By on February 2, 2010

Ford’s sales momentum continues unabated, as the Blue Oval has announced that its January sales were up 25 percent over January 2009 [full release in PDF format here]. Sales were led by a a strong performance from Ford-branded cars, which were up 54 percent as a category, with individual nameplates logging gains ranging from 33 percent (Focus, 10,389 units) to 121 percent (Taurus, 3,768 units). Ford Crossovers and SUVs were up 16.7 and 12.9 percent respectively, with most of the volume gains coming from CUVs like the Escape (+28.6%, 10,753) and Edge (+25.5%, 6,243 units). Ford truck sales were up 14.5 percent, with heavy commercial vehicles falling and the Ranger recording a strong 47.3 percent gain to 4,143 units.

Mercury saw a 5.8 percent increase, largely on a 112 percent jump in Grand Marquis sales (1,536 units), but with overall sales of 5,482, Merc still isn’t making a strong case for itself. Lincoln sales were up 15.5 percent, but again, much of the volume gains were from Town Car (+52.5 percent, 777 units), although MKX logged a 26.7 percent increase to 2,198 units. MKT is off to a weak start with only 715 units moved in January, while MKS and MKZ both fell by double digit percentages, to below 1,500 units. Volvo gained 42 percent, but managed a total brand volume of only 4,128 units.

Meanwhile, it’s important to remember that much of Ford’s bump this month likely came from less-profitable fleet sales. Ford’s release notes:

In January, Ford sales to fleet customers more than doubled last January’s depressed levels (up 154 percent) when most fleet owners deferred vehicle purchases due to the credit crunch and uncertain business and economic conditions.

Ford posted gains in every fleet market – commercial, government and rental. On an annual basis, a majority of Ford’s fleet sales are to commercial and government customers where the Ford F-Series truck and Econoline van have long been top sellers. Today, products such as Fusion, Taurus and Escape are popular choices among fleet customers.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

57 Comments on “Ford Sales Up 25 Percent In January On Fleet Buying Binge. Retail Numbers Down 5 Percent...”


  • avatar
    ohsnapback

    This is why I love TTAC; it’s to the point and factual.

    Rather than just repeating the 25% sales increase (as compared from a cataclysmic, mind you, January ’09), they include retail sales dropped and that fleet sales (usually, fleet sales are a once a year blip) accounted for the bump in sales.

    The fact that sales to individuals dropped 5% from last January’s apocalyptic levels is more proof of my contention that we’ve already entered a Great Depression (government stimulus and social and corporate welfare programs notwithstanding), and that economists will tell us this sometime in late 2010 or early 2011, and likely after the midterm elections.

    • 0 avatar
      PennSt8

      The Great Depression? If this were the Great Depression, things would be a lot worse around here.

    • 0 avatar
      baldheadeddork

      Because in the depths of a Great Depression you’d see businesses buying more cars.

    • 0 avatar
      L'avventura

      I’ll give TTAC credit for painting a better picture then even major news organizations in less words.

      However, fleet sales also indicate that fleets are buying, business is beginning to churn. While its not completely optimistic, at the same time its not apocalyptic as well.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      Until I see a breakdown of how many cars Ford “binged” on and sent to Hertz, I’m going to withhold judgement.

    • 0 avatar
      baldheadeddork

      @ 86er:

      Ford sold Hertz to a private equity outfit in 2005. They’ve been out of the rental car business since.

    • 0 avatar
      John Horner

      Business to business transactions make up something like 25-30% of the overall US economy, so they are not something to completely discount. Part of the picture which is emerging is that healthy companies are cautiously investing/expanding during the current situation. Those individuals and companies lucky enough to be in a position to replace equipment, add facilities or add people find themselves in a buyer’s market unlike any we have seen in a long time.

      At this time last year, business purchases and investments were in an ALL STOP mode at the vast majority of companies. It is a good sign that some of these businesses are getting back into the game of keeping their equipment reliable and up to date.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      @ baldheadeddork:

      Sorry – knew that, was just using Hertz as an example.

