4th Gen Focus goes Upmarket, will get "Active" Variant

[630land]

That's what I figured, would be glued to dealer lots. Only ex poster, biker, would buy 1.

[IMSA-XJR9]

That's what I figured, would be glued to dealer lots. Only ex poster, biker, would buy 1.

 

I would purchase a wagon ST (a RS would be better) if it were available, but not sure I would give up F150 or my Mach for one. So there might be 2 sold in the US!

[ZanatWork]

That's what I figured, would be glued to dealer lots. Only ex poster, biker, would buy 1.

I'd also buy one, and others I know in Ford/car circles would be very interested as well. Not everyone is attracted to an extra foot of bodywork/weight, higher centers of mass/gravity, and having one more tall, rounded soap bar.

 

Yes, CUVs have tons of momentum right now...but given that essentially every major automotive publication in the country has some fairly rabid wagon enthusiasts, dismissing the potential of sports wagons is just plain dumb. Given the ongoing failure that's been the C-Max over here, there's reasonable resentment from those (like myself) that get to look, AGAIN, at Ford items overseas not available here.

 

The Focus ST wagon makes the C-Max look like a bad joke.

[Roland]

In the US it makes no sense to me to drop the Fiesta and move the Focus up market. Ford is going down that same road they've been down before, give up market share in cars because SUVs are the trend and trucks are more profitable. Then gas spikes, sales plummet, and they struggle to regain market share in the car market.

[jpd80]

In the US it makes no sense to me to drop the Fiesta and move the Focus up market. Ford is going down that same road they've been down before, give up market share in cars because SUVs are the trend and trucks are more profitable. Then gas spikes, sales plummet, and they struggle to regain market share in the car market.

The big flaw in that theory is that those buyers moving to utilities will come running back to cars

When gas prices eventually climb, they will just demand more economy from their chosen vehicles.

 

Hybrids will become more common in the next few years reducing the impact of rising gas prices .

Edited November 11, 2017 by jpd80

[Roland]

The big flaw in that theory is that those buyers moving to utilities will come running back to cars

When gas prices eventually climb, they will just demand more economy from their chosen vehicles.

 

Hybrids will become more common in the next few years reducing the impact of rising gas prices .

 

And yet that's not what happened the last time around. Ford nearly went under and Toyota, Honda, and Nissan took a permanent position as the top selling passenger cars. Even now in the thick of CUV madness there are more Corollas, Camrys, Accords, and Altimas sold than any of Ford's CUV brands.

 

If there's a fuel price spike you don't get to pick from vehicles that you'd like to have, you get to pick off the menu. So if it happens tomorrow and you need room for five you can pick an Escape or get 3mpg better with a Fusion, or 12mpg better with a Fusion Hybrid. You can add an Escape Hybrid eventually but CUVs are simply not going to match passenger cars for economy on any given drivetrain.

 

But it's not just gas prices that could create a market change, tastes and buying habits just change over time. Failing to be competitive across a broad range of the market leaves you exposed. Chrysler is going to demonstrate this in the coming years and hopefully Ford will learn from it before they're too seriously damaged.

[akirby]

They obviously need to stay competitive, but the biggest reason cars sell more is because they are cheaper, not because of fuel economy.

 

The difference between an Edge hybrid at 30 mpg and a Fusion hybrid at 35 mpg with gas at $4/gallon is only $24/month.

 

The biggest problem Ford faced wasn’t gas prices, it was the recession where overall sales went from 17M to 11M and the most profitable F series sales went from 1M to 600K almost overnight.

[jpd80]

Correct, the big changes this time around is a more stable market and economic position.

Ford has cash in the bank and isn't in the middle of a major makeover.

 

Ford all of its Faults, Ford is making a killing on F Series right when it matters.

Edited November 13, 2017 by jpd80

[Roland]

 

The biggest problem Ford faced wasn’t gas prices, it was the recession where overall sales went from 17M to 11M and the most profitable F series sales went from 1M to 600K almost overnight.

 

Ford was in trouble long before that. They bled market share through the late '90s and into the 2000s and had already mortgaged the company in order to restructure before the great recession hit. That's why they didn't need bail-out money.

 

I hope I'm wrong but I see a lot of parallels between what's going on now in their car lineup and the blunders of the late '90s.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Roland

[jpd80]

Ford woke up one day and realized that a lot of the vehicles it was producing made little or no profit,

it traded market percentage for greater production efficiency and better ROI.

[Roland]

Ford woke up one day and realized that a lot of the vehicles it was producing made little or no profit,

it traded market percentage for greater production efficiency and better ROI.

 

I saw the previous iteration of your earlier post before you edited it. You made some good points so I'm curious why you culled it down.

 

Sorry, it's not my intention to drag this so far off topic. I really hope that Ford can be successful in their strategy but eventually I think they're going to have to turn their attention to reversing their downward trend in market share.

[jpd80]

 

I saw the previous iteration of your earlier post before you edited it. You made some good points so I'm curious why you culled it down.

 

Sorry, it's not my intention to drag this so far off topic. I really hope that Ford can be successful in their strategy but eventually I think they're going to have to turn their attention to reversing their downward trend in market share.

I was going to say plenty but them read what i'd posted several times and thought that I was being a little heavy on your post.

 

Let's just say that these are changing times and very different circumstances to 2007/2008 and that Ford is in much better shape today with a pot of cash that the chiefs seem determined to spend impressing wall street and investors, why I don't now...

Edited November 13, 2017 by jpd80

[akirby]

 

Ford was in trouble long before that. They bled market share through the late '90s and into the 2000s and had already mortgaged the company in order to restructure before the great recession hit. That's why they didn't need bail-out money.

 

I hope I'm wrong but I see a lot of parallels between what's going on now in their car lineup and the blunders of the late '90s.

 

That's correct but they had begun to fix all of those past transgressions already when the recession hit.

 

The difference today is that they have small cars and utilities and they're already working on a new BEV and lots of hybrids. So they're not completely ignoring those segments like before - they just had a pause in the product plan that should now be back on track. Platform and factory consolidation makes it easier to withstand a downturn either way.

[Roland]

No question that Ford is better off financially and they've improved their time to market and ability to localize global products. That gives them better ability to respond quickly to market changes. My worry probably comes from the fact that I'm a believer in market share. I don't like the trend there and I see every new gap in the product line as loss in market share.

[akirby]

No question that Ford is better off financially and they've improved their time to market and ability to localize global products. That gives them better ability to respond quickly to market changes. My worry probably comes from the fact that I'm a believer in market share. I don't like the trend there and I see every new gap in the product line as loss in market share.

 

This is all you need to know about market share:

 

When GM went bankrupt, they were #1 in sales.

[jpd80]

Last quarter in North America, Ford's pretax profit was around $2 Billion while Toyota's North American result

was around a quarter of that. So all those sales of Camrys Corollas and Rav4s sure don't add up to much..

 

Staying strong in segments where a huge increase in sales is not expected simply takes resources and funding

away from areas that are producing more profit. It's a balancing act and sometimes the logic seems obtuse to us

but none the less results in more profit by doing less.

 

We're all frustrated that Ford has delayed necessary upgrades to its cars but the bigger picture is that timing of

that new product is now in cleaner air where future sales projections of sales and product mix will be much clearer.

The shear fact that hybriding and diesel options will be available in key products like F 150 bodes well for Ford's future.

Edited November 13, 2017 by jpd80

[Roland]

Obviously GM was doing it wrong on many levels.

 

Obvioulsy Toyota has been caught out in the large truck/SUV segment. It's kind of the flipside to Ford's position on passenger cars. While I'll bet they wish they had moved faster in that segment, I don't think they'd trade their position on cars and hybrid/electric technology. That is serving them well globally.

[akirby]

Exactly. Each company has their strengths and weaknesses and what works for one company may not work as well for another company.

 

Honda doesn't have any full sized trucks, vans or other fleet vehicles so it makes sense for them to spend more on their cars and crossovers and minivan.

 

Ford can do things with F series that Toyota can't due to volume. Toyota and Honda can do things with Camcord that Ford and GM can't afford to do for the same reason.

[jpd80]

Obviously GM was doing it wrong on many levels.

 

Obvioulsy Toyota has been caught out in the large truck/SUV segment. It's kind of the flipside to Ford's position on passenger cars. While I'll bet they wish they had moved faster in that segment, I don't think they'd trade their position on cars and hybrid/electric technology. That is serving them well globally.

GM is a company that been mismanaged for many decades, debts removed put back on tracks in changing times with cars,

it still manages to make good profits but just imagine if management got more of its decisions correct to start with.

Profits would be huge.

 

 

Toyota profits benefit form Asian parochialism and currency shifts, it's profits are not as strong in Europe or Nth America.

Fords profits are strong in Nth America, getting much better with product mix in Europe but still struggles in Asia.

 

Toyota has no clue regarding large truck market in the US.while Ford is on another level with F Series.

Manufacturers choose which market and segments they want to compete in strongly with the best chance

of success, it's that very difference that allows all to succeed at the same time globally.

Edited November 14, 2017 by jpd80

[Roland]

Agreed. I don't think we have much left that we're disagreeing about here. I just keep adding "...but don't forget to build a full line of competitive passenger cars."

 

I voiced this originally because I worry about moving the Focus "upmarket" if there's not going to be a Fiesta in NA as an entry level. But for all I know the market data shows that's not where the entry level is anymore. I suppose at this point I should just hope that there's still and ST variant with a manual transmission.

Edited November 15, 2017 by Roland

[jpd80]

Subcompact cars are not big sellers in Nth America as most prefer a compact or now, a Subcompact Utility

I think a better Focus and Fusion would cover most of the low hanging fruit in the market. at a fraction of the cost.

You can see that with Ford set to cut the amount of ordering option variations. Ford wants car production on their terms.

[J-150]

 

That's correct but they had begun to fix all of those past transgressions already when the recession hit.

 

The difference today is that they have small cars and utilities and they're already working on a new BEV and lots of hybrids. So they're not completely ignoring those segments like before - they just had a pause in the product plan that should now be back on track. Platform and factory consolidation makes it easier to withstand a downturn either way.

The architect (Fields) and executioner (Mulally) of those plans are now gone. I don't have faith in Bill Ford or the board to do the right thing. They were the ones that gave Nasser full access to the bank account. They've now done the same for Mr. Silicon Valley.

 

Nasser and Hackett. Two guys intent on spending lots of money to make Ford something it isn't.

[Harley Lover]

The architect (Fields) and executioner (Mulally) of those plans are now gone. I don't have faith in Bill Ford or the board to do the right thing. They were the ones that gave Nasser full access to the bank account. They've now done the same for Mr. Silicon Valley.

 

Nasser and Hackett. Two guys intent on spending lots of money to make Ford something it isn't.

 

I've never made the connection between Nasser and Hackett, it's a really good point. I hope you're wrong in your assessment, but I fear you are not.

[fuzzymoomoo]

FWIW, I've heard more people at work relate Fields to Nassar than Hackett to Nassar

[J-150]

FWIW, I've heard more people at work relate Fields to Nassar than Hackett to Nassar

Fields is the one that got the financial house in order before Mulally got there. Maybe Fields was overly cautious, but at the same time he was creating a financially stable company that could survive an economic down tick.