Nonetheless, I really want to see the video if only to see the kind of spin they’ll put on it. The last episode had some laid off employees practically thanking Ford for firing them. They are now free to pursue their life long ambitions – although admittedly they did get a sweet severance package.

Try explaining to fellow execs and stockholders how your long-term plan will take a long time (about 5 – 10 years) for any tangible results to materialize. Count the number of days before you are told, in no uncertain terms, that although your time at the company was valuable, it’s time for the company to move on. Without you.

The Big 3 eschew long-term thinking for short-term plans that they think are guaranteed to net them big profits right now. Which explains why companies like Honda and Toyota continuously out-pace them by following long-term goals that insure the company’s longevity and overall well-being.

Until the MBAs and legacy-builders are pushed out of their comfy chairs in Dearborn, Auburn Hills and the RenCen, not much in the way of progress will be done. In fact, the execs and MBAs will just look forward to the day that their companies go bankrupt as the day that they can finally jet off with their golden care baskets.

What you said in your critique can be as easily said about Toyota when one considers that they have been hiding safety issues for the past eight years and have a criminal investigation going on as a result.

Product? sure Toyota delivers better in N.A. but have you seen the product lines in the rest of the world even in very strong UNION Europe.

And I was watching the sunset from the train, in Connecticut.

That’s it. It’s a FORD. Just like prior to 1955. Oh sure, you have different trim levels and maybe two engines (perhaps an ultra-clean diesel and perhaps the gas-hybrid system from the current SUV). But it’s a FORD.

Obviously, also FORD truck (separate) but offer diesel V6 hybrids, since everyone knows the probability of fuel prices skyrocketing again is high (like 97% of the US public?!). Is there any real reason for pickup trucks to be so massive? Look at a 1960’s Jeep full-sized pickup – it is about the size of a Dodge mid-sized now. DOWNSIZE.

Then do A – as in ONE – Mercury car. How about a hybrid crossover? Certainly no larger than the old Villager minivan.

Then do A – as in ONE – Thunderbird (as a brand). Obviously, a 2+2 touring sport car, maybe a 2 seat short wheelbase variant sharing 90% of the basic car. Rear wheel drive. Perhaps a retractible hardtop available on each, or tin top cars. Make them V6 hybrids.

Then do A – as in ONE – Mustang (as in a brand). V6 hybrid. Obviously, rear wheel drive. Sharing chassis components with Thunderbird, of course.

Make all of them the most fuel-efficient cars in the segments in which they compete.

Let Mazda handle the small cars, Volvo the luxury cars, lose Jaguar and Land Rover and Aston Martin.

Let some quality go back to Volvo instead of dumbing (and cheapening) them down and ruining them. Nope, volume won’t be as high, prices will be higher – but in the LONG RUN it will pay off (if in doubt, take a look at Lexus).

Some of the quotes are just golden, such as the finance department having the company by the nads, and that future products have to cost less than current products. Ax the MBAs? That would be a true Bold Move.

“Few” and “little” seems about right. Ford may indeed be “doomed”, but everything that would make it so has already been done.
You don’t get any free points by pointing out how “dumb” they are/were–as if you could have done any better.

1) Honda Civic is bold. And it’s the top selling compact model. Thus, “few” isn’t true.

2) The big 2.5 need consistency. If I were CEO at Ford, I won’t drop the name “Taurus”. I would just use the “Fusion” as the new Taurus. In addition, I would adopt a no-nonsense pricing policy. That new gen Taurus goes for $19k firm. Not $24k msrp and then dropped to $19k on fire sale.

You may know cars, but you don’t have a clue about geography.

Perhaps the Ford GT was a Bold Move, but who cares? It was a vanity project which took resources that should have been invested into the volume products.

Where the **** is a decent Focus update? Where the **** is a decent Ranger update? How can Ford just abandon the minivan market? Where is the Volvo minivan? Volvo was long the safe family car of choice which people willingly paid a premium for. Doing a Volvo grade minivan should have been Plan A 15 years ago, but no, we get a V-8 sport utility for the fickle fashion mavens. Duh!

JWT did the Beetle campaigns? They wish.

That was DDB under the inimitable and supremely gifted Bill Bernbach. Before my time, but the campaigns remain hallmarks of ingenuity.

Bold Moves is painful to watch, it’s that obviously stale. First time I watched, I thought they were actors.

===

But to go a tad easier on Ford. In spite of never having owned a Ford (unless one counts retroactively, to a Jaguar E-Type 4.2) it would be a damned shame to see the company go forever.
In spite of having rented Ford cars, and regretted not getting something else; in spite of having seen Ford erode Volvo; in spite of seeing silly concept cars at car shows, and sillier real cars on roads … I want Ford to continue as a company.

But then they, and GM and that puzzling German/American company, have to eat crow and accept that their gamble on consumers remaining idiots will never pay off. And they – straight up – have to build sensible cars, that are right for the market they are addressing, and the present and coming needs of that market.

So skip the high-margin megatrolleys. Skip the opposition to alternative drive-trains. Let the Hydrogen pie-in-the-sky go — won’t happen and won’t save you, for another ten years.

Ford exec’s should go bash their heads against a cast iron girder for a couple of days over the fact that they killed the Think EV. Wouldn’t they have liked to have something that emerged from that direction today?
And they should be deeply, deeply ashamed over their trucks and SUVs. Short sighted thinking. If Honda, Toyota, BMW and others weren’t around, showing them what could be done – then you might almost excuse them. But all they had to do was open the two holes adjacent to the bridge of their noses, take a gander and go figure. They didn’t, and now the figures aren’t adding up.

Where the heck am I going with this? To the sad truth that Ford is cooked, and will have to baste for a while before anything can be salvaged. I’ll cheer the remains.

And as to the bad Volvos comment above. I know the owner of a major UK assembly plant that readies new Volvos for distributors. He tells me that his people are appalled at the cost-cutting and savings that are evident in the Volvo platforms. That’s the one place where Ford is making any serious money, and the company is clearly intent on getting as much out of those cars as possible – but customers are catching on. My acquaintance was incensed, and told me quite a few stories about how Volvos are being squeezed for profit. Killed the brand for me, he did.

Peckwell says :How can marketing “start” with products that take 2-3 years to develop?

umm…they should take whatever they started developing 3 years ago, which according to your theory would be ready right about now…. and “start” marketing it today. First product, then marketing. Brilliant.

Where is my Falcon Turbo / Focus ST / Fiesta / S-Max?

I am not Carmen Sandiago, so sell your best efforts HERE.

That would be a “Bold Move.”

Fords in a dire position of little new product coming, i’m sure they’re trying desperately to get new models out asap to fill gaps but its probably too little too late. There is only so much you can do but as i’ve said before i don’t understand why the euro models have not been here years ago as they are all head and shoulders above the american models. just hope they can weather the storm, its gonna be real tough.

It will be interesting to see what is discussed in the upcoming deathwatches and how new info appears when the round of job cuts hits early next year and how this affects the playing field for ford.
And how does Mr. Field still seem to be hanging around. He was successful at Mazda but surely his tenure with PAG was not to standard, he continuously updates his turn around plans since transferring to NA but doesnt seem to be held accountable. Is this another yes man ford needs to remove?

I really, really wish the big two and a half would concentrate on giving me a car that’s worth a darn for my money. Advertising only goes so far.

Agreed that TTAC offers solutions, it’s the reader comments that are one-sided.

But, since you mentioned it, didn’t GM prove that closing a brand is a multi-billion dollar undertaking, plus the loss of whatever market is represented by that brand? Can Ford really take that on right now? Wouldn’t those resources be better spent pulling these “bold” products forward?

And what of pulling in some of their more appealling overseas products? Shoudn’t Ford take yet another page from the GM playbook – if it works, and it’s a quick solution, why not? At minimum, bring them in as Mercury-branded product. Like Merkur, only less funky. Seems like they have some good stuff Down Under that might fit. And the Ka – very cool mini that did well in Europe. What of those products?

All marketing starts with product. Period.

As for constructive criticism, my editorial offers an alternative to Ford's BM website.

If you scan backwards (click on "editorials" on the top menu bar), you'll see that TTAC has consistently advocated solutions to Ford's woes, mostly centered on selling or closing brands and focusing on producing a MUCH smaller range of class-leading vehicles like the F150. 

I’m not advocating a Ford “love-in”, but a little more balance might be useful. There HAS to be SOMETHING positive that they’re doing with those Bold Moves ads, even if it’s that some of the episodes show the company in a less-then-positive light. That shows SOME recognition of the dire straights.

I disagree with the assessment that Ford should not pursue “Bold Moves”, based on the rationale that the “average Ford buyer” doesn’t WANT bold design. That’s BUNK—Ford needs to grow well BEYOND the “average Ford buyer”, and the only way to do so is with compelling, beautiful, BOLD designs. Bold means a helluva lot more than “purple hair extensions”.

Ford is trying to resurrect a brand in the minds of the American consumer. They have to do something to get the worm to turn, and since it takes years to get products to market, the marketing message starts now, and the rest follows. Kinda like Mazda did with “zoom-zoom”…coincidence?

Mmm… “Think Small Because Ford is Getting Smaller?”

The only bold move done by Ford recently is faced with an enthusiastic response to a retro-Mustang they actually built it. Most would view that as a no-brainer, but for F is qualifies as astonishing.

Maybe instead of investing millions in a new ad campaign, they should have spent millions fed’izing the Euro Focus.