileage than the full sized Fairlane it replaced, but people felt better about it anyway.
The Explorer I failed to mention as well - probably the biggest success Ford has had in the 90's to be sure. While not inventing the segment - they invented the mainstream SUV that took over the market.
Ford has been the most interesting company for me to watch - being a US dynasty, and a small enough company to get your arms around and watch it work, through its predictable cycles of boom and bust. It's nimble enough to react to the market, but does so badly. It creates, then abandons new niches. Management is fascinating to watch, but certainly not consistent and the family is more of a problem than a stablizing effect. The best managers who made the most progress, money and efficiency in the market, were all canned by the family for being "difficult to work with". When the 86 Taurus came out, it not only revolutionized the industry world wide, it was very efficiently made. The bumper on the original Taurus had about 6 parts - whereas the 86 Olds' bumper had about 25 parts to it. Later, Ford cheaped out the bumper, and it became ineffective.. If Ford has a chronic failing, it is in the predictable and constant "decontenting" of its cars. They call it "Thrifting", and justify it by saying they save money on a model in areas nobody will notice. Problem is, we often notice. We notice cheap uncomfortable seats replacing what was previously world class ergonomic seats. (Taurus, Ranger, Town Car, damn near every model).
Well, I gotta quit venting. I'm a Ford guy - and my car company is leaving me. Not the reverse. :mad:
Does anyone really go into a Honda dealer to look at an S2000 just so they can say they did to their friends?<
I can only speak for myself on this. Essentially, I think you're right - even a Toyota enthusiast is usually someone who loves their Toyota because it's so well made - not because there is passion for the car. Even the Supra has failed to sell as an enthusiast car.
I've been a Ford guy all my life, though I have owned most other brands at one time or another. My passion has always been toward Ford. Yet, I now am driving a Lexus after 16 years in Lincolns. I like the car very much - not because it's exciting or even has a lot of cache - it's just an excellent car. Would I consider a Lincoln again if they came out with an incredible large sedan? Yes. But the bar is high, and they would have to have NO obvious cheap outs on the car.....
I don;t know about "transporation sells" since Toyota's average age buyer has gone up to at least 50 years old. I mean their average age buyer was in its low 40's around 1998. Even though Toyota has gained alot market share they knew they were in danger of what Buick is now if they don;t after their exterior styling issues. Toyota has sure gained alot of market share since the mid 90's but Toyota has payed the price for their escalating market share: a skyrockeing average age buyer. Look at the new Camry styling: Toyota knew their average age buyer was going up and they had to put some styling into the new Camry.
Yeah but Japanese sports cars like the Mazda RX-7, Nissan 300Z and Mitsu 3000GT all went on the chopblock in the US market in the mid to late 90's because the price of those cars had skyrocketed too much. I mean back then you could buy an SUV for as much as those 3 cars were going for when large SUV's were starting too become big around 1996-1997.
A better example of Toyota enthusiast car not selling well recently would be the Celica and MR 2 Spyder. I think Toyota just didn't market those 2 cars enough so thats partly why the didn't sell well. They did nail it in the Scion TC though and yes Toyota did actually market a youth car this time around.
Can we go back to talking about Ford? I mean how was the Tarus an enthusiast car anyway? I mean maybe in SHO trim maybe you have a case.
Toyotas escalated in price after the late 90s, as the Corolla and Camry got revised, the Tercel dropped out to be replaced by the weird-looking Echo nobody bought, etc etc. Plus, Toyota truck sales were really taking off, which of course are all more expensive vehicles. Now they have the Scions, the new Yaris which is on fire sales-wise, and so on. I think we will probably see the average buyer's age drop a few points in the years to come. But they are also reaching for the stars in the number of dollars to buy the newest Lexi, which may offset the move to less expensive models at the bottom end.
Plus the population is aging, and the "baby echo" (kids of the baby boomers) are only just reaching the age where they have any meaningful buying power in the car market. We will see the boomers get older and older, and they have the money, so all the manufacturers would do well to continue to court them for another decade or so.
But none of this has a whole lot to do with my original point - the consumers are becoming more pragmatic, the days of flashy new model debuts are waning (it SURE aint the 60s any more), so I just don't believe halo models are doing a lot of good any more for the bottom line. Nice to have, of course, and keep enthusiasts like us happy, but not worth a whole lot in terms of profits.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It's annoying that the car now shares its name with a razor. :mad:
ASTON-MARTIN: loses
-VOLVO: loses, but not sure how much
The curious thing: when gas hit $3.00/gallon, and ople quit buying big SUVs, FORD should have switched production over to smaller cars/SUVs. Now they are stuck with products that nobody wants to buy. I can seriously see FORD abandoning passenger cars-and just making trucks.
