Manual tranny and a turbocharged duratec 35? Ford did say that the new duratec 35 can be turbocharged. I would love to see an AWD, 350 HP, 2 door, manual SVT Fusion some time in the near future. I've heard rummors floating around the office, but I'm personally not holding my breath on this one. In the mean time, I think they closest thing Ford has to offer comes from Mazda, Volvo or Jag. Then again you can always go with a pony instead of a true sports.
actually INCREASED by $599 this year, even as GM decreased theirs. I can see them getting this down by 2010 as they collaborate more with their European division and close plants, but can they really afford four more years of losing money and market share?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
"You know, Its easier to sell more units by having more dealers, no one did answer my question about that, though."
To a point, that is absolutely true. To the point where the dealers can't make it anymore because they volume of sales is too low, you are correct. The problem GM & Ford have, is their market share has dropped drastically in the last 20 years, with the same number or more dealers. Some of them can't make their nut anymore with the number of Fords or Chevies sold today.
Ford has way too many dealers. In fact, their plans to cut them back by 600 or so in major metro markets will fall FAR short of what they NEED to do. They will still have more than 3700 apparently, slightly over three times as many as Toyota, whose dealers are close to the top of the list in profitability. Ford dealers (GM's too) are dying on the vine. Here in California, I have no idea how they make it given extra-slow sales and a dealer in every small town.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese team won by a mile.
The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriat e action.
Their conclusion was the Japanese team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.
They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent another loss to the Japane! se, the American's rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 Steering Supervisors, 3 Area Steering Superintendents and 1 Assistant Superintendent Steering Manager.
They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing Team Job One Program," with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for pract ices and bonuses.
The next year the Japanese won by two miles.
Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.
You forgot to mention the fact that the rower (X 1000) wanted an increase in salary, see he was already making more money than ALL THE ROWERS FOR THE JAPANESE TEAM COMBINED, but he wanted a cost of living increase and more healthcare.
The Managment team could not fire him becase he was in a union, and could not reduce his hourly rate to the point to which they could hire extra rowers or else he would strike and the boat would not move at all! The company also had a 300lb lead weight on the boat comprised of the last generation rowers rediculous retirenment package.
The final solution is to take what money is left and run while there is still something to take. OR They could throw out the rower, the boat, and everything else, move to the Right to Work south, and start all over again on a level playing field I.E. the STEEL INDUSTRY. :P
MGT has alot to do with it, but if the CEO gets a 100K pay increase, and the workers all get a $1 increase, what do you think will cost the company more?
Either way its bad, but labor and legacy costs are something both managment and the unions have to take blame for together, IMO.
I hate that word "legacy cost". There wouldn't be that word if the domestic company's would of fully funded there pension obligations over the years like they agreed too. Lets say a company has a 401K like mine and matches you dollar for dollar up to 10%. The company would on average end up matching approx. $8,000 a yr. on average and over a 30 yr. period would approx pay $250,000 out of pocket with zero hourly raise increases over a 30 yr. period.
Depending on the age of the retired employee at $30,000 a yr. pension, one would have to to live at least 8-9 yrs. to get what the company put into the 401K, on a pension plan. Assuming the company invested that money, instead of putting it into a 401K, they could of made enough money off of sound investing to have the retirement cost them zilch. This is what GE, did and is why they have approx $30 Billion in its pension fund to support retirees and it cost the company nothing out of pocket today and makes money. I guess that is where the difference lies in management fore seeing the future.
"they could of made enough money off of sound investing to have the retirement cost them zilch."
You make an excellent point for the individual to do the same. A person doesn't have to be a GE to enhance his own investment portfolio. Guaranteed pensions are a myth. Just ask the retired airlines pilots i.e. Delta, United, & TWA.
