Forbes wonders: Is Ford for Sale?

Interesting read. IMO VW is the only company out there that could, and perhaps would, buy Ford.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimcollins/2020/04/13/is-ford-for-sale/#13a342704394

Automotive companies need to be run by car guys, not bean counters. The father of the Raptor Jamal H. left ford for a reason.

I have not been a fan of Ford’s last 2 management groups. Failure to modernize the Taurus line, killing the Crown Victoria, failure to properly prop up the Lincoln brand, killing production of most car lines, going heavy on SUV, and failure to develop proper electric and hybrid cars till late in the game. Not to mention the Fiesta/Focus transmission debacle.

I am a die hard Ford supporter, have been my whole life. The company has fallen a long way from the Jac Nasser days when their stock was strong, they had 500 mil in cash reserves, and dividends were good.

I’m no auto manufacturing expert, but they need a better plan and a renewed focus on quality.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Pretty sure VW would not be permitted to purchase Ford by the Ford family, which has 40% of the voting power last I checked.

That said, Ford has some significant issues they need to resolve sooner rather than later.

Traffic22 said:

I have not been a fan of Ford’s last 2 management groups. Failure to modernize the Taurus line, killing the Crown Victoria, failure to properly prop up the Lincoln brand, killing production of most car lines, going heavy on SUV, and failure to develop proper electric and hybrid cars till late in the game. Not to mention the Fiesta/Focus transmission debacle.

I am a die hard Ford supporter, have been my whole life. The company has fallen a long way from the Jac Nasser days when their stock was strong, they had 500 mil in cash reserves, and dividends were good.

I’m no auto manufacturing expert, but they need a better plan and a renewed focus on quality.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Cars have been money losers for Ford, as well as GM and FCA, for a number of years unfortunately. You can't pay Union wages and benefits while competing with companies like Honda and Toyota that pay $9 an hour to temp/contract employees. Never mind their monetary advantages due to their government manipulated exchange rate.

As far as the Crown Vic (Panther platform)...I do question that move. It was an antiquated, yet extremely durable and reliable body on frame vehicle. The police and taxi companies loved them. The tooling for the platform must have been paid off 40 years ago; there had to be a significant profit margin in that product. The CV's replacement, the 2013 Taurus, we not well liked by police departments.

All 3 American companies have changed their game plan to focus on where they can win, instead of bleeding money in segments in which they're only offering a product because the segment exists. They are the leaders in SUVs and trucks; why waste time competing in a low margin segment such as compact or midsize cars that has been shrinking year over year? It's no different than asking why Porsche doesn't sell a $20K econo car; it's a waste of their time and resources.

As far as Jac "the knife" Nasser, he is not well regarded in the corporate folks I know. He established "Premier Auto Group", which was money loser from the beginning unfortunately. If you have a different perspective as someone who was on the outside during those days, I'd be open and interested to hear your thoughts.

FordTechOne said:

Cars have been money losers for Ford, as well as GM and FCA, for a number of years unfortunately. You can't pay Union wages and benefits while competing with companies like Honda and Toyota that pay $9 an hour to temp/contract employees. Never mind their monetary advantages due to their government manipulated exchange rate.

As far as the Crown Vic (Panther platform)...I do question that move. It was an antiquated, yet extremely durable and reliable body on frame vehicle. The police and taxi companies loved them. The tooling for the platform must have been paid off 40 years ago; there had to be a significant profit margin in that product. The CV's replacement, the 2013 Taurus, we not well liked by police departments.

All 3 American companies have changed their game plan to focus on where they can win, instead of bleeding money in segments in which they're only offering a product because the segment exists. They are the leaders in SUVs and trucks; why waste time competing in a low margin segment such as compact or midsize cars that has been shrinking year over year? It's no different than asking why Porsche doesn't sell a $20K econo car; it's a waste of their time and resources.

As far as Jac "the knife" Nasser, he is not well regarded in the corporate folks I know. He established "Premier Auto Group", which was money loser from the beginning unfortunately. If you have a different perspective as someone who was on the outside during those days, I'd be open and interested to hear your thoughts.

Click to expand...

For sure they cut down on car production because unfortunately Americans don’t buy sedans anymore.

They killed the panther platform because it couldn’t meet federal crash standards. Too bad, the CV was a very durable, very capable car for what it was.

I didn’t realize Jac was so disliked on the inside. As a Ford stockholder (and multi time customer) the stock was solid, dividends were good, and at one point read the company had 500 mil in surplus cash. Also, the cars I owned during his run were very well built.

With that said, I didn’t have to work for the guy, or deal with his policy decisions. I’ve had plenty of bosses over the years that others thought were great, but I wouldn’t have pissed on them if they were on fire, so I get it when you say there were issues.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk