Ford: Market Share Declines Will Continue Near-Term

by Cameron Aubernon

Published: December 3rd, 2014

ford market share declines will continue near term

Things are rough for Ford on Truck Mountain, with ground lost for the fourth consecutive month in November in a market-share situation that isn’t about to improve any time soon.

Automotive News reports sales fell 2 percent last month compared to the same time in 2013, with its market share in the United States diving to 14.3 percent from 15.3 percent in November 2013. The 2014 average holds at 15 percent, compared to 2013’s 15.9 percent through the first 11 months, while Ford experienced declines year over year every month this year except July.

One of the hardest-hit models was the F-150, which is undergoing its transition to aluminum, and affecting market share in so doing. 2015 models began shipping the week prior to Thanksgiving, with a handful arriving garages thus far. Vice president for U.S. marketing John Felice says inventory of the outgoing model remains sufficient, but adds that the company is maintaining a “delicate balance” with incentives until enough of the new trucks arrive on the lot. Overall inventory is at 79 days, down from 88 in October, and 89 in November 2013.

Throughout the range, every car model posted a decline in November except for the Mustang, whose sales jumped 62 percent that month, and the Police Interceptor Sedan. SUV sales fared better, with a 15 percent increase, while Lincoln posted a 21 percent boost, linked completely to the success of the MKC. Finally, the Transit reclaimed Flower Shop Lane this month, moving 373 more units over the Chevrolet Express.

#F-150 #Ford #MarketShare #MarketShareDeclines #MY2015 #November2014 #SalesDeclines #UnitedStatesMarket

Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments

Join the conversation

15 of 44 comments

Frozenman on Dec 03, 2014

That 2015 will be a nice looking unit when they get around to fixing the god awful grill/headlamps, IMHO of course.

Like Reply
- See 5 previous
- Petezeiss on Dec 03, 2014
  
  I *love* the front end on that red truck! It harkens back to early '50s painted-slat grilles.
  
  Like
- Frozenman on Dec 03, 2014
  
  @petezeiss Now that you mention it I can see what you're getting at, but its still a size too big and that whole finger in the eye thing! Make the headlamps round and set the world on fire.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Dec 03, 2014
  
  It was the Atlas that the crowds went nutz for. It had 3-piece headlights instead of all-in-one. Bigger LEDs etc. And the grill had huge intake ports. Not the most aerodynamic or production friendly. Hopefully the aftermarket will do it some favours. An Atlas kit? It's otherwise very close to the Atlas Concept. image.motortrend.com/f/future/concept_vehicles/1301_ford_atlas_concept/42090746/ford-atlas-concept-front-three-quarter-5.jpg
  
  Like
- Petezeiss on Dec 03, 2014
  
  @frozenman "Make the headlamps round and set the world on fire." Brother! Round Headlights FTW!
  
  Like
- Wheeljack on Dec 03, 2014
  
  Agreed - this thing looks like a cartoon. I don't want to drive a cartoon.
  
  Like
- Tresmonos on Dec 03, 2014
  
  @frozenman Indeed.
  
  Like
Zip89123 on Dec 03, 2014

Too much eco-junk, and not enough NA engines. Prices are too high too.

Like Reply
- Scoutdude on Dec 03, 2014
  
  Apparently the people who actually buy new trucks disagree. Ford never expected the ecoboost to sell as well as it is but that is what a huge chunk of the buyers actually buy, and without the need for massive discounts that the other guys are offering on their trucks.
  
  Like
Fordson on Dec 03, 2014

Going to take a flyer here... From what I have seen, the 3.5 Ecoboost is more powerful than say a Chevy 5.3L V8. Comparable dynos show an advantage of 305+ to 320 hp and 325+ to around 355 lb/ft or torque in the Ford's favor, also the powerband is much broader at the low end. When you put your foot in them, the Ford is faster (performs more work = horsepower). So when people put their foot in them, they may get worse fuel economy. That is because it takes more fuel to perform more work. No free lunch. I would imagine that if these two trucks lined up and drove at equal speeds, equal rates of acceleration, deceleration etc. they would probably get the same mileage, however, if driven hard the Ford will get worse mileage...but it would also go faster. Why is this a surprise to anyone here?

Like Reply
- See 3 previous
- Carlson Fan on Dec 03, 2014
  
  And a broader powerband at the low end is what you want in a truck. The only thing the eco-boost v6 needs to prove to me is that it can go the long haul (years & miles) without major/expensive engine repairs. They just haven't been out long enough to say either way. Performance wise they flat out spank any of the NA V8 1/2 ton trucks offered by the other manufacturers, especially when towing. With that comes the ability to return better fuel economy when not being put to work. What's not to like?
  
  Like
- Lou_BC on Dec 03, 2014
  
  @Fordson - the EB 3.5 that I drove did not seem to respond well to heavy handed (footed) inputs. There is a 1.5 mile 7% grade I drive almost every day. If you mash the peddle to the floor on the EB 3.5 it will easily rev beyond 4k but the sweet spot in the power band is bellow 4k. I found that I could get better acceleration up that hill by rolling on the power and preventing a downshift. In some respects the EB 3.5 power delivery felt very similar to my 5.4 V8 except there was much more power. Even briefly lifting on the gas to cause an upshift then reapplying the gas felt better than foot meet floor.
  
  Like
- Highdesertcat on Dec 03, 2014
  
  Lou_BC, I currently have parked at my house a 2014 all-black 4-dr 4x4 EB F150 Platinum. No, I did not go bonkers and trade my Tundra 5.7. What it is: the truck belongs to Nguyen, my assistant who asked me to take him to the airport in El Paso, TX, and then park the truck at my house because his wife works and he doesn't want his truck to be left unattended at his house in Tularosa, 40 miles north of me while she is away working. So after he drove us to the airport, I drove it home and parked it. The bottom line? I didn't care for it. Given the choice I'd still buy my 5.7L V8 Tundra all over again. When I step on the gas pedal of my Tundra, the truck moves NOW. With the EB, from a dead stop it accelerates very fast through the gears, but at speed, like going from 55mph to 85mph on US54, acceleration gradually builds, even if you tromp the gas pedal. Just my two cents. I have no dog in this fight. I hope the Tundra 5.7 will still be available for MY2016. No EB for me.
  
  Like
- Fordson on Dec 04, 2014
  
  Lou_BC - that sounds a lot like transmission shift map tuning to me. Also there is the fact that you had the truck for 9 days. Now, I would hope that would be enough time for the adaptive tranny mapping to learn your driving style, but maybe not - I don't know how the guy who had it before you drove it. When the 10-speed comes out, that will be a major improvement.
  
  Like
Lou_BC on Dec 04, 2014

@highdesertcat - if I had to replace my truck at this point in time I'd try to get an F150 SuperCrew with 2,300 lb max cargo and a 5.0. Everything I've read says the 5.0 has a bit more "oomph" off the line. I prefer that kind of power off-roading or in poor conditions. I'm interested in the Colorado diesel when that comes out. I bought a full sized truck because we were planning on getting a camper trailer that was at the limits for most small trucks. Plans have changed and I'd be more interested in a more off road capable tent trailer. The competition in the pickup segment is great for truck buyers that can look beyond badge loyalty.

Like Reply