Are you a current Michigan-based car shopper? A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/2 for details.
heyjewel: * In response, today Ford announced they are giving another million dollars to Alan Mulally because he's done such a good job.
In all fairness, we won't see the results of Mr. Mulally's work for a few years. Right now he is cleaning house and desperately trying to rework the corporate structure. From the insiders' perspective, it is entirely possible that he is doing a good job, changing procedures and processes that we will never see. The end result - we hope - will be better products.
Mediocre and lackluster products usually reflect internal problems. Mr. Mulally is trying to correct this - the decision by the corporation to reduce the power of Finance over new product programs will be a big help for Mr. Mulally and Mark Fields - and the results won't be seen for a few more years.
Actually, Howard, or is it Thomas?:>), most or all of that information came from the Detroit News.
Mulally was an idiot to leave Boeing. Today they came out ahead again against Airbus with UPS and Fed Ex. There is no way AM is going to do with Ford a turnaround like Boeing. After all, Boeing has always built quality products. For Ford, that would be a brand new dance. I'll bet if you asked the average American - would you feel safer flying 6000 miles in a 10 year old Boeing or driving 60 miles in a 10 year old Taurus, they'd pick the plane 90% of the time.
Now really, what can he do? Ford has driven most of their suppliers into bankruptcy or into using paper mache instead of aluminum to meet cost targets. The great greenie, Bill Ford, and his minnions argued against adopting Volvo safety standards for the roofs of Ford vehicles and won - too expensive or IOW, American heads aint worth what Swedish ones are. Exploding Pintos, exploding cop cars, sub par Explorers and tires, yadda yadda - how exactly can AM turn around this corporate mindset in a couple of years, especially when it takes them about 5 years to cycle out a new product? And especially since all the good people would take a buyout if it was offered, the dregs wiull stay cause they know what they are and dont wanna try to sell themselves to Deiter or Bob. Face it, Ford screwed themselves into a corner and I dont think they're coming out. My money says Mulally bails in less than 2 years - with a nice golden parachute of course.
Such an astute addition to the conversation. Did one of yours go flat at an inopportune moment on the cowpath?
Course it does bring up a point that relates to the rolling explorers using Firestones - the fact that the tires were used because of nepotism, not quality.
Precisely true. And even given those facts, most people would be smart to take a chance on the Boeing in the air over the Taurus on the ground. But change Taurus to Toyota and the odds are altered significnatly.
Oh, and speaking of flying, soon those with enough money to purchase a private or corporate plane will be able to buy one made by Honda. Can u imagine an extension of my argument to a plane made by Honda vs a plane made by Ford? :confuse: :sick: Ho ho ho. Which would YOU buy? Think about THAT before your next car purchase.
So, Mr Ex, I just went to the Detroit News and there's another huge example of what I'm talking about. Somewhat more recent than your model T. Another person DEAD because Ford saved a couple of bucks on a switch 15 years or so ago and they STILL have not recalled the vehicle that killed this guy (MGM).
This is PRECISELY why I think Ford is doomed. Because even with all these dead people who can be traced directly to Fords' doorstep, they STILL argue against adopting roof strength standards of their own subsidiary, Volvo, and they STILL market vehicles that could be desrcribed as 'unsafe to stop at any speed' - namely the Edge and mkx with poor brakes.
They apparently will NEVER learn. Must be in their blood, traceable back to the original bad tires 100 years ago, eh?
is a lot like buying an older German car, except you don't get any cachet from the nameplate. Don't even think about buying it unless it comes with a mile-wide stack of maintenance records, don't spend more than $50 at a time on repairs or upkeep, and don't purchase it for any more money than you'd be willing to lose in a casino. It also helps that Lemko likes the big, expensive cars which the domestics tended to put a bit more effort into back then.
Mr. Mulally and Mr. Fields have two big things on their side.
The first is that they are not responsible for those mistakes and disasters that you mentioned. (Mr. Mulally's outsider status is an advantage here.)
The second is desperation.
If this turnaround doesn't work, Ford either goes bankrupt, or ends up in the hands of its creditors, with its various components bought by other companies.
Desperation can be a very good enabler for a corporation.
Wow, if American cars of the 1980s are considered junk, today's American cars must be indestructible. I'd have to go out of my way to to kill either my 1988 Buick Park Avenue or 1989 Cadillac Brougham. I could get me one of those ultra-reliable 1980s Japanese cars. Oops! They all collapsed into piles of iron oxide dust ten years ago around here!
I'd have to go out of my way to to kill either my 1988 Buick Park Avenue or 1989 Cadillac Brougham.
Lemme have a crack at 'em. I could destroy them both within a month ditch-hopping and cruising the back roads with a set of 24s and some thumpers in the trunk
you must admit that Airbus really "helped" the situation with their delays, delays, delays mostly due to the computer systems, harnesses, network complexity and the like.
So in a sense, Boeing didn't just earn the business, it was really handed to them. Not saying that they didn't/don't make quality parts and planes, but it's not like the UPS/Fedex business was blood, sweat and tears hard-earned.
Well, you're bitter, and I understand and sympathize with that. I will not argue Ford's consistency deficit over their history, nor their fairness. Clearly though - the man at the helm has made all the difference time after time. Caldwell spawned the Taurus that changed the world, and Peterson kept the company so viable, that Nasser had so much cash available, he tried to buy up all of Europe - that was a great strategery, wasn't it?
Not everything Ford makes has been great. Yet - my cousin just left my home in Vegas today, for Salt Lake City, in his 00 Taurus with 200,000 miles on it, and no major repairs yet in the car's history. I shook my head, but he drives this car all over the country with confidence, and has never been stranded. He usually gets 300,000 miles out of each Taurus, he's had 3 so far. To him, they are the best value on the planet. I tried to talk him into a Camry this year - his response; "Why spend the extra $5,000?" I have a hard time arguing with him. Personally, I'd buy the Camry.
Mulally conquered Boeing. Nowhere to go there now but down. Ford is a new challenge, and a huge one. It's a risk, but if he can do it, it's the achievement of the century. IF not, he retires with a few hundred million, in Western Samoa or someplace where nobody knows he blew up.
I guess I am one of those japanese converts...my 88 Prelude lasted (for me) until 2001, 185K miles, gave it to my brother in law and he used it until last year when the idiot wrecked it...
My 88 Legend lasted until 98 when I traded it for a 98 Regal, reminding me once again that GM can't make a car to save its rear end...the Legend had 165K when I kissed it goodbye...
I now have a Ford and Dodge, but I still yearn for an import...I just thought it was time to try American again...while I do not regret it, I just do not seem impressed by the product, like I was when I sat in my Hondas...just my opinion, that's all...I will prob buy USA again, but I really wish they would design something that knocks my socks off, like my 4 wheel steering Prelude did when I sat in it...
Four-wheel steering is nothing new. I recall seeing an experimental 1967 Buick Special with four-wheel steering. Chevrolet and GMC recently had trucks with four-wheel steering, but I hear nothing about them today. I guess there wasn't much of a market for it.
GM is good at experimental stuff, but not so good at creating a market for those innovations. Quadrasteer was a nearly $6000 option which was barely advertised at all, then GM killed it because almost no one bought it. By contrast, Honda made the 4WS standard on the top-trim Prelude and hyped it pretty well.
does anyone here actully know anyone who was in an exploding pinto or a rolling over explorer? we all know they happened, and that does suck, but i think it was the situation was hyped. i had on firestones at least 4 different vehicles. never had a problem. my inlaws had at least 3 or 4 pintos/bobcats. none of them ever blew up. people believe what they want to. how much money did it cost mcdonalds because they made a hot cup of coffee?
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Well, yes, I had several sets of Firestones, but only a couple of instances of tread separation. I would have rather had none.
I do think Ford may have gotten a raw deal with the Explorer-Firestone clap trap, but they did themselves in by cutting product development to try to cover the costs it incurred. That company has see-sawed throughout its history with innovative products followed by neglect, and amnesia for the fact they are in the business of creating and moving products.
The 2001 Sport Trac (which had Firestones) was a good example. A decent design, which was saddled with one rather anemic engine. They never increased the hp or did much of anything with what was at first a relatively popular niche model. They instead allowed it to die off by the 2006 model year, and then belatedly updated it a couple of Explorer generations, while managing to keep the same exact shape and style (the old body with a new grill and pickup box). Consequently, I never saw a reason to buy another Sport Trac. Not exactly the way to take the 4 door pickup world by storm, but that is what Ford often does.
Lincoln needs the MKS now. It needs more differentiated products from the corresponding Fords, at the very least unique Lincoln styling. The dumb Marky letters should go, and the Marky R (Murky Er or Merkur or whatever it is called) or something close needs to be in the pipeline.
I see they are still throwing lots of money (but perhaps still too little to actually turn anything around) at Jaguar. Whether the new F sedan to replace the S will become a volume seller is anyone's guess. And they are putting money into cosmetic changes to the boring looking XJ until they belatedly bring out the replacement for the 2010 model year. 2010???? It's a total dud at sales. Waiting that long for the new one is a stupid business decision.
But in my opinion, Ford could be making a lot more $$ by putting Jaguar out to pasture, and putting those resources into Lincoln. lincoln was a volume seller, and models could be prepared for export. Or Jaguar could be the new Ford Aston Martin...forget about volume.
for about four years, I believe, and, oddly, Mazda also had it as an option in the 626 if I recall...
In the Prelude it was a $1200 option, if memory serves, and it was worth every penny, making turns on a dime, parallel parking was a breeze...
Leave it to GM to take "old" technology and charge $5000 for the option, Liberty diesel engine was $5000 option if what I read was correct...
