Jobu37

Seven Car Companies Hurt Most by Recession

Toyota's share was falling long before the economic crisis hit so it may not be a given that it will bounce back quite as quickly as you appear to be implying. Toyota can no longer charge premium prices due to their perceived quality superiority anymore. Reality is starting to settle into the market and consumers are beginning to realize that they can buy higher quality, better looking vehicles from other manufacturers such as Ford. I realize that there will always be blind loyalists but it is safe to say that the number of blind loyalists has and will continue to diminish. Blind loyalty aside, what consumer in his right mind would choose a Camry over a Ford Fusion when the Fusion has beaten the Camry, and all others, in quality surveys for the past three years, and it also gets better fuel mileage, has better handling characteristics, and costs $1,000 or more less. And don't kid yourself about Toyota holding the line on rebates, while they still have some of the lowest rebates around they have increased by a larger percentage than most. Only Kia, Hyundai, Chrysler, Nissan and GM have been more aggressive with rebates. Check the rental lots, you will find alot more Toyotas amongst the Kias and Hyundais so even their current sales are inflated compared to their historical retail demand.

Optimistic About Ford

You ask but "what do I know?" The short answer is "not very much".

Ford was carrying around 40 days worth of inventory at the end of May. There are already shortages of Expeditions, Fusions and Mustangs. Once the "Cash for Clunkers" stimulus kicks in the Focus inventories will tighten up as well. Ford is just being proactive in a good way not unlike their proactive approach to working inventories down that got them to the enviable position they are in now. If they didn't increase production to get closer to the preferred 60 days of inventory they wouldn't have anything to sell. The increase in production also includes higher prodcution for the rollout of the all new Taurus which should improve on the sales rate the current version has.


On Jun 30 10:50 PM smfranke wrote:

> "Pipas assured a revival of consumer confidence and stated that the
> worst is over for both auto sales and the economy."
>
> The confidence part of that statement doesn't jibe with what came
> out today.
>
> He should be correct on the June sales numbers though. (How hard
> is it to get your dealers to report sales to you?)
>
> I'm assuming that most people who have jobs already have cars. In
> this economy I don't think people will be buying new cars unless
> really needed. Fear of job loss should put a damper on purchases.
>
>
> Unemployed people probably can't buy cars even if they want to.<br/>
>
> I really don't think it's in Ford's best interests to be increasing
> production just yet. I'm not an auto industry professional, so what
> do I know?
>
> (disclosure... I drive a 2008 Taurus but I like Japanese cars better.)

Why I'd Avoid Toyota, The #1 Automaker in the U.S.

Japanese - the importation process in Japan adds many levels of cost to any product imported. So a 25K Chevy ends up costing closer to 40K. Historically , the government has kept the Yen artificially weak in comparison to the all currencies but especially the dollar. Recent times have allowed for the Yen to start moving closer to the natural exchange rate but it took a global semi-depression to do so. In recent months the Japanese central bank has been able to get it back up near 100 Y per $. All Japanese manufacturers count on the weak Yen to overcome their high labor costs and make their products competitive.
China - requires an auto manufacturer to team up with a Chinese firm before you get any real access to the market. Vehicles directly imported are hit with their version of a VAT. They also manipulate the exchange rate against the dollar.
Korea - essentially has a "Non-Korean tax". Even if you build a plant in Korea but are not a Korean based company your product is treated as if it is imported. Obama is supposedly addressing this in the current negotiations taking place on a new "free" trade agreement. Korea has essentially said that if you take away our auto tax we will ban U.S. beef. So lobbyists for the beef industry will derail any headway being made on free auto trade from the U.S. to Korea.
Mexico - the majority of their purchases are from Mexican plants owned by American, German, and Japanese auto manufacturers.


On Jun 22 05:50 PM 303820 wrote:

> Buddhabill...since according to you the auto industry is a global
> affair...can you tell me how many made in America cars and trucks
> the Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Europeans and Mexicans buy?

Why Ford Will Make It

Laser,

You point out the obvious very well. The product introductions that Ford has coming this year could very well be game changers. The Fusion (hitting lots now) in both hybrid and conventional form will be the new benchmark for all mid-size sedans. It is best in class in every matrix one can judge a car. Except for one, interior room. And for those that need the space the Taurus (August) which will also be the new benchmark for full-size sedans should fill their needs very well.

