Posted on 06/28/2006 11:23:14 AM PDT by george76
Ford Motor Co. shares took a hit Wednesday, pressured as Standard & Poor's pushed the automaker's credit rating deeper into junk status...
At last check, shares of the second-biggest U.S. car manufacturer were down 13 cents, or 2%, at $6.41 -- just 3 cents above their lowest level in nearly 13 years.
The ratings agency downgraded $151 billion in Ford debt by one notch, to a B+ rating, and thus put the rating four levels into speculative-grade territory, with a negative outlook.
"Notwithstanding its multiyear plan to turn around the performance of its North American automotive operations, " S&P said, "we expect the company's financial profile to weaken further during 2006 -- a period when the U.S. economy and U.S. light-vehicle sales are robust."
In January, Ford detailed its "Way Forward" restructuring plan, a centerpiece of which is the planned closure of 14 plants by 2012 and the cutting of as many as 30,000 jobs, as the automaker aims at improving its product lineup and slashing costs.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
As long as FORD embraces the gay agenda I'll buy elsewhere thanks and FORD can go to hell.
Ford is headed that way.
Ford's marketing is hurting their sales. They would be better off with no marketing at all and drop the prices.
For management,it will mean pay cuts and no more huge bonuses.For the unions,it will mean the end of the gravy train.and for the government,it will mean $$$.
Would you care to hazard a guess as to what position other car makers take on the subject? I'll wager that it's very similar to,if not even more disgusting,than that of Ford.
"Neither Ford nor GM can be allowed to go under."
Would you advocate a taxpayer bailout of the moronic management that has "led" Ford and GM to this sorry state?
Why? If they go under perhaps a competent company can buy their assets and run the company correctly. There is no reason to decrease competition in the marketplace by handing out government subsidies to keep these incompetent businesses alive.
GM and Ford have dug their own graves. Let it serve as an example for other companies.
Yup.
Agreed. Let GM sink or swim! The talented, useful employees will get other jobs. The union apparatchniki can get lost.
Yup.
Do you have any reasoning behind this crazy statement? I really don't comprehend how bailing out failing companies by the government is going to help our economy.
Is it a national pride issue? If it is, the I would rather Ford and GM go out of business faster. They are slow monolithic companies that make crappy vehicles and give our country a bad name.
"As long as FORD embraces the gay agenda I'll buy elsewhere thanks and FORD can go to hell."
bears repeating.
So, what's below "junk". Trailer Park?
"Neither Ford nor GM can be allowed to go under"
If they are not allowed to go under, then we will never ever have a viable US-based automobile manufacturing company.
Gov't bailouts only perpetuate mediocrity. Overall, US manufacturing cability is still the best in the world. An American company that focused on designing and building quality automobiles would be successful, however a new company cannot emerge if they must compete against gov't funded competition.
Ford and GM have proven they cannot, or will not do what is necessary to survive, much less thrive. They must be allowed to die.
"For management,it will mean pay cuts and no more huge bonuses.For the unions,it will mean the end of the gravy train.and for the government,it will mean $$$."
It'll also mean much better design. Make a better and more competive product and you'll start to see some sales coming back.
You're VERY good...
The others are just as bad - but the AFA chose one of the financially weak targets so they could claim victory (as if gas prices had nothing to do with plummeting SUV sales - note that Ford's car sales are up significantly)....
If people want to protest and choose Ford as a target to try to send a message to them all, and make that clear, there's nothing wrong with it... but pretending like Ford does this and Toyota doesn't is complete bull... Do you want to take bets on whether these people are walking? After all, if you buy a Toyota you're supporting the same causes. Even if you buy a Schwinn, you're supporting the Chinese government.
"Yup" [to advocating a taxpayer bailout of the moronic management that has "led" Ford and GM to the brink of bankruptcy].
And your reasons ...? If I won't voluntarily buy Ford or GM products in support of their operations, because they make inferior vehicles, why should the government be allowed to take money from me forcibly to do so?
"Until then it'd be stupid to buy a car that is less reliable (according to any major survey), has poorer quality interior materials, gets updated less often, and has a far inferior resale value"
Poor resale value? Yes.... Poor interior materials? Yeah, sure (but don't get me started on the utter crap Honda and Toyota have put in some of theirs, too)... Updated less often? Sure, if you're going purely on sheet metal (Honda and Toyota don't really update the mechanicals any more frequently)....
