Ford September 2018 Sales Down 11.2% Overall; Lincoln Down 7.2%

[jasonj80]

the refreshed MKC has also not been out very long

Also didn't help they didn't streamline the options on it, and even for existing owners it is just a bit too small. The Corsair is going to be Lincoln's make or break vehicle, it will be the far highest volume unit and will be the chance to get younger buyers into the showroom. Aviator will be good in reviews but a lot of those customers will come out with a Corsair if it is done right.

Edited October 3, 2018 by jasonj80

[Assimilator]

Ford Escape is a little like the Focus, it's not well suited to all markets but it sells well on a global scale and the critics love its driving dynamics and available power. To me the Escape is fun and well equipped, but it's twitchy, uncomfortable, and cheaply made despite looking flashy. I would certainly prefer something much more refined like the CR-V or CX5. The Edge is a vastly superior vehicle for the money IMO, and it gets you a more refined experience and better utility...if not the fun.

 

Ford's product cycles are just so much longer than the industry, but I also think Ford is more committed to bigger leaps each time so they can coast a little longer on those investments. The Escape isn't that deficient for its age. I'm sure the next Escape will have the same 8-year product cycle regardless of the industry.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Assimilator

[rmc523]

Ford Escape is a little like the Focus, it's not well suited to all markets but it sells well on a global scale and the critics love its driving dynamics and available power. To me the Escape is fun and well equipped, but it's twitchy, uncomfortable, and cheaply made despite looking flashy. I would certainly prefer something much more refined like the CR-V or CX5. The Edge is a vastly superior vehicle for the money IMO, and it gets you a more refined experience and better utility...if not the fun.

 

Ford's product cycles are just so much longer than the industry, but I also think Ford is more committed to bigger leaps each time so they can coast a little longer on those investments. The Escape isn't that deficient for its age. I'm sure the next Escape will have the same 8-year product cycle regardless of the industry.

 

Then we'll be in the same boat then too.

[Kev-Mo]

I've been reading this forum for at least 15 years. Every month for all those years it seems to be the same story:

1. In a few years Ford will have all the best new products, just you wait!

2. Fiat/Chrysler/Dodge/RAM/Jeep cannot continue with their shady reporting, crappy products, and incentive pricing much longer without imploding!

3. More volume = less profits, unless you are Toyota, But somehow only they can do it.

 

I have accepted that I am fan of a perpetual mediocre car company.

[mackinaw]

I'm sure the next Escape will have the same 8-year product cycle regardless of the industry.

With the new modular platforms that Ford is going to, maybe not. Thai-Tang hinted in some article I read last month, that it would be possible for Ford to update each module independently if needed. For example, Ford could elect to totally redesign the center people module, and keep the from drivetrain module and rear module the same. Or they could redesign the front drivetrain module and keep the center and rear modules the same.

And it’s not just Ford. On Autoline Daily a few months back, they mentioned that future GM platforms could last 12 years (again, using a modular design).

 

[bzcat]

So FCA outsold Ford in calendar Q3.

 

And YTD, Toyota is only 63,390 units behind Ford, which is roughly 10 days of sales.

[jpd80]

Ford will struggle with sales until new products arrive but i wonder whether

the products that are struggling or going away actually add much profit anyway.

 

 

We're seeing the gap caused by Mark Fields's decisions two years ago.....

[Assimilator]

Ford is still shedding a ton of volume so we are going to see Ford fall back in marketshare no matter what for at least another 6 months. But Ranger will help to replace some of that Focus/C-Max volume. Escape and Explorer won't really change their sales volume, but Escape is underperforming so they have to get it back to factory load without the aid of rental or incentive sales, they can't really grow beyond anyway because of capacity constraints. Explorer...I don't know about that one, it will make a splash but it's also moving into unknown niche territory as a RWD utility. I think Explorer is going to trade some sales for a richer customer mix. I just don't see a path for Ford marketshare growth. They also need to get to a position where they are actually profitable from a lower volume/richer ATP mix.

 

F-150 probably has less headroom to grow with so much new competition, but we'll see how that goes.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Assimilator

[rmc523]

Ford is still shedding a ton of volume so we are going to see Ford fall back in marketshare no matter what for at least another 6 months. But Ranger will help to replace some of that Focus/C-Max volume. Escape and Explorer won't really change their sales volume, but Escape is underperforming so they have to get it back to factory load without the aid of rental or incentive sales, they can't really grow beyond anyway because of capacity constraints. Explorer...I don't know about that one, it will make a splash but it's also moving into unknown niche territory as a RWD utility. I think Explorer is going to trade some sales for a richer customer mix. I just don't see a path for Ford marketshare growth. They also need to get to a position where they are actually profitable from a lower volume/richer ATP mix.

 

F-150 probably has less headroom to grow with so much new competition, but we'll see how that goes.

