Debate: Did Ford pull the plug on Mercury prematurely?

[Blue Oval Guide]

I was reading an article on Left Lane News today: "Lincoln Dealers fear for survival as Mercury dies" and happen to stumble across on reader's comments:

 

I still think that shutting down Mercury is Ford’s biggest misstep in a few years. However, barring that, I think they mismanaged this whole situation. The Mercury decision was made prematurely. Sure, they’ve got 7 upcoming models that are new or revamped; yet, why make a move on Mercury until they think the Lincoln brand is ready to stand alone? They were moving enough Mercurys to keep the Lincoln-Mercury franchises alive. Yet, now, they’re looking at a bunch of dealers folding-and they anticipate it? It seems fairly logical that at some point, when Lincoln does have a self-sustaining lineup, then Ford will need enough franchise locations to move Lincoln metal.

 

What do you think about the death of Mercury and the prospect of Lincoln?

[focus05]

No. They've pulled it just in time. Rip the band-aid off. The more profitable Ford is, the less willing dealers are to go down without billions in payouts.

[one2gamble]

I was reading an article on Left Lane News today: "Lincoln Dealers fear for survival as Mercury dies" and happen to stumble across on reader's comments:

 

 

 

What do you think about the death of Mercury and the prospect of Lincoln?

 

 

I think Ford wants some of these dealers to close.

[RichardJensen]

Did they?

 

IMO, yes, but also, IMO, not as quickly as Mulally wanted it done.

 

The problem with Detroit for years, with this industry in this country, is that it generates in the best and the worst of times, a sort of imperial style of leadership.

 

You have guys like Pete D glorifying the 'titans' that both built and destroyed the industry.

 

Edward Gibbon postulated that the fall of the Roman empire was cause by the death of individual initiative and the lack of individual investment in the fate of the state. Creativity and innovation dried up, and citizens did not see the future of the state as a whole as having any relevance to their lives.

 

IMO, if Mulally pushed the decision to kill Mercury--if this decision came from the top down, instead of from the bottom up, then it is inexcusable. Perhaps not for the loss of the Mercury brand in particular, but because it heralds a return to (or signifies the ongoing presence of) the Imperial Office of CEO. This decision making process is ultimately destructive, as it requires the company to find ever more brilliant CEOs in order to combat the cancer of careerism within the ostensibly productive ranks.

 

I can't tell you whether now is the time for Mercury to go, nor could I tell you if it was overdue, or if it had a few more years left.

 

But I can say that Mulally has, by all accounts, wanted it gone----and the desire for a CEO to do something should -never- be synonymous with its execution.

[Chester]

It was time for Mercury to go. There's only need for two divisions Ford and a Luxury make. Ford decided that Luxury make would be it's original Luxury make LINCOLN. No need for a middle child in between.

 

As for the Lincoln dealers, i think now would be as good a time as any to close up if they were at all thinking about it. Those that want to stay should be looking at ways to improve.

Currently, a sales rep that gets an inquiry about a midsize sedan can show the Milan and MKZ. It's easier to push the cheaper car. Now, that same salesman's job is easier and tuffer at the same time. Gone is the internal competition, but you have to make the sale on the more expensive product.

[Mysterio]

No. The death of Mercury couldn't come soon enough.

 

If they have waited they would have merely delayed the inevitable.

[30 OTT 6]

Gee, now if you want a gussied-up Ford you'll need to buy a gussied-up Ford!

[2b2]

Imho FoMoCo HAD TO kill Merc NOW

if they'd let the Merc C-car come out next year, it would have DOUBLED Merc's sales

and then "they" couldn't have gotten away with it without the dealers having an open'n'shut case for a lawsuit

 

...IMO, if Mulally pushed the decision to kill Mercury--if this decision came from the top down, instead of from the bottom up, then it is inexcusable. Perhaps not for the loss of the Mercury brand in particular, but because it heralds a return to (or signifies the ongoing presence of) the Imperial Office of CEO. This decision making process is ultimately destructive, as it requires the company to find ever more brilliant CEOs in order to combat the cancer of careerism within the ostensibly productive ranks...

