Ford Cuts Mach-E prices by thousands

What I meant was did Ford intentionally overproduce the Mach-E in order to drive down their CAFE number AND allow themselves to sell more of their profitable large SUVs and light trucks without fear of an EPA penalty? In other words, was this massive oversupply of the Mach-E actually planned?
In other news, the sun came up in the east again today.
 
"they" would be Ford and Jim Farley specifically. CEO's get paid millions to to predict the future. That's it. Farley failed. Given the dealers at the time of launch told him it wouldn't work, he wouldn't listen. He also wouldn't pay attention to see people wanted hybrid mavericks - they could have sold many more than they have. Its a management failure.

Toyota hasn't cut back plans. They continue on the hybrid / plug in hybrid model. A year ago everyone said they were way behind. Possibly Toyota management has driven a few cars and grew up in a middle class family and has a clue.

Say what you want about Musk - and I won't buy a Tesla either - but Musk is a visionary. He invented the entire modern EV industry on his own. Yes, there earnings have fallen a lot - but are still the highest in the car industry by a mile.

You yourself have lamented on buying a Bolt. It seems like a practical afordable family car. American's don't want to be told what to buy. They could care what power them however. If they could get a car powered by banana's they wouldn't care - assuming there was an ample and affordable supply of banana's.

Ford upper management failure. IMHO.
Toyota is the perfect example. They didnt jump into EVs and if you remember correctly everyone was trashing them for that. Seems like they were 100% right. Toyota is not known for sports cars. BTW- I was on Toyotas side in this forum and had some lively debates with others in here when they were trashing Toyota for being behind in EV development. I was right, easy to find the threads on it.

Elon Musk said many times they need 50% growth ... they are down in the 20s with slashed profit margins. Your mentioned how good their earnings are at a time they are falling, we have to see where it stops. They even put off the Mexico plant.

Bolt is not a family car, it's a puddle jumper for local running around that needs no maintainance. Like a golf cart in communities.

Calling Ford a failure (of which I am no fan of Ford AT ALL) to me is rough, considering the entire EV industry in the USA is struggling doesnt make sense to me especially since they make more money than Tesla who has been in business for well over a decade and only started making money the last few years. Musk should have known better, he has only one type of vehicle and nothing to fall back on.
Here are his results,
Screenshot 2024-02-23 at 10.01.45 AM.jpg

Ford still makes more money, through UAW strike and EV start up,
Screenshot 2024-02-23 at 9.57.33 AM.jpg

It's all good, I have no interest in either, Im just confused, you seem to be ignoring that EV roll out is not even close to public acceptance
 
Getting back on topic here, am I correct in assuming that CAFE standards are based upon production figures for a model year as opposed to sales? Could it be that the production of the Mach-E serves some nefarious purpose?
I dont think so, I think they have to turn out expensive vehicles in order to re-coup or not lose as much money per vehicle. The EV thing is an experiment by the ICE makers on how to turn profits and what the public will want most.
Maybe high performance will trump the inconvenience of an EV. Charge it up and be able to beat anyone on the road with a like ICE vehicle. The high performance group spends a lot of money on ICE so maybe they would have on a powerful EV.

Im just guessing and so is every automaker. We live in a world where do to Social Media everyone expects over night results, yet it took Tesla over TEN years with EVs to start making money. So lets give the ICE makers who do make money every year the same ten year grace period to turn profits on an EV, right?
In the mean time, they make money hand over feet on the ICE and unknown to anyone in here the Legacy USA makers workers create more revenue per worker than that of a Tesla worker.
 
You got it. Not many people know that. Gotta love the Clint Eastwood westerns
Way off topic but..... LoL. I never could get over just how awesome and gifted an actor that Eli Wallach was. He was able to do that amazing transformation from himself, a little old simple New York fellow into what could pass as a 100% authentic looking , sounding
evil, yet funny (at times) mexican bandit. He also pulled off a similar job playing vs Steve McQueen/Ule Brenner/James Coburn and a bunch of others in the great classic film called the Magnificent Seven from the late 60s.
 
What I meant was did Ford intentionally overproduce the Mach-E in order to drive down their CAFE number AND allow themselves to sell more of their profitable large SUVs and light trucks without fear of an EPA penalty? In other words, was this massive oversupply of the Mach-E actually planned?