I certainly believe they should make money, but how many people paid an extra 5 grand for an option that probably barely cost a grand, if that???...another $1200, maybe, but 5 thousand dollars???...and they wonder why folks like japanese products???
Oh, so if a tree falls in the forest and you didn't see it then it didnt really fall? Since you know of no one killed in a burning Pinto, rolling Explorer or exploding Police cruiser they didnt really happen? Or perhaps dont matter? Did u take logic 101 in college?
Look, my point here is a simple one- do u see anyone getting immolated in Toyotas because of gas tanks that are positioned such that they tend to explode on rear impact? Or cruise control switches that happen to catch fire at the most inopportune moment? Has GM been convicted by a jury of poor design and using inferior tires leading to lots and lots of casualties? No no and no. Only Ford has gone down these roads. (Please dont bring up the GM pickups of years ago - even the leftie hitmen at NBC news had to jury rig their 'investigative tests' to get thier pickups to burn so that was a non issue.)
So with a rep like Ford has, why in creation would they bring out an important product (Edge, mkx) with anything less than the best brakes money could buy? Even at an extra, what, $20 or even $100 per car? And why would they overrule the engineering standards of Volvo, the most respected name in auto safety in the world? Instead of learning from Volvo and applying those safety standards to ALL Ford vehicles? Instead they decide to dumb down everything to the barely adequate Ford "Standards" for safety? It's unbelieveable to me, but that's reality.
As for Firestone, apparently those explorer tires sucked big time and were defectively designed and/or manufactured. My 2001 LS came with Firestones and I wanted Ford to change to something else. They told me to jump in a lake (though they themselves changed tires in 2002). I took my chances and they were such good tires, that I replaced them with another set of Stones and now have my third set of Firestones (these called Wide Ovals to bring back old memories, kinda like Taurus:>) on my LS and never had an issue or a problem. I do give credit where it's due.
The story on pretty hair Fields, flying the corporate jet back n' forth to Florida, every weekend had me a bit upset. If he wants to fly he can catch a commercial plane at his own expense like the rest of us. The money he blew on the corporate jet could of saved 3-4 jobs at Ford for another year. :mad:
Well AM gave bonuses to most employees at Ford. He didn't hesitate to give himself a cool million for a bonus and the guy has done what for Ford lately ? Where is the Ford family ? I beginning to wonder if my Detroit Lions football team players will get a paycheck in 2008. :surprise:
AM, also is trying to broker a deal with Toyota, because he is obsessed with his Lexus. Toyota, management must of laughed at the proposal. They must of said you want us to help you out when you proven your incompetence by rebadging the five-hundred as a Taurus ? Is this guy for real ?
The ones who are going to pay dearly for these further mistakes will be the UAW employees and lower-middle management. Some of the up in comers have left Ford management for other oppertunity's because they could see the writing on the wall.
I agree displacedtexan. AM, with his new bonus has almost a $17 million dollar contract. You have to put the blame at the feet of the Ford family. Why didn't Ford go hire Jim Press, or some other top brass in the automotive industry that know's success ????? I'm sure one of the top dogs at GM, might of taken the job after watching how Wagoner, turned around GM. :confuse:
The guy could of taken a $1 million dollar salary for his first couple of years and paid himself lavishly later as Ford, returned to profitability. you have to blame the board. The only reason why AM, turned around Boeing was because they won a lot of government contracts which made AM, look like a superstar CEO.
heyjewel, it's nice you and I can find some common ground once again. dude, I read about all this in Motor Trend, and checked out some related story's on the net. I was shocked AM, was spending more time having fun instead of doing his job. They might as well fire AM, and let Matt Millen, run Ford, since he has such a great track record also. :P
The Delphi Quadrasteer system I agree was waaaaaay to expensive. Nissan/Infiniti, to the best of my knowledge is the only car company that makes 4-Wheel Steering. It's a shame in a way because I'd still like to see this technology become popular again. When combined with AWD, and a good suspension you probably have the foundation to achieve segment leading handling against the competition. The Dodge Stealth Twin-Turbo was one helluva of a car with it's precise 4WS/AWD handling. It's almost like cheating. :shades:
Rocky - you haven't been following all of the internal changes that AM has made in the short time he's been at the helm. He's taken the purse strings away from the board so that product funding and decisions can be made quickly. He's forced Ford of Europe, North America and Australia to stop operating as separate companies and start sharing resources and platforms, something no previous CEO was willing or able to do. Whether Ford actually executes is still an open question, but AM is forcing the changes that will allow them to be competitive. Without his changes they were doomed.
Not really, unless you were counting on a certain amount of understeer in the corners. 4ws basically reduces the turn radius at low speeds, and quickens the effective steering ratio at speed.