I *WISH* I knew

but

'think' it was a faction within FoMoCo, a group of execs, who have wanted to see Mercury murdered for at a bit over 10 years.

It's mainly that timing (far predating Mr. M.) that makes me want to believe he was mostly neutral on Merc.

But it's still non-sensical imho!!!

 

Cuz/However, I also believe that THERE IS NO SOUND BUSINESS CASE for killing Mercury

&

in the 5 to 10 year future, FoMoCo will end up creating a 3rd Brand or sales channel

(&

I don't mean the CONTINENTAL Brand that I expect them to re-create) IF the flaws inherent in what Richard was talking about don't wind up IMPLODING with Lincoln.

 

I made a thread elsewhere back when F stock plunged to almost $1 about

"Is This The Week To Buy Ford Stock?"...

now

tho I don't think it's time YET

I'm considering a

"Is It Time To UNLOAD Your Ford Stock?" thread

 

Imho there IS something seriously Wrong at FoMoCo.

[T'Cal]

I'm so disappointed. I had really hoped Ford would develop a clear focus for Mercury and then commit to it. I had hoped that Mercury would be clearly different from Ford - more up scale, more performance oriented, and truly unique. I was so wrong.

[NickF1011]

I see it as sort of a chicken & the egg kind of thing. Some say Ford should have waited until Lincoln was stronger before axing Mercury. Others suggest that Lincoln wouldn't get strong as quickly as long as Mercury still existed. I'm more in the second camp. With fewer distractions, Ford Motor Company doesn't need to waste any resources at all "gussying up" Ford-branded vehicles for Mercury and can instead put all of that focus on 1. keeping Ford's vehicles up to date and 2. breaking new ground at Lincoln.

 

(Side note: I find myself almost always automatically capitalizing "focus" when I type it now because of these forums. :lol: )

Edited June 14, 2010 by NickF1011

[Pioneer]

I think Mercury should have stayed as a niche brand. It could have been an outlet for some of the vehicles Ford sell in other countries except for NA. Like the 4-door Ranger diesel. Or the Falcon. Cars like that.

[AlRozzi]

Two Mercs: A Mustang-based Cougar and a Focus-based Capri. Then see where we are at in five years.

[Edstock]

IMHO, Mercury was carrying the "badge engineered" stigma, because Ford cannot afford what it takes to make different top hats for the badge. Ford can barely do it for Lincoln, so Mercury had to go.

 

VW has Audi; Ford has Lincoln.

 

This is a guess, but Ford might have "world" marketing for the Lincoln brand in mind. I can see the next MK X doing well. Ford will drop its weight, and the EB powertrains would make it viable, IMHO.

[F250]

One thing is certain, if you are a Lincoln/Mercury dealer you are screwed.

When the last Mercury rolls off the lot it's all or nothing with Lincoln and frankly their volume simply isn't there.

That means each one sold will have to hold the highest possible profit so look for Lincoln to increase in that regard. Question is will it be enough to keep the Lincoln dealers (high overhead) doors open. Or will those dealers pick up a cheap volume import to sell so they can pay the bills.

[twintornados]

As I stated in another thread, the difference with Ford Motor Company is that that Ford Family still controls the direction of the Company. That being said, if the Ford Family decided that it was time to lay Mercury to rest, then that proves to me that they are serious about the future survival of FoMoCo...you will see MKZ fill the gap for Milan Premier and the new Mercury variant of Focus will quickly become a Lincoln variant.

 

That will give you a :

'C' class compact

'CD' class midsize

Mariner will become a Lincoln so small SUV is covered

MKX

MKS

MKT

Navigator

and the venerable Town Car.....

 

Eight vehicles....sounds about where they were when some were called "Mercury"....I don't see the "Lincoln only" dealers withering away. But, Ford better put some more punch into their advertising budget....bring Jill over from Mercury maybe?? "Gotta put Lincoln on your list."

[ZanatWork]

I think killing Mercury sets a scary precedent: Instead of fixing errors, just destroy the situation.

 

Mercury could have had a very simple niche, competed with Buick and entry-lux offerings, and been a brand for the import types that consider Ford too "blue collar" for their tastes. In SUVs and people movers in particular, Ford had proven again and again that their customers like the squared-jawed styling found in the current Escape and the other "E's". Mercury was a logical place for vehicles like the C- and/or S- Max, a Focus CC derivative to replace the Volvo C70, and other offerings of the 'swoopy' variety.

 

The costs would be minimal and that would be a fantastic customer base to have snooping around Lincolns the next time around.

 

I admit fully I'm very sentimentally attatched to Mercury. I grew up loving Marauders, Cougars, Montegos, etc,, and owning all three at various points. Even with the woman-aimed marketing of recent years and the overdone platform sharing, the brand was only 1 step away from having a more distinct personality while still funneling customers into Lincolns the next time around. I know Ford's on a massive roll right now, but killing Mercury for the sin of being mismanaged is a complete cop-out that could and should have been avoided with a minimal amount of work.

[Noah Harbinger]

How long is this thread going to be sticky? Am I going to have to filter it via greasemonkey?

[Chester]

 

Mercury could have had a very simple niche, competed with Buick and entry-lux offerings, and been a brand for the import types that consider Ford too "blue collar" for their tastes. In SUVs and people movers in particular, Ford had proven again and again that their customers like the squared-jawed styling found in the current Escape and the other "E's". Mercury was a logical place for vehicles like the C- and/or S- Max, a Focus CC derivative to replace the Volvo C70, and other offerings of the 'swoopy' variety.

 

 

 

This is why I'm glad Mercury was killed. I don't want FOMOCO targeting Buick. I want Lincoln targeting Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Cadilac,Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, Volvo, Jag etc. All of which have lower cost vehicles in their linep to atttract younger or less capable buyers.

 

 

Why waste time and energy on buick, when you have much bigger fish to fry (that all have cars competing with buick in themselves). The best Buick can ever become is a second fiddle to Caddie, or a nice Chevy.

 

Ford seems to be going after lower volume higher profit vehicles. There is no room for a Mercury here. Lincoln doesn't need the competition either. Take a customer showing up at the dealer to test drive an MKZ and leaves with a Milan. The Milan does most of what the MKZ does (only cheaper), just not quite the style. If the MIlan is not there, that customer would most likley have spent a few extra dollars to get the MKZ.

 

The vehciles you mention above would all make great Fords as well. The volvo c70 could become a nice little Lincoln convertable.

 

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

[RichardJensen]

One thing is certain, if you are a Lincoln/Mercury dealer you are screwed.

1700 LM dealers.

 

170,000 LM sales last year.

 

100 new car sales per year (8 per month) isn't going to keep the lights on. Dealers might gross $2k off a new car sale--IF they get the buyer to pick up an extended warranty or credit life/GAP. $16k per month isn't enough to keep a dealership open.

 

Granted, losing $9k of that stings---it's not good.

 

But don't kid yourself that Mercury is life/death for these dealers.

Edited June 15, 2010 by RichardJensen

[2b2]

1700 LM dealers.

 

170,000 LM sales last year.

 

100 new car sales per year (8 per month) isn't going to keep the lights on. Dealers might gross $2k off a new car sale--IF they get the buyer to pick up an extended warranty or credit life/GAP. $16k per month isn't enough to keep a dealership open.

 

Granted, losing $9k of that stings---it's not good.

 

But don't kid yourself that Mercury is life/death for these dealers.

I know it isn't a very popular opinion here

but

I also KNOW that MERCURY IS a 400,000 per year Brand that was murdered by starvation

&

just realized that BON has had a Mercury Smilie all along:

Ford > < Lincoln

...Mercury ^

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Ford pumped to many wasted billions into things like the Jaguar/Land Rover money pit in the past whilst Lincoln Mercury got treated like Cinderella as brands.

 

Mercury have nowhere to go with all Ford vehicle moving onto global platforms.

 

Would have like to see Mercury used to maybe bring back great Ford names in the past updated purpose built Crown Vic Police/Taxi - Capri - T-Bird - Cougar - Escort etc like Fiat have come from nowhere zero to hero to be No1 best seller in class in Europe with the Fiat 500 thats kicked the KA on the same platform into 8th position in class.

 

Gotta say l remember reading a blog here saying Ford have developed a cheap quick way of designing sending completely different bodyshells designed for the same platform down the same production lines. I thought this idea would have given Mercury a very secure future with it if Ford could now offer something more than just a different Mercury grille.

 

What become of flexible/production lines/quick design flexible bodyshells that could offer more choice like a Mercury that looked nothing like a Ford it could have been a carbon copy shape of Fords competition like a VW Golf, Camry etc that could have dented their sales instead of Fords ?

Edited June 15, 2010 by Ford Jellymoulds

[syrtran]

Yes, they pulled the plug too soon.

 

While I'm sentimental towards Mercury and prefer it to stick around, I can understand the decision to kill it. Without Mercury, Ford vehicle prices can slide slightly upward giving more profit per vehicle. It also gives Lincoln a slightly better cachet, again allowing prices to slide upward.

 

The problem, as I see it, is that Lincoln isn't ready for that and still won't be ready for at least another model year - 2012, at the earliest. They first need to get Ecoboost into the MKX and MKZ, along with the hybrid technology already slated (for 2011?) for the MKZ. They also need a hybrid MKS. (And there won't be an MKR-like vehicle 'till at least 2014)

 

Mercury was already going to lose the Mountaineer and Grand Marquis, leaving just the Milan, Mariner and Tracer. I agree that it would be ridiculous to start up the Tracer now and then kill it in a couple years, but Ford is still going to need to do a lot of work to turn it into a Lincoln instead of a rebadged Ford. It'll take a couple years, anyway. Plus, Lincoln will be getting a Kuga-based CUV in 2012 (or thereabouts), and a possible Explorer-based Navigator at about the same time.

 

I think it would've been better if they had announced that 2011 was going to be the last model year for Mercury. It would've given them - and the dealers - a chance to better develop a stand-alone Lincoln.

 

I also firmly believe that Lincolns should never share floorspace with Fords - not if you want Lincoln to be seen as a true luxury brand. That was one of the benefits Mercury gave them, way back when.

 

And, Chester, the Milan doesn't "compete" with the MKZ. They are both from the same division. Lincoln-Mercury still gets the profits, albeit smaller profits from the Milan. Also, if someone drives out of an L-M dealer with a Milan, they weren't going to get an MKZ, anyway, either because of needs, or because of price - the Lincoln is a bit more than "a couple dollars" more expensive. I still think at least half of those Milan buyers are going to end up in an Altima or Accord.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

My opinion is STILL that Ford killed the wrong brand.

 

I can't find a person that doesn't connect Lincoln with that fear of "last car before the coffin" stigma. I don't know what market research Mullaly looked at, but, Lincoln is systemically damaged unless the change their design language and drop the Town Car immediately. Even then, it's going to take more years for FoMoCo to get people's impression of Lincoln changed than it took them to convince the US that they build a decent car.

 

At least with Mercury, most people that I know kind of knew about it, but either didn't know what they were about and what they had, or had seen the Jill commercials and figured it was aiming for that urban chic market.

 

I'll grant the board one thing; brand awareness for Lincoln is markedly higher than for Mercury. At lot of people that I talk to thought that Mercury was already dead. Building brand awareness is tough to do, especially with the level of background advertising noise in today's world.

[akirby]

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that the decision to kill Mercury NOW was done to accelerate the dealer consolidations/closings. There are obviously too many dealers to support the new anticipated L/M volume. Otherwise, they could have left Mercury alone with the Milan and Mariner for another year or two.

 

I also think this plays into the new product developments. Now they don't have to spend anything on a new Tracer, Mariner or Milan.

 

I guarantee there is a much bigger and well thought out picture here that we aren't privy to and killing Mercury now gets them to the end goal quicker.

[TomServo92]

I guarantee there is a much bigger and well thought out picture here that we aren't privy to and killing Mercury now gets them to the end goal quicker.

 

I concur with this statement 100%.