fuzzymoomoo Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) Any idea how many units (C-Max Energi) MAP has exported to Europe Again, no. I've tried counting how many are built on one shift, but I lose count pretty quickly. I'm guessing maybe a few hundred in total? *Edit I see you are in Estonia, are you guys right or left hand drive? MAP only builds Left hand drive cars. Edited June 15, 2015 by fuzzymoomoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I didn't know the F150 MSRP started at $45k. It doesn't. Per Ford's website, the MSRP range is $25,800 - $51,350 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) Again, no. I've tried counting how many are built on one shift, but I lose count pretty quickly. I'm guessing maybe a few hundred in total? *Edit I see you are in Estonia, are you guys right or left hand drive? MAP only builds Left hand drive cars. I am amazed that so many have been exported, but are not for sale in any markets in Europe, or anywhere else in the world as far as I know besides USA & Canada. Very curious what the heck FoE is doing with these units. Same as you, left hand drive. Face lift C-Max Edited June 15, 2015 by MKII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 It doesn't. Per Ford's website, the MSRP range is $25,800 - $51,350 Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I am amazed that so many have been exported, but are not for sale in any markets in Europe, or anywhere else in the world as far as I know besides USA & Canada. Very curious what the heck FoE is doing with these units. Same as you, left hand drive. Face lift C-Max That's just it, I'm not 100% sure they've even made it over to Europe yet. For all I know they could be on a holding lot on the east coast somewhere waiting for a ship to bring them over. Ive been wishing we had the face lifted C-Max ever since I saw it a year ago. Maybe the could actually sell instead of rotting on dealer lots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 This is frustrating because FORD Invented the segment, and they IMO have been very Short sighted about the EcoSport and made some/ many decisions that make it difficult to Market in the US and Europe. Translation - "I know more about marketing and production than Ford does, even though I have none of the data that Ford uses to decide how to market and produce vehicles." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 That's just it, I'm not 100% sure they've even made it over to Europe yet. For all I know they could be on a holding lot on the east coast somewhere waiting for a ship to bring them over. Ive been wishing we had the face lifted C-Max ever since I saw it a year ago. Maybe the could actually sell instead of rotting on dealer lots. I found out where those Energi's are being sold, in the Netherlands (Holland) sold in one spec Titanium, no options choices, only choices are exterior paint on the road price in US$41,000.00. I took a guess at Netherlands as this is where green car sales are the strongest, and found the car at ford.nl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) I found out where those Energi's are being sold, in the Netherlands (Holland) sold in one spec Titanium, no options choices, only choices are exterior paint on the road price in US$41,000.00. I took a guess at Netherlands as this is where green car sales are the strongest, and found the car at ford.nl Looks like C-Max Energi is on a very slow roll out in Europe... It seems that a lot of EU countries that have favorable tax incentives on EVs do not have favorable tax incentives on PHEV. For example, Focus EV finally made it to Norway that exempts EVs on a lot of annual taxes but strangely, not PHEV. Edited June 15, 2015 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I don't think a "tall AWD focus" makes sense, that's what the Escape is. I don't see Ford adding Escape capacity - Initially (2001-2002?) there were two Escape plants (KCAP and Avon Lake) Closer to a Kia Rondo or Elantra Touring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Think of it this way they had excess capacity in the EU, and the cost of building a new facility, or importing it from Japan, was greater than having to idle the plant in France. The same argument can and should be made for the escape, the cost of setting up another facility in North america is going to much higher than paying a SMALL premium for importing a few escapes from the EU. you just make sure you import the highest margin variant from your highest cost facility. Consider that Ford already imports the Transit connect From Spain, Too. The Transit Connect has a higher ATP then any B (or is A?) class car like the Yaris. The TC sells what, 3-4x the amount of what the Yaris does in the US? As for the Escape...they can limit the number the MKC (if they are at the high end of stock with them) and go back and forth...I don't see the Escape adding so many new customers that it would require another plant to make the difference up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 The Transit Connect has a higher ATP then any B (or is A?) class car like the Yaris. The TC sells what, 3-4x the amount of what the Yaris does in the US? As for the Escape...they can limit the number the MKC (if they are at the high end of stock with them) and go back and forth...I don't see the Escape adding so many new customers that it would require another plant to make the difference up. If you used the Same logic you are using for the Transit connect on the Escape, you should reach the same conclusion, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 If you used logic, you would realize that your "Ford shouldn't add Escape production in NA, they should import from Europe" is magnificent straw-man argumentation, as Ford is not planning on adding Escape production in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donaldo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 (edited) Why no discussion here of other European built entry level CUVs available in the US like the Jeep Renegade/Fiat 500X, Mini Paceman, Mercedes GLA, BMW X1? it's not like the VW Tiguan is the only such model. Edited June 16, 2015 by Donaldo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 The same argument can and should be made for the escape, the cost of setting up another facility in North america is going to much higher than paying a SMALL premium for importing a few escapes from the EU. you just make sure you import the highest margin variant from your highest cost facility. The inability to move even 40,000 units of Escape production to MAP, show how poorly the plant was planned, and how much work ford has to do to fix it. BTW: You're doing a pretty good job of staking out positions on both sides of the debate. As long as nobody remembers this, if Ford