Ford Sales Plummet 39 Percent

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: February 3rd, 2009

Automotive News [sub] reports that US-market sales of Ford, Lincoln and Mercury-branded vehicles fell 39 percent in January, to 90,131. “Retail demand appears to have stabilized,” Ford sales analyst George Pipas told AN before those numbers were announced “Regrettably, but understandably, it stabilized at a low rate. But before you can begin to improve, things have to bottom out.” And have they ever. Ford’s press release is a roiling sea of not good, with Volvo down 64 percent, Mercury down 44 percent, Lincoln Down 23.7 percent and the Ford brand 39.5 percent versus January 2008. Fusion was the only significant seller that dropped less than 20 percent (Volvo V50 was down only 16.6 percent with a big 136 models sold, and the Towncar is up 147 percent at 510 units sold).

So instead of becoming the last known survivor stalking its prey in the night and watching bailout proceedings with the eye of the tiger, Ford is preparing to ride this bad news straight to the handout line. Ford executives announced to Automotive News [sub] that the firm expects “robust” additional funding for a program of low-interest government loans to help automakers and suppliers retool for more fuel-efficient vehicles. Beyond the $25b already appropriated, of course. Specifically, Ford is gunning for $11b worth of these so-called Section 136 loans, implying that the Obama administration should double down on the program “because President Barack Obama likes it and some congressional Democratic leaders are enthusiastic about it,” according to Ford VP for Government Affairs, Bruce Andrews.

And Ford will even make it worth the O-Man’s political capital, vowing to “work together” with state and federal officials to create a coherent national standard on fuel efficiency and tailpipe emissions. After all, the “bailout bucks used to sue states” story aint helping Detroit’s underdog turnaround narrative any. If Ford is going to get in line for more (non-136 loans) bailout money (and if February isn’t an improvement, expect it), they want to keep whatever bits of moral highground seperates them from the PR hell currently occupied by GM and Chrysler. And who can blame them?

#Bailout #Ford #Sales

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 19 comments

Anonymous on Feb 03, 2009

Actually, since the silly Flex went on sale, The Taurus X has gathered 11,437 sales...which is 68% of the total Flex sales (16,916). So...yeah..it would have made a big difference. I never expected the Flex to save Ford's bacon...that is what I was told by Ford cheerleaders. And if they were anywhere near class leading, they would be selling. But they are too expensive, small, and not efficient enough.

Like Reply
Rusted Source on Feb 03, 2009

I sure hope Ford can find a way to not have to go begging to the government for TARP relief. I think it was a bold move to go it on their own and I hope people reward them with sales over GM or Chrysler for their efforts. Of course even if they start to bounce back, they're still stuck in union purgatory.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
Redapple2 Love the wheels
Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.