Less reliable? Well.... did you know Mercury beat Honda, Acura, Mazda, Hyundai, Subaru, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Suzuki, Daewoo, Isuzu, and Kia in the latest JD Power dependability survey? The only Asian makes to beat them were Lexus, Infiniti, and Toyota (by only 194 problems per 100 vehicles to 195 problems per 100)....
Lincoln beat them all but Lexus (139 per 100 vs 151 per 100).
Buick and Cadillac finished right behind Lincoln.
Did you also realize that Consumer Reports only gets a 6% response rate on their survey? Or that considering the number of models on the road and the length of their survey, they only average a sample size of 400-500? Or that a sample size this big is only about 1/5 to 1/6th the size needed to accurately measure the difference between a Mercury and a Toyota reliability (based on JD Power's numbers and CR's own admission of the low problem rates), assuming the surveys and respondents were unbiased? (Think of it like calling 1500 registered dems and 500 pubbies and considering that a valid sample)
Or how about that the difference between a V8 Dodge Magnum and a V8 Chrysler 300 is greater than the difference between "better than average" and "worse than average" (completely skipping over the "average" rating), despite the fact that they're mechanically identical?
I'll keep an open mind buying my next car, but I'll also remember the HUGE repair and maintenance cost differential that has been in favor of my Taurus over my Camry.
No great coincidence that Honda just announced a major new plant in Indiana, to go with its existing facility in Ohio. BMW makes cars in South Carolina; Mercedes has plant in Alabama; Toyota is in Kentucky; Nissan is in Tennessee; Mitsubishi is in Illinois; and Subaru and Isuzu are in Indiana. All of these facilities, I believe, are non-union.
The greed of the UAW has all but killed the "old" American auto industry. I see no reason for taxpayer-funded intervention to revive these dinosaurs. Japanese and German companies are picking up the ball fumbled by Ford and GM.
GM and Ford have dug their own graves. Let it serve as an example for other companies.
Amen and preach on! History's graveyard is full of 'indispensable' men...and companies.
First, on the cost side...
Ford will likely threaten a UAL bankruptcy type move.
UAL got rid of much of their longterm union pension/health care obligations to become competitive with other low cost airlines.
GM is doing buyouts; my guess is that Ford will do something similar.
Second, on the revenue side...Ford needs to listen to their customers. IMHO.
At car shows, there are few to no executives willing to meet their past and future customers. I know that shows are boring, but that is where their customers are.
Dealers tell me that Ford does not listen to them much , either.
all good points.
I'll keep an open mind buying my next car, but I'll also remember the HUGE repair and maintenance cost differential that has been in favor of my Taurus over my Camry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What? You are actually going to look at facts, don't you know decisions of this sort are supposed to be made on a purely emotional basis and never to go against the current fashion? You probably have never even owned any designer jeans. Are you some sort of iconoclast? What is it that you are trying to erase?
I know of no one pretending anything -nor do I know what impact if any the AFA sponsored boycott is having. Your plea for boycott equality sounds nice regardless how irrelevant it is...
Well, a "minivan platform" isn't necessarily worse than a "car platform", though in this case it was for GM - the U-body platform for the Rendezvous was derived from a car platform - the 80s-early 90s Chevy Celebrity / Buick Century.
Not a good starting point.
The Highlander is derived from the Camry platform, which is also the platform for the Sienna. Actually there are quite a few minivans on car platforms... so what was a "minivan platform" may be no worse than a car platform. Of course, with a crossover or minivan, handling will be considerably worse than for the car. That's basic physics. But if you start from a good platform....
GM should never have used the U-body for the Rendezvous, you're right... the Rendezvous always was a half-hearted effort that thankfully is going away soon....
There are plenty of them floating around here condemning Ford and saying they will buy GM/Toyota/Honda/Nissan/etc instead rather than support a company doing this... while neglecting that they all do it...
AFA claims to be winning based on lower sales at Ford and decreased stock price. However, the stock has at worst followed the same glidepath it has been on since well before the boycott. Sales have dropped slightly, though if you look at sales, SUV sales are down, but car sales are up quite significantly. I wonder if there could possibly be other factors involved there? I mean, why would someone rather buy a 30+mpg sedan rather than a 18mpg truck? Oh, yeah....
I *LIKE* to go against the current fashion. :)
If I can buy a 1 year old Taurus for $12,000 and get a 6 year warranty on it (the recent generations of Taurus actually have good reliability records, btw) rather than spend $21,000 for a new Camry with a 3 year warranty or $19,000 for a 1 year old Camry with a 6 year warranty, I won't mind being unfashionable.... :) Its just transportation. Then I can buy more GE stock. :P
Pride goeth before a fall....
