Buy Ford Stock for the F-150 Alone, Morgan Stanley Tells Investors
It’s no secret Ford Motor Company cut its previous CEO, Mark Fields, loose after the company’s stock price fell 40 percent during his time at the helm. Eager to attract investors, Fields’ superiors must have looked at General Motors’ and Tesla’s valuation and wondered, Dammit, if a very profitable company and a very unprofitable company can do it, then hell, so should we.
Out the door Fields went. Since taking the big chair in Dearborn, CEO Jim Hackett has pissed off automotive purists with his “future cities” and mobility talk, and word that the Mach 1 will return as an electric crossover hasn’t done anything to endear him to the pony car crowd. The new Mustang Bullitt does not erase this sin.
Animosity aside, Hackett has managed to place a checkmark next to a top item on his to-do list: get Wall Street’s attention.
On Wednesday, Morgan Stanley changed its tune on the company, reversing its classification from “underweight” to “overweight” and raising its price target from $10 to $15. It’s the equivalent of saying “buy this stock.” Since 2014, the investment firm has told investors to do the opposite.
“A window of opportunity has opened up for Ford,” the firm’s analysts wrote in a note.
Hackett’s plan to slash streamline his way to improved profitability impressed the firm, garnering the company a greatly improved earnings forecast. By cutting low-profit, slow-selling models and investing heavily in utility vehicles (Ford’s transferring $7 billion in development funds from cars to trucks and SUVs), as well as chopping $14 billion in engineering costs, Hackett wants to position the Blue Oval as Detroit’s leanest, most forward-thinking automaker. Please, no pushing when you line up to invest.
“We see Ford as an out-of-favor self-help story with room to surprise the market with cost-savings and profit repositioning potential,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a research note.
The firm also said the F-150 truck franchise might be worth up to 150 percent of the company’s value. It’s indeed a juggernaut, and there’s little reason to believe the F-150 won’t reign over the full-size truck segment for years to come (F-Series sales rose even during the brand’s F ebruary downturn).
The impact of Morgan Stanley’s improved outlook on Ford’s stock was immediate, if slight. Shares rose 2.2 percent by the end of Wednesday trading, adding an extra 1 percent since trading started Thursday. Despite the lift, Ford’s stock hasn’t recouped the losses seen in January, when share prices fell from $13.23 on January 12th to $10.24 on February 5th. The stock currently sits at $11.11.
[Sources: Automotive News, MarketWatch] [Image: Ford Motor Company]
More by Steph Willems
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Slavuta CX5 hands down. Only trunk space, where RAV4 is better.
- Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Oof 😣 for Tesla.https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-05-03-nhtsa-probes-tesla-recall-over-autopilot-concerns.html
- Slavuta Autonomous cars can be used by terrorists.
- W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
- Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
Comments
Join the conversation
Doesn't all this sound like the second coming of Jacques Nasser? He did the exact same thing, only to be blamed when oil prices boomed --and "Detroit" was blamed for not having fuel-efficient *cars* like the Japanese. About the only thing Hackett hasn't done yet is express an interest in junkyards and quick-oil-change shops. I said it before: Ford needs to go private. Despite making tons of profits since Mulally was boss their stock has really gone nowhere. Wall Street could care less if the Ford "Mach 1" is the greatest electric SUV ever built; they kneel down to worship Elon the Great.
Well, have a look at Ford's global performance. China down 30%, Ford Australia, totally reliant on the Ranger and Mustang, what is the plan here? Trump import tariff on aluminium. Remember Ford was the only auto manufacturer to make this complaint due to dismal profits. A potential down swing in US sales. Ford is looking good, or maybe not.