Bye Ford, we'll miss you

UPI | The Bear's Lair ^ | 3/17/2003 | Martin Hutchinson

[FITZ]

If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have $50 000 SUVs

There were unions in the 70's when the cars cost $5000 new. Unions that got a wage earner enough to live middle class on one income ---back then that wasn't so outrageous to have the father be the only one making money supporting a wife and more than 2 kids, a home and all that which has become more difficult today with two wage earners.

[ATCNavyRetiree]

Buy one of those lil jobbers, and some big rig will have ya stuck in his grille!

[Dog Gone]

Ford's problem is that the CEO is a leftist wacko. It was doing pretty good until he took over. Leftists ruin businesses. See Loral and Time-Warner.

[MississippiMan]

I can't think of a Ford product I would buy.

Me either. In addition to the fact that their trucks have been butt ugly for the past several years, I've now had so many bad experiences with Ford products that I'll probably never buy another one. They have a multitude of problems. Unions are a nasty boil on the butts of virtually everything they touch, but in addition to that, Ford management at the executive level is also atrocious. I had serious problems that they were utterly uninterested in. Write letters to top officials and never get so much as a kiss-my-butt form letter in return. A company can only ignore its customers for so long. Then they won't have those customers.

MM

[Jhoffa_]

Oh I know.. I had an 87 hardtop.

Loved that car. 85 mph was midway through third gear.

..and it was a 5 speed.

[uncitizen]

Then the educated superior one has the same motive as the uneducated inferior one ---they both want more money. I'm not pro-union but why should a CEO be able to demand $1 million or more a year and it's okay but a union worker shouldn't ask for $30,000 a year? It's not like anyone is the owner, only stockholders are the owners ---how do CEOs get by with their outrageous salaries?

Even the least trained of union workers makes more than $30K. That barely the value of their benefits. My uncles job was to light a furnace in a steel mill. He used to sleep on the job and get paid over $100K. Never graduated high school.

OTOH, i'm very close to someone who is a CEO. He doesn't sleep on the job. He barely sleeps at all. He has a tremendous responsibility and a great deal of stress. The managers all come to him with their problems which he has to solve, the board is pressuring him to do things their way instead of the way he knows things should be done, the investors are counting on him to not lose their money but make their money grow. And the man has no time for his family as he works 6 days a week, sometimes 7. I am beginning to understand why CEO's are paid so much.

[gcruse]

Too many heated adjectives in the article. I don't trust the expertise of people who feel they need hot rhetoric to make a point.

[meyer]

Oddly enough, success in the automobile industry is determined by producing cars people want to buy -- and buyers are not always completely rational. Chrystler was bailed out, but had the good fortune to get a CEO who saw the marketing trend. I can't think of a Ford product I would buy. Heck, I have trouble thinking of a Ford product, other than its trucks.

Yes, buyers determine the success of a car company and style plays as big a part as anything in that decision (along with past experience). Chrysler makes some beautiful cars and trucks, though the ties to Germany are too strong for me in light of recent UN events. GM still makes some fine-looking cars, but someone got loose in the design department with a great big ugly-stick. I'm sorry if this is offensive to anybody, but the Aztek has got to be about the ugliest car on the road today.

As for Ford, well, I have one - an Explorer. I like their trucks and the Mustang is fine. I'm not fond of their attempt to make their SUV's more car-like of late. C'mon, what is independent rear suspension doing on an SUV? I'd prefer they put solid axles and stiffer springs on them and sell them for their intended purpose. I also don't understand the styling of small wagons like the Focus (and a few others) - maybe I'm getting old, but I think they look silly.

Sorry if I swayed off topic, but I think my rantings illustrate the silly things that go through our minds when we look for a car.

[Paulus Invictus]

Ford makes junk cars and the Taurus is a real POJ (Piece of Junk!). I just rented a new one and it had the worst suspension and driveability that it scared me.

[Willie Green]

The managers all come to him with their problems which he has to solve,

That's the idiot's own fault for surrounding himself with incompetent suckups.

[uncitizen]

Read the tagline idiot.

[P.O.E.]

My thoughts exactly.

I think we might go for another Jeep.

[FITZ]

Even the least trained of union workers makes more than $30K.