I could give a rats [non-permissible content removed] what internal changes AM makes. I look at the potential of a company's turnaround plan by what products it's bringing to the market. Cost cutting alone will not solve the company's problem only product. The results he's shown me so far are nothing but failing grades on his report card. He's wasted millions so far and allows the folks under him to blow money like flying the corporate jet for leisure back n' forth to Florida, or send his wife on vacations to Tahiti at the company's expense. However when it comes to contract time the UAW workers are going to be asked to shoulder the biggest burden while he allows a product like the Ford five-hundred to be rebadged as a Ford Taurus. I know he plans on bringing back other names like the Sable, and what not but taking a name off of one car and then applying it to another gives me little hope at FoMoCo. future. I guess these "great" judgements is why he had to pay himself that $1 million dollar bonus?
I think AM or ARM as some of y'all call him is a absolute overrated joke of a CEO. I do hope for the sake of the large workforce I'm proven wrong. Lots of my fellow union brothers and sisters are depending on this guy to save the day. I dislike jumping to conclusions early but I do not see the product neccessary to create this turnaround. :sick: Ford, has to many costly brands with no sound identity. The 2007' Volvo S80 is a nice car but it's only one at Volvo. The S60, S40, The Whole Jaguar, Aston Martin, Mercury, Lincoln, needs new products ASAP. I don't think time is on Fords side. They have some great Aussie and European platforms and products that would help Ford out but instead of utilizing one of those for a new Taurus, instead we get a five-hundred. :confuse: I think that one blunder proves my point on how far over his head AM or ARM is. :mad:
I've seen from the track tests just how neat of a feature 4WS can be. I can understand why it never became super popular explained to me as cost, weight, maintence. One would think by now a very high-tech, reliable, low maintaience system would evolved. It seems like common sense 4 wheels steering would make emergency transitions safer and combine that with AWD, you gottchya one hell of a deadly performance combo for racing as AWD gives ya grip. The early-mid 90's Dodge Stealths, Mitsubishi GTO's were awesome performance cars. They did have some turbo issues but todays turbo's are a lot more reliable and maintence free. I guess Infiniti, is the only company that advertises 4WS in a couple models but it's not available with AWD. I heard from others the Saabs have this system also and I forget who else if their is anyone else ?
I'd like to see GM, do a joint venture with someone to get a high-tech 4WS system. Maybe Ford and GM ? I'd also like to see GM, further develop their new "intelligent AWD" system. It sounds to me nothing more than the Halidex system from Volvo?
Good grief, Rocky - do you think the man can pull a brand new car out of his hat in 6 months? The Taurus decision was easy and was the right thing to do. Did you see the numbers? 500 and Montego sales were mediocre last year. The Taurus/Sable names have 80% recognition with the buying public while the 500/Montego only had something like 40%. So you have a car that nobody recognizes in a sales slump while a name with a 20 yr history and twice as much recognition sits on a shelf. That was a no-brainer. You can argue that Ford handled the Taurus/500 thing badly from the beginning and I can't argue too much there, but that was WAY before AM arrived. He's simply doing damage control and you don't turn around 10 years of neglect overnight.
If you understood how a corporation works and why bad decisions get made then you'd understand why AM is doing all the right things for Ford right now.
As I said before, it's totally up to the engineers to come through with the product, but at least now they have a fighting chance. Before AM they had none.
Agreed. The 500 was design by committee with interference (not help) from the board and Ford family. But abandoning the Taurus name in the process was sheer stupidity.
Either the 500 or the Fusion should have been named Taurus, but some marketing whiz thought all Fords should start with "F" (never mind that they had no problem with keeping the Fustang name, due to its recognition factor). So clearly it's not so much a rebadging as a correction of a total brain fart.
Too bad they couldn't have re-skinned the thing as well. I suspect they would have, had AM gotten there sooner. On Bill's watch, they decided the problem with the 500 (in addition to the engine) was the grill. Yeah, right, that's the only reason why people see it as boring and anonymous.
Actually, it takes about 5 seconds, and one turn around the corner at 20 mph to learn it...the rear wheels only turned fractions of an inch in order to make the car change lanes quicker or turn around a corner...you may be imagining the wheels turing like the back of a large fire truck, but it doe not do that...when you turn the steering wheel a few inches, like you were changing lanes, the rears turn the same way...when you keep turning the steering wheel, like all the way to round a corner, you cannot do it at high speed, and the wheels cross over from same direction to the opposite direction, so the rear of the car is making its own arc around the corner...you would not flip the car, and it was heaven to drive...
You would get used to it as fast as taking a car with no sway bars, with severe body roll on turns, and then drive it with hi-perf sway bars on the front and rear, allowing it to handle better...that would take one turn and 5 seconds to learn...4WS was the same...
Good grief, Rocky - do you think the man can pull a brand new car out of his hat in 6 months?
Good god is he an idiot ? Your ordinary everyday jerk like me can figure that out? You go get your next Taurus/Sable from Fords Australian unit or European division. Why is that so complicated to figure out is beyond me. :confuse:
GM, has replaced a lot of boring slow selling cars here in the U.S. by doing exactly that. Instead AM takes a large car like the Volvo S80 and throws a Taurus/Sable name on it. I have no doubt I will be proven right that the five-hundred/Taurus will be a flop and gain little sales. This car is just too big for what people expect in a Taurus.
