What do you think is different about them? My question is aimed at why does Ford not have to ask for money when the other two do? Is it strictly related to how well their sales are doing or is there something different about how they are run?
What is the difference between the "big three"?
- Thread starter John K
- Start date
- Status
Ford is in the position that they are in because they foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year. They were able to obtain almost 20 billion (yes with a b) in lines of credit backed by their assets. As long as things turn around by 2010 Ford will be able to pull through, however, they will be in the same position as GM and Chrysler if the recession lasts into 2011.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Quote:
What is the difference between the "big three"?
The amount of money that they'll lose per quarter.
What is the difference between the "big three"?
The amount of money that they'll lose per quarter.
Ford is no different than the other 2. Ford ran into its problems about 2 years before the other guys and it hit bottom before all this other financial mess hit and was in recovery mode so the optics of it appear better for Ford when in reality they had lucky timing.
Last edited:
"They foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year"
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
Plus in my opinion the quality of Ford is higher then the other two.
But I haven't driven anything brand spankin' new from them, so that may have changed.
But I haven't driven anything brand spankin' new from them, so that may have changed.
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
Originally Posted By: Johnny
"They foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year"
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
Exactly.
Originally Posted By: hone eagle
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
X2
"They foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year"
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
Exactly.
Originally Posted By: hone eagle
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
X2
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
This never happened, sorry.
Originally Posted By: Duffman77
Ford ran into its problems about 2 years before the other guys and it hit bottom before all this other financial mess hit and was in recovery mode so the optics of it appear better for Ford when in reality they had lucky timing.
Yea sure, except GM went to these same lenders around the same time Ford did and were turned down.
The difference between the Big 3 is that Ford has been properly managed over the last several years.
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
This never happened, sorry.
Originally Posted By: Duffman77
Ford ran into its problems about 2 years before the other guys and it hit bottom before all this other financial mess hit and was in recovery mode so the optics of it appear better for Ford when in reality they had lucky timing.
Yea sure, except GM went to these same lenders around the same time Ford did and were turned down.
The difference between the Big 3 is that Ford has been properly managed over the last several years.
Ford's lineup in the near future has a lot of gems and only a few duds.
GM's lineup in the near future has a few superstars and a fair (but shrinking) number of duds.
Chrysler's lineup in the near future has the Viper, the Charger police car, and a bunch of rental fodder.
That's how I tend to see it...
GM's lineup in the near future has a few superstars and a fair (but shrinking) number of duds.
Chrysler's lineup in the near future has the Viper, the Charger police car, and a bunch of rental fodder.
That's how I tend to see it...
Originally Posted By: hone eagle
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
It seems you guys are right. I was under the impression that the loans did take place. My mistake. I will now install my hat and return to the corner.
Originally Posted By: Ryan02SS
Does no one remember the $25 Billion Fed load to Ford in 2005 to keep them afloat. They are no different than GM or Chrysler. They just did it earlier.
No one remembers because there was no fed loan
It seems you guys are right. I was under the impression that the loans did take place. My mistake. I will now install my hat and return to the corner.
Originally Posted By: Johnny
"They foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year"
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
If you call running up huge losses during average economic times `good management`I would like your advise on what stocks not to buy.
"They foresaw this recession and mortgaged all of their assets early last year"
"Ford when in reality they had lucky timing".
I call it good management and perfect timing.
If you call running up huge losses during average economic times `good management`I would like your advise on what stocks not to buy.
Chrysler got themselves in trouble by depending almost solely on their trucks (Ram, Jeep lineup) and bigger passenger cars all using larger engines. There is no decent small car, fuel economy minded car in the lineup, and none on the near horizon. Ouch.
Ford was having financial problems earlier and saw more trouble in its crystal ball. Financing was available at the time, and they took it. Smart move in retrospect! They also have a stout lineup with many good things in and coming to the showroom. Their quality rankings continue to improve and difference between them and other competitors continues to narrow.
GM - why so many nameplates? Killing off dealerships dependent on all the nameplates will be hard, but still. Making essentially one vehicle then slapping three nameplates on it along with the marketing can't be cheap?
Ford was having financial problems earlier and saw more trouble in its crystal ball. Financing was available at the time, and they took it. Smart move in retrospect! They also have a stout lineup with many good things in and coming to the showroom. Their quality rankings continue to improve and difference between them and other competitors continues to narrow.
GM - why so many nameplates? Killing off dealerships dependent on all the nameplates will be hard, but still. Making essentially one vehicle then slapping three nameplates on it along with the marketing can't be cheap?
- Status
Similar threads
