Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ohio judge says Ford must pay dealers $2B
yahoo/ap ^ | 6/11/11 | Joanne Viviano

Posted on 06/11/2011 7:27:44 AM PDT by EBH

Ford Motor Co. must pay nearly $2 billion in damages to thousands of dealerships in a 2002 class-action lawsuit that said the automaker violated dealer agreements, an Ohio judge ruled Friday.

Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Peter Corrigan in Cleveland issued the ruling based on a Feb. 11 jury determination that the company overcharged dealers for commercial trucks over an 11-year period.

The $2 billion award covers more than 3,000 dealerships and about 474,000 trucks. It includes a judgment of about $781 million and about $1.2 billion in interest.

"In awarding the dealers the amount of money they overpaid for trucks, the jury verdict places ... the dealers in the financial position contemplated by the terms of the contract," said James Lowe, a Cleveland attorney for Westgate Ford Truck Sales Inc., a dealership in Youngstown that represents the class.

Ford's annual report, filed on Feb. 28, says the class action included all dealers who purchased a 600?series or higher truck from Ford from 1987 to 1997. It says the lawsuit accused the automaker of failing to reveal that price concessions were given to some dealers.

Ford said in a Friday statement that the company will appeal.

(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; Government; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last
If I negotiate a price cut/concession...why would the terms of that deal need to be revealed to my competition?
1 posted on 06/11/2011 7:27:45 AM PDT by EBH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EBH
If I negotiate a price cut/concession...why would the terms of that deal need to be revealed to my competition?

Because the Obama Regime has picked winners and losers. They are out to get Ford for opposing their nationalized GM and Chrysler manufacturers? They have to steal what we will not give them willingly, and any excuse that hurts Ford is okay. Obama and his far left regime disgust me -what happened to the rule of law?

2 posted on 06/11/2011 7:31:41 AM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Because their dealer agreement says so. A contract is a contract.


3 posted on 06/11/2011 7:33:49 AM PDT by Dan Nunn (Support the NRA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH
If Ford is giving one of its dealers preferential treatment over another Ford dealer, then it's doing it wrong.
4 posted on 06/11/2011 7:38:40 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Check and Balances? Nah! Obama Makes His Own Laws!

My Fellow American,

Politically, the “gloves are off.” Barack Hussein Obama will now GO AROUND Members of Congress and the American people via EXECUTIVE ORDERS and “SECRETARIAL ORDERS”… because that is now the only way he will be able to push his radical agenda forward. Mr. Obama will EVADE Congress simply because he no longer CONTROLS the House of Representatives.

He will use whatever means are available to him to seize the control to “legislate” away from Congress. In short, he literally wants to RULE you!

Whatever means at his disposal through Executive Orders and Secretarial Orders (who ever heard of a Secretarial Order?) to implement what Congress won’t entertain legislatively. Executive Orders are pretty much veto-proof unless Congress overrules the White House edicts. And, since it takes a majority in both Houses of Congress to rescind an Executive or Secretarial Order, the odds of that happening in the Harry Reid Senate are slim to none.

http://formerobamasupporters.com/54017/check-and-balances-nah-obama-makes-his-own-laws/


5 posted on 06/11/2011 7:39:41 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EBH

“...the company overcharged dealers for commercial trucks over an 11-year period.”

Can we sue Detroit for overcharging us for crap vehicles since the mid-1970s ?


6 posted on 06/11/2011 7:40:04 AM PDT by PLMerite (Shut the Beyotch Down!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

OBAMA DID NOT NEED TO TAKE OVER ALL THE CAR MANUFACTURERS TO TAKE OVER THE AUTO INDUSTRY

ONLY ONE

THEN USE THE FORCE OF THE GOVERNMENT TO BANKRUPT THE OTHERS

ANYONE WHO BUYS GM IS A TRAITOR


7 posted on 06/11/2011 7:44:59 AM PDT by Mr. K (CAPSLOCK! -Unleash the fury! [Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite

The Federal Gov’t has been overcharging the self-sufficient and selfactivated for decades.


8 posted on 06/11/2011 7:47:11 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
Because their dealer agreement says so. A contract is a contract.

Ding! We have a winner! I love Ford, but they should abide by their contracts just like anyone else. They don't get a pass just because other auto companies do underhanded things, in fact, I expect them to play by that much higher a standard and still keep up.
9 posted on 06/11/2011 7:49:49 AM PDT by arderkrag (Georgia is God's Country.----------In the same way Rush is balance, I am consensus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

What if one dealer purchases more units than another? What if the Ford dealer is in a tougher market and needs a little help to get the sale from GM or FORD?

HOw much of this money will ultimately go to the dealers? BAh! Only to the attorneys.

I want to know more about the judge and the attorneys representing the dealers...

I can’t imagine a Caterpillar Dealership suing Caterpillar.

Something stinks here. No loyalties?

Must be more to the story...


10 posted on 06/11/2011 7:52:41 AM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121
What if one dealer purchases more units than another? What if the Ford dealer is in a tougher market and needs a little help to get the sale from GM or FORD?

Taking money out of one dealer's pocket to help another dealer is a no-no. If you help one dealer, you must help them all.

I suppose the contract could contain a clause that reads, "we reserve the right to give other dealers preferential treatment over you," but who would sign it?

11 posted on 06/11/2011 7:57:48 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
"the rule of law"

What rule of law? Methinks you jest.

12 posted on 06/11/2011 7:58:16 AM PDT by I am Richard Brandon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn
Must be a really great relationship with their dealers if they are being sued.


13 posted on 06/11/2011 8:00:15 AM PDT by OldCorps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EBH
ummm... if the dealers were overcharged, weren't the customers overcharged too???
14 posted on 06/11/2011 8:21:43 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

That’s baloney and sounds both French and libtard at its root. Why shouldn’t Ford treat its best dealers better than it’s lousy ones ? It’s business, not Kindergarten.

Taking money out of one dealers pocket ? Pelosian....


15 posted on 06/11/2011 8:23:07 AM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Excuse me, Ford has a right to negotiate any way it pleases with each individual dealership.

If this argument is carried to its logical conclusion it would mean that any retail customer who paid more than someone else for the identical vehicle should be able to sue. Pure lunacy.

If allowed to stand this ruling will be the demise of wholesaling and volume discounts—or discounts for any reason.


16 posted on 06/11/2011 8:28:29 AM PDT by dools0007world
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Question: no matter what the Ford Co. charged the dealers for a truck, the dealer passed that price plus their profit on to the consumer. Where did the dealer get screwed??? Looks to me like the consumer got screwed.


17 posted on 06/11/2011 9:41:15 AM PDT by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dools0007world; major-pelham

You are excused for not understanding distribution, dealership, and franchise law. I’m not in the position to practise it either. You should be able to find someone fairly decent at it for $500/hour.


18 posted on 06/11/2011 10:07:49 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K
ANYONE WHO BUYS GM IS A TRAITOR

By your standards and mine, I am a patriot. I will never buy another GM vehicle. That company is dead to me because of the massive corruption in the nationalization and stiffing bondholders to reward the UAW and other big campaign donors. I will not buy a new GM and reward the criminal enterprise that GM has become, nor will I buy a used GM and support their resale value, which can convince others that a new GM is worth buying. GM can rot in its socialism, but I am boycotting them forever.

19 posted on 06/11/2011 11:55:33 AM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

i agree with you 100%

I used to be a chevy guy while my brother was a ford gy- it made for some intersting conpetitions

But now I have to say- I LOVE FORD TRUCKS~!


20 posted on 06/11/2011 12:50:47 PM PDT by Mr. K (CAPSLOCK! -Unleash the fury! [Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dan Nunn

Welcome to the Ford Heavy and Medium Truck Dealer CPA Class Action website

This site provides information concerning a class action brought on behalf of current and former Ford Dealers who purchased medium duty and heavy duty trucks from Ford between October 5, 1987 and the present.