I'm sure it isn't - but I find it interesting that Ford is the undisputed Gold Standard of trucks for everyone. Nissan has copied the F-150 to an embarrasing level for their Titan, and Toyota has grudgingly finally admitted that their Tundra is still not full sized, and are going to fix that. But the original Tundra was so much like an F-150 inside, you could get confused at the time.
Clearly, everyone thinks the Ford is the one to beat. Now, they have some real competition coming. So far the Titan hasn't seemed to set the world on fire, and problems with those trucks have been myriad. Eventually though, even Nissan will fix that stuff, and the Titan will be better thought of than it is now.
The one thing Ford did exceptionally well, is trucks. And that edge is now slipping away.
The reason is that many people are determined not to buy anything anymore called "Ford". I heard it many times from different people. They think anything that carries Ford badge is a junk. By using Mercury or may be new name similar to Saturn, e.g. Venus - next planet after Mercury
save: they could name it after any planet they want, say, Pluto...oh, wait...after all these years of SCIENCE telling me, now they have decided that Pluto is no longer a planet...I would be careful about naming anything Neptune at this stage of the game...:):):)
There are plenty of people out there that have AFFECTION for Ford and would definately buy a Ford if a competative model was available. I think Ford can regain lost ground if future models are competative and appealing.
The people that oggle a GT500 is an example of this affection.
Mark.
LOL at naming a brand "Venus"...uh that would be a disaster unrivalled by any goof in automotive history.
Including the cared-for older ones.
I can argue with your statement. Remember Edsel? I do not argue that after several years Ford will let Venus down (as it happened with Saturn in case of GM). But American companies and their CEOs do not keep focus longer than a few years. Bill Ford is a good example. Of course he is able to keep focus on foreign brands like Jaguar for 20 years, but not on core domestic brands. Say Lincoln LS never was updated and was unprofitable and it was dropped in the end! Jaguar has never been profitable, but was constantly updated, poured money into with no results and still there are no talks about dropping or selling it. God forbid even think about it. What is the benefit for core brands from all money spend on Jaguar? None. All technologies developed by Jaguar stay with Jaguar.
IMHO the reason for such strange behavior is Bill Ford and other executives love import cars (who does not love them?) and have a great disdain to American brands which normally are technically unsophisticated and are products of cost cutting. So now you see it is a vicious cycle – they demand cost cutting on domestic brands and as a result hate them. I cannot imagine Bill Ford coming to dealership and buying Lincoln when he can easily afford Mercedes or even Aston Martin.
Of course, I'd rather have a 61 Conti than any new Lincoln, too.
But yeah, Ford sure has a knack for decontenting a name to its deathbed. Short term focus indeed has to be a big factor in this.
You're either crazy or you're not serious. Ford is the most honest brand they have. The fastest way to Packardland would be to do this, not to mention the dealer mayhem....
As to your comments that "nobody" will buy anything Ford anymore, that is a ludicrous statement as well. There are those who are Ford bigots, however there are an equal or greater number of disgruntled GM bigots (of which I am one) out there - Lots of people will buy Fords - if only they produce an attractive car again. I am one of those too.
Try to tell folks here in CA that you want to buy a Ford – they will look at you as if you are out of your mind. Of course people still are buying Ford trucks but cars – hardly. I saw only couple of Fusions on the street since they started production and it is the most popular Ford car. During last month I did not see any Fusions at all, even rental ones. Normally if you see Ford it is a rental car.
At that point, I really wish I had had a Ford.
Multiple brands are OK as long as they stand for something. This is where GM has failed...Pontiac (the excitement division) with a minivan and Buick (the we don't know what it stands for division).
I don;t see more Ridgelines than Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and in New Jersey there alot of import branded cars around/
"And New Toyota truck FJ is all over the place even though it was introduced much later than Fusion."
I don;t see more FJ's than Fusions here either unless I;m not looking in NJ.
"Remember that CA sets the trend and trend."
No I think each region(Midwest/east/west coast) has its own trend of cars that are popular. Its hard to belive in CA imports looked to be more popular than in Jersey from the way it looks. The Ridgeline and FJ are not popular for example in NJ.
sedan: http://www.fordeurope.net/pictures/p17_sectionid/198
Modern enough to take some conquest sales from the imports? I think so.