    • 0 avatar
      baldheadeddork

      @ 86er – Okay, but using Hertz as an example doesn’t work, either. One of the things Bill Ford did after firing Jacques Nassar in 2001 was immediately ending the practice of selling cars to fleet operators at zero profit or a loss, even for a division of the company like Hertz. The legend lives on, but that practice stopped at Ford four years before they even got out of the rental business.

      None of the manufacturers have an ownership stake in rental car companies today, and the last alliance between a manufacturer and rental company ended last year when Dollar/Thrifty started buying non-Chrysler products. When you read or hear someone saying today that fleet purchases are less profitable, it’s because fleet models almost always have the lowest trim level and very few options. That’s all it is.

      If there is enough retail demand to run the assembly lines at full capacity you’ll see a manufacturer discourage or even kill off a fleet model. But more often, auto makers use fleet production and sales to keep the line running at optimum speed. The biggest costs in auto manufacturing are measured by the hour. If you make ninety or a hundred cars in an hour the labor and energy costs are going to be the same. If you can get stripper fleet sale models to fill out a production schedule, it makes every car you build that day more profitable.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      @ baldheadeddork:

      I shouldn’t have been so obscure, it was my fault.

      My only point here was to be critical of the headline, “binging” being used in a negative connotation, and to state that not all fleet sales are necessarily bad. So until I see how much of this “binging” was direcly related to rental fleets, which we all seem to agree is bad for reasons of desirability and resale value, then I will withhold judgement on Ford’s January sales. Period.

  • avatar
    ott

    Ranger records a 47.3% gain… So why is Ford planning to kill it off, as was reported by TTAC last month? Actually, maybe that post was the reason for the increase in sales!

    • 0 avatar
      OldandSlow

      Who knows why Ford won’t keep a small, fuel, efficient pick-up truck in its livery. They sure haven’t put much effort in updating it.

    • 0 avatar
      PennSt8

      Well apparently it’s not going anywhere anytime soon. Especially if Ford took the time to fit it with AdvanceTrac and side impact airbags.

    • 0 avatar
      jaje

      Previous estimates of Ranger fleet sales #s was 60-70% and that this January I’d bet it was even greater chunk. Fleets have to replace their old light trucks and the cheapest on the market right now are the Ranger / Colorado (until the Mahindra gets here).

  • avatar
    Sinistermisterman

    This isn’t a ‘Great Depression’ yet – I don’t see wall street traders living in their cars working on farms and children who’s parents can’t afford to buy them shoes – yet. Even so, retail numbers down 5% on last year is very worrying.

    • 0 avatar
      geeber

      In Pennsylvania, revenues from every tax were down from the prior January. Especially worrisome is the decline in the sales tax revenue.

      Interestingly, for the first time ever, revenues from the taxes on beer and liquor declined in January, too. Make of that what you will.

  • avatar
    Mark MacInnis

    Missing the month-end sales-results babe-fest. My favorite dose of soft-core p0rn….

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    Ouch…Ford must really be in pain after reading those numbers.

    The Taurus had a horrible month (considering all of the cheerleading surrounding this (bland) car)

    The Flex continues to prove it’s dead weight and not selling near the 100K a year it was forecasted to (8300 a month)…and the ancient Explorer is outselling it handily….as is the Traverse.

    The Fusion had a terrible month and was beat by the much older Malibu (again…For the amount of undeserved cheearleading surround the car…you wouldn’t expect a car that’s three years old to spank it)

    The Focus was outsold by the Cobalt.

    The Mustang was outsold by the Camaro…again.

    The Lincoln rebadge of the Taurus has not been down 7 months in a row…by double digits.

    The MKT is proving what we already knew…it’s useless.

    ————–

    Point being…all of Ford’s new appliances have terrible sales numbers…while the old ones (Crown Vic, Explorer, Ranger, etc) are selling like hot cakes. More specifically…the reskinned Taurus and reskinned Fusion. All that work…to move only 3700 units and 10K units.

    And will Ford make up their mind on what to call the Escape…it’s an SUV…not a silly crossover. That is what Ford called it in 2001 (hasn’t changed at all since then) and that is where it’s located on Ford’s web site.

    • 0 avatar
      jaje

      You are completely overlooking the point that the new Ford cars have a much higher transaction point than the cars they replaced. I’ll gladly trade off selling an annual amount of 100k old fleet designed Taurii for a $1m profit than 50k new Taurii for a $3 profit. The reason why Ford can charge more on their newer cars is that they are much better – so give credit where its due and realize its sales numbers are less b/c the cars are much more expensive.

