Ford to sell only two cars in North America

Keith Tanner said:

Appleseed said:

In reply to Adrian_Thompson :

What model Ford pickup are you planning on buying?

I know this is in jest - but it illustrates the way a lot of people think. If it's not a Focus, it's an F150. No middle ground. The reality is quite different.

Interesting chart from the CBC. I'd like to know exactly what their definitions of each category are, but as long as they're consistent it does show the trend in Canada. "Cars" vs "Truck/van/SUV". Dunno exactly where a RAV4 sits.

It is a link, not a picture

 

Nice chart, pity it only goes back 10 years, but it still shows how fast the change is happening.

The change may only be most dramatic in the last 10-15 years as the CUVs took hold.

Here's a question someone might be able to answer: Something like 6-7 years ago Ford implemented an effort to try to raise the average transaction prices up for their vehicles. The idea was that they would sell more higher trim level models (eg. introduction of "Titanium" level), thus significantly increasing profits (costs are not that different between a base model and a fully optioned model). Did they make any progress?

If not, perhaps this is part of why they're taking this approach, it's not simply volume. If you can't make money on a Focus by adding Sync, a nicer interior and automatic parking, you stretch it out a bit into an Escape, add AWD and sell it for a lot more (I'm being slightly glib for effect).

Adrian_Thompson said:

In reply to Kreb :

So watching consumer and market trends.  Paying attention to what is selling, what areas sales are increasing in and where sales are falling off.  Then making long term investment decision as to where to spend your (not unlimited) R&D $$' is short sighted is it?  A better long term approach would be to ignore burgeoning sectors and sink hundreds of millions or billions of $$'s into a traditional market share that is shrinking at double digit % per year.  OK, got it.

We've been down this road before. Market's change. If you base your planning only on current realities, the next trend will leave you by the side of the road.

I think in terms of my own business. We've done jobs (HVAC and metal fabricating) anywhere between $30 and $500,000. Now I determined some time ago that jobs under $120 or so were generally not profitable, yet we never seriously considered raising our rates. Why? Because we're part of a berkeleying community, and believe in servicing that community, even when it hurts our bottom line.

The idea is that the guy who buys a Fiesta moves up the vehicular food chain and profitability follows him. The Fiesta leads to a focus, which leads to a Fusion, and so it goes. It seems real wise to abdicate the entire lower-end market to the Asians. Nevermind that in an international economy there's little that should keep us from going toe-to-toe with them.

In reply to Snrub :

Yes a huge amount of progress. I don’t know what figures I can share so I’d refer you to the investors report which is in the public domain. There has been a very significant increase in the average transaction price 

Driving through my (suburban mobile home) neighborhood today I couldn't help but notice how many driveways have one or two crossovers or SUVs.  There are so many Escape sized vehicles that the Escape sized cars actually might outnumber Focus sized cars 2-1.  People just like them.  There are at least two houses I pass while walking our dogs that have two Escapes in the driveway.

Kreb said:

Adrian_Thompson said:

In reply to Kreb :

So watching consumer and market trends.  Paying attention to what is selling, what areas sales are increasing in and where sales are falling off.  Then making long term investment decision as to where to spend your (not unlimited) R&D $$' is short sighted is it?  A better long term approach would be to ignore burgeoning sectors and sink hundreds of millions or billions of $$'s into a traditional market share that is shrinking at double digit % per year.  OK, got it.

We've been down this road before. Market's change. If you base your planning only on current realities, the next trend will leave you by the side of the road.

I think in terms of my own business. We've done jobs (HVAC and metal fabricating) anywhere between $30 and $500,000. Now I determined some time ago that jobs under $120 or so were generally not profitable, yet we never seriously considered raising our rates. Why? Because we're part of a berkeleying community, and believe in servicing that community, even when it hurts our bottom line.

The idea is that the guy who buys a Fiesta moves up the vehicular food chain and profitability follows him. The Fiesta leads to a focus, which leads to a Fusion, and so it goes. It seems real wise to abdicate the entire lower-end market to the Asians. Nevermind that in an international economy there's little that should keep us from going toe-to-toe with them.

And that same argument has been postulated and refuted probably 10 times in this thread.

I think it's time to put this one to rest.

Keith Tanner said:

The change may only be most dramatic in the last 10-15 years as the CUVs took hold.

I recently made a video of me proving that I actually finish projects I start/what it's live to drive a Detroit Locker on the street.

I'm the kind of person who, when watching a movie, pays a lot of attention to what is going on in the background.  Watch this video and pay attention to what other vehicles are on the road.  You could practically count the other CARS on the road on one hand.  And most of them are huge except for an old Sentra.

rslifkin said:

I feel like some of this issue is this: Take your average non-car person and put 2 identical cars in front of them.  One is badged as a Ford, the other a Toyota or Honda.  They'll happily pay more for the Toyota / Honda even if it's exactly the same car just due to their perceptions.  

I can do you one better.  Toyota Camry and Toyota Avalon.  Mechanically identical except for the wheelbase.  Used Camrys have twice the value of Avalons.  And Avalons cost more when new.

Perception is EVERYTHING when selling things to people.  Camry is the standard of "reliable".  Avalons are not Camrys, and they are upmarket, and upmarket is not perceived as reliable.

Speaking as someone who bought a ten year old high-end Volvo at 90% depreciation because people think Volvos are unreliable, and high-end is futher ostracized.  I bought teh S60R in part because going rates on the market were literally less than half than that of the second-generation S40s, which were altogether a E36 M3tier car with more problems.  (Srsly, S60Rs were in the $4-7k range while I couldn't touch a ratty S40 for under $8k, and the ones I wanted were 10k+!)

Also, I get to put an engine in a Toyota next week because for some reason it calls for 28 hours of labor to do head gaskets on the later model V6 so it's cheaper to do an engine swap.

Also also, I need to find the strength to not buy the core engine for myself so I can throw head gaskets in it and put it in a second generation MR2.  And you people are exactly the people who I should not ask to help me find that strength.  You guys would point me to Craigslist ads for MR2s with blown engines.

I thought I’d post this as it’s been mentioned on here how much taller on more ground clearance cars used to have. Here is 32 Ford 5 window parked beside a mini van.

That Deuce is wrong. All wrong. This is a 32 as God intended.

In reply to MotorsportsGordon :

In an editorial in a long-ago issue of C&D, the writer (maybe it was Bedard?) pointed out that "longer, lower, wider" was a myth, or at least something that died out by the 1960s.  Citing Ford's subcompacts as an example, there was first the Pinto.  The Escort that replaced it was taller.  The Focus that replaced the Escort was also taller than its predecessor.

The Focus was already a bolt-upright car, so it stands to reason that the only way to continue the trend is to cut the pretense and make its replacement an SUV.