pursues either course in the future you can proudly tell the rest of us that Ford is finally doing what you suggested, and that--therefore--you know so much more than Ford's engineers 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 BTW: You're doing a pretty good job of staking out positions on both sides of the debate. As long as nobody remembers this, if Ford pursues either course in the future you can proudly tell the rest of us that Ford is finally doing what you suggested, and that--therefore--you know so much more than Ford's engineers he fails to realize that when they tout MAP as flexible, its not in the sense that he's thinking. Its the only plant in the world that can build FHEV, PHEV, BEV, NA and Turbocharged drivetrains all on the same line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 he fails to realize that when they tout MAP as flexible, its not in the sense that he's thinking. Its the only plant in the world that can build FHEV, PHEV, BEV, NA and Turbocharged drivetrains all on the same line. BTW: You're doing a pretty good job of staking out positions on both sides of the debate. As long as nobody remembers this, if Ford pursues either course in the future you can proudly tell the rest of us that Ford is finally doing what you suggested, and that--therefore--you know so much more than Ford's engineers there just doesn't appear to be any plan. Ford VP says they are constrained in one plant yet are unable to use production from another plant making the same product. or use excess capacity from a plant making a product on the same platform. he fails to realize that when they tout MAP as flexible, its not in the sense that he's thinking. Its the only plant in the world that can build FHEV, PHEV, BEV, NA and Turbocharged drivetrains all on the same line. that isn't impressive and does little to make the plant any more resistant to fluctuations in the marketplace. And Fuzzy all the PR for MAP mentions it's ability to build multiple models on more than one platform. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2011/03/17/ford-opens-flexible--green-michigan-assembly-plant-with-producti.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 there just doesn't appear to be any plan. Yes, there is. Build the Escape at Louisville. The US market is probably at a cyclical peak right now, if you go by the upward creep of default rates, increasingly risky loan portfolios at GM, and Chrysler's situation. Adding capacity at the top of a market is not smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Let's be fair here, Ford is still building and selling plenty of Escapes and regardless of questions of production limiting sales supply, that has to be a much better proposition than having over production and massive inventories full of hard to sell vehicles. Somewhere in between not enough and too many lies right sizing - a sweet spot that means the best ROI for Ford. All of us would love to see Ford selling more at higher levels but not at the expense of long term sustainability. There is evidence that for at least the last two years, Ford has been a bit pessimistic on production forecasts which means it probably has missed out on "easy sales" at the expense of being a little too risk averse. These are no longer the Mulally survive and recover years, these are the times when Ford should be a little less tentative and build with a bit more confidence. Edited June 17, 2015 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) I disagree emphatically, JPD. There is a real cost to trying to squeeze every possible dollar of profit out of the good times: Think of the extent to which idle labor and plant eats away at booked profits. Think of the extent that slowing a line eats away at profit. If there has been one lesson that has been taught by Detroit manufacturing, it is that overproduction in good times leaves you weaker at the end of the next downturn. Edited June 17, 2015 by RichardJensen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Let's be fair here, Ford is still building and selling plenty of Escapes and regardless of questions of production limiting sales supply, that has to be a much better proposition than having over production and massive inventories full of hard to sell vehicles. Somewhere in between not enough and too many lies right sizing - a sweet spot that means the best ROI for Ford. There is a balance between too much and too little. All of us would love to see Ford selling more at higher levels but not at the expense of long term sustainability. There is evidence that for at least the last two years, Ford has been a bit pessimistic on production forecasts which means it probably has missed out on "easy sales" at the expense of being a little too risk averse. These are no longer the Mulally survive and recover years, these are the times when Ford should be a little less tentative and build with a bit more confidence. I agree, at what time does ford stop surviving and start to thriving? Edited June 17, 2015 by Biker16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Do you think this is no longer a cyclical business? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 ....and then theres the case of the F-150 order date 1/16, no vin yet, and the Transit wagon, order date 3/30 no vin yet......seems to me they are still ramping up to "thriving"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Do you think this is no longer a cyclical business? It hard to grow planning for the next downturn. IMO the best protection from a downturn is cash, which is hard to make if you cannot grow when the market is hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 It hard to grow planning for the next downturn. IMO the best protection from a downturn is cash, which is hard to make if you cannot grow when the market is hot. So, what's better: 1) Be right-sized so you can actually continue to make money, or at least break-even during a downturn. 2) Have extra capacity to make more money during an upswing, then burn through that cash during a downturn because you are losing money. In #1, you don't have to alter your business as much during a downturn. You continue (mostly) as normal and business continues. In #2, you have to completely alter your business, hope to have enough cash to weather the downturn, hope the downturn is short-lived so your cash holds out, etc. In #1, you make extra money by keeping incentives to a minimum. In #2 you make extra money by selling more units at a lower profit per unit. #2 has more overhead. #2 has more chances for failure. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Since when is making several billions in profit year after year while continuing to invest heavily in future products and upgrades bad? 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.