Jump to content

New Facebook Pages

Ford Mach E

Ford Thunder

  • Custom Search


Sign in to follow this  
jcartwright99

A not so nice view on Hackett

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, akirby said:

That's the answer!   Install generators at every gas station that run on gasoline or diesel, then burn that to charge the BEVs.

That would really confuse the greenies........

That's kind of what happens when you use electricity anyway. Most of the greenies are blissfully ignorant of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, akirby said:

Veteran leadership is no good if they don't want to embrace the future and embrace change.

 

Take a step back and look at what he's doing right now.   Consolidating on small unibody, large unibody, mid and large BOF truck/suv and commercial platforms (SD, Transit) and BEVs. 

And they'll have at least one factory for each one in North America.  They still have Focus, Mondeo and Taurus in ROW - they didn't kill them.

And look at the hybrid strategy - build hybrids off the same platform as the non hybrid.  Production can be geared towards demand and engineering is simplified.   They can do 10% hybrid explorers or 90% - whatever the market dictates.

AVs are limited to commercially viable use cases and focuses on not just the vehicles but the entire service.  That's probably the only way to really make money on AVs short to mid term.

They'll have at least 2 BEVs - a sporty crossover and a truck - and probably more to come.

 

It looks to me like they'll have all the bases covered.   Need more BEVs?  Platform will be ready.   Buyers switch back to cars?   Bring back Focus and Fusion on C2.  Buyers want more utilities?   Bronco, Maverick and Puma all right around the corner.    More hybrid utilities?  Covered.   High performance vehicles?  Mustang GT350, GT500 and upcoming hybrid.  Edge and Explorer ST.   Aviator PHEV.    BEVs.

 

They're embracing electrification without having to bet the farm.   I honestly don't see the downside to this strategy.  If there is a big shift to BEVs and hybrids they will be positioned better than anyone including Tesla.  If not they have a stong lineup of non hybrids.

 

I don't necessary have a problem with the hybrid and battery emphasis but this is hardly anyone on this board would of figured out.

 

What I don't like is his management style and that he is running an automotive company. Look across town and tell me you would not want to have Mary Berra running the company and their senior leadership. She has brought about a lot of change in the company and been very clear in their business. I personally would take any current industry leaders over Hackett. Hell, get Ghosn out of jail and let him run the company. On top of that, I don't think this has a happy ending......Bill Ford has misfired several times, so he is hardly a genius when it comes to picking the leaders of the company. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kyle said:

 

I don't necessary have a problem with the hybrid and battery emphasis but this is hardly anyone on this board would of figured out.

 

What I don't like is his management style and that he is running an automotive company. Look across town and tell me you would not want to have Mary Berra running the company and their senior leadership. She has brought about a lot of change in the company and been very clear in their business. I personally would take any current industry leaders over Hackett. Hell, get Ghosn out of jail and let him run the company. On top of that, I don't think this has a happy ending......Bill Ford has misfired several times, so he is hardly a genius when it comes to picking the leaders of the company. 

This. So much this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

U wonder if Big oil is looking to invest in recharging networks as a way of cornering the market before it gets away from them..

Isn't shell starting to install chargers at some stations?

57 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

That's kind of what happens when you use electricity anyway. Most of the greenies are blissfully ignorant of that. 

You mean power doesn't come from unicorn farts and rainbows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, kyle said:

What I don't like is his management style and that he is running an automotive company. Look across town and tell me you would not want to have Mary Berra running the company and their senior leadership.

 

Would I prefer he was a better communicator?  Absolutely.   Would I prefer that she was running Ford?   Not right now.   For the future it depends on what is going on behind the scenes at Ford that we aren't privy to yet.  I keep hearing about new stuff that will take everyone by surprise.   Guess we'll have to wait another year or two to see everything.

Barra seems to be good at managing a traditional auto mfr.   Hackett is trying to change the way Ford does business and get them to do things differently including new products and new lines of business.  That may be not at all successful or wildly successful - there is no way to know for sure.  But adding Ranger, Bronco and Maverick plus Aviator GT and hybrid F150 and mustang and BEV F150 makes me believe that it will be more successful than not.  And I don't see GM being able to match that.

 

GM did almost nothing with hybrids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

That's kind of what happens when you use electricity anyway. Most of the greenies are blissfully ignorant of that. 

