Ford guys, where do you see this heading?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
4,989
Location
Kuwait
I ended up having quite a long conversation with my boss after work, and I was wondering what other people's thoughts on the subject were, just out of interest.

I'm not really a fan of Ford's current lineup of vehicles, especially the Lincoln line. It seems Ford is positioning itself as a boutique car manufacturer, loading cars up with all sort of gadgets and gizmos, and basing everything on one or two platforms. It seems they would rather sell a few expensive Fords, than provide Fords for the masses around the world.

I realize this has a lot to do with consumer demand for high tech vehicles, which I suppose explains the price bit. But a base model U251 Explorer on the old platform used to start at about $25,250 here, whereas the new U502 Explorer on the D4 platform starts at $34,680. That's $9,430 more than the previous model, which is quite a difference over just one model year! I realize the old version was truck based, and SUVs are becoming more of a fashion item, hence the switch to a car platform, but such a price increase is just ludicrous! If people are willing to pay that sort of price, I suppose it isn't as much of a problem, but that doesn't seem to be happening at the moment (at least here). And speaking of features, I think it's kind of ironic that a commercial version of the Crown Victoria comes with a power driver's seat, whilst the base model Taurus comes with a manual driver's seat.

Considering the D4 is a revised version of the D3 platform, which is essentially Volvo's P1, you have the Taurus, MKS, Flex, MKT and Explorer all on the same platform. I also never really understood the point of the Five Hundred/Montego/Sable and Freestyle/Taurus X either, all of which lived an extremely short lifespan.

I remember being quite confused many years ago, when Alan Mulally made a statement about how the Taurus should not go away, because it was the 'best selling car' in America. I suppose I can see where he was coming from, considering it's production run, but much like the Crown Victoria, the Taurus was fleet only in the mid-2000s, and lost significant market share, which eventually lead to its discontinuation. So maybe that could have been worded a little differently.

That said, in my opinion, the Lincoln lineup should not be badge engineered Fords and is in serious need of a remake if the brand is to survive. Not only is the MK-whatever nameplates difficult to follow (we have customers mixing up MKS, MKX and MKT all the time), but with the standard MKS costing $60,900 with the 3.7L and front wheel drive, I can see why it isn't so popular. We haven't got the 3.5L Ecoboost version with AWD in just yet, but realistically, how much is that going to cost? In that price range, you are competing with the Germans, and I really don't blame people if they prefer a BMW 5-Series or Mercedes E-Klasse over the MKS.

Anyway, just interested to hear what other peoples' opinions were.
 
I think the modern Lincoln line-up is rediculous.

Yes, they are nice cars, but they are so obviously re-badged Ford models, with huge price increases, it's amazing they sell.

They need to do what Cadillac is doing - make cars that truely look like nothing else that is produced by the parent company.

As for the price increase in the Explorer, it doesn't suprise me - they went from a cheaper, older truck platform to a far more expensive re-worked car platform with a all-new body. i like the new Exoplorer, and it seems to be selling well. Good for Ford.
 
Lincoln is going up against Cadillac. The new Explorer is going up against the Traverse. Maybe you haven't checked out the competition, but it's comparably priced.

The constant increases in new vehicle pricing across all makes has convinced me I probably will never buy another new vehicle. Not because I can't afford it, but IMO it doesn't make financial sense.

So to answer your question, no, Ford isn't moving into boutique status.
 
I don't know the answer to your question, but one thing occurred to me the other day. You know what car I NEVER see, as in I've probably seen fewer than 10 of them? The new Ford Taurus. And I have to think this is a pretty big part of the market? Granted, I'm in the land of wagons and SUV's, and the Taurus doesn't come in a wagon (SHO wagon anyone??). Are they selling any of these??
 
Originally Posted By: Falcon_LS
I also never really understood the point of the Five Hundred/Montego/Sable and Freestyle/Taurus X either, all of which lived an extremely short lifespan....

I remember being quite confused many years ago, when Alan Mulally made a statement about how the Taurus should not go away, because it was the 'best selling car' in America.