What is this lawsuit about? This is an action for breach of contract brought by Westgate Ford Truck Sales, Inc. (“Westgate”), against Ford Motor Company (“Ford”). Westgate has been a Ford truck dealer in Youngstown, Ohio since 1973. Westgate instituted this lawsuit on its own behalf and as the representative of all Ford Dealers who purchased medium duty and heavy duty trucks (“medium/heavy trucks”) from Ford between October 5, 1987 and the present. Class Members are sometimes referred to in this Notice as “the Dealers”. Medium/heavy trucks are defined as trucks with a Ford series designation of 600 and above.

Westgate claims that Ford has breached the Sales and Service Agreement (referred to here as the “SSA”) of every Class Member. Specifically, Westgate alleges that Ford failed to comply with the product pricing provisions set forth in Paragraph 10 of every Dealer’s SSA. Under Paragraph 10, Ford is required to sell products to every Dealer using prices, charges and discounts that are published in advance of sale in accordance with dealer-wide Terms of Sale Bulletins. Westgate alleges that Ford violated this duty through the operation of pricing programs known as the Competitive Price Assistance Program and the Government Price Concession Program (referred to jointly as the “CPA Program”).

Westgate contends that around 1983, Ford began publishing to Dealers wholesale prices on medium/heavy trucks that were far in excess of the resale prices those trucks could command in the retail marketplace. This made it necessary for Dealers to ask Ford for discounts from the wholesale price in order to be able to profitably sell the trucks to retail consumers. The CPA Program was the mechanism through which Dealers asked for those discounts. There were two levels of discounts available under the CPA Program. The initial or minimum level of discount was published to all Dealers and was available on all medium/heavy trucks. This first level of CPA discount was originally known as the “Rainbow Schedule” and was later called “Sales Advantage.” When those initial discounts did not bring the Dealer’s wholesale price to a level below the expected retail price, the CPA Program provided for an appeal process. A Dealer could appeal to Ford to grant further price reductions known as “Appeal-Level CPA.”

Westgate alleges that, contrary to the duties imposed by Paragraph 10, Ford did not publish the amount of Appeal-Level CPA discount available on any truck, nor did it publish the prices of trucks receiving Appeal-Level CPA. Instead, Appeal-Level CPA was given at Ford’s discretion so that the maximum amount of discount available - and true net wholesale price - for a given truck was never known by the Dealers. Westgate claims Ford’s operation of the CPA Program made it possible for Ford to sell comparable trucks to Dealers at prices that varied widely. As a result, Ford sold like trucks to different Dealers at price differences as great as $15,000 per truck. Through this suit, the Dealers seek to recapture those differences and other losses caused by Ford’s breach of contract.

Ford denies all of Westgate’s material allegations and denies that it breached its duties under Paragraph 10. Ford claims that Appeal-Level CPA discounts were based entirely on a Dealer’s “competitive need.” Ford also contends that it satisfied its duty to publish prices and discounts by faxing CPA approvals to the Dealers, and by sending Dealers invoices for trucks after the sales were made. Alternatively, Ford claims it complied with its Paragraph 10 duties by publishing a CPA Manual.

Who represents the class? The Court has designated, that Westgate Ford Truck Sales, Inc. shall serve as the Class representative in this lawsuit. The attorneys that serve as lead counsel for the Class are: John A. Corr from Law Offices of John A. Corr, LLC, 301 Richard Way, Collegeville, PA 19426; Stephen A. Corr and Thomas E. Mellon of the law firm of Mellon, Webster & Shelly, 87 North Broad Street, Doylestown, Pennsylvania 18901; James A. Lowe and Dennis P. Mulvihill from the law firm of Lowe, Eklund, Wakefield & Mulvihill, 610 Skylight Office Tower, 1660 West Second Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44113; and James A. Pikl from the law firm of Scheef & Stone, LLP, 2601 Network Blvd., Suite 102, Frisco, Texas 75034.
http://cpaclassaction.com/


21 posted on 06/11/2011 1:19:12 PM PDT by EBH ( Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter's stomach, is an absolute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Your knee jerk reaction to the current jerk that is running GM, if successful will likely leave you, the taxpayer holding an even bigger bag when GM does not do reasonably well financially. The fact that this guy wants gas to go up so he can sell cars none of us want in nonsense. I have several GM vehicles. They have been serviceable for me. I hate the UAW, but they didn’t build the Avalanche I have currently, as it was built in Monterrey, Mexico. GM, and for that matter, the other two remaining US automakers are victims of both the UAW and the aholes that have acended to the leadership roles within their respective companies. My prediction, and it’s based on recent press articles, is that the US automakers are going to leave the country. They have to, to escape the UAW and our government. And the Japanese are probably going to do the same ( just look at Mazda). They got tied up with Ford and have to build cars here in a UAW plant. But no more, they’re ceasing US manufacturing all together.