 

RWD doesn't make it niche...

[silvrsvt]

I really do think Ford is consigned itself to keep its current market share and not expand it-if they wanted to grow, they would have added the plant in Mexico. Otherwise they seem content in selling a set number of products that waxes and wanes as the product launches then gets older. They haven't added a new assembly plant in over 20 years.

[Assimilator]

 

RWD doesn't make it niche...

 

 

In this segment it sure does now, Durango is the only comp. I don't know what percentage of Explorers sold are AWD now, but standard RWD as opposed to standard FWD significantly changes the entry-level target customer for Explorer. That may not be a big deal or a customer they care about. I know my sister in particular only wants a FWD Explorer for cost and economy, if RWD becomes standard I know she wouldn't buy one unless AWD was free and came at no cost to economy. She would end up buying a Traverse instead. That's a customer right there I know could be affected depending on how all those variables shake out.

 

I am confident Ford knows what it's doing and wouldn't do this with unexpected results. As a "Check all the Boxes" kind of shopper, I couldn't be happier with a more exotic Explorer, I think it's going to be awesome but I don't expect sales growth.

 

I do think Ford is targeting value over volume, so growth to them doesn't come from marketshare but from shifting to more profitable customers and growing those specific products. Personally I would like to see Ford move away from entry-level products, especially products like EcoSport where they struggle the most and understand the customer the least. If Ford can stabilize or grow volume without the aid of traditionally cheap Ford volume products, I think that's progress.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Assimilator

[bzcat]

I really do think Ford is consigned itself to keep its current market share and not expand it-if they wanted to grow, they would have added the plant in Mexico. Otherwise they seem content in selling a set number of products that waxes and wanes as the product launches then gets older. They haven't added a new assembly plant in over 20 years.

 

If that's the plan then they need to do something about the 8 years model cycle.

[tbone]

The numbers aren't pretty, and I wonder how RAM is getting increases when their quality remains everything we know and remember about FIAT.

Well, it is a brand new truck with some nice features. In addition, they were running an ad for $10k plus off of 2019 Rams here in Chicagoland.

[jasonj80]

I really do think Ford is consigned itself to keep its current market share and not expand it-if they wanted to grow, they would have added the plant in Mexico. Otherwise they seem content in selling a set number of products that waxes and wanes as the product launches then gets older. They haven't added a new assembly plant in over 20 years.

In the past 20 years they have closed Atlanta, Lorain, St Thomas, Wixom, Wayne, St Paul, Edison, Norfolk, Ontario Truck, and St Louis.

 

Ford isn't consigned to keep its current market share, if anything the past has shown they are consigning to slowly shrink it. It what happens when you incompetent upper management for the better part of the past 30 years.

[tbone]

 

 

Ford's product cycles are just so much longer than the industry, but I also think Ford is more committed to bigger leaps each time so they can coast a little longer on those investments. The Escape isn't that deficient for its age. I'm sure the next Escape will have the same 8-year product cycle regardless of the industry.

I hope you are wrong about that cycle. This is something they really need to work on improving. I thought when they came out with some quality products these past few years they would follow a good refresh/replace cycle however they have completely dropped the ball on this and they have allowed most of their products to become embarrassingly old. This must change if they want to be at the top of the industry in product and margins. They have talked a big game and haven't been backing it up, which I find incredibly disappointing.

[probeGT]

I have accepted that I am fan of a perpetual mediocre car company.

Seems true, unfortunately.

[jpd80]

In this segment it sure does now, Durango is the only comp.

What about Grand Cherokee, the base 2WD models start at the same price, yes?

 

I don't know what percentage of Explorers sold are AWD now, but standard RWD as opposed to standard FWD significantly changes the entry-level target customer for Explorer. That may not be a big deal or a customer they care about. I know my sister in particular only wants a FWD Explorer for cost and economy, if RWD becomes standard I know she wouldn't buy one unless AWD was free and came at no cost to economy. She would end up buying a Traverse instead. That's a customer right there I know could be affected depending on how all those variables shake out.

The majority of Utilities sold these days are now AWD, motor companies have done a great job

of up selling it as a safety feature and relegating the 2WD versions to buyers who don't care.

In saying that, the number of 2WD utes sold is still significant and very dependent on the segment.

 

FWD is a distinct advantage in the North East in Winter time, has been that way for many years

but a RWD shod with proper tires even all season tires makes a big difference....

 

I am confident Ford knows what it's doing and wouldn't do this with unexpected results. As a "Check all the Boxes" kind of shopper, I couldn't be happier with a more exotic Explorer, I think it's going to be awesome but I don't expect sales growth.

And I hope it elevates Explorer sales to the level of needing overflow capacity (Oakville)

and maybe if Edge was to follow the CD6 path, the good time lovin' would continue...

