Can An Airline Guy Steer An Auto Company?

wrote:
> Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
>> Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC.
>
>>From what I've read, very likable but not hard-assed enough when he
> needed to be.
>
> "Disaster" for FMC, I think is way too harsh. After all, Team Mustang
> under is tenure has been a huge success and he also greenlighted the
> Ford GT[40] project. If he was a ball player, IMO, his average would
> work out to be a low 200 hitter, with one home run, a few long balls
> and a decent number of RBIs. Not a guy you want at the plate in the
> 9th inning and you're down a couple runs, but certainly not a guy
> you're going to cringe when he walks up to the plate with two down.

Maybe I'm being a little harsh but old Bill Jr. hasn't set the world on
fire or even generated a flame, IMO, while at the helm of FMC. I will
give him some credit for letting the Mustang team design a car that the
fans would love. I don't think he understands, or knows, the auto
business very well. Under his tenure Ford has dumped several of their
bread and butter models that had huge name recognition. IMO, this has
been a substantial contributor to their declining market share. I also
give him credit for bringing vehicles like the hybrid Escape, Fusion,
new Explorer to market but if he can't market them it really doesn't
matter how good the product may be.

>> I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere.
>
> The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and
> Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about.

I don't think Ford has too few. Lincoln and Mercury are definitely
hurting for unique models. Why they don't let Lincoln compete head on
with Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Cadillac etc. is beyond me. This is a niche
that they have all but abandoned.

> Here's what I would do right off the bat if I was the new CEO.
>
> Top 5:
>
> 1) Leave Team Mustang alone to do what they've been doing.

Agree. Maybe even give them the green light to develop a Cougar model
for Mercury.

> 2) Update the Focus. It was great when introduced but the most recent
> redesign didn't put it back in the front of the pack. They need this
> car to continue to be a hit.

They need a car that has name recognition and will generate repeat
buyers. IMO, they need to pick the Focus, Fusion or something and
commit to it for the long run. How many Camrys are sold ever year just
because of the name? My guess is a lot. If Ford brings another small
car to market I think they should dust off the Escort name and use it.

> 3) Lincoln needs to be a rear-drive division. And they need a
> flagship... something with some retro. AND ditch the alpha/numeric
> name idea!!

IMO, the Continental, Town Car, Capri are a few they could revive.

> 4) Mercury needs some stylish cars. A Mustang-based Cougar would be an
> easy start.

I don't know if Mercury is worth saving at this point. I think they can
get all the models they need from Ford and Lincoln. The only model that
I see Mercury running with is the Cougar. They might be better off
offering a luxury/sport Lincoln to boost the image of that brand.

> 5) The Hurricane V8 is proceeding, they have a new really nice V6 in
> the pipline, now they need a world-class 4 cylinder engine. Something
> really stout to bring import buyers into the showroom -- pair it up
> with a new rally-inspired Focus option.

I think Ford needs bread and butter models more that rally car variants
and big displacement V-8s. They need something to go up against the
Camry, Accord and Maxima. The majority of car buyers are not concerned
with their car's name being on the race track. Ford needs a modern day
"Taurus" in the worst way.

>> I don't think the new guy could do much worse.
>
> Two words: Jack Nasser.

If the new guy does no better than Bill Jr. then Ford might be a
subsidiary of Toyota by 2015.

> Patrick
> ----
>
>><snip>

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 18:13:56 -0400, ZombyWoof >
wrote:
>I agree with most of your points and would like to throw one in of my
>own. I really think all American car companies need to quit trying to
>compete heads to heads with the Japanese on styling and be freaking
>American again. If people want Japanese they'll buy Japanese, but if
>they want an American car, and what an American car used to be and
>stand for, other then bad quality that is, then lets give them that
>classic American styling. It seems to be working with the Mustang.
>People are drooling over the new Camaro & Challenger. The 300C was a
>big hit and so are the Caddy's. Bring back big & performance using
>technology to get fuel economy and screw tiny. Hell were Americans
>and were big & loud & flashy!


The new Mustang proves a lot of that.

Ford needs to continue quality, and add models people want.

Too many lumps put there. And Toyota & Nissan are falling into that
trap. Maxima and Camry are starting to look like Oldsmobiles.