I understand y'alls point. The situation of being a small buisness or work for a small buisness is alot different than a large corporation. A large corporation can turn a few billion into multi-billions through investing. They have the ins and outs of the market, because of resources. I've always have said the best buisness approach for the Big 3 and UAW, would become lean. Offer the UAW workers $50 or $60 bucks an hour w/ ZERO benefits. The company could eliminate thousands more jobs because they would no longer need HR people to run them. Those people collect a large salary and use benefits. I know Microsoft in the past used this approach and it works because a corporation can afford to pay more upfront and save by eliminating or not needing the excess people. I've said before my dad and I have talked a great deal about the cost savings and benefits for the employees and company. I've proposed this idea to my union, to not only benefits me but to save you tax payers money. GM, and Ford, for example is paying around $19 an hour for temp workers. Tell those new workers you will pay them $40 or $50 bucks an hour with zero benefits like they have now and I guarantee you'd have a buncha happy workers and it would save GM, Billions in benefits What I mean is GM, claims it costs them $81 an hour per veteran employee. Ford, has similar claims. I have the perfect fix that would pass in the union halls. Say alright here's $50 or $60 bucks an hour zero benefits, we can then eliminate "X" amount of overhead and y'all are happy and we are happy. :shades: I guess I should be CEO, right. :P
the concept of the company pension, it just seems to me that the companies make promises they cannot financially afford to keep...just like when an individual charges his credit cards, then loses his job, and files Chapter 7, basically voiding his prior promises to pay, Ford/GM do not seem to be making enough $$$ to pay everything they promised...since their suppliers will cut them off if they do not pay, which would cause forced liquidation in about 2 days, they have no choice but to work with the one variable that really can be varied...dump employees, cut benefits, cut pensions, because, if they don't, then there will be NOTHING left and no reason for the company to continue operations...
What you are really seeing is the slow death of the welfare state, where the workers actaully depended on the company to take care of them, shirking their responsibility for their own lives, and now that sugar daddy (GM/Ford/Delta/etc) cannot live up to the inflated promises of the past...so, in order to survive, you jettison the only things you can, and everyone learns a lesson...
And while this is a perfect time to throw in something about the unions strangling the American employment market with their insane demands of pay for unskilled labor, but I will remain silent on that issue...
Medical Insurance Programs to direct union members health.
Retirement Programs to fund union members after work.
Microsoft employees are capable of working out their own answers to money management, health insurance, & retirement programs due to a higher level of education as required in their work. I look forward to the day when all union members are of such apptitude enabling them to be more independent.
There's a type of union/labor organization you rarely see people here whine about...state and government workers who have pensions rarely seen in the private sector. Hmmm
I'm worried about Ford, I'm confused about Ford, I'm thinking the best thing for Ford would be for ALL of the Ford family to get out of management altogether and let some new talent run that company. It's all over the place!! You have a mega-hit with the Mustang, AGAIN, creating the retro market in other companies now. And the product is very very good. They still produce IMO, the best pickup trucks and SUVs in the market (by design, at least). Then, they produce the 500 and the Fusion. I'm at odds with the world on these, because I rather like the 500 on the inside, and I hate the Fusion on the inside. Both need an engine they just can't get going. Both are butt ugly cars to me. The Focus is languishing like an old old lady in a rest home. Mercury and Lincoln are a sad parody of their past now. Probably one decision I think was a good one was holding on to the Panther cars, since the rest of the world gave up RWD sedans years ago. Ford has made a haul off of taxi and police cars and livery service for the Town Car. These cars are indestructable, cheap to buy, cheap to run, dead bang reliable, and fully depreciated so the profit margin on them is terrific. I see Mr. Mullaly, as one of his first edicts, put his hand up to stop the sword of death that Bill had imposed on this line of cars, and saved them from being killed after 07. Smart move, since they are a major provider of income for the company.
When Jacques Nasser was President of Ford, contributions to the Republican party were large, nothing to Bill Clinton's party. Now, Bill Ford supports the Environmentalists and every gay cause he can find out about. So, the politics have certainly changed. OTOH, Nasser was a diversity king, and got rid of as many white male engineers as he could, in favor of "diversity". Unfortunately, some of these engineers knew what they were actually doing, and now work for Toyota, who is looking for more Anglo faces in their otherwise Asian crowd of employees.
As I said, this company is schitzophrenic. I can't figure them out. I still have a soft spot in my heart for them, but I don't know who they are anymore..... :confuse:
>hen an individual charges his credit cards, then loses his job, and files Chapter 7, basically voiding his prior promises to pay,
I thought the banks had gotten the congress to change what could be discharged through bankuptcy and credit cards weren't part of that any more. So if someone charges lots of auto accessories on their credit card it will have to be paid?
Marsha7: What you are really seeing is the slow death of the welfare state, where the workers actaully depended on the company to take care of them, shirking their responsibility for their own lives...
That's too harsh. I wouldn't say that workers "shirked" their responsibility to plan for retirement...it's more like the company put forward proposals relating to pensions, medical benefits, etc., the union agreed to them, and the contract was created. The workers depended on the contract.
What happened is that no one - the workers, union or company management - foresaw the day when non-unionized transplant operations would capture a siginificant share of the market for brand-new vehicles in the United States.
Now GM, Ford and Chrysler must shrink to reflect their reduced status in the U.S., but their obligations aren't shrinking in tandem.
The bankruptcy laws did change as of Oct 17, 2005, last year, but an analysis was done and it seems that about 90% of the folks who qualified under the old law for Ch 7 still qualify under the new law...it did place income limits on those filing for Ch7, but, most of the folks needing a 7 come in well under those income limits...once you lose your overtime or your job, coming in under median income limits (Georgia...all numbers approximate...household of 1, $36,400; HH of 2, $43,000; HH of 3, $49,000; HH of 4, $56,000...so, here in semi-rural Georgia, if a husband/wife/2 kids earn combined income under $56K, and have under $20K home equity, they easily qualify for a Ch7 in about 30 seconds...:):):) )
So, some folks are forced in 13s, but not really that many...I think the hype was much more than the substance, altho the work for the atty has doubled, so fees have increased and they raised the filing from $274 to 299, added $100 for credit counseling fees, so filing now costs almost $400.00...
So, for the person who has no money to pay bills, he now must spend almost $300 more than last year...what a country...:):):):):)
...back on topic, anyone know what Ford's short to medium term plans are for the Focus in the U.S.? How long is Ford going to let it soldier on in current form?
Just odd that the company that makes plenty of competent subcompacts for the rest of the world can't seem to get it together here in the U.S. Or does Ford figure these high gas prices are just some short-term thing and before long, we'll all be clamoring for the return of the Excursion?
I may be going against the grain, but I think Ford's turning the corner and the future is bright.
Based on the number of Fusions I see in New England, that car is a hit. I've yet to read much negative about it. They pulled the plug on the dreadful Freestar and retired the Taurus. They delayed the Edge in order to get the quality just right.
The Mustang is a hit, the new Explorer is well designed, and the F150s are still the best trucks around.
I also have read where they're going to beef up the engine to a 3.5 in the underpowered 500.
It's going to be interesting to see the reaction to the Edge when it's finally in showrooms.
Rocky: I think using any political strategy to straighten out a failing company is bad. Political strategies are usually based upon polls, and adjustments to those polls at any cost or in any way possible. Lying, cheating and stealing is not above a political strategist. There's no substance there, no character, and a very short term strategy at best - just gotta make the public believe we're right, whether we are or not. I don't see that as a way to build a company image, and from the article, it hasn't worked for Ford either. Even their employees know it's all crap.
I doubt Toyota would hire a political strategist to fix an image problem. They would just try to build better cars that would appeal to the customer and build a reputation that would propel them further along. And that's what Ford has been lacking all its life. They move in fits & starts. Then they go to hell for a while, bring in a new team and recover, and start the cycle again. Consistency is what is lacking at Ford, for whatever reason. In the last 5 years since Bill Jr. took over, their "strategy", if you can call it that has changed about 6 times. From "we're going to give you the best mileage trucks and SUVs in the world", to safety, to green & hybrids, to Mustangs, back to trucks, then back to we care about you, and finally green again. And none of those have sold or worked, except the Mustang. IF they didn't build great trucks, they would already be gone.
I'm a Ford guy, or at least I used to be. It has taken a lot for me to give up on them. I'm just about there though. I'll give Mulally a chance - and what I see so far has potential. But if the Ford family doesn't get out of the management of this company, they are doomed. Somebody with a vision has to take over and be given the lattitude to do what must be done to stablize this company, now.