A year from now the Fiesta will be hitting the market and if gas has any sort of a runup between now and then it could very well be a 10K per month seller along with the new Focus that will once again be best in class, if it is not already.

I certainly don't view Ford a buy right now due to the upcoming dilution that will take place with the conversion of debt into stock but the bottom will be shortly after the conversion takes place and the appreciation in value will start there and once Chrysler is put to sleep the U.S. auto market will become much more profitable for everyone. Especially the strongest player, Ford.


On Mar 02 11:28 AM Laser wrote:

> I've read many of the comments and would like to respond thus:<br/>
>
> A bad experience at ONE dealership is not a reason to trash a brand.
> I've owned Ford products exclusively since 1980 and found that not
> all Ford dealerships are created equal. When I had a Ford product
> that seemed to be a lemon at one Ford dealership, I took it to a
> second one that fixed the reoccurring problem(s) once and for all.
> I wouldn't think of switching brands based upon one dealership's
> treatment of me.
>
> Second, I have read the nose-out-of-joint GM executive (negotiated
> six-speed transmission deal) and have this to offer him ... You forgot
> to mention the detail that the six-speed transmission was already
> in development at GM when Ford entered the equation and that both
> sides are appreciative for each other's contributions into this system.
> You also left out the detail that the reason Ford chose to locate
> its controllers on the outside was to give a better ability to tune
> the transmission for shifting quality. GM may have done theirs for
> "costs" but Ford did theirs for the experience of the consumer driving.
> I appreciate your contribution to the project but you obviously have
> a bias that is clear in your tone and comments. Any GM executive
> has no reason to have such a tone since your lunch is being handed
> to you every day on the sales floor.
>
> Third, much has been discussed about Ford's cash burn - it is true
> that Ford has a high cash burn rate but the difference is they are
> using the money to develop new products, to retrofit truck plants,
> and to accelerate products to market. GM is RETRENCHING and still
> burning excessive cash merely standing still.
>
> Fourth, GM has been unable and unwilling to offload underperforming
> brands. Plus GM paid $2 billion to get out of the deal with Fiat
> earlier in this century and paid $500 million to end the American
> Axle strike that GM allowed to fester. Furthermore, GM rushed the
> GMT-900 truck program to market and offered a product that was not
> innovative, looked much like the prior version, and was truly little
> changed. The most striking feature of this truck was the new song
> used to sell it - interestingly, GM took almost three years to be
> able to figure out a competitive advantage the truck had over the
> competition and to sell it to the public in its ads. By that time,
> Ford matched GM's fuel economy advantage.
>
> GM has had the same manager in charge of the company for eight years
> and the same "product czar" for six - a man who personally took credit
> for developing the moribund Buick LaCrosse and Lucerne in his blog;
> he also oversaw the development of the Pontiac G6 which couldn't
> be brought to market with a full model line in its first year. With
> those two gentlemen having been in their offices over six years,
> GM has offered stale and underperforming products. These are the
> two men who clung to moribund brands, didn't forsee the change in
> market and economy (like Mulally did with the financing deal while
> credit markets were still lending), etc.
>
> In the end, the reason Ford will more likely survive than GM is because
> its managers "get it" and have been willing to change since 2006.
> GM's management is still partying like its 1999 and unwilling to
> accept the situation that they themselves created.
>
> The seminal article here was very weak - it failed to even offer
> a glimpse at the main reason Ford will "make it" - PRODUCT - 2010-2012
> Ford products will give every Toyota and Honda model direct competition
> on quality, fuel economy, and price. I know Honda and Toyota owners
> will smirk, but the facts will bear this out. Already the quality
> gap has disappeared and price certainly has as well.

Why Ford Will Make It

The marketplace appears to view Ford's software applications on the jointly developed 6-speed transmission to be far superior to the approach that GM took. Read any review and you will find glowing remarks regarding the smooth shifts in the Ford application while reviews of GM's applications have been criticized for the lack of refinement. Maybe Ford should buy more of GM's blueprints and improve upon them.

