Ford Reports $1.7b Profit For Q3

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer
ford reports 1 7b profit for q3

Ford’s profitability outstripped even yesterday‘s $1.37b estimate, coming in at a whopping $1.68b, as Ford made mad money in the North American market in the 3rd Quarter of this year, for a fifth consecutive profitable quarter. Global revenue was down by about $1b, but excluding Volvo from Q33 2009 results, revenue was actually up $1.7b. $1.6b of Ford’s profitability came from North America, as its most crucial market carried the company over weak overseas results. And with $900m in positive cash flow, Ford says its “automotive cash” will equal its debt by the year’s end, sooner than it had previously forecast. Ford paid of $2b of its revolving credit line last quarter, and plans to pay off the final $3.6b it owes the UAW VEBA trust in Q4. By the end of the year, Ford estimates it will have reduced its overall debt by $10.8b over the course of 2010. Hit the jump for a few key slides from Ford’s Q3 financial presentation.

Ford’s complete slide set can be found here in PDF format, but we’ve assembled a few of the most telling slides here.

Clearly North America is where it’s happening for Ford.

But where is Ford pulling those profits from? Volume and market share are up, and as identified yesterday, Net Pricing is a major contributor. Selling Fiestas for more than the cost of a Corolla is a great way to inflate already-healthy profits. But mix is important as well. Much of Ford’s volume gains have been in profitable trucks, as the F-Series is having one of its better years in some time.

After all, Ford’s North American market share actually declined significantly in the third quarter… but its retail share actually increased. This seems to prove that Ford is getting off the fleet-sales jag that has brought overall sales levels up, and has particularly buoyed the Detroit firms. And why not? Ford is making enough money due to consumers choosing its more profitable products, and by securing better transaction prices for its vehicles. Though Ford ran at 30 percent fleet for most of the year, it hasn’t seemed to hurt demand, and Ford’s proving that it can lay off the “empty calorie” volume and focus on making money.

And making money it is. If Ford can end the year with more cash than debt and keep its sales and pricing momentum up into next year, when key products like the 2012 Focus launch, it will cement the Blue Oval’s status as the Detroit automaker to beat.

Join the conversation
2 of 24 comments
  • Rabbimike Rabbimike on Oct 26, 2010

    Used part of my profits from Ford stock to buy a new Mustang Convertible. Win-win. :-)

  • Telegraph Road Telegraph Road on Oct 26, 2010

    It seems that the CNN/Money/Fortune Businessperson of the Year voting is coming down to a final round of Alan Mulally vs Steven Jobs. Mulally is crushing Warren Buffett in the semi-final round (95% to 5%). In the previous round Buffett defeated Ratan Tata.

  • Alan The Prado shouldn't have the Landcruiser name attached. It isn't a Landcruiser as much as a Tacoma or 4 Runner or a FJ Cruiser. Toyota have used the Landcruiser name as a marketing exercise for years. In Australia the RAV4 even had Landcruiser attached years ago! The Toyota Landcruiser is the Landcruiser, not a tarted up Tacoma wagon.Here a GX Prado cost about $61k before on roads, this is about $41k USD. This is a 2.8 diesel 4x4 with all the off road tricky stuff, plus AC, power windows, etc. I'm wondering if Toyota will perform the Nissan Armada treatment on it and debase the Prado. The Patrol here is actually as capable and possibly more capable than the Landcruiser off road (according to some reviews). The Armada was 'muricanised and the off road ability was reduced a lot. Who ever heard of a 2 wheel drive Patrol.Does the US need the Prado? Why not. Another option to choose from built by Toyota that is overpriced and uses old tech.My sister had a Prado Grande, I didn't think much of it. It was narrow inside and not that comfortable. Her Grand Cherokee was more comfortable and now her Toureg is even more comfortable, but you can still feel the road in the seat of your pants and ears.
  • Jeffrey No tis vehicle doen't need to come to America. The market if flooded in this segment what we need are fun affordable vehicles.
  • Nrd515 I don't really see the point of annual inspections, especially when the car is under 3 years (warranty) old. Inspections should be safety related, ONLY, none of the nonsensical CA ARB rules that end up being something like, "Your air intake doesn't have an ARB sticker on it, so you have to remove it and buy one just like it that does have the ARB sticker on it!". If the car or whatever isn't puking smoke out of it, and it doesn't make your eyes water, like an old Chevy Bel-Air I was behind on Wed did, it's fine. I was stuck in traffic behind that old car, and wow, the gasoline smell was super potent. It was in nice shape, but man, it was choking me. I was amused by the 80 something old guy driving it, he even had a hat with a feather in it, THE sign of someone you don't want to be driving anywhere near you.
  • Lou_BC "15mpg EPA" The 2023 ZR2 Colorado is supposed to be 16 mpg
  • ToolGuy "The more aerodynamic, organic shape of the Mark VIII meant ride height was slightly lower than before at 53.6 inches, over 54.2” for the Mark VII."• I am not sure that ride height means what you think it means.Elaboration: There is some possible disagreement about what "ride height" refers to. Some say ground clearance, some say H point (without calling it that), some say something else. But none of those people would use a number of over 4 feet for a stock Mark anything.Then you go on to use it correctly ("A notable advancement in the Mark VIII’s suspension was programming to lower the ride height slightly at high speeds, which assisted fuel economy via improved aerodynamics.") so what do I know. Plus, I ended a sentence with a preposition. 🙂