Pioneer Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 C'mon. What does overpriced office furniture have to do with cars. About the same that is in common between airplanes and cars I reckon. Give the guy a chance. He's only a change officer. If he handles Ford the way he handled taking over as athletic director at U of M, he injects stability then does a candidate search for a permanent replacement. Just don't hire Dave Brandon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 About the same that is in common between airplanes and cars I reckon. Give the guy a chance. He's only a change officer. If he handles Ford the way he handled taking over as athletic director at U of M, he injects stability then does a candidate search for a permanent replacement. Just don't hire Dave Brandon. You serious? Mulally had 1) shown his ability as a crisis manager after 9/11, and 2) manufacturing planes involves coordinating a global supply chain that has to provide subassemblies on time and on budget to assembly plants. What's Mr. Steelcase going to do? "Well, in the office supply business, whenever the margins got tight, we came up with a cool looking but surprisingly uncomfortable chair, charged a ridiculous price for it, and sold a ton of them to startups that went belly-up because they bought overpriced products from us." 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 I mean, I'm not saying that Fields should've stayed, but cripes, you don't replace people like this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 This smacks of firing for the wrong reasons and hiring for the wrong reasons. It's not going to go well. I read an article before that Jim Hackett is buddy buddy with Bill Ford...wonder if that had anything to do with it also. I've worked around the tech industry for almost 20 years now and I know of other people here also work...I still don't see the merging of the two with the expected profit percentages from it ever working out. Ford does about 10% in North America when times are good...people are expecting double that from "transportation companies" of the future. Tesla does this supposedly, but they also don't produce millions of cars either nor sell cars that start at $15K. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 If all this guy does is hire his replacement, then this might work. Otherwise, not. good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Ford does about 10% in North America when times are good...people are expecting double that from "transportation companies" of the future. Tesla does this supposedly Except they don't. They really really don't. Comparing Ford's net to Tesla's fantasy land accounting is like saying that you're richer than Warren Buffett just because you happen to have more money in your billfold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 If all this guy does is hire his replacement, then this might work. Otherwise, not. good. If he's there over 6 months to a year I'll be very surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Of course we're all speculating. but I suspect he'll stay 2 - 5 years. The Board will give him a chance to proof his stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 This is well worth the read: http://www.autonews.com/article/20170522/OEM02/170529986 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) I think interim is definitely implied here even though they didn't come right out and say it. Sounds like someone the board trusts while they search for the real replacement. Could be wrong though. Edited May 22, 2017 by akirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Black Label Lincolns will come with matching luggage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 This is well worth the read: http://www.autonews.com/article/20170522/OEM02/170529986 I don't normally listen to analysts but this pretty much echos my thoughts: It looked as though Fields left manufacturing and day-to-day product development decisions on cruise control. Recalls and quality issues dragged down earnings while spending increased on new business ventures. Passenger car sales began to slip. Ford needed a true multitasker and from the outside looking in, Fields seemed to be enamored with trying to grab some of that Tesla cool factor while the manufacturing side of the business started to unwind. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) Look for Ford to present itself as an AI Machine Learning Big Data Tech Firm OMG, I'm sorry mackinaw, I couldn't read anything after this. If someone who writes sentences like this approves of your decision, then you have either made a mistake, or they are correct entirely by accident. Edited May 22, 2017 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 BTW I don't think this has as much to do with stock performance as it does being late to market with ecosport, ranger, bronco, expy, navi and aviator, too many recalls/poor quality and letting car sales dwindle much faster than the overall market due to lack of investments and changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 OMG, I'm sorry mackinaw, I couldn't read anything after this. If someone who writes sentences like this approves of your decision, then you have either made a mistake, or they are correct entirely by accident. Wrong analyst. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Wrong analyst. I didn't even get to that guy. If this is concern over neglect of Ford's CORE business, then, fine, but that is absolutely NOT what I'm hearing from either Ford's official press releases, or the bulk of the sources that have spoken to the press. I mean, maybe Ford doesn't want to say this is about issues with manufacturing when it really is, but I am not confident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Wrong analyst. Heh. Actually, I thought you posted the article. That's what I meant. I edited my post to change the reference to mackinaw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 I'm not putting any stock in what analysts thinks - it just happened to coincide with what I've been saying the last year or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 BTW I don't think this has as much to do with stock performance as it does being late to market with ecosport, ranger, bronco, expy, navi and aviator, too many recalls/poor quality and letting car sales dwindle much faster than the overall market due to lack of investments and changes. this x1000 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Since Mullaly left and Fields took over, I've noticed a big difference in how manufacturing is run. It's becoming more about cutting cost regardless of quality but don't let quality slip, which as you can probably tell is a ridiculous concept. And in the ~3 years since Fields took over, morale on the plant floor has plummeted. I'm not going to hold my breath on anything changing any time soon, but I hope it does, starting with better communication like for one stop acting like telling your employees what's going on is a matter of National security and you need to be president to hear it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 If all this guy does is hire his replacement, then this might work. Otherwise, not. good. If he's there over 6 months to a year I'll be very surprised. Yeah, as I said before, I don't see him being CEO for long. I kinda think Jim Farley will eventually be CEO. I don't normally listen to analysts but this pretty much echos my thoughts: Yeah, I have to agree as well. If they want to "transition to a mobility company", fine, but don't neglect the lineup (product development, production, quality, etc) that pays the bills while you add mobility "components" to the business. BTW I don't think this has as much to do with stock performance as it does being late to market with ecosport, ranger, bronco, expy, navi and aviator, too many recalls/poor quality and letting car sales dwindle much faster than the overall market due to lack of investments and changes. Yeah, I think everyone knows Ford's stock is undervalued because of the family's stock. So while stock price may have been a component of the decision, it certainly (for me at least) wasn't the deciding factor. The issues you pointed out are bigger issues than stock price. --- I just wonder what this guy will do to remedy this. I hope they don't become even more (too) focused on the mobility part while neglecting the product lineup. --- I can't remember if it was here or elsewhere that someone said that Fields at first benefited from the products that were started under Mulally, whereas this guy could benefit from what Fields started....and by that I mean if all the rumors are true about CD6, the broad range of electrified vehicles, etc. that are supposedly coming in the next few years (along with critical redesigns of products like Escape, MKC, Fusion, MKZ, etc.). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 BTW I don't think this has as much to do with stock performance as it does being late to market with ecosport, ranger, bronco, expy, navi and aviator, too many recalls/poor quality and letting car sales dwindle much faster than the overall market due to lack of investments and changes. Don't forget lack of innovation and nickel and dimeing your customers to death for optional equipment that is standard on competitor vehicles. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 I can't remember if it was here or elsewhere that someone said that Fields at first benefited from the products that were started under Mulally, whereas this guy could benefit from what Fields started....and by that I mean if all the rumors are true about CD6, the broad range of electrified vehicles, etc. that are supposedly coming in the next few years (along with critical redesigns of products like Escape, MKC, Fusion, MKZ, etc.). It seems he was investing too heavily in the new stuff including plant shuffling and ignoring the current issues with products and quality. What should happen is they continue to invest in new stuff but maybe at a slower pace and use that cash to keep the current products competitive and get the missing stuff here sooner including Lincoln. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) nickel and dimeing your customers to death for optional equipment that is standard on competitor vehicles. Hasn't Ford been doing that for a decade or two? My issue isn't so much with the price as availability. We bought a 2016 MKX Reserve - the highest trim available. We still had to add 3 packages that should have been standard: Technology, Driver's Assist and one other. In the end we could not find all 3 available in stock anywhere in a 4 state area and we didn't want to wait 8 weeks so we forego the driver's assist package. All of that should have been standard on the Reserve and optional on the next lower trim. Edited May 22, 2017 by akirby 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 Wow, so much to be concerned about. Get ready for some big time knee-jerk slash and burn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.