As Sales Plunge, Ford Tries Again With China

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Ford isn’t about to kiss off the barely tapped potential of the Chinese new vehicle market, so it’s throwing more effort into strengthening its efforts in that “developing” country. To better mine a market in which its sales sank 43 percent last month, the automaker has announced the creation of a standalone business unit: Ford China.

Overseeing the unit is a CEO poached from a Chinese automaker — a man who once spent 17 years working under the Blue Oval banner.

In its Wednesday announcement, Ford said former Chery CEO Anning Chen would take on the top executive position for Ford China. Chen left Ford in 2009 after having served since 1992, soon appearing at China’s state-owned Chery Automobile Co., where he reached the general manager position in April 2017.

Chen resigned from Chery at the end of September for personal reasons, according to a company statement. In his new position, Chen will report directly to Jim Farley, Ford’s head of global markets.

“Success in China is critical as we reposition our global business for long-term success,” said Ford CEO Jim Hackett in a statement. “With today’s actions, we are strengthening our commitment to the China market and reorganizing our international markets to strengthen their performance.”

Farley echoes Hackett’s sentiment, stating, “China is absolutely essential to Ford’s profitability and growth,” said Farley, claiming a standalone unit was needed to ” increase our decision-making speed and be closer to our customers.”

Chen’s first day on the job is November 1st. Helping him transition into the role is Peter Fleet, president of Ford Asia Pacific, who’s also tasked with the creation of an International Markets business unit focused on the non-China Asia-Pacific region and other unspecified markets.

Ford’s Chinese market share hit a peak of 4.36 percent in 2015, falling nearly a full percentage point by 2017. A rapidly transitioning market with its own domestic troubles was made all the more volatile by U.S. tariffs levied this summer, leading to a steep nosedive in volume.

The automaker’s aforementioned 43 percent year-over-year sales drop in September was only the latest reason for a rise in antacid sales in Dearborn. August saw a 36 percent monthly sales drop, while July’s volume came in 32 percent lower than the same month a year prior. June sales fell 38 percent. If this looks like a worsening trend that would weigh on the minds of investors, you’re right.

Ford plans to launch 50 new models in the Chinese market by the middle of next decade, all the while increasing its volume of locally produced vehicles.

While news of a new China unit should have brought some lift to the automaker’s deeply depressed stock, a quarterly earnings report expected after Wednesday’s closing bell weighed heavily. As of publication time, Ford’s stock was down nearly 5 percent on anticipation of bad news.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 4 comments
  • DeadWeight DeadWeight on Oct 24, 2018

    Ford, late like 2008 to the "Hail Mary China Domestic Market Will Save Us & Cure All Our Woes" groupthink dogma affecting almost every other major automaker, now comes rushing in like a giant A$$ fool, throwing way more resources into that pot while talking up this strategy as if it's a) novel, and/or b) wise, just in time for what will be one of the greatest meltdowns in the history of a formerly hot emerging market economy (China realistically could go into real economic contraction, and possibly even a depression, based on trending export, domestic consumption and internal debt patterns). China will save al, automakers, and especially Ford and GM!

  • Dantes_inferno Dantes_inferno on Oct 25, 2018

    Sounds like the definition of insanity. Insanity. Rinse and repeat.

  • Honda1 Unions were needed back in the early days, not needed know. There are plenty of rules and regulations and government agencies that keep companies in line. It's just a money grad and nothing more. Fain is a punk!
  • 1995 SC If the necessary number of employees vote to unionize then yes, they should be unionized. That's how it works.
  • Sobhuza Trooper That Dave Thomas fella sounds like the kind of twit who is oh-so-quick to tell us how easy and fun the bus is for any and all of your personal transportation needs. The time to get to and from the bus stop is never a concern. The time waiting for the bus is never a concern. The time waiting for a connection (if there is one) is never a concern. The weather is never a concern. Whatever you might be carrying or intend to purchase is never a concern. Nope, Boo Cars! Yeah Buses! Buses rule!Needless to say, these twits don't actual take the damn bus.
  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
  • MaintenanceCosts I don't have an opinion on whether any one plant unionizing is the right answer, but the employees sure need to have the right to organize. Unions or the credible threat of unionization are the only thing, history has proven, that can keep employers honest. Without it, we've seen over and over, the employers have complete power over the workers and feel free to exploit the workers however they see fit. (And don't tell me "oh, the workers can just leave" - in an oligopolistic industry, working conditions quickly converge, and there's not another employer right around the corner.)
Next