Of course if the cars are engineered very poorly it isn't the least trained union workers who would be to blame ----you'd have to blame the engineers and the CEOs aren't doing a good job if they allow poor engineering.

I don't have a problem with their engineering myself because my Ford is past 200,000 miles and still going strong. I know people driving Fords from the 70's so I think they were worth the money. I know someone who bought a 79 Ranger when it was 6 years old for $3600 and could still sell it for that much.

[meyer]

Then the educated superior one has the same motive as the uneducated inferior one ---they both want more money. I'm not pro-union but why should a CEO be able to demand $1 million or more a year and it's okay but a union worker shouldn't ask for $30,000 a year? It's not like anyone is the owner, only stockholders are the owners ---how do CEOs get by with their outrageous salaries?

Hey, we're all free agents to a certain extent. I'm not against people bargaining for the best deal they can get, as an individual or collectively. But, I'm also in favor of the right-to-work and employ-at-will laws. Free enterprise should be free.

[Dan from Michigan]

Jaques Nassar is a major reason for Ford's ails.

Good riddance to him.

[FITZ]

I'm not against people bargaining for the best deal they can get, as an individual or collectively.

I'm not for unions ---but I think when businesses began to be huge stockholder corporations things changed. There is no single owner, no one is accountable. It's different when people work for a small business and actually know an owner ---less likely for unions to form in the first place. Corporations and unions go hand-in-hand for a reason.

[meyer]

Of course if the cars are engineered very poorly it isn't the least trained union workers who would be to blame ----you'd have to blame the engineers and the CEOs aren't doing a good job if they allow poor engineering.

If you saw how much of a car is outsourced to third-world countries, you'd be quite amazed. I have a Ford with a Mexican transmission, a German engine (which isn't necessarily a good thing), countless dashboard and interior parts from Mexico, China, Tiawan, and elsewhere. Body panels and final assembly are about the only things done in the US on my Explorer. Point is, it isn't necessarily engineering nor is it the union worker that are a primary cause of poorly made products. A lot of it is lowest bidder junk.

[truth_seeker]

"GM, Ford, Daimler-Chrysler, Toyota and Volkswagen are the transnational giants of this cartel.
Most other automotive companies are merely puppets with incestuously entangled financial ties back to one of these Big Five."

I backed up to this post, after seeing the loooong list. I had hoped to find some summary, which would give proof to the Big Five notion.

In such a tabulation, the remainder "all other" category is typically small.

In this case, beyond the Big Five (as you call them) are some very noteworthy vehicle companies.

I cite Honda and BMW. Both build excellent, well designed, high quality products. Both have seen rising market share.

BMW has been reported to be the most profitable auto company.

The demise of the American auto companies would be attributable to the inferiority of car products. Thus far, trucks have propped up GM and Ford.

GM is such a smart company that it announced cancellation of Camero/Firebird WITHOUT a replacement.

GM cannot design/build the GTO domestically. It goes to Australian Holden sub to find a suitable product.

GM puts forth Design vehicles, one after the other. And doesn't build any.

I give Chrysler credit. They are bringing our a string of new vehicles. I believe Mercedes management will breath a lot of creativity into them.

GM creativity can be best viewed with the Aztek crossover beauty.

Now Ford. So far there is little evidence of sharing designs between Europe/world cars and US Ford cars. In other words, there isn't a combined design effort, since the Lincoln LS/Jaguar S series.

Likewise Volvo. Volvo just released just about the best overall SUV/Crossover vehicle XC 90. If they followed the Honda model, there would be a less costly version, with a Ford brand.

I am pretty impressed with the new line of products, from Nissan. The new 350Z car is a beauty, as are the Infinity GS35 (sedan and coupe).

Americans have shown a preference for European/Japanese automobiles in terms of design features, and a preference for American trucks in terms of design features.

SUVs fall between these categories. Hence the flurry of new crossover design combinations. And the resurgence of the "station wagon" segment (completely being missed by GM, Ford).

In the Crossover/wagon segment GM and Ford are sleeping at the wheel, thus far trying to compete simply with small SUVs.

[uncitizen]

We're talking at each other FITZ.

[FITZ]

A lot of it is lowest bidder junk.

So who is responsible for the lowest bidder policy?