I wonder whether the apparent dumpster fires that are called Ford, GM and what remains of Chrysler are the result of misguided attempts to shrink to profitability? All three have drastically shrunk both the breadth of their offerings as well as their production capacity. In the case of Ford, if they could produce more Mavericks then their dealers would not need, nor be able, to mark these things way up over MSRP and the same is true of the Bronco and the mainstream half ton pickups. If supply were more in line with demand that would bring many more customers into the brand. This is also true for GM and the Chrysler brands in the US and a buyer who has good experience with the brand is likely to return to it, which is what these manufactures need.
Shrinking to profitability never seems to work yet remains a favorite B-school grad strategy.
It seems to me that it's a lot easier to teach an engineer what they need to know about finance and economics than it is to teach an MBA what they need to know about engineering.
Maybe we have our corporate leadership qualifications backward?
Shrinking to profitability never seems to work yet remains a favorite B-school grad strategy.
It seems to me that it's a lot easier to teach an engineer what they need to know about finance and economics than it is to teach an MBA what they need to know about engineering.
Maybe we have our corporate leadership qualifications backward?
Last edited: