TTAC Data Dive: Ford Monthly Sales From 2003-Present

by Edward Niedermeyer

Published: July 21st, 2009

ttac data dive ford monthly sales from 2003 present

Ford got a whole lotta love around here yesterday for agreeing to hook up TTAC’s staff with better press fleet access. Though the move shows that Ford is more willing to face the truth than its Detroit competition, the announcement generated perhaps a bit more optimism about the firm’s fortunes than the data warrants. One commenter got so carried away by the good vibes that he opined “the Ford brand pretty much has a good car in every segment there is, with the exception of the minivan.” Not quite. Let’s turn to our XLS spreadsheets of Ford monthly sales since 2003, shall we? [Thanks to bumpy ii for the spreadsheet]

Ford has never come close to selling the 500 in old Taurus volumes. In fact, one of Ford’s oldest products, the Crown Victoria/Towncar/Grand Marquis, has been about as competitive sales-wise as the 500/Taurus (and has to be more profitable). Only time will tell if the refreshed Taurus will be the full-size sedan hit that has eluded Ford since the Taurus name was discontinued. There’s no sign of a turnaround yet.

Similarly, the Flex is off to a slow start. Though its sales show steady growth, Ford’s stab at the alterna-MPV segment is miles away from the kind of volume that the saggy Windstar used to push. The question facing the Flex is whether its sales will keep ramping up or top out at 5-6 thousand units per month for a year or so and then fall away, as was the case with Freestyle/Taurus X.

On the SUV front, the Escape is the name of the game. Although far longer in tooth than the Edge CUV, the Escape is proving the more resilient model. Edge was slaughtered by rising gas prices last summer, and has been slow to recover. Escape sales took less of a hit, and bounced back faster and stronger. Not that anything has made up for the giant sucking sound that used to be Explorer and Expedition sales.

Focus sales haven’t been the same since the Fusion was introduced. Sure, there have been a few good months, but demand has been especially inconsistent since the latest North America-only “restyle.” The Fusion did add sales in a segment that Ford had largely abandoned, but wasn’t a consistent 15k/month+ seller . . . until the recent refresh. It’s safe to say (for now, anyway) that the new Fusion is a legitimate hit. Only the F-150 outsells it, and only the Escape comes close.

Mercury and Lincoln are a wasteland. Full stop. A few thousand Fusion rebadges per month, the Mariner and the MKX are the only models that register. Sure, they represent extra profit, but the rebadge game can’t last forever. On the other hand, Volvo does have unique product and is doing even worse. The premium game hasn’t been good to Ford.

On the other hand, Ford has the skeleton of a solid product lineup for its Ford brand. If Fusion stays in demand, adding the Fiesta and the Euro Focus could give Ford the most promising American small-car lineup in, well, forever? Meanwhile, if the F-150 stays solid and the Ranger finally gets a major update, Ford could be remarkably well positioned. There are lots of “ifs” to all of this, but if you’re looking for optimism in Detroit, Ford is easily as good as it gets.

Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 33 comments

Rnc on Jul 22, 2009

Not smart to issue debt, smart to finance with loans from banks, which can and will be refinanced over and over again. GM used debt issuance (bonds, very unflexable, lots of owners) to pay for unfunded liabilities, Ford used loans (banks, flexable, terms and rates can be changed and changed again, very few orginizations to deal with and they have an incentive to help you when things go bad) to reorganize/modernize for company (alot of these monies were used to keep it going, but not the orginal intent of). This was the stroke of genuis (or luck) on thier part not the debt raised but what kind of debt, they could have issued debt at that time period and wouldn't have had any problem doing it, if they had, they would have been part of the bail out. For decades Japanese and European companies used bank debt over bond issuances and in US business schools this was mocked (basically a control thing, issue debt you still control your destiney, loans the banks have you), there was a reason for them doing that, it was flexability.

Like Reply
Th009 on Jul 22, 2009

Corporate bank debt will typically have covenants (based on balance sheet metrics, operating profit etc) as well; if you do not meet the covenants, the bank can call the loan. Bonds or bank loans, either way a company has debt it has to service and manage.

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.