Time for some nice American cars.

Cougar and Thunderbird are a bit tarnished after the last tries, but
could hold some respect if done right.

Styling and fun to drive were once the words at Ford, bring those
back!

I drove next to a GRAND 1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible the other day.
Black, white top & interior - near perfect. What a car!

On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 20:02:48 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:

>His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing
>department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically
>bring back Ford's bread and butter name plates like the Taurus,
>Thunderbird, Escort etc. Finally, get the designers and engineers
>together and tell them to start thinking outside the box and develop
>some innovative and forward thinking vehicles.
>
wrote:
>> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01
>>
>> He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor
>> down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity.
>>
>> Patrick
>>


No doubt that the marketing and ad people should be fired. For quite
a while recently they were running ads for some ford cars, including
the new 500. They wanted the ad to be "edgy" I guess, and the damn
picture changed so quickly you couldn't even tell what the friggin
cars looked like or even be sure what car it was you were
theoretically looking at.

An GM can't seem to get their stylists out of their love of
swoopiness. Every damn car they make, with rare exception, looks like
crap, and the same crap rehashed year after year after year. If I see
one more Pontiac with that god-awful fish front I'll puck.

wrote:
> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01
>
> He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor
> down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity.
>
> Patrick

The Boeing way has been to eliminate US jobs and outsource to other
countries.
They are building (overseas) special 747s to transport major Dreamliner
sections from Asia to the US for final assy.
Korea has exclusive rights to manufacture F15 major assemblies, and
they are doing so right now.

Will you still buy a Mustang if 2/3s of it came out of Asia?

All these so called company leaders care about is the price of stock.
When they anounce big layoffs, the stock price jumps and they get huge
bonuses.

Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford.

Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 20:02:48 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> > wrote:
>
>> His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing
>> department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically
>> bring back Ford's bread and butter name plates like the Taurus,
>> Thunderbird, Escort etc. Finally, get the designers and engineers
>> together and tell them to start thinking outside the box and develop
>> some innovative and forward thinking vehicles.
>>
>> wrote:
>>> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01
>>>
>>> He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor
>>> down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity.
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>
>
> No doubt that the marketing and ad people should be fired. For quite
> a while recently they were running ads for some ford cars, including
> the new 500. They wanted the ad to be "edgy" I guess, and the damn
> picture changed so quickly you couldn't even tell what the friggin
> cars looked like or even be sure what car it was you were
> theoretically looking at.
>
> An GM can't seem to get their stylists out of their love of
> swoopiness. Every damn car they make, with rare exception, looks like
> crap, and the same crap rehashed year after year after year. If I see
> one more Pontiac with that god-awful fish front I'll puck.

One of the worst commercials I saw from Ford was about some cutting edge
super performance braking system. They went on to talk about it for
15-20 seconds and then at the end of the commercial they informed me
that it's not available on any of their cars yet! After watching it I
couldn't decide if they wanted me to wait and buy once the new brakes
are in production or just go ahead and buy a Ford now with the old
crappy brake system.

IMO, Toyota is the current marketing master. They try and convince the
consumer that they have made the vehicle to fit their needs/wants. Ford
and GM builds a vehicle the then tries to make us think it is one step
away from and Indy racer even if it is a boring, cookie cutter sedan.
Sorry but a Ford 500 isn't sexy and sleek. It is plain Jane mode of
transportation. Toyota markets the Camry as a reliable, economical, no
surprises form of transportation which is exactly what the car is.
There are millions upon millions of car buyers that want exactly what
the Camry delivers. The trouble for Ford is that they can't bring
themselves to tell people the 500 is exactly the car for them too.

Ford can take a lesson from the Mustang. They built a sporty, quick,
fun to drive car that they market as such and it is selling very well.
They should do this same thing with all their lineup.

Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

> >> Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC.

> >>From what I've read, very likable but not hard-assed enough when he
> > needed to be.