Funny how the Mondeo has been so loved and is seen as so competent (if not boring) in Europe, but the bug filled Contour version we got here was pretty dreary save for a few trim levels. My sister had one...admittedly she did ride it hard and put it away wet, but it sought revenge on her countless times. She got like $300 in trade in for it, generous in my eyes. The Focus that replaced it is up to about 49K trouble free miles in 27 months.
Case in point, the MINI this car is available with just about every luxuary feature you could want, yet no one would call it a luxuary car because it small and doesn't have Porsche on the back.
I think this trend is changing as the GenYers don't see massive size as such an advantage anymore.
That is what killed the Contour though and why the current Euro Focus would never survive here. People would take one look at at $19,000 Focus, then buy a Fusion.
I'll get more real world data this year when the new Sentra starts to arrive.
This car will be fully loaded with things that Ford never thought of, like Bluetooth and Intelligant key beautiful perforated leather for around 19k. Styling is bland but we'll see.
Mark.
"Toyotas escalated in price after the late 90s, as the Corolla and Camry got revised, the Tercel dropped out to be replaced by the weird-looking Echo nobody bought, etc etc."
Those 2 statement contradict each other because the Echo was designed to be a youth car but never sold well overall or tho the youth. I think styling as you said what tyou described as the Echo being weird looking didn't help the Echo's cause.
You don;t think Toyota's worried about an escalating average age buyer? I;m sure they are because thats the reason for the Scion brand being present like it is in the US right now to get Toyota younger buyers. I mean from 1998-2004 Toyota's average had gone up by 1 year with each passing model year for 7 years straight. What that tells you is Toyota is gaining less amd less new buyers each year. The Camry's average age buyer is 55 I think(this was before the 07 came out.) I should also add once Toyota executives saw the 06 Honda Civic before it came onto the market Toyota decided to put the 08 corolla back in the styling oven after the 08 Corolla was a finished product. Toyota had said with the 08 Corolla even before the current Civic had come out that there were going to focus on styling more. Toyota knows they are having an escalting average age buyer problem. There are even articles on the internet about it.
If a kid wants a new car, there's a limit to what they can afford, erg; the used car market for young drivers. They keep raising their prices, and force younger drivers over to the used side for a few years.
Secondly, why does everybody worry about the "aging" car buyer? I'm one, so are you, so is everybody. Where exactly am I gonna go, assuming Lexus remains so good, when I get 63 instead of 53? I think they have me served....what's the problem?
Again I agree the car market has escalated new car prices but...look at my next response to your upcoming paragraph.
I should also add there are cheap compacts like the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, and Nissan Versa that are cheap but heavily in demand and demand drives up dealer transaction dealer prices which is a strike against a first time car buyer.
"Secondly, why does everybody worry about the "aging" car buyer? I'm one, so are you, so is everybody. Where exactly am I gonna go, assuming Lexus remains so good, when I get 63 instead of 53? I think they have me served....what's the problem?"
I understand what you are saying afterall I am 5 years removed from my last car purchase but Buick and late 90'/early 00's Caddy is a prime example of what happens to a brand when their buyer ages. I mean Caddys average age buyer was like in its late 60's around 1999-2001. Today its 54 years old. What that tells me is Caddy is gaining alot of new buyers. However I think caddy;s average buyer will stay around the early to mid 50's set because car buyers in their 20's and even maybe 30's don't have money for a new Caddy.
Last I read Mazda, VW, and Scion have the lowest average age buyer which is 42. Honda's average age buyer is 48 as is Nissan's. I'm surprised whow Honda's average age buyer has escalated but alot of young people don't like the current generation of Accord Sedan in terms of exterior looks. Toyota's average age buyer is 50 which is right on the industry average I think. These numbers were were published from different 04 internet artcles that I read however. Toyota has the oldest average age buyer of any Japanese Car make in the US.
To be fair there have been articles in which I read that have said the average age car buyer(when you combine all nameplates (European, Japanese, and Domestics)in the US has gotten older.
I bought it used so I wasn't worried about trade in value since I was already on the good side of the curve and I basically drove the wheels off it. Actually I used that car for amature track events in California, where it was competitive in its class.
I kind of felt slighted, the 98-2000 ones were rental cars, they made the interior look and feel cheaper and got rid of a lot of the nice features that mine had. They also got rid of the sport package that mine had with the good seats and suspension.
Eb, bygones...but the new Mondeo does look nice, kind of Acura TL-ish, but the hatchback look doesn't seem to work well in the states.
Wow, that focus looks tight !!!!
Rocky
Rocky
"The big thing in Europe is now SUVs, the fastest growing segment, and Ford has failed to do anything, leaving it to Land Rover and its Freelander. But the Freelander was too upmarket and Ford was left high and dry in a sector they dominated in the U.S. but have nothing in Europe. That's almost criminal. In another age Ford management would have been taken outside and shot," said Bhaskar, warming to his theme."
In the U.S. Ford relied too much on SUVs to drive sales and profits...in Europe, Ford apparently ignored the segment.
Also, in the 1960s and through the early 1970s, it wasn't impossible for a young person working at a relatively low-wage job to afford a brand-new car (usually, of course, he or she was still living at home). Now it's very hard for someone making a low salary to afford a new car, especially once insurance, maintenance, inspection costs and licensing fees are added to the mix.
If I recall correctly, the average age of Ford buyers wasn't too high, primarily because of the Focus, Mustang and Ranger. Of course, the geniuses in Dearborn are letting two of those three wither on the vine, while other competitors are moving in with newer offerings.
Unbelievable!! No wonder Ford is in such bad trouble.... Nice kick Bill - you're wrong everywhere....
F ord Motor Co's Super Duty unveiling was an event of Texas-sized proportions. Mark Fields, president of Ford's Americas group, descended into the midst of Ford's arena in the cab of one of the automaker's brand new F-450 Super Duty pickups, lowered by a construction crane as hard-hatted workers maneuvered it into position with guy ropes.
"Now that entrance was a bold move," Fields declared when he emerged from the pickup, wearing cowboy boots and a suede jacket. "We had the lawyers really worried about that one."
Fields also got some up-close advice from Ford's truck pitchman, country singer Toby Keith.
In his unscripted remarks, Keith praised Ford's new Super Duty lineup, but suggested the automaker could do more.
"I personally drive a 250 everywhere I go and it might be the best looking 250 on the planet. In fact, you guys oughtta come and look at my 250 if you want to see what a bad truck is," Keith said. "It's sharp."
Rocky
Rocky
Having too many dealers is like having too many customers, i cannot see how Ford finds this to be a bad thing. More dealers (whether they are close together or not) means more choices for the consumer, and more people to buy your product, since the dealers must stock inventory.
How many times have you been in a situation where one dealer is giving you an outrageous price, but you go to another dealer and they help you out. Less dealers mean thats a problem.
Also, less dealers mean less exposure to the FORD brand. You may se a mustang commerical but its when you are driving by and see a ford dealer that you remember that commerical.
In the 80's Ford understood all of this, and worked to make its dealer network the envy of the intustry. Since then, toyota and nissan both copied fords model, and now look where they are.
I think this is a disastrous mistake, ford should work to have MORE dealers not less. I have heard people buying a certain brand of car because another brand (say toyota) does not have a dealer close enough for service. Now ford is going to do a 180? Less dealers guarantee less customers, unless your product is so crazy that they will travel far to get it. I don't see that. I see good, but not that good.
In this market, consumers have too many choices to give it a second thought. Thats not a bad thing, either.
I have a 2000 SVT Contour that is anything but boring! It is wrecked, and sitting in a garage awaiting resurrection. There lies one of Ford's problems; that was the last real sports sedan from Ford, and that was SEVEN YEARS AGO! Ford needs to do as GM is, and import some of the great cars they make in Europe and Australia, especially the Aussie Falcon. This is a nice mid-size 4 door sports sedan that can be had with a dual-turbo 4.0L I6, or a 5.4L DOHC 32 valve V8, and either can be had with a 6 speed manual! Now why can't we have this car?!? http://www.ford.com.au/range/falcon/models/
Ford of NORTH AMERICA'S last sports sedan....
I think there is a mentality that makes a car that appeals to everyone, or at least doesn't offend anyone (Toyota Camry, Beringer white zin, Baskin Robins Vanilla...) but isn't particularly outstanding in any one area. This isn't the way the market is going. It is going to be nitch markets.
They need to figure out a way to make $$ on relatively low volume cars that meet a particular market need. Thats what the SVT Contour was, thats what the Mazdaspeed6 and Mazdaspeed3 are as well. BMW doesn't have any super high volume cars and they are considered to be the most profitable car company in the world right now.
A beer can Fusion with a zetec and a manual isn't terrible but its not exactly a sports sedan either.