Several years ago, someone at Ford had this "bright idea" to re-name every Ford vehicle so that they all started with the letter "F" and every Mercury vehicle would start with "M."
confused.gif
33.gif
So when they re-designed the Taurus, they called it the Five Hundred, and called the Sable the Montego. When Alan Mulally took over the company, he basically said how dumb of an idea that was and renamed the Five Hundred back to the Taurus, and the Montego back to the Sable. Ford may have let the Taurus get stale, but at least everyone knew what it was. (And at one time, it WAS the best selling car in America) Hardly anyone had even heard of the Five Hundred and knew it existed. Same with the Freestyle. It’s basically a CUV version of the Taurus, why not call it a Taurus X? It has a recognizable name and people will know what it is.

The new Explorer, being much more car-like, has replaced the Taurus X.
 
I've complained about it ad-nauseum.

Especially divesting itself of Mazda and Kia.

They never properly utilized Kia and I still have no idea what they were expecting from Mazda.

I can see losing Land Rover and to a slightly lesser extent Volvo. They already had a competent truck and SUV lineup and had extensive operations in Europe. (plus, LandRover had already bled $6 billion out of BMW) But Mazda was serving as a de-facto "Ford Asia".

But what did Mazda do for Ford? Gave them a design to be competitive with the ubiquitous "Camccordtima". Have you driven a Fusion lately? Thank Mazda. The Contour (Mondeo) was too small and by the time the Fusion was released, the Taurus was an outdated fleet and rental car.

Quote:
"Does anyone actually own a white Taurus, or are they all rentals?"


As far as Kia, I can't really fault Ford on that one. Nobody was properly utilizing their stakes in Korean marques in the '90s. Chrysler with Hyundai, GM with Daewoo... but GM has since turned Daewoo around and has had quite a bit of design success.
 
I watched on a business channel the History of the Ford family and their automobile line. It seems that when Ford becomes very, very successful and makes lots of money, the family seems to find a way to get it back into trouble financially. Management personnel are still controlled by the family and the family can be both an asset and a liability in that company. I was sad to see the Mercury Brand bite the dust. I see ads for one of the Lincoln automobiles that looks like a piece of junk, and the ad continues to run ad infinitum ad nausem. Ford has reduced the number of automobile platforms that they use to manufacture automobiles.

Just to let the audience know a little bit of history: Henry Ford started his second automobile company, which would fail and it would become the Cadillac Company. Later on, there was one investor who asked for help from Henry Leland, a Detroit Machinist and the guy was able to pull Cadillac out of bankruptcy. General Motors would eventually buy Cadillac July 29, 1909.

Ford was no stranger to failure.
 
for the last 30-40 years Ford and Chrysler have always been pinning their hopes one or two models to sell well (Mustang, minivan,taurus, explorer, Grand cherokee, fusion etc.) They have not really had sucess with a broad line up. Its either feast or famine (new Taurus, Flex etc.)
 
Originally Posted By: Mustang2008Z
I watched on a business channel the History of the Ford family and their automobile line. It seems that when Ford becomes very, very successful and makes lots of money, the family seems to find a way to get it back into trouble financially. Management personnel are still controlled by the family and the family can be both an asset and a liability in that company. I was sad to see the Mercury Brand bite the dust. I see ads for one of the Lincoln automobiles that looks like a piece of junk, and the ad continues to run ad infinitum ad nausem. Ford has reduced the number of automobile platforms that they use to manufacture automobiles.

Just to let the audience know a little bit of history: Henry Ford started his second automobile company, which would fail and it would become the Cadillac Company. Later on, there was one investor who asked for help from Henry Leland, a Detroit Machinist and the guy was able to pull Cadillac out of bankruptcy. General Motors would eventually buy Cadillac July 29, 1909.

Ford was no stranger to failure.


One very minor correction to that version of history...and no slight against you, there are many versions available, most of them with flaws.

Anyway, the second company that Henry founded did not fail under Henry. Henry walked away because he had major differences of opinion with his investors. The investors wanted to build expensive cars for the rich and Henry wanted to build cheap cars for the masses. Henry wanted to build his name and rep by racing cars and then leveraging that name affixed to cheap cars everyone could afford. His investors thought the money spent on race cars and toys were a waste of capital. So they parted ways.