I'm reversing my opinion on the sale of the PAG. I'm starting to feel that Ford is not worthy of the great heritage nameplates of Europe, and maybe they should sell Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo and Aston Martin to the highest bidder, and concentrate on the Ford brand. Clearly they don't possess the management skill to run a global company. They have no RWD cars for Europe other than these luxury brands, and they have no update for the American Focus, which is languishing like the Ranger in category II Alzheimers. They have squandered their resources with bad moves and investments in the wrong products at the wrong times. They have squandered their position in the market place and their brands. What they have done to Lincoln is unconscionable. They did it to Mercury decades ago, but to make Lincoln a souped up Mazda 6 is shameful, inexcusable. Lincoln outsold Cadillac at one time in recent history. Cadillac may never be the "Standard of the World" again, but it certainly has recovered nicely and has a strange and wonderful following now among Gen Y. Hard to comprehend, but it's there. I actually find myself liking the DTS!! I haven't liked a Cadillac since about 1990.
Anyway, the sooner they sell Jaguar or Land Rover, the sooner I may be confident enough to buy one. That's how I look at it. Meanwhile, I think I'll start filling my fleet out with Toyotas....... :mad:
I really hate how it's in the U.S. that Ford's brand equity is the lowest.
What does that say about America that a company is willing to let its name be so tarnished in its own country, with barely a fight? Most companies consider it a matter of pride (if not one of maintaining a reliable customer base) to ensure their best products are sold in their home market. :mad:
Guys, sit back and really think about it. I really can't put all the blame on our domestic auto companys. I blame our "culture of corruption" which is our government. They have opened the doors to all of those that have the deepest pockets, and doing what's right has been throwin out the window.
Our government, has sadly become a "barter/auction system" where I'll do "X" for "Y" amount. It's not a government working for the averge citizen anymore. :sick: They will hang a carrot in front of our nose once in a while to let us think they care. The wealthy elites and buisnesses run our politics and it took the CEO's from the Big 3, to come togeather as one, just to get a interview with the Prez :surprise: To the best of my knowledge those "talks" haven't happened yet, right ?
GM, Ford, Chrysler, are un a unlevel playing field-a topic we've kicked several times and thus needs no need of further explanation.
Maybe someday something will change, but until then the road looks rough.
It's both party's like Lou Dobbs pointed out yesterday in his 2 live interviews. He's honestly making me think about registering as a independent. Lou, went on to explain how both party's get "special interest" money, which has corrupted our politics. :sick:
I agree with him 100% of the time, and wished Lou Dobbs would run for President. He, like our soldiers, both are american hero's in my eyes.
The problem isn't our government or our political system. The pluralistic system that the United States has developed is certainly flawed, but it's best system available in the world.
The problem in this case is Ford.
Broad-brush-stroke-wise (I've leaving out a lot, like the legacy costs issues, but...) Ford, like its domestic competition, decided to spend its resources on influencing government policy to its advantage. But that meant that it has fewer resources to devote to creating a quality product. Ford knew this, and hoped that this plan would work.
But it didn't work, in large part because American citizens refused to go along with it. They demanded high-quality cars, no matter where they come from. And because politicans are elected by voters, not Ford, they got them. There is no ban on foreign autos in this country. In fact, many so-called 'foreign' vehicles are built right here in the U.S., by U.S. citizens.
So all those resources Ford spent to limit competition went down the drain, and it now has to play catch up, squaring off against very tough competition who have been spending their resources on making quality products. It's going to be tough, as Ford has belatedly realized.
But this isn't bad...this is the market at work. I'm just sad that a company with Ford's history wasn't smarter sooner. It made a poor choice, and now the market is coldly and inexorably extracting its penalty.
There's a Japanese proverb that opines that the reputation of a thousand years can be undone by the conduct of one hour. Or in this case, a few years.
Perusing the Ford website the other day, it appears that perhaps Ford may be getting it that not all people buying a 4cyl Fusion are doing so because it's the cheap, base, stripper model...some actually prize the manual transmission available only at this level.
Ford is now offering a "sport package" for the 4cyl model. It's cosmetic, but I like what it portends. Different wheels, fog lamps, red stitching/accents on the seats and some aluminum on the interior.