 

Not really.  Most electricity comes from coal, natural gas, water, solar or wind power not petroleum.  Petroleum is currently only about 0.5%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s why I think big oil wil look at natural gas power plants to generate the electricity they sell for recharging EVs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

That’s why I think big oil wil look at natural gas power plants to generate the electricity they sell for recharging EVs

True but at least natural gas burns pretty clean compared to gas, diesel, kerosene or heating oil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Power utilities need a big injection of funding to support future energy and transmission needs..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kyle said:

Look across town and tell me you would not want to have Mary Berra running the company and their senior leadership.

I would not, as GM's actual offerings are largely crap...in fact, they define mediocrity/failure as much as any time that I can remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

Isn't shell starting to install chargers at some stations?

You mean power doesn't come from unicorn farts and rainbows?

Depends where you live. We use almost exclusively hydro power in the northwest. Along with a nuclear plant.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, akirby said:

 

 

Barra seems to be good at managing a traditional auto mfr.  

Yes and no.

At the corporate level, she has made the decisive moves that previous GM management had long avoided. This includes selling the money-losing European operations and shuttering excess North American capacity.

But individuals don't buy corporate strategies...they buy new vehicles. The GM vehicles released under her tenure take us back to the bad old days of the late 1990s and early 2000s, when GM vehicles sold primarily on low price or "the deal," and showed clear evidence of the bean-counters' fingerprints.

Cadillac, meanwhile, is still wandering in the wilderness, waiting for yet another new strategy. If the "new strategy" is chasing Tesla, that is unlikely to be any more successful than the old strategy of chasing BMW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, grbeck said:

Yes and no.

At the corporate level, she has made the decisive moves that previous GM management had long avoided. This includes selling the money-losing European operations and shuttering excess North American capacity.

But individuals don't buy corporate strategies...they buy new vehicles. The GM vehicles released under her tenure take us back to the bad old days of the late 1990s and early 2000s, when GM vehicles sold primarily on low price or "the deal," and showed clear evidence of the bean-counters' fingerprints.

Cadillac, meanwhile, is still wandering in the wilderness, waiting for yet another new strategy. If the "new strategy" is chasing Tesla, that is unlikely to be any more successful than the old strategy of chasing BMW.

While every product has not been real successful there is no denying that they have a strategy and like you said, made painful moves long avoided by others. That took a hell of a lot of balls to walk away from Europe, Russia and Brazil. Plus by any measure, they are significantly more profitable than Ford. 

Sure maybe the upcoming Ford products will be all they are cracked up to be, but there are no guarantees that will happen. Plus it is not like they are doing anything unique here. Every car manufacturer in the world has some type of EV and likely a Hybrid strategy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, kyle said:

Plus by any measure, they are significantly more profitable than Ford.

Only the last couple of years.  And it seems to be due to a lot of cost cutting (re: the new Silvererra) as opposed to revenue or profit growth.  And they were helped immensely by the bail out and tax breaks.  Unless they do something different I think Ford will surpass them in profits and profit margin in the next 2-3 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, kyle said:

 Plus it is not like they are doing anything unique here. Every car manufacturer in the world has some type of EV and likely a Hybrid strategy. 

They may have a strategy but I don't see any other volume mainstream brand going after so many hybrid utilities and trucks the way Ford is doing.   Especially what they're doing with RWD vehicles and high performance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said last year that I weeped for  Ford's future and I am more concerned now than I was then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 351cid said:

I said last year that I weeped for  Ford's future and I am more concerned now than I was then.

Why?  Are you really concerned about Ford's future or are you just worried that they won't be building something you want to buy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, grbeck said:

Yes and no.

At the corporate level, she has made the decisive moves that previous GM management had long avoided. This includes selling the money-losing European operations and shuttering excess North American capacity.

But individuals don't buy corporate strategies...they buy new vehicles. The GM vehicles released under her tenure take us back to the bad old days of the late 1990s and early 2000s, when GM vehicles sold primarily on low price or "the deal," and showed clear evidence of the bean-counters' fingerprints.

Cadillac, meanwhile, is still wandering in the wilderness, waiting for yet another new strategy. If the "new strategy" is chasing Tesla, that is unlikely to be any more successful than the old strategy of chasing BMW.

I wasn't aware that practice stopped?  Based on ads I see anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, akirby said:

Why?  Are you really concerned about Ford's future or are you just worried that they won't be building something you want to buy?