Where, exactly, would a new Australian or European sedan fit in the lineup? What would it accomplish? You could argue that the Fusion should have kept the Taurus name since it's the one that competes with the Camcords just like the Taurus. But the Fusion is winning awards and selling nicely so no need to change anything there. The 500, OTOH, was a name nobody resonated with and sales were down dramatically.
AM has already told his direct reports that Europe and Australia will start sharing platforms with the U.S. to cut overall costs. So the next generation Fusion and Mondeo will be on the same platform as will the new Focus. This is the right way to do it. You can't just import a car designed for Europe or Australia without major work on emissions and crash safety. Besides, Ford has tried that before (Merkur ring a bell?).
You want immediate results and you're not going to get that. It will take at least 2 years for the changes to start paying off on new products. In the meantime all they can do is tread water and make small improvements.
Bringing an Australian platform here may be a good idea. Even so, Australian cars need a lot of re-engineering to come here. GM decided long before AM was ever at Ford that they were going to bring their platform here, re-labeled as the Pontiac G8...even though they had already tried the GTO here and it didn't work out.
The G8 will likely fit the market better, plus it is isn't the styling bore that a lot of Australian cars seem to be. But bottom line, even with all the longterm planning for this new Pontiac, IT IS STILL NOT HERE, and won't be until fall. How in heck do you expect AM to have beaten GM to the punch, when GM has been dancing as fast as it can for a longer time to get an Australian platform here that will sell, and it still isn't here yet??
I am the first to criticize Ford (because I am still so mad they squandered their lead and market share with such a long string of goofball decisions), but I suspect that the stopgap Taurus will be followed by a real Taurus replacement just a soon as possible. The Taurus can grow...that is hardly a problem, as so many nameplates have increased in size over time. Perhaps you are too young to remember when the Accord was a subcompact?
Ford has to live with some recent and imminent product changes that aren't the greatest, but still have taken gobs of investment and retooling: the MKZ, the "new" Navigator, the Expedition XL, the "new" 2008 Super Duty, the 2008 E vans, the tepid re-do of the Escape/Mariner, the Edge, the 2008 Taurus/Sable changes, not to mention the new models or revisions for their European brands. Within the next year, they will bring out the Fairlane, the Lincoln equivalent, the MKS, and a revised F150. Many of these changes were not bold and will not be good enough. But tons of resources were so committed even before AM got onboard. There are plenty of idiots at Ford to go around, but akirby is right in sayig that AM is not one of them.
Well spoken, gregg. Particularly the comments on the squandered market lead they had in the 80's. As to the bonuses that others here are so offended by - AM understands what it takes to hire and keep talent, and Ford needs talent if they're ever going to turn this ship around. If he fails, it ends AM's career as a fixer and CEO. If he succeeds, the Ford family survives on the fortunes of Great Grandpa, and America retains a family business with rich heritage - something personally, I think we still need. I say let AM do his thing, run the company. I'm watching with great interest. Meanwhile, I just bought an Escalade EXT rather than a Lincoln Mark LT. Not deliberately, just what was available with what I needed. But it's unusual for me. I've never had a GM truck before. :surprise:
Meanwhile, I just bought an Escalade EXT rather than a Lincoln Mark LT. Not deliberately, just what was available with what I needed.
:surprise: :surprise:
This doesn't replace the Lexus, does it?
I have hopes for AM. While I railed against the overall seeming corporate culture of senior management greed, I do agree that FoMoCo needs to retain talent. If bonuses for senior management does it, and if AM does indeed turn things around, I'll be tickled.
Time will give us answers. I predict in 2 years we will see only minor changes and the Ford/Mercury brands will still be abandoned. Lincoln, might have some fairly decent products and how many more times can Ford go to the "well" to have another variation of the Mustang. What's next a Mustang Mach or R ???? :P
Has to do what GM is doing with Cadillac.... If Ford gives Lincoln good products, people will come. I recall Lincoln was the number #1 selling luxury brand in the US as recent as 2000?
Comments
In all fairness, we won't see the results of Mr. Mulally's work for a few years. Right now he is cleaning house and desperately trying to rework the corporate structure. From the insiders' perspective, it is entirely possible that he is doing a good job, changing procedures and processes that we will never see. The end result - we hope - will be better products.
Mediocre and lackluster products usually reflect internal problems. Mr. Mulally is trying to correct this - the decision by the corporation to reduce the power of Finance over new product programs will be a big help for Mr. Mulally and Mark Fields - and the results won't be seen for a few more years.
Mulally was an idiot to leave Boeing. Today they came out ahead again against Airbus with UPS and Fed Ex. There is no way AM is going to do with Ford a turnaround like Boeing. After all, Boeing has always built quality products. For Ford, that would be a brand new dance. I'll bet if you asked the average American - would you feel safer flying 6000 miles in a 10 year old Boeing or driving 60 miles in a 10 year old Taurus, they'd pick the plane 90% of the time.
Sorry, that's the way I see it.
Course it does bring up a point that relates to the rolling explorers using Firestones - the fact that the tires were used because of nepotism, not quality.
But when you're on the ground in the Taurus and something happens, there you are.
Oh, and speaking of flying, soon those with enough money to purchase a private or corporate plane will be able to buy one made by Honda. Can u imagine an extension of my argument to a plane made by Honda vs a plane made by Ford? :confuse: :sick: Ho ho ho. Which would YOU buy? Think about THAT before your next car purchase.
Here's the link if you think you hjave the stomach to read it:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070306/AUTO01/703060370/1148- -
This is PRECISELY why I think Ford is doomed. Because even with all these dead people who can be traced directly to Fords' doorstep, they STILL argue against adopting roof strength standards of their own subsidiary, Volvo, and they STILL market vehicles that could be desrcribed as 'unsafe to stop at any speed' - namely the Edge and mkx with poor brakes.
They apparently will NEVER learn. Must be in their blood, traceable back to the original bad tires 100 years ago, eh?
Heck, I'll take a 20 year-old Buick over either a new or 10 year-old Ford or Toyota.
Yeah, I guess Ford did used to build planes. THey also used to build tanks (some for the [non-permissible content removed] come to think of it.)
But that was then and this is now.
I just realized that my '95 Ford Econoline has that dreaded cruise control switch. Guess it's time for another trip to the Ford dealer.
The first is that they are not responsible for those mistakes and disasters that you mentioned. (Mr. Mulally's outsider status is an advantage here.)
The second is desperation.
If this turnaround doesn't work, Ford either goes bankrupt, or ends up in the hands of its creditors, with its various components bought by other companies.
Desperation can be a very good enabler for a corporation.
Lemme have a crack at 'em. I could destroy them both within a month ditch-hopping and cruising the back roads with a set of 24s and some thumpers in the trunk
you must admit that Airbus really "helped" the situation with their delays, delays, delays mostly due to the computer systems, harnesses, network complexity and the like.
So in a sense, Boeing didn't just earn the business, it was really handed to them. Not saying that they didn't/don't make quality parts and planes, but it's not like the UPS/Fedex business was blood, sweat and tears hard-earned.
Not everything Ford makes has been great. Yet - my cousin just left my home in Vegas today, for Salt Lake City, in his 00 Taurus with 200,000 miles on it, and no major repairs yet in the car's history. I shook my head, but he drives this car all over the country with confidence, and has never been stranded. He usually gets 300,000 miles out of each Taurus, he's had 3 so far. To him, they are the best value on the planet. I tried to talk him into a Camry this year - his response; "Why spend the extra $5,000?" I have a hard time arguing with him. Personally, I'd buy the Camry.
Mulally conquered Boeing. Nowhere to go there now but down. Ford is a new challenge, and a huge one. It's a risk, but if he can do it, it's the achievement of the century. IF not, he retires with a few hundred million, in Western Samoa or someplace where nobody knows he blew up.
My 88 Legend lasted until 98 when I traded it for a 98 Regal, reminding me once again that GM can't make a car to save its rear end...the Legend had 165K when I kissed it goodbye...
I now have a Ford and Dodge, but I still yearn for an import...I just thought it was time to try American again...while I do not regret it, I just do not seem impressed by the product, like I was when I sat in my Hondas...just my opinion, that's all...I will prob buy USA again, but I really wish they would design something that knocks my socks off, like my 4 wheel steering Prelude did when I sat in it...
And then killed it.
we all know they happened, and that does suck, but i think it was the situation was hyped.
i had on firestones at least 4 different vehicles. never had a problem. my inlaws had at least 3 or 4 pintos/bobcats.
none of them ever blew up.
people believe what they want to. how much money did it cost mcdonalds because they made a hot cup of coffee?
I do think Ford may have gotten a raw deal with the Explorer-Firestone clap trap, but they did themselves in by cutting product development to try to cover the costs it incurred. That company has see-sawed throughout its history with innovative products followed by neglect, and amnesia for the fact they are in the business of creating and moving products.
The 2001 Sport Trac (which had Firestones) was a good example. A decent design, which was saddled with one rather anemic engine. They never increased the hp or did much of anything with what was at first a relatively popular niche model. They instead allowed it to die off by the 2006 model year, and then belatedly updated it a couple of Explorer generations, while managing to keep the same exact shape and style (the old body with a new grill and pickup box). Consequently, I never saw a reason to buy another Sport Trac. Not exactly the way to take the 4 door pickup world by storm, but that is what Ford often does.
Lincoln needs the MKS now. It needs more differentiated products from the corresponding Fords, at the very least unique Lincoln styling. The dumb Marky letters should go, and the Marky R (Murky Er or Merkur or whatever it is called) or something close needs to be in the pipeline.
I see they are still throwing lots of money (but perhaps still too little to actually turn anything around) at Jaguar. Whether the new F sedan to replace the S will become a volume seller is anyone's guess. And they are putting money into cosmetic changes to the boring looking XJ until they belatedly bring out the replacement for the 2010 model year. 2010???? It's a total dud at sales. Waiting that long for the new one is a stupid business decision.
But in my opinion, Ford could be making a lot more $$ by putting Jaguar out to pasture, and putting those resources into Lincoln. lincoln was a volume seller, and models could be prepared for export. Or Jaguar could be the new Ford Aston Martin...forget about volume.
In the Prelude it was a $1200 option, if memory serves, and it was worth every penny, making turns on a dime, parallel parking was a breeze...
Leave it to GM to take "old" technology and charge $5000 for the option, Liberty diesel engine was $5000 option if what I read was correct...
I certainly believe they should make money, but how many people paid an extra 5 grand for an option that probably barely cost a grand, if that???...another $1200, maybe, but 5 thousand dollars???...and they wonder why folks like japanese products???
Look, my point here is a simple one- do u see anyone getting immolated in Toyotas because of gas tanks that are positioned such that they tend to explode on rear impact? Or cruise control switches that happen to catch fire at the most inopportune moment? Has GM been convicted by a jury of poor design and using inferior tires leading to lots and lots of casualties? No no and no. Only Ford has gone down these roads. (Please dont bring up the GM pickups of years ago - even the leftie hitmen at NBC news had to jury rig their 'investigative tests' to get thier pickups to burn so that was a non issue.)
So with a rep like Ford has, why in creation would they bring out an important product (Edge, mkx) with anything less than the best brakes money could buy? Even at an extra, what, $20 or even $100 per car? And why would they overrule the engineering standards of Volvo, the most respected name in auto safety in the world? Instead of learning from Volvo and applying those safety standards to ALL Ford vehicles? Instead they decide to dumb down everything to the barely adequate Ford "Standards" for safety? It's unbelieveable to me, but that's reality.
As for Firestone, apparently those explorer tires sucked big time and were defectively designed and/or manufactured. My 2001 LS came with Firestones and I wanted Ford to change to something else. They told me to jump in a lake (though they themselves changed tires in 2002). I took my chances and they were such good tires, that I replaced them with another set of Stones and now have my third set of Firestones (these called Wide Ovals to bring back old memories, kinda like Taurus:>) on my LS and never had an issue or a problem. I do give credit where it's due.
The story on pretty hair Fields, flying the corporate jet back n' forth to Florida, every weekend had me a bit upset. If he wants to fly he can catch a commercial plane at his own expense like the rest of us. The money he blew on the corporate jet could of saved 3-4 jobs at Ford for another year. :mad:
Rocky
AM, also is trying to broker a deal with Toyota, because he is obsessed with his Lexus. Toyota, management must of laughed at the proposal. They must of said you want us to help you out when you proven your incompetence by rebadging the five-hundred as a Taurus ? Is this guy for real ?
The ones who are going to pay dearly for these further mistakes will be the UAW employees and lower-middle management. Some of the up in comers have left Ford management for other oppertunity's because they could see the writing on the wall.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Well I was thinking the same thing but since you went on the record I will gladly back your claim.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
There were many other business factors involved at Boeing besides the government contracts that ARM was skillful in dealing with while he was there.
Most union mentality thinkers are used to instant gratification and ARM will develop their patience while traversing the high road to success.
When the shareholders hang in there, he is doing very well.
I could give a rats [non-permissible content removed] what internal changes AM makes. I look at the potential of a company's turnaround plan by what products it's bringing to the market. Cost cutting alone will not solve the company's problem only product.
The results he's shown me so far are nothing but failing grades on his report card. He's wasted millions so far and allows the folks under him to blow money like flying the corporate jet for leisure back n' forth to Florida, or send his wife on vacations to Tahiti at the company's expense. However when it comes to contract time the UAW workers are going to be asked to shoulder the biggest burden while he allows a product like the Ford five-hundred to be rebadged as a Ford Taurus. I know he plans on bringing back other names like the Sable, and what not but taking a name off of one car and then applying it to another gives me little hope at FoMoCo. future. I guess these "great" judgements is why he had to pay himself that $1 million dollar bonus?
I think AM or ARM as some of y'all call him is a absolute overrated joke of a CEO. I do hope for the sake of the large workforce I'm proven wrong. Lots of my fellow union brothers and sisters are depending on this guy to save the day. I dislike jumping to conclusions early but I do not see the product neccessary to create this turnaround. :sick: Ford, has to many costly brands with no sound identity. The 2007' Volvo S80 is a nice car but it's only one at Volvo. The S60, S40, The Whole Jaguar, Aston Martin, Mercury, Lincoln, needs new products ASAP. I don't think time is on Fords side. They have some great Aussie and European platforms and products that would help Ford out but instead of utilizing one of those for a new Taurus, instead we get a five-hundred. :confuse: I think that one blunder proves my point on how far over his head AM or ARM is. :mad:
Rocky
I've seen from the track tests just how neat of a feature 4WS can be. I can understand why it never became super popular explained to me as cost, weight, maintence. One would think by now a very high-tech, reliable, low maintaience system would evolved. It seems like common sense 4 wheels steering would make emergency transitions safer and combine that with AWD, you gottchya one hell of a deadly performance combo for racing as AWD gives ya grip. The early-mid 90's Dodge Stealths, Mitsubishi GTO's were awesome performance cars. They did have some turbo issues but todays turbo's are a lot more reliable and maintence free. I guess Infiniti, is the only company that advertises 4WS in a couple models but it's not available with AWD. I heard from others the Saabs have this system also and I forget who else if their is anyone else ?
I'd like to see GM, do a joint venture with someone to get a high-tech 4WS system. Maybe Ford and GM ? I'd also like to see GM, further develop their new "intelligent AWD" system. It sounds to me nothing more than the Halidex system from Volvo?
Rocky
If you understood how a corporation works and why bad decisions get made then you'd understand why AM is doing all the right things for Ford right now.
As I said before, it's totally up to the engineers to come through with the product, but at least now they have a fighting chance. Before AM they had none.
Either the 500 or the Fusion should have been named Taurus, but some marketing whiz thought all Fords should start with "F" (never mind that they had no problem with keeping the Fustang name, due to its recognition factor). So clearly it's not so much a rebadging as a correction of a total brain fart.
Too bad they couldn't have re-skinned the thing as well. I suspect they would have, had AM gotten there sooner. On Bill's watch, they decided the problem with the 500 (in addition to the engine) was the grill. Yeah, right, that's the only reason why people see it as boring and anonymous.
You would get used to it as fast as taking a car with no sway bars, with severe body roll on turns, and then drive it with hi-perf sway bars on the front and rear, allowing it to handle better...that would take one turn and 5 seconds to learn...4WS was the same...
Good god is he an idiot ? Your ordinary everyday jerk like me can figure that out? You go get your next Taurus/Sable from Fords Australian unit or European division. Why is that so complicated to figure out is beyond me. :confuse:
GM, has replaced a lot of boring slow selling cars here in the U.S. by doing exactly that. Instead AM takes a large car like the Volvo S80 and throws a Taurus/Sable name on it. I have no doubt I will be proven right that the five-hundred/Taurus will be a flop and gain little sales. This car is just too big for what people expect in a Taurus.
Rocky
AM has already told his direct reports that Europe and Australia will start sharing platforms with the U.S. to cut overall costs. So the next generation Fusion and Mondeo will be on the same platform as will the new Focus. This is the right way to do it. You can't just import a car designed for Europe or Australia without major work on emissions and crash safety. Besides, Ford has tried that before (Merkur ring a bell?).
You want immediate results and you're not going to get that. It will take at least 2 years for the changes to start paying off on new products. In the meantime all they can do is tread water and make small improvements.
Bringing an Australian platform here may be a good idea. Even so, Australian cars need a lot of re-engineering to come here. GM decided long before AM was ever at Ford that they were going to bring their platform here, re-labeled as the Pontiac G8...even though they had already tried the GTO here and it didn't work out.
The G8 will likely fit the market better, plus it is isn't the styling bore that a lot of Australian cars seem to be. But bottom line, even with all the longterm planning for this new Pontiac, IT IS STILL NOT HERE, and won't be until fall. How in heck do you expect AM to have beaten GM to the punch, when GM has been dancing as fast as it can for a longer time to get an Australian platform here that will sell, and it still isn't here yet??
I am the first to criticize Ford (because I am still so mad they squandered their lead and market share with such a long string of goofball decisions), but I suspect that the stopgap Taurus will be followed by a real Taurus replacement just a soon as possible. The Taurus can grow...that is hardly a problem, as so many nameplates have increased in size over time. Perhaps you are too young to remember when the Accord was a subcompact?
Ford has to live with some recent and imminent product changes that aren't the greatest, but still have taken gobs of investment and retooling: the MKZ, the "new" Navigator, the Expedition XL, the "new" 2008 Super Duty, the 2008 E vans, the tepid re-do of the Escape/Mariner, the Edge, the 2008 Taurus/Sable changes, not to mention the new models or revisions for their European brands. Within the next year, they will bring out the Fairlane, the Lincoln equivalent, the MKS, and a revised F150. Many of these changes were not bold and will not be good enough. But tons of resources were so committed even before AM got onboard. There are plenty of idiots at Ford to go around, but akirby is right in sayig that AM is not one of them.
:surprise: :surprise:
This doesn't replace the Lexus, does it?
I have hopes for AM. While I railed against the overall seeming corporate culture of senior management greed, I do agree that FoMoCo needs to retain talent. If bonuses for senior management does it, and if AM does indeed turn things around, I'll be tickled.
Rocky