    • 0 avatar
      geeber

      If Ford is in pain because of its January results, then GM must be suicidal. GM recorded a measly 3 percent gain in retail sales, and that was compared to last January’s cataclysmic 48.8 percent decline in sales.

      Incidentally, the Flex sells well in California; it is conquesting sales from other makes; and its customers have some of the best demographics of any Ford model. So while I’m sure that Ford would like to sell more, it’s hardly a complete flop at this point.

    • 0 avatar
      86er

      “As goes California, so goes the nation”.

    • 0 avatar

      jaje, with expensive comes sticker shock. I was at a Ford lot not too long ago and was confronted with $40k Mustangs, $45k Flexes, $40k Tauri, $30k Fusions and $50k F-150s. Call me crazy but just about everything Ford offers is about $7k – $10k more expensive than I would expect them to be. Maybe this is why Hyundai is steamrolling everyone, including Ford. They charge a lot less for similar if not better quality products.

    • 0 avatar
      rockit

      Trishield:

      Where exactly do you live??? I live in Canada where we always get ripped off on car prices, and those are high even for here.

      Unless well, your lying. Or over exaggerating.

    • 0 avatar
      Z71_Silvy

      “You are completely overlooking the point that the new Ford cars have a much higher transaction point than the cars they replaced.”

      So what? That doesn’t mean they are making money on them. The transaction price on the Veyron was over one million dollars…and they lost tons on that car.

      The massive amount of money Ford dumped (wasted) on their reskinned products (Taurus, Fusion, Edge, F-150, etc)and the gimmicks they have added may have increased transaction prices, but a lot of people are not going to pay that much money for a Ford.

      Ford arrogantly thinks they are better than everyone else…and thinks that people are going to pay BMW/Audi/Mercedes/Lexus/Acura prices…for a Ford. And they simply are not. The products are not ANYWHERE NEAR good enough…and no sane person will spend 45K and end up with a Ford…or even Lincoln.

    • 0 avatar
      jaje

      So what? It doesn’t mean they aren’t making money on them. Ford has been turning profits as of late so I guess that would be some evidence that they are making some money on these cars. Yes – there will be sticker shock comparing the price of the older POS Taurus versus the new Taurus which is twice the car the old one ever was.

      As for Trishield – If you are only looking at the highest optioned and special models – of course they are expensive and those at the high end never sell. You can still buy a new Mustang, Fusion for low $20s out the door and a Taurus for mid $20s (not including incentives). I’d figure the old Taurus out the door price was probably mid to high teens as no one actually bought that car for the fact that it was a Taurus – they only bought it b/c they got it super cheap or b/c their credit was so bad that Ford had to somehow off load these to whatever retail customers they had – when fleets were it’s #1 customer.

  • avatar
    jaje

    Also recall that TTAC (one thing I like about this site) when analyzing previous sales #s and losses the D3 were pointing the greatest pain on loss of fleet sales (when in reality fleet sales were down slightly but retail sales really were the hardest hit).

    In the end retail sales and resale value give the best picture of an automakers’ health. If they can’t sell their cars to the higher profit customer they can’t make as much money, and if their used already sold do not hold their value it makes a statement of a consumers willingness to trust that brands products (this is affected by the need to have big rebates or sell them to fleet in order to move inventory – either take big hits at profit).

  • avatar
    tparkit

    “Ohsnapback” writes “we’ve already entered a Great Depression”, and “Geeber” talks about economic problems in Pennsylvania.

    Anyone interested in the dire financial plights of some of the states can start with these two posts:

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/01/massive-layoffs-coming-in-nyc-nevada.html

    http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/01/25-state-unemployment-funds-bankrupt.html

    That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

  • avatar
    Matt51

    I think AM is killing Ford. Taurus- complete botch job, overpriced for what you get. How many twin turbo Taurii is Ford going to sell? Ford will not sell enough to recover their investment. I agree with the sticker shock you see at a Ford dealership. $20K for a bland Focus isn’t going to sell me a car, when I can find better value at Kia/Hyundai/Suzuki/Nissan. I can’t see Ford making it. AM moved Ford up to a higher price point, when he needed to move Ford down to survive the Depression (I did not use the word Great – not quite yet).

    • 0 avatar
      Z71_Silvy

      $20K for a Focus???????

      Soon we will have $20K Fiestas…$20K for a cheap, unsafe roller skate (that looks terrible).

      And the hideous 2012 Focus will be overpriced as well…

    • 0 avatar
      rockit

      It’s like hearing a worn out record. You guys really need to get out more.

    • 0 avatar
      Runfromcheney

      Alan Mulally is killing Ford?

      I’ll have some of what this guy is having.

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      If that’s the same Matt who pisses everyone off over on Autoblog, I always figured he and Z71_Silvy nee P71_CrownVic were the same person. Maybe they are. Either way they’re both annoying as hell and amazingly resistant to logic.

      A 5% drop in retail is disappointing, and I don’t see how the Malibu is selling higher than the Fusion, and by such a large margin, all of a sudden (even more fleet sales? I wouldn’t be surprised), but Ford are holding the line for now. Honda did similarly, and Toyota did worse (though they have an excuse). GM did slightly better compared to last January but their 09 sales were so godawful that it doesn’t really matter.

  • avatar
    Loser

    fetish fet·ish (fět’ĭsh, fē’tĭsh)
    n.
    An abnormally obsessive preoccupation or attachment; a fixation. An object of unreasonably excessive attention or reverence. Used in a sentence: P71-Z71 has an extreme Ford fetish.

  • avatar
    mikey

    Me to SV

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    Wow…who knew the truth would bother so many people.

    As for Big Al killing Ford…he’s not killing them…but he isn’t doing anything that’s worth his salary.

    All he has accomplished is plunging Ford amazingly far into debt, spend TONS of money Ford didn’t have re-skinning their lackluster appliances into somewhat newer, bland, lackluster appliances.

    If Ford were smart, they would start looking around for a replacement. Big Al may know business…but he doesn’t have the first clue as to what car buyers want or will pay for…thus the lackluster sales of Ford’s reskinned appliances.

    And this ‘ONE FORD’ plan is a joke. Where does that leave the F-Series? Where does that leave the Mustang? Where does that leave every lackluster model that current;y rides on the D3 platform (Taurus, MKTaurus, Flex, MKFlex, Future Explorer)?

    Big Al said there would be no market specific platforms. Will we have a F-150 based on the global Focus platform?

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      Mullally never said every single Ford from here on out would ride on a global platform, he said most would. The F-150 sells in monumental numbers, recession or no, so it remains on a US-specific platform and will make a substantial profit doing so.

      The Taurus will be based on the next generation of Ford Europe’s midsize “EUCD” platform, along with the next Fusion and Mondeo (which will be twinned, and on a shorter wheelbase than the Taurus obviously). It can be assumed that since the Taurus will be based on a stretched EUCD, then so will future versions of the Flex, MKT, MKS, Explorer, etc etc. All this complaining about D3′s profitability can end now because Ford’s already moving to replace it with that global platform, which will also, by the way, replace the current Fusion/Edge’s CD3 architecture and the current Mondeo’s first-gen EUCD.

      The Mustang will be partially developed by Ford Australia, with the intention of it being sold globally and possibly (though this has not been confirmed) underpinning a next-gen Falcon as well. It will still be RWD.

      And last I checked sales increases of 33 percent (Focus), 121 percent (Taurus), and 49 percent (Fusion) were far from lackluster.

    • 0 avatar
      geeber

      Z71_Silvy: All he has accomplished is plunging Ford amazingly far into debt, spend TONS of money Ford didn’t have re-skinning their lackluster appliances into somewhat newer, bland, lackluster appliances.

      As opposed to driving his company to bankruptcy, and then going to Washington, D.C., to beg for a taxpayer-funded bailout.

      Z71_Silvy: If Ford were smart, they would start looking around for a replacement. Big Al may know business…but he doesn’t have the first clue as to what car buyers want or will pay for…thus the lackluster sales of Ford’s reskinned appliances.