I dont believe so.

The massive oversupply is Ford doing what all manufacturers that sell through the dealer models do - stuff the channel.
Now the channel has to move them, this is why big threee auto numbers have little meaning selling means selling to dealers that may or may not sell what they bought.

The mach is hardly alone when it comes to the massive oversupply of inventory, big 3 dealer lots are full.

Ford could have sold almost all of these early if their dealers hadn't sat on utterly stupid ADM numbers.
If Ford built a better product they would have attracted more Tesla clients.

The biggest mistake of all was GM not continuing on from the EV1 and Volt, they had it all, ICE,EV, Hybrid - FIRST - and let it all go.
 
Getting back on topic here, am I correct in assuming that CAFE standards are based upon production figures for a model year as opposed to sales?
Appears so. EV also receive a multiplier (This has been covered on BITOG before). Still it's a lot of capital to invest in just trying to game the system. They also receive carbon credits rather than having to go out and buy them all from say Tesla.

https://fbaum.unc.edu/lobby/_107th/..._Activities/NHTSA/NHTSA_Cafe_Overview_FAQ.htm

"Manufacturers can earn CAFE “credits” to offset deficiencies in their CAFE performances. Specifically, when the average fuel economy of either the passenger car or light truck fleet for a particular model year exceeds the established standard, the manufacturer earns credits. The amount of credit a manufacturer earns is determined by multiplying the tenths of a mile per gallon that the manufacturer exceeded the CAFE standard in that model year by the amount of vehicles they manufactured in that model year. These credits can be applied to any three consecutive model years immediately prior to or subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned. The credits earned and applied to the model years prior to the model year for which the credits are earned are termed “carry back” credits, while those applied to model years subsequent to the model year in which the credits are earned are known as “carry forward” credits. Failure to exercise carry forward credits within the three years immediately following the year in which they are earned will result in the forfeiture of those credits. Credits cannot be passed between manufacturers or between fleets, e.g., from domestic passenger cars to light trucks."
 
EV sales forecast - (as previously posted its not just ford)
We dont need forecasts, all we need to do is look at EVs on line and see what is readily available. Which should not be, production is very low but demand is even lower. So it is not inventory holding back EV sales, it is the consumer who doesnt want them as originally projected. On top of everything, other than estimates by outside agencies Tesla is the only automaker that does not release USA sales numbers.

Screenshot 2024-02-23 at 2.26.38 PM.jpg

source = https://seekingalpha.com/article/4666328-tesla-faces-major-headwinds-in-ev-demand-in-2024
 
The problem with EVs is that they remain fairly costly, largely due to the cost of current batteries. If I could easily pick up a 250 mile range EV for the price of a new Accord Hybrid I would probably be more inclined to buy one.
An additional factor is that makers have in many cases introduced premium level EVs rather than more basic models that would be more likely to sell in volume and serve to introduce many buyers to the realities of EV ownership. If the neighbors or a co-worker finds an EV quite usable then the average buyer would be more likely to consider one.
Having said this, if there's really a year's inventory of these Fords on hand then we can expect heavy discounting. I have no idea what Ford offers to floor plan these EVs named Mustang, but neither Ford nor its dealers can long afford to finance that level of inventory.
Probably cheaper just to pay any applicable CAFE penalties than it would be to produce EVs that can't find buyers.
Markets must clear. It's just a matter of the price level at which this one will do so.
 
It's all good, I have no interest in either, Im just confused, you seem to be ignoring that EV roll out is not even close to public acceptance
Your the one that said Ford made a mach e because DC and the rest of the globes governments told them to and they had no choice. That's not what they did - proof evident - vehicle that doesn't even meet the requirement of the tax credit.

Further proof evident is Toyota - the globe's largest automaker didn't pay attention at all. Apparently they didn't feel forced?

Farley was trying to jump on the Tesla bandwagon making a ridiculous amount of profit per vehicle in 2001 / 2002. It blew up in his face. His dealers were pretty sure it wouldn't fly either - was discussed here a lot. Some apparently believe Ford is a well run company and Farley is an awesome CEO. My opinion differs.
 
Back
Top Bottom