Dodges and Chryslers are not, for the most part, mechanically identical. Higher quality and cost parts are used on Chrysler products.
I reckoned some suckers had to still be buying the products.
Are you suggesting DCX would actually do something like buy a lower cost EGR valve for a Chrysler than a Dodge, when the engines and transmissions are identical designs? Do you realize the logisitical nightmare this would cause? I can understand there being a difference in trim components and even suspension tuning, but not powertrain
Besides, it is the Dodge that ended up with the higher rating....
Of course, on the V6 versions of the same cars, you get the exact opposite effect....
Ford forgot its base for a political agenda...
Care to explain why someone would be a sucker for buying a car when you can't show any statistically significant difference in reliablity between it and one priced thousands more?
Sure, my 98 Camry didn't depreciate as fast as my 97 Taurus. But the difference in blue book value is now less than half what the difference in initial price was. If a car starts at $20k and depreciates to $15k, it has lost only 25% of its value. If it starts at $16k and depreciates to $11k, it has lost 31% of its value. Sounds worse... until you realize the cost is the same.
The Taurus cost $3000 less than the Camry. It now is worth just $1300 less. So the Camry is worth 50% more - but the Taurus still has had less depreciation. It also has cost about $2500 less to maintain and repair.
When you consider the total savings so far, I could buy another 98 Camry easily just on the savings.... Doesn't sound like you have to be a sucker...
It ain't gonna happen this time, too many large companies are just years away from the same fate. Ford should die it's rightful death if it can't get things under control.
If the unions hang tough, Ford and GM may be forced to follow the lead of UAL into bankruptcy court to get the judge to void the previous contracts.
Quotations about cars and those who love them (or hate them).
That is for sure.
"Ford forgot its base for a political agenda..."
"As long as FORD embraces the gay agenda I'll buy elsewhere thanks and FORD can go to hell."
Ford is hot for homos and hates families. The homo leftests have taken over the company and regard anything that resembles morality and values as a threat to their stranglehold on power (and therefore in the process is destroying the company). As long as Ford wants to shove their leftest family hating values down our throat I will continue to boycott - time for Ford to go the way of the horse drawn buggy.
Those boys do some great work! Thanks for the link
I own two new Fords so this is more than a passing interest for me. The problem is that they let their passenger cars go on being ignored and they thought they could ride the truck and SUV boom into the future with impunity. They were wrong. The thing that would keep them from going bankrupt is that the Ford family can't permit it. They would lose control of the company so it won't happen. What I can't understand is why GM has come back up. I understand their sales for June are off 30% and they are up to their eyeballs in debt. Chrysler doesn't have any debt. And they were the ones that had to get a government bailout. It was said at the time this was going to boomerrang on Ford and GM and so it appears to have happened.
I don't have the answer except that they need a hard nosed no nonsense manager come in and do what is required to save the company. It can be done as was shown with Nissan. But Ford has been pouring money down ratholes like Jaguar that have never shown a profit. Craziness.
I just bought Ford bonds with a 9.5 coupon and yielding almost 13%
The only way Ford goes under is if American Motors Corporation is resurrected. Whis is to say America and Congress and the Sherman Anti Trust Act will not permit one American auto company and it's monopoly
"but pretending like Ford does this and Toyota doesn't is complete bull."
possibly. but Ford has been visibly vocal about it.
what they do behind the scenes is one thing. running full page ads offering discounts in gay magazines is another.
Enjoy your horse drawn buggy, because you can't buy a car made by a company who does anything different than Ford. They're all guilty.
Very astute analysis - fortunately, the Fusion is a high quality competitor for the midsize sedan market. And if the 500 gets the new 3.5L in the next year, they'll have been able to rid it of its primary criticism - lack of power (though honestly 0-60 in 7.8-8.0 isn't that bad)....
They've put Mark Fields in charge of the turn around. Just look at Mazda to see what he's capable of. Mazda and Nissan were both in trouble about the same time. Carlos Ghosn turned Nissan around, but they're seriously slipping again. Mark Fields turned Mazda around, and Mazda is still experiencing large sales gains....
Ford's sales are expected to be down 4% for June (they didn't match the GM sales until later in the year), but if anything follows the past few months, look for about a 6-7% drop in truck sales and an 8-10% increase in car sales....
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.