      Given that you have said that the upcoming Cruze will “lead its segment,” while reviews in countries where it is already on sale have deemed it lackluster at best, I’m having a hard time taking your opinion of Ford’s cars seriously.

      The Cruze can’t even beat the current Focus on sale in Europe… it is therefore hard to believe that it will best the upcoming all-new one.

  • avatar
    BuzzDog

    I’m not particularly worried about a 5% decrease in Ford’s sales of retail units, particularly if the company is able to get a higher price for its vehicles, and a higher per-unit profit. So in response to those who post that Ford needs lower priced products, please remember that you can’t sell vehicles at a loss and “make it up on volume.”

    As for the 112% increase in Grand Marquis sales, I suspect that may be related to the fact that the Crown Victoria is no longer sold to retail buyers.

  • avatar
    Matt51

    I am not “the same Matt who posts on autoblog”. I am an engineer living in Indianapolis, Indiana. I don’t see Taurus as a success, that is delusional thinking. Selling at a rate of less than 50,000 Taurii a year, it is a failure.
    If Ford can’t match the competition on value for the money, they won’t last long. In spite of all the hype about the new Taurus, including the Ford fans on this site, it crashed and burned when it hit the market.
    Cheering on a Greater Depression? Or just acknowledging reality so we can begin to fix the problem? An alcoholic has to start healing by admitting he is an alcoholic. Retail, commercial real estate, residential real estate, state budgets, by any honest measure – we are in a Depression. When I was growing up, schools used to talk about the depressions of the 1890′s, 1921, and the Great Depression. As part of govt propaganda, the word no longer is allowed to be used.

    • 0 avatar
      rnc

      Compare the Taurus to the avalon and maxima (all of a sudden doesn’t look so bad), that is what it sells against. The Taurus, Flex, MKS and MKT are all built in the same factory, using the same components, given what they sell for I would imagine they are extremely profitable. (as BMW, Porsche, etc have shown, it’s not how many you sell it’s selling for a profit that kind of matters, GM tried the opposite approach didn’t work so well.)

      The GM lovers/ford Nazis need to take a tour of the country (which I do every january) and have a good look at the airport rental lots, I know where GM’s fleet sales are going, I also know that my company has or is getting ready to purchase (february) 90 new cars (after not buying any last year), they are all going to be fords because the purchase price (-) residuals are so much higher (Yes you can get a GM vehicle for much less than a Ford today, but there is a reason for that), so taking into assumption that our CEO/CFO and Treasurer are all very smart people and make smart decisions similar to the way that other companies do, I think I know where Ford’s fleet sales are coming from.

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      Whether or not the new Taurus is a success remains to be seen, but FOR ITS CLASS 50,000 units a year is decent. The Fusion is the volume leader for Ford now.

      As for “value for money”, I think the problem here is the idea that Fords need to be budget-priced. When their cars weren’t as good as Honda/Toyota/Nissan rivals, yes they needed to be. But now the Fusion and Taurus are on par with the Camry, Accord, Avalon etc, and they can be priced accordingly. The Taurus still starts $3,000 lower than the Avalon by the way, and the Fusion starts a fair bit lower than the Accord; I’m not sure what the Camry’s pricing is nowadays.

      If, by your logic, prices need to be lower because of this supposed uber economic catastrophe that only you and a few others can see, then the same applies to ALL car companies because Ford’s pricing isn’t any higher than theirs (Hyundai/Kia excepted)

      As for this depression business, schools still call the one in the ’30s the Great Depression, there’s none of this “propoganda” crap that you claim is so rampant, the words can still be used. And I believe Obama has specifically used the term “Great Depression” in a number of his speeches…so there.

      Whether or not we are currently in a “depression” remains to be seen, however…that depends on how fast the economy recovers. It looks like we’ve pretty much hit bottom; though job losses still seem to be growing, by most other metrics we’re recovering. The future will look back on this as either a Great Recession or a mini-depression…it’s those that think this downturn will eclipse the Great Depression, where unemployment reached 25% and GDP dropped by a third, that I have a problem with.

    • 0 avatar
      AccAzda

      I can almost deduce why the Taurus is a failure.

      The concept of the Taurus as a midsizer was doing fine in 2000. When the car got canned.. it was “replaced” by the 500 as the larger car (inches from Crown Vic) and the Fusion as the smaller car.

      But 500 bombed.. cause it was a boring as hell car to look at (Mays stole the design from VW). SO they spent a coupla hundred bil to redo it.. and debut it with the Freestyle. Then that gutter bombed.. along with the redo.

      Only the REDO BOMBED also with the Freestyle.

      SO.. they rename them both Taurus and Taurus X.. and hope they sell. The X went away miserably.. and the Taurus soldiers on as a FAT COW thats 12-1500lbs heavier than it should be… and away from the midsized segment of 20g topping out at 24.

      Now..
      We should be at a MASSIVE CRUX with the midsized car.
      Ford is having issues with the Fusion name being on some subcompact “4×4″ in Europe with the KUGA being their compact / Escape sized
      Ford is also having issues with the Mondeo being Europe’s midsizer.
      Pair that with the Taurus here and Fusion as the midsizer.. and Ford just F’d themselves into ONE hell of a marketing / advertising, name recognition = multi-billion $$$$$$$ mess.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt51

      Hi AccAzda,

      Yes, Ford’s car lineup appears to be a mess. All that money spent on new models, which are going nowhere except to the big Edsel junkyard in the sky.

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    “As opposed to driving his company to bankruptcy, and then going to Washington, D.C., to beg for a taxpayer-funded bailout.”

    Umm…Big Al was there begging for money as well. He secured $9 BILLION dollars. Ford has $9 BILLION dollars sitting on retainer to add to the already received $5.9 BILLION of tax payer dollars.
    —————

    “I don’t see Taurus as a success, that is delusional thinking. Selling at a rate of less than 50,000 Taurii a year, it is a failure.”

    You have to realize that these people do not argue on the basis of logic and facts. They believe that the Flex missing it’s yearly sales goal by 60K units is a good performance.

    All they are concerned with is percentage increase/decrease. They are not able to look at the raw numbers and see that there is a huge problem with Ford’s “new” appliances.
    —————————-

    As for Ford’s outrageous pricing scam…yes…a vehicle with the Blue Oval on the front needs to be priced a bit lower than the competition…because buyers see that blue oval as a scab. Even if the Ford appliances were better than the competition…brand perception trumps all…and Ford does not have any. Once they figure out how to make quality and desirable automobiles, that will change. But so far, Ford has done nothing to change that perception.

    • 0 avatar
      Loser

      First of all how is Ford pricing a scam? Who is being scammed and how? Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a Ford. As for your claim that brand perception trumps all and your assertion Ford has none, you may want to read the below link. According to your own logic/words, Ford has now trumped all with it’s changed perception.

      I’m mainly a GM guy and yet find your continuous unfounded Ford bashing annoying. Ford has enough legit problems without you making more up. Thanks for making me defend Ford.

      http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2010/01/new-study-has-ford-overtaking-toyota-in-quality-perception.html

      Meanwhile, Ford — whose announcement Thursday of a profitable 2009 blew away analysts’ expectations — vaulted from 14th place as recently as the 2006 model year to sixth for 2010. Here’s how the 20 non-luxury brands stacked up:
      1. Honda
      2. Buick
      3. Mazda
      4. Volkswagen
      5. Saturn
      6. Ford
      7. Toyota
      8. Hyundai
      9. Subaru
      10. Chevrolet

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      “You have to realize that these people do not argue on the basis of logic and facts.”

      These people?

      Can this guy just get banned, please? It’s not as if that would be unprecedented, he was banned from GM Inside News…

  • avatar
    Z71_Silvy

    If Ford had any brand perception…they would be outsold by Honda/Toyota.

    Compare the Civic/Corolla to the Focus.
    Compare the Traverse to the Flex
    Compare the Malibu/Accord/Camry to the Fusion
    Compare the ancient Impala to the Taurus.

    The ignorant public of this country…for some unreasonable reason…consider Ford different that everyone else…when really, nothing at Ford has changed.

    You can mistake my truth for bashing all you want….but the truth needs to be said. Ford’s new products are HIGHLY overrated for the bland/boring/cheap appliances that they are. Ford tells bold-faced lies to try and sell their products (Ecoboost is V8 power and V6 economy), Ford has an massive debt load, and quality is no better than before. Ford’s quality is not rising, the others are falling.

    —————-

    SV:

    Why should I be banned? Because I don’t engage in the foolish “blowjobbery” of Ford at the current moment? Because I see them for who they are and what they make…rather than what I (personally) wish they were or wish they produced?

    You should be more concerned on Ford’s massive fleet dumping and retail market share drop than what little ‘ol me is posting on the internet. THAT is the real story

    It’s a shame RF is gone….He had enough common sense to see what is going on…

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      Just saying what you’re spouting is the “truth” doesn’t prove anything. To decry everything Ford makes as “crap” because it didn’t instantly outsell everything else in its class upon introduction is more unreasonable than anything the rest of us have been saying.

      Interesting that you also own a Ford, apparently:

      http://www.feoa.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=593852

      And no, I wish you would be banned because you label everyone who doesn’t agree with you “delusional,” when it’s clear to everyone that the opposite is the case. You’re obnoxious. You only ever post on Ford threads and even then only bash them with irrational, tenuously-supported arguments. And you’ve done this on other sites….I don’t see why you do it; maybe you saw Ford’s Board of Directors eating children behind closed doors and they killed your family to keep you quiet, because that’s the only explanation I can think of.

  • avatar
    dkulmacz

    Please don’t feed the trolls.

  • avatar
    ohsnapback

    TriShield
    February 2nd, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    jaje, with expensive comes sticker shock. I was at a Ford lot not too long ago and was confronted with $40k Mustangs, $45k Flexes, $40k Tauri, $30k Fusions and $50k F-150s. Call me crazy but just about everything Ford offers is about $7k – $10k more expensive than I would expect them to be. Maybe this is why Hyundai is steamrolling everyone, including Ford. They charge a lot less for similar if not better quality products.

    ……..

    TriShield – I couldn’t agree with you more.

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      By that same metric we should all by shocked at the prices of loaded Toyotas, Hondas, and yes even Chevys. All this hoopla about “$40k Taurii” is silly, because yes, it’s a loaded model. A Toyota Avalon also tops out at $40k. And $30k Fusions are outrageous? Really? For a loaded 3.5V6 Sport Package or Hybrid model, well, yes, I would expect a price of around $30,000. If you can’t pay $30k for a car then get a Fusion SE for $22k, which seems to be what most Fusion buyers are doing.

      The same thing applies to Mustangs and F150s – these examples of “outrageous pricing” are fully loaded models…yeah, a King Ranch or Platinum or whatever top line F-150 will be stupidly expensive, but Ford also has $25-30k XLT Crew Cab models and $20k XL extended cabs…and the Mustang can be had in V6 guise (with a near-GT-matching 306hp in a few months) for less than $25k.

  • avatar
    geeber

    Z71_Silvy: Umm…Big Al was there begging for money as well. He secured $9 BILLION dollars. Ford has $9 BILLION dollars sitting on retainer to add to the already received $5.9 BILLION of tax payer dollars.

    Ummm…wrong. He was there to support the request by GM, Chrysler and the UAW for a bailout. He did not request bailout money at those hearings, nor did Ford receive bailout money that will never be repaid. The funds you are talking about are completely different.

    You also need to keep your stories straight. First you post this:

    As for Ford’s outrageous pricing scam…yes…a vehicle with the Blue Oval on the front needs to be priced a bit lower than the competition…because buyers see that blue oval as a scab.

    But then you later post this:

    The ignorant public of this country…for some unreasonable reason…consider Ford different that everyone else…when really, nothing at Ford has changed.

    So…which is it? Do buyers see the Blue Oval as a scab, or are they ignoramuses who see that Ford is different from GM and Chrysler?

    Z71_Silvy: Why should I be banned? Because I don’t engage in the foolish “blowjobbery” of Ford at the current moment? Because I see them for who they are and what they make…rather than what I (personally) wish they were or wish they produced?

    Your posts are entertaining in a delusional sort of way. Although anyone who says that the mediocre Cruze will blow away competitors in its class has no grounds to accuse other posters of carrying water for a particular company.

    Might help you to actually read a review of the car in the countries where it has debuted. Let’s just say that it will be a worthy successor to the Cobalt.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India