Also, AWD is now available on the V6 model.
Please keep the momentum going with this car, Ford...it started strong, and it's getting even better.
Nice job, well said...rather than actually think in their own mind, "We need to make our product better", Ford thought to try and kepp the better product out...kinda cowardly, if you ask me...so we badmouth the Japanese product, waste our money on lobbyists, while the market, in its infinite wisdom, beats us to pieces...
If I didn't want to see Ford survive, I would almost say that it serves them right...
And, in a deeper sense, it bothers me when I think how much they could have done to make their products the best...despite unions and all the other factors we discuss, they really can do better, IMO, but are we willing to spend our $$$ on junk while waiting for them to get their act together???
And, in a deeper sense, it bothers me when I think how much they could have done to make their products the best...
Hit the nail right on the head...that really bugs me too. There's nothing sadder than wasted potential.
Ford's problem really is its leadership...both on the management side and the union side. Management has refused to think long-term, and the Union leadership has refused to face the realities of today's market. When we here talk about "the lazy autoworker" or the "greedy manager", we're really talking about the leadership of the groups, not most of the members.
Ford has plenty of very bright people on the white-collar side who are just itching to design great cars. And the blue collar side is full of highly skilled workers who can build them. They're the ones who can save the company...I just hope the leadership on both sides realizes that it's better to compromise a little to work toward a common goal than it is to have been the big leader of a defunct company.
to be a small highly profitable company, seems to me, than a huge one where money is leaking like a sieve. Even the board and the Ford family could be made to see that, seems to me. The good thing about having a family at the top rather than a profit-driven board is the potential for making the long-term case, rather than constantly thinking in terms of two years or five.
The most successful competition is thinking in terms of two DECADES, or five.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Thank you for a reasoned and well elucidated opinion. I tend to agree that Ford itself (and Bill Ford himself) are to blame for their condition. Bad management, poor decisions, inconsistent leadership with no vision have put them where they are. Bill, is not a car guy, and not a businessman either. He took the help reluctantly, and ran the company in a "management by crisis" fashion, with no clear vision or goal of where he wanted to go, and so the company went all over the place. This is no more evident than in the product line itself:
F-150,250,350 - reflects a clear vision SUVs - denotes a myopic and stubborn, "stay the course" Panthers - reflects decontenting and neglect. Five Hundred - denotes a departure from the plan Fusion - seems to have a plan, but I don't like the plan Focus - My goodness, does anybody know they make these still Mustang - An example of what can be done with a vision.
They're all over the place from trucks and the Mustang that know what they're building, to the 500 and Fusion that are stabs in the dark.
And whats is with all this alliteration anyway? Why does every Friggin Ford have to start with an F? You limit yourself to 1/26th of your naming options and eliminate some great names!!
Rocky thinks the Bush Administration has been unsympathetic to the plight of Ford. He's right. But Bill Ford will not give one dime to the Republicans, and if you want an audience with the Pope, you have to light a candle on the altar......
Comments
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061004/AUTO01/610040411/- 1148
Rocky
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If this is true it is trully bad news for ford. Meybe thats why the stock is so weak.
You know, Its easier to sell more units by having more dealers, no one did answer my question about that, though.
To a point, that is absolutely true. To the point where the dealers can't make it anymore because they volume of sales is too low, you are correct. The problem GM & Ford have, is their market share has dropped drastically in the last 20 years, with the same number or more dealers. Some of them can't make their nut anymore with the number of Fords or Chevies sold today.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061003/AUTO01/610030387/1148-
Ford has way too many dealers. In fact, their plans to cut them back by 600 or so in major metro markets will fall FAR short of what they NEED to do. They will still have more than 3700 apparently, slightly over three times as many as Toyota, whose dealers are close to the top of the list in profitability. Ford dealers (GM's too) are dying on the vine. Here in California, I have no idea how they make it given extra-slow sales and a dealer in every small town.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
(Ford Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the
Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to
reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese team won by a mile.
The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided
to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A
management team made up of senior management was
formed to investigate and recommend appropriat e
action.
Their conclusion was the Japanese team had 8 people
rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team
had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So American
management hired a consulting company and paid them a
large amount of money for a second opinion.
They advised that too many people were steering the
boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent
another loss to the Japane! se, the American's rowing
team's management structure was totally reorganized to
4 Steering Supervisors, 3 Area Steering
Superintendents and 1 Assistant Superintendent
Steering Manager.
They also implemented a new performance system that
would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater
incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing
Team Job One Program," with meetings, dinners
and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of
getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra
vacation days for pract ices and bonuses.
The next year the Japanese won by two miles.
Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower
for poor performance, halted development of a new
canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital
investments for new equipment. The money saved was
distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and
the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.
The Managment team could not fire him becase he was in a union, and could not reduce his hourly rate to the point to which they could hire extra rowers or else he would strike and the boat would not move at all! The company also had a 300lb lead weight on the boat comprised of the last generation rowers rediculous retirenment package.
The final solution is to take what money is left and run while there is still something to take. OR They could throw out the rower, the boat, and everything else, move to the Right to Work south, and start all over again on a level playing field I.E. the STEEL INDUSTRY. :P
MGT has alot to do with it, but if the CEO gets a 100K pay increase, and the workers all get a $1 increase, what do you think will cost the company more?
Either way its bad, but labor and legacy costs are something both managment and the unions have to take blame for together, IMO.
Rocky
Depending on the age of the retired employee at $30,000 a yr. pension, one would have to to live at least 8-9 yrs. to get what the company put into the 401K, on a pension plan. Assuming the company invested that money, instead of putting it into a 401K, they could of made enough money off of sound investing to have the retirement cost them zilch.
This is what GE, did and is why they have approx $30 Billion in its pension fund to support retirees and it cost the company nothing out of pocket today and makes money. I guess that is where the difference lies in management fore seeing the future.
Rocky
You make an excellent point for the individual to do the same. A person doesn't have to be a GE to enhance his own investment portfolio. Guaranteed pensions are a myth. Just ask the retired airlines pilots i.e. Delta, United, & TWA.
I understand y'alls point. The situation of being a small buisness or work for a small buisness is alot different than a large corporation. A large corporation can turn a few billion into multi-billions through investing. They have the ins and outs of the market, because of resources. I've always have said the best buisness approach for the Big 3 and UAW, would become lean. Offer the UAW workers $50 or $60 bucks an hour w/ ZERO benefits. The company could eliminate thousands more jobs because they would no longer need HR people to run them. Those people collect a large salary and use benefits. I know Microsoft in the past used this approach and it works because a corporation can afford to pay more upfront and save by eliminating or not needing the excess people. I've said before my dad and I have talked a great deal about the cost savings and benefits for the employees and company. I've proposed this idea to my union, to not only benefits me but to save you tax payers money. GM, and Ford, for example is paying around $19 an hour for temp workers. Tell those new workers you will pay them $40 or $50 bucks an hour with zero benefits like they have now and I guarantee you'd have a buncha happy workers and it would save GM, Billions in benefits
Rocky
What you are really seeing is the slow death of the welfare state, where the workers actaully depended on the company to take care of them, shirking their responsibility for their own lives, and now that sugar daddy (GM/Ford/Delta/etc) cannot live up to the inflated promises of the past...so, in order to survive, you jettison the only things you can, and everyone learns a lesson...
And while this is a perfect time to throw in something about the unions strangling the American employment market with their insane demands of pay for unskilled labor, but I will remain silent on that issue...
Medical Insurance Programs to direct union members health.
Retirement Programs to fund union members after work.
Microsoft employees are capable of working out their own answers to money management, health insurance, & retirement programs due to a higher level of education as required in their work. I look forward to the day when all union members are of such apptitude enabling them to be more independent.
When Jacques Nasser was President of Ford, contributions to the Republican party were large, nothing to Bill Clinton's party. Now, Bill Ford supports the Environmentalists and every gay cause he can find out about. So, the politics have certainly changed. OTOH, Nasser was a diversity king, and got rid of as many white male engineers as he could, in favor of "diversity". Unfortunately, some of these engineers knew what they were actually doing, and now work for Toyota, who is looking for more Anglo faces in their otherwise Asian crowd of employees.
As I said, this company is schitzophrenic. I can't figure them out. I still have a soft spot in my heart for them, but I don't know who they are anymore..... :confuse:
I thought the banks had gotten the congress to change what could be discharged through bankuptcy and credit cards weren't part of that any more. So if someone charges lots of auto accessories on their credit card it will have to be paid?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
That's too harsh. I wouldn't say that workers "shirked" their responsibility to plan for retirement...it's more like the company put forward proposals relating to pensions, medical benefits, etc., the union agreed to them, and the contract was created. The workers depended on the contract.
What happened is that no one - the workers, union or company management - foresaw the day when non-unionized transplant operations would capture a siginificant share of the market for brand-new vehicles in the United States.
Now GM, Ford and Chrysler must shrink to reflect their reduced status in the U.S., but their obligations aren't shrinking in tandem.
(Georgia...all numbers approximate...household of 1, $36,400; HH of 2, $43,000; HH of 3, $49,000; HH of 4, $56,000...so, here in semi-rural Georgia, if a husband/wife/2 kids earn combined income under $56K, and have under $20K home equity, they easily qualify for a Ch7 in about 30 seconds...:):):) )
So, some folks are forced in 13s, but not really that many...I think the hype was much more than the substance, altho the work for the atty has doubled, so fees have increased and they raised the filing from $274 to 299, added $100 for credit counseling fees, so filing now costs almost $400.00...
So, for the person who has no money to pay bills, he now must spend almost $300 more than last year...what a country...:):):):):)
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061011/AUTO01/610110363/1148-
Rocky
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061010/AUTO01/610100366/1148-
Rocky
P.S. Glad to see a bad situation, have at least some good.
Just odd that the company that makes plenty of competent subcompacts for the rest of the world can't seem to get it together here in the U.S. Or does Ford figure these high gas prices are just some short-term thing and before long, we'll all be clamoring for the return of the Excursion?
Based on the number of Fusions I see in New England, that car is a hit. I've yet to read much negative about it. They pulled the plug on the dreadful Freestar and retired the Taurus. They delayed the Edge in order to get the quality just right.
The Mustang is a hit, the new Explorer is well designed, and the F150s are still the best trucks around.
I also have read where they're going to beef up the engine to a 3.5 in the underpowered 500.
It's going to be interesting to see the reaction to the Edge when it's finally in showrooms.
Rocky
I doubt Toyota would hire a political strategist to fix an image problem. They would just try to build better cars that would appeal to the customer and build a reputation that would propel them further along. And that's what Ford has been lacking all its life. They move in fits & starts. Then they go to hell for a while, bring in a new team and recover, and start the cycle again. Consistency is what is lacking at Ford, for whatever reason. In the last 5 years since Bill Jr. took over, their "strategy", if you can call it that has changed about 6 times. From "we're going to give you the best mileage trucks and SUVs in the world", to safety, to green & hybrids, to Mustangs, back to trucks, then back to we care about you, and finally green again. And none of those have sold or worked, except the Mustang. IF they didn't build great trucks, they would already be gone.
I'm a Ford guy, or at least I used to be. It has taken a lot for me to give up on them. I'm just about there though. I'll give Mulally a chance - and what I see so far has potential. But if the Ford family doesn't get out of the management of this company, they are doomed. Somebody with a vision has to take over and be given the lattitude to do what must be done to stablize this company, now.
Anyway, the sooner they sell Jaguar or Land Rover, the sooner I may be confident enough to buy one. That's how I look at it. Meanwhile, I think I'll start filling my fleet out with Toyotas....... :mad:
What does that say about America that a company is willing to let its name be so tarnished in its own country, with barely a fight? Most companies consider it a matter of pride (if not one of maintaining a reliable customer base) to ensure their best products are sold in their home market. :mad:
Our government, has sadly become a "barter/auction system" where I'll do "X" for "Y" amount. It's not a government working for the averge citizen anymore. :sick: They will hang a carrot in front of our nose once in a while to let us think they care. The wealthy elites and buisnesses run our politics and it took the CEO's from the Big 3, to come togeather as one, just to get a interview with the Prez :surprise: To the best of my knowledge those "talks" haven't happened yet, right ?
GM, Ford, Chrysler, are un a unlevel playing field-a topic we've kicked several times and thus needs no need of further explanation.
Maybe someday something will change, but until then the road looks rough.
Rocky
Problem is, we keep voting those knuckleheads in. No one's holding a gun to our head and saying "vote for a crook."
I agree with him 100% of the time, and wished Lou Dobbs would run for President. He, like our soldiers, both are american hero's in my eyes.
Rocky
Rocky
The problem in this case is Ford.
Broad-brush-stroke-wise (I've leaving out a lot, like the legacy costs issues, but...) Ford, like its domestic competition, decided to spend its resources on influencing government policy to its advantage. But that meant that it has fewer resources to devote to creating a quality product. Ford knew this, and hoped that this plan would work.
But it didn't work, in large part because American citizens refused to go along with it. They demanded high-quality cars, no matter where they come from. And because politicans are elected by voters, not Ford, they got them. There is no ban on foreign autos in this country. In fact, many so-called 'foreign' vehicles are built right here in the U.S., by U.S. citizens.
So all those resources Ford spent to limit competition went down the drain, and it now has to play catch up, squaring off against very tough competition who have been spending their resources on making quality products. It's going to be tough, as Ford has belatedly realized.
But this isn't bad...this is the market at work. I'm just sad that a company with Ford's history wasn't smarter sooner. It made a poor choice, and now the market is coldly and inexorably extracting its penalty.
There's a Japanese proverb that opines that the reputation of a thousand years can be undone by the conduct of one hour. Or in this case, a few years.
Ford is now offering a "sport package" for the 4cyl model. It's cosmetic, but I like what it portends. Different wheels, fog lamps, red stitching/accents on the seats and some aluminum on the interior.
Also, AWD is now available on the V6 model.
Please keep the momentum going with this car, Ford...it started strong, and it's getting even better.
If I didn't want to see Ford survive, I would almost say that it serves them right...
And, in a deeper sense, it bothers me when I think how much they could have done to make their products the best...despite unions and all the other factors we discuss, they really can do better, IMO, but are we willing to spend our $$$ on junk while waiting for them to get their act together???
Hit the nail right on the head...that really bugs me too. There's nothing sadder than wasted potential.
Ford's problem really is its leadership...both on the management side and the union side. Management has refused to think long-term, and the Union leadership has refused to face the realities of today's market. When we here talk about "the lazy autoworker" or the "greedy manager", we're really talking about the leadership of the groups, not most of the members.
Ford has plenty of very bright people on the white-collar side who are just itching to design great cars. And the blue collar side is full of highly skilled workers who can build them. They're the ones who can save the company...I just hope the leadership on both sides realizes that it's better to compromise a little to work toward a common goal than it is to have been the big leader of a defunct company.
The most successful competition is thinking in terms of two DECADES, or five.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
If a sport package is offered, it should have something in it that makes the car either handle better or have more power.
'Racing' stripes, a spoiler, and some underbody cladding has GOT TO GO.
:mad:
F-150,250,350 - reflects a clear vision
SUVs - denotes a myopic and stubborn, "stay the course"
Panthers - reflects decontenting and neglect.
Five Hundred - denotes a departure from the plan
Fusion - seems to have a plan, but I don't like the plan
Focus - My goodness, does anybody know they make these still
Mustang - An example of what can be done with a vision.
They're all over the place from trucks and the Mustang that know what they're building, to the 500 and Fusion that are stabs in the dark.
And whats is with all this alliteration anyway? Why does every Friggin Ford have to start with an F? You limit yourself to 1/26th of your naming options and eliminate some great names!!
Rocky thinks the Bush Administration has been unsympathetic to the plight of Ford. He's right. But Bill Ford will not give one dime to the Republicans, and if you want an audience with the Pope, you have to light a candle on the altar......
its called an appearance pacakge.
cool your jets.
Mark
Expect the 2 door sedan a'la ZX2 Escourt to return.
People keep wishing for the European Focus. Which is an xample of how amature advice isn't the best.
American doesn't need a $19,000 Ford Focus.
I wish Ford would lower the MSRP on the Focus and drop the $2,500 rebate though.
Mark.