It is obvious that you are a GM fan and will go out of your way to paint them in some kind of positive light. But perhaps you need a dose of reality. Yes Ford has more total debt on their balance sheet but $65 billion of that is offset by receivables due to Ford Motor Credit. In case you haven't heard, GM sold off a majority stake in GMAC so the debt associated with the financing of vehicles is not included in the total debt number for them, nor are the receivables. Ford's net debt after receivables is $90 billionish as of the 4th quarter. The majority of that debt that is not secured by collateral (bonds) is trading at 30 cents on the dollar or less. Hence the reason Ford is trying to retire a portion of that debt at premium to it's current value. Pay $10 billion in cash and stock and get rid of $30 billion + in debt sounds like a pretty good deal for Ford. Not so good for the current shareholders that will see their stock holdings diluted. But it's moves like this that will keep Ford from taking the same path as GM and Chrysler. You might want to look at "cash flow from operations" for the last year. That is the true indicator of how strong a company is relative to competitors since that demonstrates whether or not you are bringing in more than is going out in whatever business you are in. You won't like what you see but you should go take a look anyway.

On Feb 27 12:18 PM Miken wrote:

> Mr. Chester
>
> I was on the team that negotiated the deal with Ford on the six speed.
> GM gave them the blueprints and Ford paid the money. That was the
> joint development.
>
> I am very aware that the transmission is being jointly produced.
> The Ford version is being produced at the Sterling plant and the
> GM version is being produced at their Warren, MI plant and in Ramos
> Arizpe, Mexico.
>
> The electronics are basically the same except that Ford chose to
> move the controller outside the transmission while GM stayed with
> their original design and kept the controller internally to save
> wiring costs as well as being able to calibrate the electronics to
> each particular transmission. Bosch is the supplier for both. Don't
> assume you know about this by reading Wikipedia.
>
> The software is somewhat different. I'm sure each company thinks
> they did the better job of calibrating the product.

Ford's the Strongest of the U.S. Automakers: So What?

Most of that $165 billion is backed by loans due to Ford Credit. Ford's real debt that is held against assets is in the $45 billion range. A little worse than GM but GM doesn't have a lineup coming out in the next year that will put their vehicles in the status of best in class in almost every segment of the market like Ford does. GM has not demonstrated strong cashflow from operations as Ford has until the fourth quarter of 2008 either.

This author appears to be another idiot that thinks Toyota is invincable. Maybe the author should look at the debt load that Toyota has taken on in order to expand plant capacity around the world. Capacity that they don't need. At the end of the last quarter posted by Toyota they had debt of $55 billion with even less cash than Ford. And their lackluster lineup does not appear to have potential for more sales but much less when compared to Ford's upcoming lineup.

Q: Which economy looks even more dire than the U.S.? A: Japan's does. Fortunately due to the protectionist environment that does not allow Ford to be competitive in Japan, Ford has much less exposure to the dead Japanese economy while Toyota has a heavy reliance on Japan for most of their profits. By keeping competition out, the Japanese manufacturers are able to extort extremely high margins from their people. The Japanese culture is much more inclined to save their earnings instead of spending their way out of a recession which means the recovery won't come soon. So while Japan went into a recession long before the U.S. and they will come out of it long after the U.S. does. It seems very likely that there will be a few major banks fail in Japan due to their attempts to save companies like Toyota in order to keep the land of the rising sun a prominent force in the global economy. The potential failure of the Japanese economic model will be good a thing in the long run. Perhaps the impending implosion of the Japanese economy will demonstrate the benefits of truly free trade to the Japanese and they will open up their borders to cheaper product that will allow their own people to get more bang for their buck which would help fend off future implosions like the one about to take place. Or maybe they will luck out and the global slowdown will recover fast enough to continue to hide the precarious postition their protected industries are truly in. Time will tell. The one thing that is certain is the fact that Toyota is going to feel the pain this time around much moreso than in past recessions.

Detroit: Please Bring Back the Stripped Car

The Fiesta is not going to come over as a stripper. The majority of it's sales will be at prices above where the bottom end Focus currently sells. The allure for the car in Europe is due to the high-end feel of the car along with it's superior driving dynamics. Most likely that won't change once we get it over here.

This article is completely flawed. Demand is what dictates residuals. The fact that a large percentage of import loyalists demand more Camrys and Accords is why they have higher residual values. When you start "dumping" more cars on a market than there is natural demand the tranaction prices have to come down to move the product. This is the game that the Big 3 were forced to play due to inflexible UAW contracts that made it slightly more profitable to keep churning them out instead of paying the workforce to sit idle. The long-term ramifications of this strategy is why the Big 3 currently trail the competition in residuals. Along with a flawed perception of materially higher quality for the imports. GM still uses this approach on certain models (Impala, and Pontiac) and Chrysler has no choice but to do so. When they don't follow this model you see sales numbers down 50%+. The only fleeting that Ford is aggressive at is "fleet only" models such as Crown Vic. Through June 2008 Ford was down to 13.58% rental fleet. Chrysler was 27.45% and GM a much improved 15.60%. The king of residuals, Honda, was at .75% rental fleet. Yes, point 75 percent. Honda's retail demand in the marketplace is where anybody in the car business should want to be. The company that is most aggressively moving toward fleet dumping is Nissan they came in at 13.07% and very likely will fall behind Ford in the next survey.

You can't manufacture demand you have to earn it. Ford and GM for the most part are doing the things necessary to earn it but as always perception lag can exist for many years. Fortunately, for Ford, the lag is already into it's 3rd year and the tide may be turning for them sooner than Honda and Toyota would like.


On Jan 07 12:00 PM tirereviews wrote:

> I think Ford gets it, albeit a little late. The subcompact Ford Fiesta
> sold in Europe (not to be confused with the crappy Festiva we had
> in the 90s) should be arriving on our shores within a year or two.
>
>
> Chevy had the right idea coming out with the outsourced Aveo, but
> it was absolutely sub-par compared to the Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa,
> and hello! -- the very successful Honda Fit. The Japanese may have
> copied Detroit in the 60s and 70s, but they have been and still are
> leading innovation and "what people want".

Could It Be a Happy New Year for Chrysler?

Perhaps you need to remove your head from the sand. Ford has been improving quality at the fastest rate of any manufacturer that sells in the U.S over the last four years. They match both Toyota and Honda today. And on the car front they exceed both. The fact that more of Ford's trucks are used for real work drags them down a bit when compared to Tundras that never leave the asphalt and are mostly garaged. For the past three years, both the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan have beaten the Accord and Camry in the annual JD Power surveys. The Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable have beaten the defect plagued Toyota Avalon over that same time period as well. And Focus rates very closely to the Corolla and Civic with the only difference being it has a 21st century suspension as opposed to the floaty unresponsive feel of the afore mentioned Asian offerings.

I'm sure you have owned 29 cars in 32 years but how many years ago was it that you owned your last Ford? Probably too long. Don't be scared. Go down and test drive one today. I promise the sales staff won't treat you like an idiot even though I'm sure anyone as uninformed of current events in the auto industry as you appear to be would most definitely have idiot written all over his face.


On Dec 21 03:21 PM User 323757 wrote:

> Ford making cars that are equal and/or better quality than Honda?
> I want sum of what u are smoking! I have owned 29 cars in 32 years.
> Three were Fords, and each one lost either the engine, transmission,
> or both. One lost a transmission 3 times. I currently own a Honda,
> and for the past 9 years, no problems. Union pay scales and demands
> leave little to no room for the kind of R&amp;D American car companies
> must have to compete, and now Obama is going to pay off the union
> votes he recieved with our, the taxpayer money, so there is still
> no incentive for innovation on the part of teh American car makers.
> I say let the maket take em down, the business will go the more productive
> and superior products from Toyota and Honda. Let the maket work,
> no more giveaways to keep inferior, unproductive companies on the
> public dole. Its common sense.

Ford Celebrates, GM Scratches Its Head

You will get your wish in about a year and a half. The Fusion will be moved to the same platform as the globally praised Mondeo.


On Nov 04 09:44 AM Maximus wrote:

> If Ford sold it's European Mondeo in the U.S. I wouldn't hesitate
> to buy it. It is much more appealing that any other car in their
> U.S. showrooms.

September Auto Sales: Why Was Ford Hit So Hard?

The fact that Ford has not jumped into the incentive battle with GM and Chrysler for the past two months is the real reason that they performed in a more negative manner. Plus, while Ford reduced fleet sales by 29% in September, GM increased fleet sales by 19%. The only vehicle that GM has that has appeared to to actually have "true" demand was the new Malibu. But then it comes out that 54% of all Malibus sold in September were fleet sales. This does not bode well for GM. It is the same old story with GM. The GM ego is doing what they can to make sure that 2008 is not the year that they lose the title of largest automaker in the world. Unfortunately, they are making moves in the short term that are going to hurt them down the road. By this I am referring to the harm on the residuals of the Malibu that will be the result of fleet dumping your "hottest" vehicle.

You have to admire Mulally at Ford. His goal before the bottom fell out of the market was to reduce fleet sales and fire sale discounts in order to improve the residuals of the Ford lineup along with higher margins that come with this approach. And even now Ford has not matched GM, Chrysler, and now even Nissan in giving the product away. Ford has the F150 coming out in a month and nicely updated Fusions, Milans, and MKZs in December that will help Ford increase prices and sales at the same time. Focus prodcution has been able to finally catch up due to the slow Sept. sales so the pipeline will start being able to feed demand if there is any semblance of a return to stability for the rest of the year. Ford is doing the right thing no matter how painful it is now. As I write this, Toyota just announced 0% financing on all their major models. Now let's see if Ford can still hold the line in October. Ford may have no choice but to react to Toyota's new firesale since they are quickly becoming Ford's real competition.

Was July the Bottom for Auto Sales?

I agree with Mr. Jimmy. However, on what basis does one view GM as a hold when compared to Ford's sell. You have to understand that probably 80% of GM's sales in August were at breakeven at best. Out of the Big 3 only Ford is demonstrating discipline in trying to limit rebates to reasonable levels.

Challenge for Ford and GM: To Stay in Business

Agreed that this guy did his research by reading headlines instead of looking for facts.
Had he searched for facts he would have known that the only reason that Ford was down on the car side was because they plain ran out of Focus modesl after a record setting May. The Fusion with 4-cyl engines were also in very short supply.

The plant that builds the Focus will begin benefiting from a third shift in paint and body departments along with the assembly line being sped up to meet demand in coming months.

Fusion/Milan/MKZ will introduce new engines, trannies, and interiors in December. Car is already selling near capacity on a 4-year old design. Ford is looking at expanding capacity at an underutilized plant to cover the increased demand that the newest car in the mid-size will garner. Hybrid versions of these same cars come out in Jan or Feb. Annual production of these could be sold out as soon as the order process opens up.

Fiesta is the car that will make the B segment mainstream in the US. It will offer 40+ mpg and have an interior that is desriable and have a sporty suspension. Yaris, Fit, Versa, and Aveo are and will be not match. It hits the Eurpean market in a month or two and then China after that. Watch it zoom to the top of the sales charts to gauge it's future performance in the US in just over a year. This is one reason may experts view Ford as the domestic company that has the best chance of surviving.

Is There Any Hope for the Big Three Auto Makers?

Ford is the one American company in a position to benefit from the current state of the market. They are just months away from bringing out the Fusion and Milan Hybrid Sedans. Unlike GM's Malibu hybrid which gets a mere 1 mpg better than the gas version, the Ford and Mercury hybrids should surpass even the Camry Hybrid. At the same time that the hybrids are brought to market the entire Fusion/Milan/MKZ lineup will get refreshed engines, interiors and styling updates. Currently Ford is trying to figure out where they are going to be able to find additional production for these models. The demand between hybrid and gas verions could easily go beyond 30K per month which is Camry and Accord-like numbers.

In just one week you can go down to your Ford dealer and buy a 2009 Escape which is best in class in both horsepower and fuel mileage. They are also best in class in the reduction of interior noise levels. The Escape is already nipping at the tails of the sales leading Honda CRV. These refinements will put the Escape over the top and allow Ford to raise the transaction prices at the same time. Once again the factory that builds these will need to move to max max capacity and Ford is already putting the folks in place to do that.

In barely a year and a half the Fiesta will arrive and become the sales leader for those truly interested in fuel economy in a classy package. It will be built in Mexico for the U.S. market thus it will be profitable from early on.

Focus supply adversly affected June sales. In July or August Ford's addition of plant workers at the Wayne plant building the Focus should get supply closer to demand and will result in better numbers.

Ford held the line on rebates in June and actually had lower rebates compared to the prior year which means they made more money on each unit sold than either GM or Chrysler. About $1,000 more per unit on average. GM went rebate crazy in order to stay ahead of Toyota and Chrysler has no choice considering their lackluster lineup.

Ford has also already put into motion plans to bring the Euro-Focus, C-max, and Transit van over ASAP. Once these highly regarded European models arrive Ford will be the volume leader on the MPG front.

These are just a few of the reasons that Kirk Kerkorian may have no trouble at all sleeping at night.