The investors let Ford take his name and they brought in Leland who at the time was the largest machine shop owner in Detroit and a very succesful man in his own right. The first Cadillac was essentially a Ford designed car with a Henry Leland engine.

An interesting side note to tie this with the OP and Lincoln. It was Henry Leland who founded the Lincoln Motor Company after he left Cadillac, he then sold Lincoln(in BK) to Ford in the early 20's iirc.
 
Last edited:
I like the look of the new Taurus. Its probably the nicest one yet -its subtle but definitely upscale. (And better looking than Lincoln IMO)

Having said that, the price of new is getting to be ridiculous.

Keep in mind it went from mid-size to Full.

I think Ford and Chevy have come a long way over the last few years -And I normally buy smaller imports (Subaru, Honda and BMW)
 
I don't know that Ford necessarily is trying to become more "boutique" rather than simply changing with the times and simply giving people what they want, as you said.

However, if they really are becoming more niche-oriented in their approach, I think I see the sense in that. Playing to the lowest common denominator might get you good sales figures when times are good, but it's not really sustainable because it means making your products into commodities that are easily replaced. If you play to specific tastes, you may not make the sales numbers, but you will generate a following that can be counted on. I think that explains why companies like Mercedes, Porsche, BMW, and Lexus do so well: it's not because they make cars for everyone, but because each one plays to people for whom they are the only game in town.
 
Agreed on new prices for a Taurus, which looks great, but for the Limited package you could buy a Lexus... Who are they kidding? Who in their right mind would spend $34k for a Taurus when you can get a IS or ES Lexus ? That's tough company they are playing with.
 
Last edited:
Unless Fords stated goals are way out of alignment with reality. I reject entirely the premise that Ford is in any way positioning themselves as a boutique manufacturer. The capital investments they have announced in Asia and in other regions as well as their stated sales goals just don't line up with a company looking to sell fewer cars.

It was less than two months ago that they made this very ambitious announcement:


Ford Mid Decade Outlook


"Capital spending will average about $6 billion annually through mid-decade, an increase from $3.9 billion in capital spending in 2010 "

...IMO, not exactly the actions of a company looking to contract. They are planning massive capital investments all over the globe!
 
Originally Posted By: nepadriver
Agreed on new prices for a Taurus, which looks great, but for the Limited package you could buy a Lexus... Who are they kidding? Who in their right mind would spend $33k for a Taurus when you can get a IS or ES Lexus ? That's tough company they are playing with.


I would.
 
I own two Lincoln's and in the past 7 years, every Lincoln dealer close to me, within 30 miles, has shut down. This is 5 dealerships. I now have to take my Lincoln's to a Ford dealership for service and the one I go to also sells Lincoln's now. I love my Lincolns and I think Ford has come along way but the Lincoln Brand is in danger of being gone, it would seem.
 
Originally Posted By: kkreit01
Originally Posted By: nepadriver
Agreed on new prices for a Taurus, which looks great, but for the Limited package you could buy a Lexus... Who are they kidding? Who in their right mind would spend $33k for a Taurus when you can get a IS or ES Lexus ? That's tough company they are playing with.


I would.


Based on Ford's sales figures, you are the minority. The Focus ,Fiesta and Fusion are selling like gangbusters, and should be, no mention of Taurus at all.

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=34834

In fact, go back thru 2011 month by month, nada for the Taurus:
http://www.blueovalnews.com/index.php?categoryid=22

Don't get me wrong, I had a loaded 2003 Taurus, got it for a song (about 25% off sticker), but other wise I wouldn't pay what they are asking. At best you can get the dealer down to $31,000 from a $35,000 car (maybe more), but that is still 2k away from a base IS ? Nope, not for me.
 
Please update the History Channel with your information. I am sure they would appreciate correcting their information. I already knew that there was a parting of ways between Henry Ford and the investors of the second automobile venture which would become Cadillac.
 
I'm sure they wouldn't care in the least.

As is often the case when you try and tell a 20 hour story in one hour, accuracy takes a back seat to expediency.

In the History Channels mind, I'm sure it was "close enough"...lol...but inaccurate none the less.
 
They need to bring back the Lincoln Mark Coupes. I love those rides. They had a good looking Mark IX prototype some years ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom