What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ford Motor Company (1 Viewer)

I guess Toyota employees better not show up at any resorts wearing nametags either.
Maybe you should stop taking guesses. As long as Toyota is not asking for money in any shape from the government (Ford still did ask for a credit line to tap in the future if needed) then Toyota can do whatever it wants in sending employees to resorts and have no fear of PR issues.

Banks or American car makers on the other hand, ought to think through these type of things.
To be clear, Toyota is not taking money from the United States government.
And hence, it is ok for them to do whatever they want when taking into consideration the PR ramifications here in the states. As long as US tax money is going to help American car companies then they need to be good stewards of that money or face the consequences. And to be clear, being a good steward of the money also means taking into consideration the appearances of what is happening with the money. If American car companies can not understand that then it tells us a whole lot about the disconnect that they have with the American consumer.
I agree with you that appearance is everything in these cases. I think companies were already supposed to be good stewards of their money for their stockholders, employees, and board of directors. If I find out Starbucks drops 200K on lapdances, I'm not going to be happy.Many of the domestic automakers have support from their government. Renault is owned by the French government, and they also own 40+% of Nissan. Germany, Japan, and Sweden support their manufacturers. Japan has enjoyed favorable trade terms for years. Their citizens don't look down on government investment in these companies.

In theory, I'm against big government and bailouts. The cluster of TARP so far is maddening. The lack of a small government candidate in the last election is maddening. The decline of manufacturing in the United States and the seeming indifference of our citizens is maddening. Hopefully the credit markets thaw and some consumer confidence finds its way back into the economy.
I am not one to get excited about government bailouts like TARP but I will say that is has been successful in stopping the domino effect of bank failures- or helped facilitate mergers that very well could have stopped a failure (think National City being bought by PNC). I think the adminstration of the money is obviously not as good as it could be but what do you expect when you ask government to use money?! Yes, companies should be good stewards of money but corporate governance in America is a joke and any shareholder that is not a huge institutional fund really has no voice in it. Taxpayers ought to hold to standard not only the companies that money is given to but the politicians that give it, if the money is not spent well or even if they fail to act accordingly to make it appear it is. AIG is obviously the best example of failure here, not once but twice.

 
Ford doesn't need a bail out. True They aren't even close to being in the situation that GM and Chrysler are in. True But if the fed is going to be handing out money to GM and Chrysler, Ford ain't just gonna stand by and watch it's competition get free money from the fed while they get none. False
Ford would only need it if the fed gave it to GM and Chrysler, because then Ford's competion would have an advantage over Ford. The Fed can't give it to two without screwing over the one. It's either all three or none. Totally False
You don't think giving GM/Chrysler a bailout would be unfair to Ford?
Ford wants them to get the bailout.
Now that you mention it, if I were Ford, I'd want them to get the bailout too. But not for the reasons the big 3 apologists would suggest.
What does that even mean?
It means I'd want them to get the bailout too. But not for the reasons the big 3 apologists would suggest.
I don't quite get this either.I think Ford wanted to see GM and Chrysler get the bailout to help support the overall industry. A BK could disrupt the supply chain which hurts all automakers.

Fringe benefits for Ford is a renegotiated UAW contract as the UAW believes in pattern bargaining. Any concessions granted by the UAW to Chrysler or GM would also be granted to Ford. The PR of not needing a bailout is also a positive.

I don't know exactly what a Big 3 apologist is, so I don't know if I suggested the right things.

 
Ford doesn't need a bail out. True They aren't even close to being in the situation that GM and Chrysler are in. True But if the fed is going to be handing out money to GM and Chrysler, Ford ain't just gonna stand by and watch it's competition get free money from the fed while they get none. False
Ford would only need it if the fed gave it to GM and Chrysler, because then Ford's competion would have an advantage over Ford. The Fed can't give it to two without screwing over the one. It's either all three or none. Totally False
You don't think giving GM/Chrysler a bailout would be unfair to Ford?
Ford wants them to get the bailout.
Now that you mention it, if I were Ford, I'd want them to get the bailout too. But not for the reasons the big 3 apologists would suggest.
What does that even mean?
It means I'd want them to get the bailout too. But not for the reasons the big 3 apologists would suggest.
I don't quite get this either.I think Ford wanted to see GM and Chrysler get the bailout to help support the overall industry. A BK could disrupt the supply chain which hurts all automakers.