 

 

I do think Ford is targeting value over volume, so growth to them doesn't come from marketshare but from shifting to more profitable customers and growing those specific products. Personally I would like to see Ford move away from entry-level products, especially products like EcoSport where they struggle the most and understand the customer the least. If Ford can stabilize or grow volume without the aid of traditionally cheap Ford volume products, I think that's progress.

I remember Bill Ford expressing concerns about building so many of the one kind of vehicle,

I think he was referring to the oft mentioned Escape overflow volume or a second plant like RAV4

You know...Ford should be so lucky to have a compact that can sell over 40K in a month......

 

Maybe there's a glimmer of light with different small C and new Ecosport on the horizon and if the latter

is anyhting like Mazda's CX-3, it should sell a damned sight better globally..

Edited October 3, 2018 by jpd80

[silvrsvt]

 

If that's the plan then they need to do something about the 8 years model cycle.

I think what we are seeing now is from

The great platform consolation of 2012-2015 and then not really having a plan for whats next after that.

 

I dont see a problem with an 8 year platform cycle-as long as its updated every couple of years-which as of late Ford has been bunting really badly with.

 

Doing a minor refresh after 3 year then a major one at the 6 year mark then updating it again at 9 year mark doesnt seem like it would be a bad thing.

[akirby]

I think what we are seeing now is from

The great platform consolation of 2012-2015 and then not really having a plan for whats next after that.

 

I dont see a problem with an 8 year platform cycle-as long as its updated every couple of years-which as of late Ford has been bunting really badly with.

 

Doing a minor refresh after 3 year then a major one at the 6 year mark then updating it again at 9 year mark doesnt seem like it would be a bad thing.

 

I think they HAD a plan but Fields put most of it on the shelf. Then after seeing what was happening with car sales they decided to change direction again.

 

The problem is they never seem to follow through fully on their plans - they get scaled back or modified so much that the original vision is never realized. Right or wrong I'd like them to see something through all the way for once before changing horses.

[rmc523]

I think what we are seeing now is from

The great platform consolation of 2012-2015 and then not really having a plan for whats next after that.

 

I dont see a problem with an 8 year platform cycle-as long as its updated every couple of years-which as of late Ford has been bunting really badly with.

 

Doing a minor refresh after 3 year then a major one at the 6 year mark then updating it again at 9 year mark doesnt seem like it would be a bad thing.

 

Eh, I think that's too long when the competition is going 3 refresh / 6 all new. You end up where Ford is now.

 

---

 

I've said for a while now, I always thought the plan was to consolidate to core platforms/products, and then add complementary/niche (and market-appropriate) models on those core platforms. That should've been the plan, but Fields just stopped it all.

[Assimilator]

Ford's product churn isn't too far off the industry norm, it use to be MUCH worse. Ford was insufferably outdated to the point you wondered if they actually forgot how to develop new products or platforms internally (relying instead on decades old platforms or borrowed assets like Mazda and Volvo). Explorer is still riding one of the oldest platforms in the industry (much older than LX). We are seeing a significant platform renaissance right now which took some work to do after an enormous drought. This is the first time we're seeing new new platforms across the board in a short period of time. We aren't seeing the same product diversity this time it seems, but it's adding up eventually.

Edited October 3, 2018 by Assimilator

[Trailhiker]

I like the fact that Navigator and Expedition are being produced with a much higher rate of the upscale versions.

I would like to see Explorer/Aviator follow the same path.

I wonder if Lincoln will try to go even more upscale and have something more exclusive than Black Label.

[jpd80]

 

Eh, I think that's too long when the competition is going 3 refresh / 6 all new. You end up where Ford is now.

 

---

 

I've said for a while now, I always thought the plan was to consolidate to core platforms/products, and then add complementary/niche (and market-appropriate) models on those core platforms. That should've been the plan, but Fields just stopped it all.

The golden rule with long product cycles is to do regular and significant MCEs.

When a vehicle gets to five or six years, it normally needs a major update of both

appearance and equipment / features or new/ improved power train.

 

Ford tends to let it products drift a little in the final years preferring to trade on incentives,

I don't think this is wise today as it just convinces buyers that Ford is not keeping up.

Focus could have and should have been updated three years ago with at least 1.5 EB /6AT

but what we saw was typical Ford uncoupling itself from the global update. You can tell that

Ford was falling behind even then and chose to do nothing, the cheapest option....

Edited October 3, 2018 by jpd80

[akirby]

With the competition in the small CUV market they need 3 year significant refreshes and new tophats every 6 years.

[snooter]

With the competition in the small CUV market they need 3 year significant refreshes and new tophats every 6 years.

I agree but its a huge gamble as you need to gauge the trends....shinoda understood it but thats been 50 years now and the track record within ford aint been that great..the mentality of they know best has been a decades long struggle to kill and that bitch mentality just needs to die...

Edited October 4, 2018 by snooter