22 posted on 06/11/2011 1:41:54 PM PDT by vette6387 (Enough Already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

ping


23 posted on 06/11/2011 3:31:29 PM PDT by EBH ( Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter's stomach, is an absolute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: vette6387
Your knee jerk reaction to the current jerk that is running GM, if successful will likely leave you, the taxpayer holding an even bigger bag when GM does not do reasonably well financially . . .

It's not the current jerk, it's the jerk several jerks back and the jerks in the White House and Congress back in late 2008. The bailout and nationalization of GM were reprehensible and unforgivable, which is why I will never forgive that company or anyone else involved. The rightful claimants on GM assets were ripped off, stiffed, robbed, however you want to put it - contract law, bankruptcy law, and common law were ignored and grossly violated. It's for that reason and not because the current CEO is a jerk that I am boycotting GM for life.

24 posted on 06/11/2011 5:05:39 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: vette6387
Your knee jerk reaction to the current jerk that is running GM, if successful will likely leave you, the taxpayer holding an even bigger bag when GM does not do reasonably well financially . . .

Also, I believe the more costly this GM bailout turns out to be, both in federal dollars and in jobs killed by fascism, the better for America. I want even the UAW and SEIU to join decent fiscally responsible Americans in opposing this sort of governmental abuse the next time a bailout is proposed.

25 posted on 06/11/2011 5:16:02 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

I agree with most of what you say, but I also believe never to say never. Neither of us know what the future holds for GM or who it’s future leaders may be. Just like the government. I would not move out of the US because we have a Marxist no account for president, and I won’t move out ( unlike some of our “nation’s brightest” in Holllywierd) if for some inexplicable reason he stays on for four more years. You are sort of saying like the folks did after WWII, “I won’t by a Japanese car” and you know how that’s turned out. I will continue to shop for cars like I do everything else, look for the best value for my money.


26 posted on 06/11/2011 9:32:37 PM PDT by vette6387 (Enough Already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

There are times to say “never”.

I have been ripped off only twice when it was enough to be worth criminal charges, and both times I prosecuted and obtained a conviction. I’ve been ripped off where there was either not enough money or not enough evidence, and the prosecutor wouldn’t press charges, and in those cases I’ve refused ever again to deal with the company and encouraged others to do the same. Skip the most convenient gas station for two decades because they ripped me off once? You betcha. Boycott GM forever because they ripped off their old bondholders and are too politically connected to be prosecuted? Again, you betcha!

The differences between GM and an honest company are not now nor will they ever be enough that a sensible person would consider a GM vehicle a dramatically better deal than a competitor. If integrity mattered, why would anyone accept about the same product from a corrupt organization when they could buy from a company that does not engage in grand theft? Besides, wouldn’t contributing to GM’s survival encourage the fascists in our government to approve another bailout and another massive theft from the rightful owners of assets? Better to make this as expensive as possible, one time, that to have our government routinely behave as the corrupt organization that perpetrated this bailout and robbed the GM bondholders.

Those who boycotted Japanese products did so out of what was to some extent a justifiable anger, but they responded in a racist manner. With GM, my righteous anger is directed only at the criminal organization responsible for grand theft. Since the government will not do the right thing, it is our individual responsibility to respond to GM. Forever.


27 posted on 06/12/2011 2:46:54 AM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: EBH; ADemocratNoMore; Akron Al; arbee4bush; agrace; ATOMIC_PUNK; Badeye; Bikers4Bush; ...

Ohio Pings!

To be added to the Ohio Ping List, please freepmail (works best).
LasVegasDave

28 posted on 06/12/2011 2:57:43 AM PDT by Las Vegas Dave ("Getting freepers to all agree, is like herding cats!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Either because it’s a point of law that they missed or it’s either a line-item or an assumption in the contract they have with one another. If it’s just made up by the judge, then the judge has problems. If it’s a reasonable interpretation or assumption by a dealer that they were entitled to the same rates, then Ford has a problem.


29 posted on 06/12/2011 4:35:28 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EBH

I don’t understand the ruling.

They paid the negotiated price and want the same T&C’s as other dealers who may have sold more vehicles and would naturally be given a price concession that other dealers didn’t get.

That’s the way it works in my industry. There is standard pricing along with Terms and Conditions.

You get what you negotiate for and if you negotiate nothing more than what is offered there is no obligation for the supplier to give you the same deal someone else got.


30 posted on 06/12/2011 10:21:32 AM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

No way! That is not who business is done and how contract negotiations work.

You negotiate the deal you want.

Some are better than others.


31 posted on 06/12/2011 10:24:47 AM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Well, we can go by how you feel about it, or by what the judge said:

Corrigan says Ford's use of the program breached its franchise agreements.

"Westgate showed that the CPA program, through its scheme of unrealistically high published wholesale prices and secretive unpublished discounts, systematically violated the ... requirement that Ford sell medium and heavy trucks to dealers at prices and discounts that were published in accordance with all dealer Terms of Sale Bulletins." [emphasis added]

Now, you can argue (as Ford likely will on appeal) that the judge is wrong, but you should refrain from exclaiming that it is not how "business is done."
32 posted on 06/12/2011 10:45:09 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; dools0007world; major-pelham

I understand distribution, dealership and franchise law.

Not all dealerships or franchisee’s are equal.

BTW, I am in a position to practice it as a dealer for two VoIP suppliers and the equipment. They handed us a standard contract and I balked until I got what I wanted.

Everyone else probably pays more than us.

Same thing with the agent contracts we have. I negotiated very different %’s of pay and changed the T&C’s to something closer to what I wanted.

On the ISP side of our business, same thing.

Our construction business doesn’t really have the ability to negotiated better terms for parts and supplies. You can get slightly better pricing but ultimately the advantage comes from negotiated terms with the customer and our ability to beat the estimated time for completion.

On our maintenance company we have different deals with different companies. Not so favorable for us at this time but as we grow that business and understand the market better we will be able to negotiate more favorable terms.

That’s business.

BTW, we run and agent business from our VoIP business and only one person ever bothered to negotiate terms that made sense from his side and it’s worked out well.


33 posted on 06/12/2011 11:12:08 AM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: EBH
...the class action included all dealers who purchased a 600?series or higher truck from Ford from 1987 to 1997.

Well done, it only took 24 years.
/S

34 posted on 06/12/2011 1:15:52 PM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Having worked for a number of manufacturers, including one that sold exclusively through distributors, all I can say is that there is a legal limit to what one can and cannot do. From your comment, it appears as though you are unaware of the restrictions the manufacturer of a product may face.
35 posted on 06/12/2011 1:41:53 PM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Sort of like some companies get healthcare waivers and some don’t.


36 posted on 06/12/2011 1:48:43 PM PDT by Crawdad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

I may very well be unaware but that is my experience in telecom services and equipment.

You get the deal you negotiate for and agree upon.

When we started with one wholesale provider they refused to bugde. So I told them will perform “x” and what would be the T&C’s based on our achievement.

They told us (I was shocked) and I asked for a tiered performance but that the last two tiers will have to be higher.

We will provide many of the services they normally would (I charge for it as part of the package or by event).

There were some other elements but ultimately they agreed and they agreed to some other things.

I have a friend, who is a competitor but he absolutely didn’t get a deal anywhere like ours.

We even charge our clients more than most of our competitors but we are a trusted advisor relationship and there’s a cost associated with that.

Our work on the telecom, ISP and Construction businesses are custom. Each client has unique requirements and their environments are unique.

When buy the equipment, cabling, parts and supplies are about the same from supplier to supplier.

Even when we were in the cabling business there were no real price advantages from suppliers. I had a couple of competitors who had better pricing on supplies but that never made the difference in the deal or the ultimate profit.