Fringe benefits for Ford is a renegotiated UAW contract as the UAW believes in pattern bargaining. Any concessions granted by the UAW to Chrysler or GM would also be granted to Ford. The PR of not needing a bailout is also a positive.

I don't know exactly what a Big 3 apologist is, so I don't know if I suggested the right things.
A Big 3 apologist is anybody from Detroit, anybody that sees the benefit of the Big 3 surviving, or anybody that disagrees with KnowledgeReignsSupreme.
 
Ford Benefits as GM, Chrysler Stumble

Hoping February makes the 5th month in a row that Ford picks up market share.

In January, 45% of Ford buyers turned in cars or trucks of other manufacturers, up from 38% in August, according to Edmunds.com, an auto-shopping Web site. Meantime, the "conquest rate" for GM's Chevrolet was 43% last month, down from 49% in August, and for the Chrysler brand, the conquest rate was 60% last month, down from 67% in August, according to Edmunds.
 
Consumer Reports Rates Ford

Ford

Brands

Ford, Lincoln, Mercury

Ford has made great strides in reliability, with some models now rivaling the best from the Japanese automakers. Some newer models, such as the Ford Flex, have also done well in our testing and are very competitive in their categories. But many others are middle-of-the-road, unexciting also-rans. And some powertrains and interiors lack the refinement of class leaders.

What's right

Reliability, interior room, access, crash-test results

Almost all of Ford's models are now average or better in reliability. The Ford Fusion, Lincoln MKZ, and Mercury Milan rank among the most trouble-free models in our reliability survey.

Several mainstream sedans, such as the Ford Taurus, Fusion, MKZ, Mercury Sable, and Milan, have performed well in our road tests.

The new seven-passenger Flex SUV combines attention-getting styling with a flexible, roomy interior, making it a very nice family vehicle.

Moreover, the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid provided the best fuel economy—26 mpg overall—of any SUV we've tested.

Ford's innovative Sync system helps reduce driver distraction by using voice recognition to let drivers make hands-free telephone calls and control audio system functions.

What's wrong

Fuel economy, engine noise, fit and finish

Some models, such as the Ford Escape and Focus, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis and Mariner, have gone without major changes for many years. And recent updates haven't been enough to keep them competitive with the best in their classes.

Some engines, including the 3.0-, 3.5-, and 3.7-liter V6s used in many models, are noisier and less refined than those offered by the best automakers.

Looking ahead

Ford needs to maintain its high level of reliability while upgrading its older models, especially in the areas of fuel economy, refinement, and interior quality.

Freshened Fusion and Milan sedans, due this spring, are promising signs. They're expected to have improved interior fit and finish. And new hybrid versions of both models should provide good fuel economy.

Improved engine technology, including direct fuel injection and turbocharging, should give smaller, more efficient engines the power of larger ones while retaining good fuel economy.

And in the next few years, Ford plans to bring to the U.S. some of its competitive, nicely finished, small European models, such as the Fiesta and the new Focus.

 
And in the next few years, Ford plans to bring to the U.S. some of its competitive, nicely finished, small European models, such as the Fiesta and the new Focus.
Or in other words, the Focus they should have been building here since Day 1 of its release instead of investing cash in reheating the old one.
 
Ford Surges into 2010

2009 was brutal, but Ford moved it's stock price form under $1.50 to $11/share. They picked up market share and have a great product line set for 2010. I'm hoping this ride continues.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ford Posts First Full-Year Profit Since 2005

DETROIT—Ford Motor Co. swung to its first annual profit since 2005, helping the auto maker further distance itself from its troubled U.S. rivals while stoking consumer buzz about the company and its vehicles.

Net income for the fourth-quarter was $868 million, or 25 cents a share compared with a loss of $5.98 billion, or $2.51 a share. Excluding items, the company reported a 43-cent earnings-per-share profit, exceeding the Thomson Reuters analyst estimate of 26 cents a share. The auto maker's fourth-quarter revenue was $35.4 billion.

Ford's full-year 2009 profit was $2.7 billion, compared with a loss of $14.7 billion the previous year. Revenue for the full-year revenue was $118.3 billion.

...

 
I want to buy a Ford. I like them. But their warranty is just total crap, just like all other American manufacturers out there.

How can I justify buying a new car with only a 3 year / 36,000 mile warranty when a Kia/Hyundai comes with a 10 year / 100,000 mile one?

That is really the only thing holding me back at this point - if they could just compete on that issue, then it would be a no-brainer for me.

 
I want to buy a Ford. I like them. But their warranty is just total crap, just like all other American manufacturers out there.

How can I justify buying a new car with only a 3 year / 36,000 mile warranty when a Kia/Hyundai comes with a 10 year / 100,000 mile one?

That is really the only thing holding me back at this point - if they could just compete on that issue, then it would be a no-brainer for me.
I can understand that part, but how important is a warranty if it's a quality vehicle? We bought a brand new Suburban in 2005 and it came with the typical 3/36 warranty. We've driven it for over 7 years and put on over 129,000 miles. Here is a complete list of all the money we've put into it:Fuel

Tires

Windshield wipers

Oil changes/scheduled maintenance

Windshield rock chip repair

New brake pads

Burned out brake/marker bulbs

Basically I could have had a 0/0 warranty and my out of pocket costs would be the same. Warranties are by no means useless, but IMO they tend to be highly overvalued. Most high dollar repairs/manufacturer's defects will manifest themselves well before the 3 years / 36,000 expires. Maybe I got lucky.

According to JD Power & Associates in 2012 Lincoln/Ford is the #7/8th best ranked company in overall vehicle dependability. You can find Kia and Hyundai further down the list.

CARS

JD Power & Associates 2012 1st Ranked Midsize Car: Ford Fusion

JD Power & Associates 2012 3rd Ranked Large Car: Ford Taurus

JD Power & Associates 2012 1st (tie) Ranked Entry Premium Car: Lincoln MKZ

TRUCKS

JD Power & Associates 2012 1st (tie) Ranked Midsize Crossover/SUV: Ford Explorer

JD Power & Associates 2012 2nd Ranked Midsize Premium Crossover/SUV: Lincoln MKX

JD Power & Associates 2012 2nd Ranked Midsize Pickup: Ford Ranger

Edited to add: Man that "not minivan" minivan is hideous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I want to buy a Ford. I like them. But their warranty is just total crap, just like all other American manufacturers out there.How can I justify buying a new car with only a 3 year / 36,000 mile warranty when a Kia/Hyundai comes with a 10 year / 100,000 mile one?That is really the only thing holding me back at this point - if they could just compete on that issue, then it would be a no-brainer for me.
Big issue with me too. Plus, is the resale value still #### (crap) on American cars?
 
I want to buy a Ford. I like them. But their warranty is just total crap, just like all other American manufacturers out there.How can I justify buying a new car with only a 3 year / 36,000 mile warranty when a Kia/Hyundai comes with a 10 year / 100,000 mile one?That is really the only thing holding me back at this point - if they could just compete on that issue, then it would be a no-brainer for me.
Big issue with me too. Plus, is the resale value still #### (crap) on American cars?
Resale is improving. Ford revamped their Certified Pre-Owned program in February 2012. CPO sales increased 40% YOY and should see another 20%+ increase next year. Dealers are paying more for cars that they can certify. For the most part, everything depends on the model. I have a 2011 Explorer that will turn 2 in February. I could sell it for about $2K less than I paid for it or trade it in for about $4K less.
 
I want to buy a Ford. I like them. But their warranty is just total crap, just like all other American manufacturers out there.

How can I justify buying a new car with only a 3 year / 36,000 mile warranty when a Kia/Hyundai comes with a 10 year / 100,000 mile one?

That is really the only thing holding me back at this point - if they could just compete on that issue, then it would be a no-brainer for me.
Here is a good chart from the Hyundai website comparing some warranties. They don't include the Ford warranties on there and I would totally agree that the Hyundai warranty is by far the best, but if you think the American manufacturer warranties are total crap, then you must think the Toyota/Honda/Nissan warranties are total crap too.
 
I don't get it, who cares about resell value on a car you are buying? It only make sense to buy a car if you're going to drive it long term, 10+ years. If you want to drive a shiny new car the rest of your life, lease.

 
Well they were doing well. I liked the look of the Fusion and the Taurus.

But...

This might be the ugliest vehicle I have EVER seen.

:yucky: :X
I don't think I'll be able to sell my wife on this one.
Somewhere a Pontiac Aztek is pointing and laughing. It looks pissed off or like it just ate a bad clam or lit the filter or something. Must be a mirror around there somewhere. W/r/t Ford, I tried out the new Fusion the other day. Really liked the outside, but WTF is the deal with the brick wall in between the seats? No storage, just a huge vast center console for no good reason. Ford comes so close to making a really likeable product, but there's always interior details (check out the Sealy Beautyrest thick seats on the Focus) that leave me scratching my head.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top