Posted on 01/27/2006 8:14:40 AM PST by oxcart
Down the pit of oblivion.
Do people know Ford makes a luxury Sedan called Ford-500.
I have never heard of it.
Went truck shopping, and the dealer said, just like Mercedes makes 500, Ford makes their own 500.
How innovative!
Friend of mine says, "I'd rather push a FORD than drive a CHEVY"!
The Ford Death Watch begins...
Interesting that the employees don't want to buy Fords, the product that they assemble and build... Says quite a bit about the work ethic of the average Ford "union" employee.
Not trying to pick on you MM
From an Edmunds review. The 500 is essentially a Volvo:
"The Five Hundred and Montego are the first Ford products to take advantage of the company's controlling stake in Volvo. They're built on the same platform Volvo uses for its S60 and S80 sedans, V70 and XC70 wagons and XC90 SUV, and make extensive use of Volvo safety and all-wheel-drive technology. Ford is upfront about this relationship, and indeed any mention of Volvo is apt to be a plus when you're selling family cars."
Rob Webber will soon be resigning in shame as this gets thrown out by HR.
That says alot, if 85%, or even if it's just a simple majority, would rather own a non-Ford.
FORD - Found on Road, Dead.
FORD - F@#$%d Over Rebuilt Dodge.
You need to work a bit on your ability to think logically. If folks opposed private property rights, they'd be calling for legislation to ban the practice.
Folks here aren't saying that Ford can't do this; they are just pointing out how stupid the Ford decision is.
It may be dumb, but it is his right to do it.
As folks on this forum who have been saying to smokers who's employers have decided you either have to quit smoking or be fired, if you don't like company policy get another job, or live with the policy.
Smart move. Collect all the oil that leaks out in the parking lot and, at $60/barrel, recycle and pay off the union health plan.
Hehe...I'll agree on that.
Still think Dodge trucks are better than either.
*putting on flame retardant suit...*
I believe in buying American but when any company tells it's employees what they have to drive to park in their lot, that company has acceded to socialism.
This is the kind of ignorance that helps no one.
The answer is to build a car that consumers want more than they want competitor's cars.
GM did this in the 80s. I drove a Fiat ragtop and that was a no-no. They wanted me to fix a computer system at the Truck assembly plant in Dayton, but wouldn't let me park in the lot. I told them to find somebody else to fix the machine and left. The next day the plant manager called my boss and they let me park right up by the door.
Easy for you to say;
it's an excellent way of pointing out that your bread and butter comes from your company's vehicles.
And oh BTW: identical policies have been the norm in Detroit for decades: in the '70s I know from personal experience this was the policy at the Dodge Truck Plant in Warren, Mich.
Furthermore, I can say from personal experience that Nissan has the same policy at at least two of their plants in Japan. Taken a step further, Nissan's SUPPLIERS do not even permit anything other than a Nissan to be parked in the employee parking lots, in Japan.
This Ford policy doesn't say you can't work there if you drive a competitor's car; it just gives preferential parking to those who DO.
Choice is up to the employee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.