Ooops, gotta take of something....


37 posted on 06/12/2011 3:33:30 PM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: EBH

>> “If I negotiate a price cut/concession...why would the terms of that deal need to be revealed to my competition?” <<

.
Because every Franchised Dealer has the right of expectation of an equal footing. Why else would they sign the contract?

If Ford wished to play favorites, they should have included that provision in all of their dealer contracts.


38 posted on 06/12/2011 3:48:33 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

This has nothing to do with Obama.


39 posted on 06/12/2011 3:51:07 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121

>> “What if one dealer purchases more units than another?” <<

.
That’s in the contract, its called “Dealer Incentives,” and it is not done in secret.


40 posted on 06/12/2011 3:54:07 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Cuyahoga County judge Corrigan? My bet is that he’s a liberal hack. Ford should appeal.


41 posted on 06/12/2011 3:55:05 PM PDT by meyer (We will not sit down and shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dools0007world

>> “Excuse me, Ford has a right to negotiate any way it pleases with each individual dealership.” <<

.
No, they do not. They have a contractual arrangement, and must abide by it.


42 posted on 06/12/2011 3:57:08 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

The current “GM” cannot be a victim of the UAW, since they are a division of the UAW.


43 posted on 06/12/2011 4:03:35 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

>> “They paid the negotiated price and want the same T&C’s as other dealers who may have sold more vehicles and would naturally be given a price concession that other dealers didn’t get.” <<

.
You have zero understanding of franchise business.


44 posted on 06/12/2011 4:07:30 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Going 'EGYPT' - 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
This has nothing to do with Obama.

More than likely, it may have something to do with the closing of 1 or more Ford facilities that are within the boundaries of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland area). Last time I drove by the Brookpark engine plant, the parking lot was completely empty. That's a huge facility. That was last year, but it may well remain empty. Ol' Corrigan might be seeking revenge for Ford leaving his town.

45 posted on 06/12/2011 4:08:35 PM PDT by meyer (We will not sit down and shut up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

You know, I am actually getting pretty tired of people telling me I don’t know anything.

I have owned everything from a Quickstop to my latest company REO management services.

Since we make a lot of money and have for more than 30 years and are pretty much debt free I’ll take my experience over the word of everyone else, until I am proven wrong.

There is a standard contract price and there is a negotiated price.

You get what you negotiate for and if you don’t understand that then it’s not surprising you don’t see my point of view.

So tell me, oh smarter than me, what do you do for work?


46 posted on 06/12/2011 4:28:52 PM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Apparently Ford also doesn’t understand the franchise business.

Why aren’t you advising them?

You could make a killing telling everyone they don’t anything.


47 posted on 06/12/2011 4:29:43 PM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Apparently Ford also doesn’t understand the franchise business.

Why aren’t you advising them?

You could make a killing telling everyone they don’t know anything.

Why, knowledge like that is invaluable. Particularly for its vacuous and broadly unspecific nature.

It’s just the kind of useful information I look for that can really protect my business while putting it on the right path to accelerate growth.

Thanks again for your detailed warning.


48 posted on 06/12/2011 4:38:19 PM PDT by Vendome ("Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it anyway")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: EBH

Price-fixing laws require a supplier to make comparable offers to all its equivalent customers. For instance, a company that sells C cell batteries would have to make comparable offers to drug stores, another set of comparable offers to electronics stores, etc.

You have to be able to demonstrate you dealt evenly with these customers.


49 posted on 06/12/2011 4:51:19 PM PDT by gitmo (Hatred of those who think differently is the left's unifying principle.-Ralph Peters NY Post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite
Oh, you mean stuff like the 1970 'Cuda 340 which sold for under $4,000 when new and now goes at auction for a cool $50,000+ in excellent condition? Here's a nice yellow one for sale for that price.

Or the many run of the '69 Cameros that go for $40K or more, all those SS and SS/RS models?

Or maybe we should pick on Ford, whose original GT40 won LeMans four times in a row, from 1966 to 1969. It was pricy in the day but now goes for $100,000.

Here's two for sale at Hemmings.

50 posted on 06/12/2011 5:12:23 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson