bystander

They closed the POEE building? Where did they move the occupants?

Speaking of obvious. OBVIOUSLY, Ford should have hired Farley five years ago since none of their other executives was evidently bright enough to recognize that the company needed to bring out new product at a much more aggressive pace.

The Explorer America concept is underwhelming, to say the least. If this thing isn't coming out until 2011, it will be long outdated when it hits showrooms. It doesn't look all that different than the illustration Honda just released for the next generation Pilot (which will probably beat the Explorer to market by 2 years). Is this the product of Ford's best minds???

I agree with you, Mac. Over the past few years DeLorenzo has failed to point out Ford's glaring product and strategy miscalculations while consistently focusing on what GM needs to do to reclaim its role as the world's dominant automobile company. Perhaps he thought Ford was simply too f'up to waste much bandwidth on. But he didn't pull any punches in this article, and in my opinion, he painted a pretty accurate picture of the bald-faced incompetence at Lincoln over the last ten years. I don't think his point was lost or muddled in the least. Lincoln has been and continues to be mismanaged to such a degree that its brand image (i.e. what a Lincoln is supposed to be) is totally unclear. The new product on the horizon (MKS) does very little to correct this because it is virtually indistinguishable from any number of Japanese products. DeLorenzo also points out what many, many Lincoln observers have for years been practically screaming--that the 2000 Continental concept showed the way toward a Lincoln design language that was distinctive, proud, and entirely identifiable as Lincoln's. The MKS gives the consumer no reason to consider it over the Infinitis, Lexuses it so blatantly emulates. Cadillac has at least made a credible effort to attract younger customers through innovative, attractive design and engineering investment. Lincoln, with the MKS's me-too styling and unimpressive mechanical specifications (a V6 in a luxury flagship?!?) has made a credible effort to become nothing more than a commodity product.

You're exactly right. GM has been much more aggressive and effective in turning out new product. Although Ford has launched some winners in the past few years (Fusion, Edge), they are not moving fast enough to revamp their rapidly sinking product line. People are down on GM because they reported a shocking $39 billion quarterly loss due to a balance sheet adjustment required by accounting rules. It was not a reflection of the strength of their cash position.

Not only were the Explorer and Expedition/Navigator too firmly tuned for the North American market, but RPJ drove a disastrous amount of cost into these vehicles trying to make five and six-thousand pound trucks defy the laws of physics.

Fair points. However, if auditors and outside analysts are able to accurately gauge default risk and thus the adequacy of loss reserves, how was it possible for the market to be blindsided by the subprime lending collapse?

Ford should worry for three reasons: 1) The credit crunch will make debt even more expensive than it is (especially with a junk rating) 2) If the economy slows down as a result of the subprime meltdown, Ford is not in a good position to weather much of a drop in new car sales. Their already shrinking car and truck business could get a lot smaller a lot faster. 3) I wonder if they haven't been lowering their credit standards for car loans to bolster their sales. I remember seeing a sign in a Ford dealership about a year ago offering zero down new car loans to people with poor credit. That is kind of the sub-prime mortgage industry in miniature. What would happen to Ford if large numbers of people began defaulting on their car loans? Hopefully, for Ford's sake, they bundled and sold off those loans to someone else.

The Fusion is not rated for higher MPG than the Camry, in any configuration. The numbers in your post are the old EPA ratings for the Fusion and the new (lower) EPA ratings for the Camry. The ratings for the 2007 Fusion I4 based on the new rating system are 20/29, not 23/31 (which are the ratings from the old rating system). The 2007 Fusion V6 is rated at 18/26 for FWD and 17/24 for AWD. The Avalon, based on fueleconomy.gov, is rated at 20/28 for 2007.

Take off your blue-tinted glasses and you will realize that F150's have plenty of faults too, friend. They are overweight by 500lbs, have the weakest lineup of powertrains in the segment (wimpy engines, crummy 4 speed transmissions). They are sensitive to irritating vibration problems in certain configurations. The tall box sides make them more difficult to load than other makes. With the latest generation Tundra, Toyota has pretty much caught up with the domestics. Oh sure, you might be able to quote one area or another where the Tundra is outdone, but the Tundra also has some relative advantages. They are no more "faulty" than the average pickup built by Ford, GM, or Chrysler. If Toyota is willing to deal on Tundras (which they appear to be doing), they will severely undercut the last bastion of profitability for the domestic 3. They don't have to outsell the F150 or even Dodge. Their goal might just be to make the F150 into a high volume, but break-even product for Ford. That would be disastrous for the blue oval.

"Toyota is 30 years behind on developing American pickup trucks, and experience is something money can't buy." By that rationale, Toyota would have never caught GM and overtaken them as the world's largest producer of cars and trucks. Toyota has just unveiled their third generation attempt to crack the full-size pickup market. Usually, by the third or fourth generation product, the Japanese automakers (particularly Toyota and Honda) have pretty well zeroed in on the target. It happened with minivans, it happened with family sedans. It will happen with trucks. Each model redesign arrives with fewer and fewer weaknesses until they are completely competitive. The latest Tundra may have reached that point. It already leads in powertrains. "Toyota is going to have to accept a role as a niche player in the North American truck market sooner or later... it just depends on how many billions they want to lose." Yeah, they really seem to have stalled out, with a ~40+% gain in sales. Toyota has deep pockets from its highly profitable operations. They can afford to buy market share in the full-size pickup market if they want to. And it sure does undercut the former Big 3's cashflow from pickups when a strong competitor enters the market with an aggressively-marketed, competent product.

GM sold 51% of GMAC and retained a 49% stake, so they are still receiving nearly half the cash and profits they enjoyed when it was a wholly-owned subsidiary.

I agree. Right in the middle of this thing, about 15 straight places are devoted to some Mercedes Benz fan's wet dream collection, including some very obscure Benzes. And I'm sorry, the put the Lamborghini Muira up in the 50s or 60s of their ranking (and behind some utterly un-sexy four door sedans and limos) is just laughable. This is not a credible top 100.

I have a 2001 V6 4x4 Escape and it rarely exceeds 22.0 mpg on the highway (usually lower). It was rated at 24. Never happened.

If you look closely, the body aft of the front fenders is identical to the '98-01 U.S. model Explorer. Sounds like that model (independent SLA frt suspension, leaf spring rear) tweaked for sale in the Middle East market.