Bailout Watch 419: Ford Losing Luxury of Time

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

In the autoblogosphere, Ford gets brownie points for not sidling up the federal bailout buffet. This despite the fact that FoMoCo CEO Alan Mulally sat shoulder-to-shoulder with GM CEO Rick Wagoner and Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli at the pre-trough-snuffling congressional hearings. This despite the fact Big Al has lined-up a line of credit just in case he has to roll up one of those million dollar bills Ford pays him. Unfortunately, out there in the real world, consumers hear “Detroit Bailout,” not “Chrysler and GM Bailout.” Which is, coincidentally enough, fair enough. Ford is in deep shit. MSNBC ran the numbers; they’re bad enough for Uncle Sam to hide the checkbook. As if. If only. OK, here we go. . .

Looking over Ford’s financial statements, reason for confidence is hard to find. Income from Ford’s financing arm, historically a rare bright spot on Ford’s deteriorating balance sheet, swung to a $300 million loss. Inventory is up by $2 billion, and the plummeting value of used cars cost its leasing business $2.1 billion. Ford lost $2.46 per share solely in the last quarter—more than its entire current market capitalization. This year’s forecast anticipates the worst sales in decades, and Ford’s 40 percent revenue decline in January suggests that even its current-year prediction may be overly optimistic. Most serious of all is the $21.2 billion in cash the company chewed through last year. If the company keeps spending at that rate—though it insists it won’t—Ford will face a liquidity problem before the end of the year…

Having triple the cushion of GM, however, doesn’t give Mulally much padding. By the end of the fourth quarter, Ford was down to $13.4 billion in cash on hand, an amount that would have brought Ford near its minimum capital requirements by the end of this quarter. To fill the gap, Ford has exhausted its remaining credit lines. (It withdrew the money now, the company said “due to concerns about the stability of the capital markets”—possibly a reference to the several hundred million dollars in guaranteed credit it lost last year when Lehman Bros. went under.

Brrrrr. That was some cold shower. Uh-oh. Here comes the stinky cologne: MSBC’s Jeff Howitz wants Ford to hit-up the taxpayer sooner rather than later.

Seeking more from Washington than a line of credit would be a blow to Ford’s pride. But given the new administration’s preoccupation with halting job loss at all costs, it’s hard to imagine a better time to bargain.

In 2006, Mulally recognized the chance to borrow cheap money when he saw it. If he’s serious about repairing Ford, it’s time to join GM and Chrysler in Washington—and give up on the idea that Ford is in “a different place.”

Pride goeth before a bailout? Someone should tell Wagoner and Nardelli.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 16 comments
  • Robert.Walter Robert.Walter on Feb 25, 2009

    I would expect that Ford's actions include all, and more, to a greater or lesser extent, the different motives called out in the preceding posts. However, I still think the greatest motivation is that, with a gov't loan, the Ford Family, Inc., risks being forced to convert their Class-B super-voting stock (allows them with 4% of the equity to control 40% of the votes) into common or regular prefered. The thought of losing control, or in the event of a Ch.11 filing, outright losing your source of wealth, will force Ford to sell the china (Mazda) and silver (VCC), before letting Washington pry control (with apologies to C.Heston) "from their cold dead hands."

  • Anonymous Anonymous on Feb 25, 2009
    The total spend on D3 cars has been about $2B-$2.5B including the yet-to-be launched Explorer. By the time the current and past vehicles get refreshed, Ford will likely have sold 1.6-1.8M vehicles (depends on the success of the Explorer) on the platform. I’m not sure how that’s a bad investment, especially when you consider the profile of customer buying the Flex and MKS (ie - foreign luxury traders, above-average wealth, new to Ford). Ha! Lets see: -Round 1: Five Hundred - failed Montego - failed Freestyle - failed -Round 2: Taurus - failed Sable - failed Taurus X - failed -Round 3: Flex - Failing (Ford said they would sell 100K of those Scions a year Lincoln Taurus - Again, not doing so hot. Ford is charging Cadillac prices for a Buick. -Round 4 2010 Taurus - Has a small chance of success...only because of the exterior. The interior is standard Ford parts bin...and the faux SHO will do nothing to help sales. Explorer - Completely useless. They have the Escape, Edge, Flex, Explorer, and Expedition...they don't need another SUV. The D3 has been a terrible performing platform since day one. Meanwhile, the old Panther platform soldiers on as Ford's real money maker...and sells just about as many units as the D3 too.
  • MaintenanceCosts I wish more vehicles in our market would be at or under 70" wide. Narrowness makes everything easier in the city.
  • El scotto They should be supping with a very, very long spoon.
  • El scotto [list=1][*]Please make an EV that's not butt-ugly. Not Jaguar gorgeous but Buick handsome will do.[/*][*] For all the golf cart dudes: A Tesla S in Plaid mode will be the fastest ride you'll ever take.[/*][*]We have actual EV owners posting on here. Just calmly stated facts and real world experience. This always seems to bring out those who would argue math.[/*][/list=1]For some people an EV will never do, too far out in the country, taking trips where an EV will need recharged, etc. If you own a home and can charge overnight an EV makes perfect sense. You're refueling while you're sleeping.My condo association is allowing owners to install chargers. You have to pay all of the owners of the parking spaces the new electric service will cross. Suggested fee is 100$ and the one getting a charger pays all the legal and filing fees. I held out for a bottle of 30 year old single malt.Perhaps high end apartments will feature reserved parking spaces with chargers in the future. Until then non home owners are relying on public charge and one of my neighbors is in IT and he charges at work. It's call a perk.I don't see company owned delivery vehicles that are EV's. The USPS and the smiley boxes should be the 1st to do this. Nor are any of our mega car dealerships doing this and but of course advertising this fact.I think a great many of the EV haters haven't came to the self-actualization that no one really cares what you drive. I can respect and appreciate what you drive but if I was pushed to answer, no I really don't care what you drive. Before everyone goes into umbrage over my last sentence, I still like cars. Especially yours.I have heated tiles in my bathroom and my kitchen. The two places you're most likely to be barefoot. An EV may fall into to the one less thing to mess with for many people.Macallan for those who were wondering.
  • EBFlex The way things look in the next 5-10 years no. There are no breakthroughs in battery technology coming, the charging infrastructure is essentially nonexistent, and the price of entry is still way too high.As soon as an EV can meet the bar set by ICE in range, refueling times, and price it will take off.
  • Jalop1991 Way to bury the lead. "Toyota to offer two EVs in the states"!
Next