Isn't that one in the same?

 

I may be old news, but I have a great many just like me...and we have the money to buy. Notice my current fleet: nothing newer than 2013. I have always had at least one vehicle that was less than 3 years old in my fleet(that I bought new). No reason to buy a Fusion since I'd be buying the same thing I have. I like the new Mustang, but I like mine better. When my SD was due to replace, Ford dropped the V-10 from the F-250 and I wasn't going to lose torque from that replacement engine...and now the trucks are just ugly (IMO, but it's the one that counts).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t mean to sound dismissive, but what you and your friends want to buy (or me and my friends) is irrelevant in the bigger picture.   What matters are actual sales and profits and 3 things are really clear:

People want and are willing to pay a premium for Utilities of all sizes.

People are not buying as many sedans and what they are buying are cheaper models that don’t yield much, if any, profit.

F150, SD, Navi and Expy are setting sales and ATP records with their current drivetrains.

In fact, engine choices on trucks and high performance options on mustang have never been better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kyle said:

Look across town and tell me you would not want to have Mary Berra running the company and their senior leadership. She has brought about a lot of change in the company and been very clear in their business. 

I've soured on GM as of late.  Even sold my stock.  Barra has done some good things, like exiting Europe, but pulling out of India (the fourth largest auto market in the world, and growing) makes me question her priorities.  

And I really question GM's push to be a 'modern tech" company.  Yeah, EV's and AV's are the future, but widespread public acceptance of both is probably decades off.  In the meantime, their latest products seem to mediocre at best.  Their new full-size pickup is a disappointment, usually ranking dead last in a comparison test with Ford and Ram.  The Camaro is another botched attempt (so bad that GM is rushing through another styling update so as to make it more competitive with the Mustang and Challenger), and Cadillac's latest full-size SUV, the XT6, was met with yawns at the Detroit Auto Show.   

Maybe Barra will surprise me, but for now, this investor will sit on the sidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would take Mary Barra over Herbert Diess...........

Edited by 7Mary3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, akirby said:

 What matters are actual sales and profits 

At Ford, both metrics are down. If you include the third metric that is perhaps most important to the Ford family, stock price, it's WAY down. One can blather on and on about what is going to happen in the rosy future, but until it happens, it hasn't.

IMO there's a place at Ford for Hackett, either back on the board of perhaps somewhere on staff, but he's not a leader, plain and simple, and does not belong in the number one chair. His ideas have merit, and deserve exploration and implementation where it makes sense, but none of that makes him suited for the position he currently occupies. Bill Ford needs to correct this mistake and get Hackett positioned properly so that he can influence Ford's future while not ruining its present.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

At Ford, both metrics are down. If you include the third metric that is perhaps most important to the Ford family, stock price, it's WAY down. One can blather on and on about what is going to happen in the rosy future, but until it happens, it hasn't

There is no reason why the stock price should be as low as it is-its Wall Street punishing them for not operating like a Tech Company. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harley Lover said:

At Ford, both metrics are down. If you include the third metric that is perhaps most important to the Ford family, stock price, it's WAY down. One can blather on and on about what is going to happen in the rosy future, but until it happens, it hasn't.

IMO there's a place at Ford for Hackett, either back on the board of perhaps somewhere on staff, but he's not a leader, plain and simple, and does not belong in the number one chair. His ideas have merit, and deserve exploration and implementation where it makes sense, but none of that makes him suited for the position he currently occupies. Bill Ford needs to correct this mistake and get Hackett positioned properly so that he can influence Ford's future while not ruining its present.

 

 

Profits are down but they’re still not bad, and Ford hasn’t cut back on spending - they’re just choosing different things to invest in for the future.

Would you rather they cut back on future products just to pump up the current profits?  That’s not healthy but that appears to be what GM is doing to some degree.

They have a lot of cost in retooling for Ranger, Explorer/Aviator, Escape/Corsair and whatever else they build in Mexico.  Not having Ranger sales and profits have hurt along with Explorer/Aviator.  With the products coming out this year and next year I think they’re in great shape, but profits aren’t going to be great for another year or two.   

As for Hackett, you can’t change the company from a board seat.  He needs to stay in place another year or two at least until his plans play out one way or the other.   If they stop now it will be Fields all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×