By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
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.