Fords calls for action by the US government- remarks by Mark Field

[syko]

Just so people know Mark Fields could possible be the next CEO of the entire Ford world.

[Matt]

I was trying to paraphrase a lengthy speech into as few words as possible, i think in that context the term "crappy products" is more than justified.

You can't say that Ford (and GM's) current state is nothing to do with poor domestic product.

It's all well and good for Mark Fields to complain that Japanese saloons were selling better than "domestic" cars, but why?

Nothing to do with the Taurus etc., being rubbish compared to the competition?

Mark Fields himself admits as much: "vehicles that aimed to be all things to all people, but instead ended up being too little to too few."

Then you have the contradiction of the same Japanese saloons being beaten in Europe by cars like the Ford Mondeo and Opel/Vauxhall Vectra - products from "American" companies.

If they could do it in Europe and Australia, why couldn't GM & Ford compete in their own domestic (and patriotic) market?

Because Americans aren't stupid, and they aren't going to buy a second-rate car simply because it has 80% US sourced components, and was lovingly constructed by some poor guy in Detroit.

It is the same problem that Rover had - their cars were utter shite, and funnily enough sticking a little Union Flag on the back didn't make everyone in the UK rush out and buy one - so they went bust.

In the USA motor companies found that simply having cars that were "domestic" in terms of materials & manufacture doesn't matter when the "Foreigners" come along with something newer & prettier.

It is amazing that it has taken them untill now to realise that they need to be building something even newer and prettier - they wouldn't be in their current position if they had been doing that all along.

No one is denying that American companies have, for the most part, created inferior products for most of the past 3 decades. What I'm saying is that is old news. Basing your opinion of current American products on the cars they made 10-20-30 years ago is illogical. You're not paying attention to the current state of affairs in forming your opinion. I hear it all the time when having conversations with non-car-freaks. I'm just surprised to hear such outdated opinions on these forums.

[Matt]

The Japanese in particular are fantastic at learning from mistakes and taking a step back and figuring out the right road, by implementing this sort of ideal, instead of, in Chrysler's case, jumping from one 'Icon Car' to the next in an attempt to stay cool AND profitable, the US auto industry has a hope.

I actually think Chrysler has picked a unique and, so far, profitable way of improving their image. Viper, Prowler, Crossfire, Magnum, 300, Charger, upcoming Challenger - all have captured the attention of not just American consumers, but much of the world. I think the 300 has lasting sales power, at least in the US. They are EVERYWHERE and I still haven't grown tired of seeing them. The 300/Charger/Magnum have done for Chrysler what the Escalade did for Cadillac. It made them part of American pop culture for a new generation. It's now hard to see a rap video without one of the trio making an appearance. Using that momentum, Chrysler has started to infuse the rest of their line-up with a more upscale feel and bold styling cues. Better sales have allowed them to put forth more money into development of new technologies. DCX has finally started doing more tehcnology and component sharing and it has proven to be beneficial to both sides. Of the Big 3 (2.5, whatever), I think Chrysler is the one who most has its act together right now. Cadillac probably has the most clear vision and best execution of that vision, but Cadillac alone is not enough to pull GM out of the hole it has dug itself. Chrysler, on the other hand, has been the profitable half of the DCX partnership in the US.

[Coventrysucks]

Basing your opinion of current American products on the cars they made 10-20-30 years ago is illogical. You're not paying attention to the current state of affairs in forming your opinion. I hear it all the time when having conversations with non-car-freaks. I'm just surprised to hear such outdated opinions on these forums.

I don't base my opinions on cars 10-20-30 years old, I base them on what is currently available.

IMHO there are some "alright" cars coming over here, but I don't believe they are as good as a product coming from the United States of America should be.

You do have to wonder what is going on when the European departments of American companies are producing better cars that the American departments.

The American cars should be at least as good, if not better.

$7.5 billion invested in R&D from Ford - I can believe that looking at an all aluminium Jaguar XK, or a DB9, even the new Focus and things like the Galaxy and S-Max, but the Mustang (IMHO again), by comparison looks as if the R&D budget for Ford is more like $7.50.

[culver]

Matt,

This is my first non-technical car post on this forum. If you read my previous posts you will see I stick to technical subjects. When discussing technical subjects I try to keep it fact/analysis base.

That said, you are 100% right. It is very easy for people to say, "just build better cars." An understanding of economics dictate that in a very cost competitive market the sort of structural cost disadvantages the domestics are burdened with are insurmountable.

Problems such as healthcare are well beyond Ford's control. Ford, like many successful companies in the US in the 50's and 60's shared the wealth. Now those same agreements with labor are out dated but Ford is unable to shed them. Meanwhile other companies can take advantage of the inherent disadvantages with which the domestics are coping.

It is not my intent to get into this debate. I simply wanted to say, Matt you are right on the money. Mark Fields makes a lot of good points but I would be interested to read responses of those who disagree with the points he has made.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I actually think Chrysler has picked a unique and, so far, profitable way of improving their image. Viper, Prowler, Crossfire, Magnum, 300, Charger, upcoming Challenger - all have captured the attention of not just American consumers, but much of the world. I think the 300 has lasting sales power, at least in the US. They are EVERYWHERE and I still haven't grown tired of seeing them. The 300/Charger/Magnum have done for Chrysler what the Escalade did for Cadillac. It made them part of American pop culture for a new generation. It's now hard to see a rap video without one of the trio making an appearance. Using that momentum, Chrysler has started to infuse the rest of their line-up with a more upscale feel and bold styling cues. Better sales have allowed them to put forth more money into development of new technologies. DCX has finally started doing more tehcnology and component sharing and it has proven to be beneficial to both sides. Of the Big 3 (2.5, whatever), I think Chrysler is the one who most has its act together right now. Cadillac probably has the most clear vision and best execution of that vision, but Cadillac alone is not enough to pull GM out of the hole it has dug itself. Chrysler, on the other hand, has been the profitable half of the DCX partnership in the US.

I happen to think lurching from one 'Hero' Car to the next isn't good business practice because one false step and your out of fashion.

Focusing on cars with ability might be the better option.

The component sharing you talk of comes mostly from old Mercedes cars updated with new designs - not really the best in an engineering sense, but you are right in saying it's good business practice - most of the parts for those cars have been written off investment wise.

I guess the big thing is that Chrysler was smart enough not to rely on SUV's for key sales - it makes them, sure, but not in the numbers or profit-requirements needed by GM and Ford.

[mattmacklind]

Oh boy. Well, there are good US made cars, even from an enthusiast point of view. It is interesting that Euro spec US models often seem better, or perform better, but you have to keep in mind that even though car makers make mistakes, they definitely do their homework. There is a reason for the choices made and its usually based in numbers and sales projections. You have to think about what the average, non-enthusiast buyer thinks when they buy a car in the US. They don't have a stack of car mags in the bathroom and write messages on boards like these, but they are the bread and butter for the car maker selling in the US. I don't care personally if US car makers make cars I like or not because so few car makers really do in my price range anyway, but I do care whether the economy and the car buyers in my country will continue to support US business. This isn't out of "patriotism", but a desire to see my country'e economy healthy, strong and vital, probably the same as everyone else feels/wants.

The global economy makes manufacturing here difficult. Many want to compare Japanese and German imports and their ability to build cars here and wonder why the big 3 can't do the same effectively, but the expenses for the big-3 and the asian/euro makers aren't the same. Also, Toyota for one doesn't always pay salary, but instead payes workers per finished car or for productivity overall. The worker just works his butt off to make good money (which they do) meanwhile they have no union (a whole other thread) protection and limited benefits. Its like strip mining a labor force.

No more babbling, I'm done. Sorry.

[scottie300z]

Also, Toyota for one doesn't always pay salary, but instead payes workers per finished car or for productivity overall. The worker just works his butt off to make good money (which they do) meanwhile they have no union (a whole other thread) protection and limited benefits. Its like strip mining a labor force.

I once read an article on Labornotes.net or .org, dont remember, but anyways it talked about toyota's labor and it made the point that toyota actually pays higher wages and that is what keeps the unions out. so its sort of a trade off. But there is some negatives i agree.

And as far as the whole non salary thing, its good to be accountable for your work, just as long as its goals are fair and easily within reach and reason. its sort of like commision to me.

An understanding of economics dictate that in a very cost competitive market the sort of structural cost disadvantages the domestics are burdened with are insurmountable.

Problems such as healthcare are well beyond Ford's control. Ford, like many successful companies in the US in the 50's and 60's shared the wealth. Now those same agreements with labor are out dated but Ford is unable to shed them. Meanwhile other companies can take advantage of the inherent disadvantages with which the domestics are coping.

It is not my intent to get into this debate.

i dont mean to pull you into a debate, but i just wanted to make the point that every business has to deal w/ outside forces. The domestics have to deal w/ their crap so do the imports. and each one tries to take adv. of the other thats how it works. I mean, you can whine about it (like the article) or you can try to find a real solution.

One of the first things they teach in business colleges is P.E.S.T.L.E which is an acronym for Political, Economic. Social. Technology. Legal. Environment (the outside forces business has little effect on but has effect on business) And the leaders in business are usually the ones that find smart solutions, not the ones that whine b/c they are getting the short stick.


One thing that struck me about the article, is that he admitted they have been building sub-par vehicles, but the only solution offered was the use of more flex fuel engines. That may help in South america where that is used more often and is accomidated for in most of the gas stations, but that is not the case in the USA which is where the problem is.

[2ndclasscitizen]

America still has a long way to go. The interior of a 300C isn't as good as the interior of a smiliarly priced HSV. The HSV is based on a 20 year old platform and is regualrly panned for having a terrible interior. And this is a comparison I can make, I've sat in a 300C STR8 and a HSV Senator, Senator was miles better.

[Ferrer]

Well the thing is mechanically wise I'm pleasantly surpsrised by some of the new cars that are coming from the US. Take the new Ford saloons (the Fusion and the Five Hundred). Both have independent suspension all-round, 6-speed auto gearboxes or CVT autos and modern V6 and 4 cylinder engines. Now that shows that american cars are making progress. But still is this enough?

I've mentioned two examples but Ford is also the company which gives the old Focus, the Crown Victoria or the current Mustang. And Chevrolet offers the Impala and Montecarlo. I mean they are big crude cars which are exactly cutting edge, technology wise. I believe american manufacturers could catch up (the Fusion and Five Hundred are a clear example).

But the question is, do they want to? And I don't think it's a problem of money, but rather cutting corners is. If they can spend less on the cars development which means bigger profits when people buy it, why not do it? The problem is it can come back and bite you, which is what has happened. Maybe more competition in the domestic market who have helped american realize this earlier.

[kingofthering]

Can somebody please simplify all that into a couple short sentences?

basically after several years of screwing up we fought back and we need your help to weaken the foreign car makers so we can make more $ all in the name of America, and the usual bullshit people use when kissing ass or trying to look important

[zeta]

"We build them, and they'll buy" regardless,- if it wasn't for very drastic measures (and them being jealous of Toyota's hybrid hype ), this philosiphy would still stand. Proof that they take/took the NA consumers as a bunch of arse's. The only thing they got going for them in the market is that they're a american corporation. The foriegn competition (Toyota,..) cattered to the american consumer much better all along

[zeta]

$7.5 billion invested in R&D from Ford - I can believe that looking at an all aluminium Jaguar XK, or a DB9, even the new Focus and things like the Galaxy and S-Max, but the Mustang (IMHO again), by comparison looks as if the R&D budget for Ford is more like $7.50.

Ditto.
Not a pence went into a American product, this side of the GT.
Maybe the excellent German engineered quality and TDi's and such.

[The_Canuck]

Our new products – especially our fuel-efficient cars – are selling well. The Ford Fusion, Mercury Milan, and Lincoln Zephyr, all had their best months ever, and are gaining share at the expense of our Japanese competitors.

Doesn't he mean product?

[adrenaline]

Doesn't he mean product?

I wouldnt call them one product. Atleast they made the effort to differentiate the three of them, which they succeeded in. Look at the MKZ, its completely different, aesthetically!!

I would call the 500 and Monetgo the same product through