> > "Disaster" for FMC, I think is way too harsh. After all, Team Mustang
> > under is tenure has been a huge success and he also greenlighted the
> > Ford GT[40] project. If he was a ball player, IMO, his average would
> > work out to be a low 200 hitter, with one home run, a few long balls
> > and a decent number of RBIs. Not a guy you want at the plate in the
> > 9th inning and you're down a couple runs, but certainly not a guy
> > you're going to cringe when he walks up to the plate with two down.

> Maybe I'm being a little harsh but old Bill Jr. hasn't set the world on
> fire or even generated a flame, IMO, while at the helm of FMC. I will
> give him some credit for letting the Mustang team design a car that the
> fans would love.

And the Ford GT[40].

> I don't think he understands, or knows, the auto
> business very well. Under his tenure Ford has dumped several of their
> bread and butter models that had huge name recognition.

Ford has let some models "rot on the vine" so long that any positive
name recognition they had is destroyed by the time a new one would come
out. That's why, IMO, they rename the next model.

> IMO, this has
> been a substantial contributor to their declining market share. I also
> give him credit for bringing vehicles like the hybrid Escape, Fusion,
> new Explorer to market but if he can't market them it really doesn't
> matter how good the product may be.

Both GM and Ford has been bad marketing their hybrids.

> >> I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere.

> > The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and
> > Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about.

> I don't think Ford has too few.

Not few products, I meant few *new* products.

> Lincoln and Mercury are definitely
> hurting for unique models. Why they don't let Lincoln compete head on
> with Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Cadillac etc. is beyond me. This is a niche
> that they have all but abandoned.

It's crazy! They've all but destroyed Lincoln. And that's sad for me,
after growing up with the Hot Rod Lincoln being one of my favorite
songs.

> > Here's what I would do right off the bat if I was the new CEO.

> > Top 5:

> > 1) Leave Team Mustang alone to do what they've been doing.

> Agree. Maybe even give them the green light to develop a Cougar model
> for Mercury.

> > 2) Update the Focus. It was great when introduced but the most recent
> > redesign didn't put it back in the front of the pack. They need this
> > car to continue to be a hit.

> They need a car that has name recognition and will generate repeat
> buyers. IMO, they need to pick the Focus, Fusion or something and
> commit to it for the long run. How many Camrys are sold ever year just
> because of the name? My guess is a lot. If Ford brings another small
> car to market I think they should dust off the Escort name and use it.

At this point I'd keep Focus. By the time the Escort died, it was
known as a bomb.

> > 3) Lincoln needs to be a rear-drive division. And they need a
> > flagship... something with some retro. AND ditch the alpha/numeric
> > name idea!!

> IMO, the Continental, Town Car, Capri are a few they could revive.

Personally, I never liked Town Car. The other two, yes!

> > 4) Mercury needs some stylish cars. A Mustang-based Cougar would be an
> > easy start.

> I don't know if Mercury is worth saving at this point. I think they can
> get all the models they need from Ford and Lincoln. The only model that
> I see Mercury running with is the Cougar. They might be better off
> offering a luxury/sport Lincoln to boost the image of that brand.

Lincoln could/should be upscale. Mercury could/should be the stylish
bridge to Lincoln and Ford the plainer entry level position.

> > 5) The Hurricane V8 is proceeding, they have a new really nice V6 in
> > the pipline, now they need a world-class 4 cylinder engine. Something
> > really stout to bring import buyers into the showroom -- pair it up
> > with a new rally-inspired Focus option.

> I think Ford needs bread and butter models more that rally car variants
> and big displacement V-8s.

But the 500 has just been introduced. All they need to do is
refine/upgrade it.

Ford needs a new bib V8 for thier trucks. The 5.4 isn't cutting it
anymore aganst the competition. PLUS, a 6.2 liter [Hurricane] would be
really cool in a Mustang! :-)

> They need something to go up against the
> Camry, Accord and Maxima. The majority of car buyers are not concerned
> with their car's name being on the race track. Ford needs a modern day
> "Taurus" in the worst way.

Rally cars -- WRX's & EVO's image is HUGE amongst young buyers. And
the Focus is the entry level model that could -- with a Rally model --
get some creed in that market. They need it to gain some respect. And
before you think/say Mustang, the Mustang appeals to a different
buyer... it just isn't going to do it for someone who loves an Evo.

> >> I don't think the new guy could do much worse.

> > Two words: Jack Nasser.

> If the new guy does no better than Bill Jr. then Ford might be a
> subsidiary of Toyota by 2015.

Toyota doesn't need/want anyone. You won't see them buy-up any auto
company.

Patrick

> >><snip>

Brent P wrote:

> What I would do product wise at ford:

> Bring in successful foreign market cars. If they do well against japanese
> and european makes overseas they should do well here. Namely focus and
> falcon. They can be built in the US, but there is no reason not use
> successful models elsewhere after they have proven successful. (some
> exception for cars that obviously wouldn't sell in a particular place)

"Euro models" haven't done particularly well for the domestics -- i.e.
-- XR4Ti & GTO

Patrick

In article . com>, wrote:

>
> Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford.

Practically everywhere in the US. Welcome to globalism and the north
american union.

In article .com>, wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> What I would do product wise at ford:
>
>> Bring in successful foreign market cars. If they do well against japanese
>> and european makes overseas they should do well here. Namely focus and
>> falcon. They can be built in the US, but there is no reason not use
>> successful models elsewhere after they have proven successful. (some
>> exception for cars that obviously wouldn't sell in a particular place)
>
> "Euro models" haven't done particularly well for the domestics -- i.e.
> -- XR4Ti & GTO

Yeah... because the US automakers screw it up time and time again.

WTF is a merkur? That was the first screw up there. GM with the GTO?
well calling it a GTO was their first blunder. People didn't expect a
GTO in theme of 1964, they expected a GTO in the theme of the judge.
It's huge marketing blunders like that, plus not knowing how to sell the
vehicles.

BTW, the current focus here is a warmed over, cheaped version of
europe's previous generation focus. The contour was allowed to die as
they tried to sell it like a tempo replacement.

Bring over the falcon. Move the driver's side over and don't screw
anything up. Don't rename it, keep it named falcon. There, now there's
something to compete with chrysler's V8 RWD sedans.

Chrysler is bringing over several MB designs without trouble. But then
again they don't seem to be screwing things up with goofy new make names
and poor market research.

wrote:
> wrote:
>> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01
>>
>> He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor
>> down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity.
>>
>> Patrick
>
> The Boeing way has been to eliminate US jobs and outsource to other
> countries.
> They are building (overseas) special 747s to transport major Dreamliner
> sections from Asia to the US for final assy.
> Korea has exclusive rights to manufacture F15 major assemblies, and
> they are doing so right now.
>
> Will you still buy a Mustang if 2/3s of it came out of Asia?
>
> All these so called company leaders care about is the price of stock.
> When they anounce big layoffs, the stock price jumps and they get huge
> bonuses.
>
> Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford.

The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't
afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have
enough workers to do these jobs here in our borders. Don't believe me?
Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? It is
because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs
they are willing to perform. The world is becoming an economic melting
pot at a ferocious pace.

All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest
of the world. Why would we want to punish these people for emulating
us? The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc.
just want the American dream for themselves. I really would not care if
a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. If
you took the position of buying only American with everything you
consume then then you will have a very empty house.

There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is
4.6%. Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a
fast food position either. I know of numerous job opportunities for
people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a
college education either, just a willingness to work hard, smart and
learn. I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or
educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to
retain their easy going life style. They don't mind complaining about
the poor hand they were "dealt" though. There are plenty of good paying
jobs to be had in this country. Trouble is too many people don't want
to work hard enough to hold them and/or be qualified for them.

As for the domestic automakers, don't blame Ford and GM because, IMO,
the UAW is more to blame. At a time when Toyota is increasing their
manufacturing in the USA with job satisfied, nonunion labor, Ford is
having to pay UAW employees that haven't shown up to work for almost
eight years. The unions are killing the domestically owned auto
industry just as much as any competition from the Asians or Ford's
mismanagement. It is hard for me to have much sympathy for UAW members
when they have let their union gouge them financially and negotiate
their jobs away. Too many felt they were owed a great paying job for
life no matter how poorly they performed. That mentality only works in
communist societies and I don't think there are many shining examples of
these around (BTW China is far from communist, economically speaking).