What I know about Ford finally made public

[vztrt]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...e-sales-prices

Quality, technology help Ford boost vehicle sales prices
Bryce G. Hoffman / The Detroit News

Dearborn --Two months ago, Ford marketing executives watched as a panel of California consumers checked out one of their new, European-designed small cars.

Surveyors asked the group how much they thought the car would cost. Most shouted out a price well above what the company plans to sell it for in the United States. Then they ripped the masking tape off the badge on the hood and revealed Ford's Blue Oval. For the first time anyone could remember, the price actually went up.

"We didn't hug each other, but we came close," confessed Jim Farley, Ford's global marketing czar.

Advertisement

For decades, Ford has had to sell its cars for less than similar models offered by Japanese competitors because of its inferior quality and lackluster designs. Now, with Ford's quality rivaling the best in the world and a new generation of edgy cars and trucks hitting its showrooms, that is beginning to change. In the first six months of the year, Ford's net pricing increased by $1.9 billion. Most of those gains came in the U.S.

As the other Detroit automakers watched their market share erode and heaped big incentives on their products to stanch the hemorrhaging, Ford increased its share of the market -- and did it with lower incentives and higher sticker prices.

"That's huge," said analyst Eric Selle, who follows Ford for JPMorgan. "It's very encouraging for the future, when they are going to have to start making money on smaller cars."

In fact, Farley says the success of Ford's new product strategy, which aims at replacing its decades-long dependence on big trucks and sport utility vehicles with a more balanced product portfolio, is predicated on these pricing gains.

Making money off small cars has been an elusive goal for American automakers, but he said Ford's pricing gains -- coupled with cost savings from union concessions and a new global product development system -- will change the game.

Farley credits Ford's pricing gains to a number of factors: new models and improved quality, cutting-edge technology like Ford's voice-activated Sync system, and a host of tweaks to pricing and production that were the products of sophisticated mathematical modeling. Ford also has benefitted from positive consumer sentiment stemming from its decision to forgo a federal bailout.

Neither General Motors Co. nor Chrysler Group LLC would provide net pricing data. Analysts say the average price of their vehicles fell during the first six months of this year, in part due to their bankruptcies. Both are now trying to reverse that trend.

"Our main goal is to enhance our brands," said Chrysler spokeswoman Kathy Graham. "Part of that is being competitive in the marketplace on a transaction price basis."

GM spokesman John McDonald said the Detroit automaker's average transaction price increased from August to September, though largely because of increased demand for trucks.

Farley said Ford still has not achieved pricing parity with brands like Toyota and Honda, but he said the gap is closing.

"We still have a lot of work to do," he said. "But I'm confident we can continue to do this."

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by vztrt

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...e-sales-prices

Another great find VZTRT!

Farley said Ford still has not achieved pricing parity with brands like Toyota and Honda, but he said the gap is closing.

"We still have a lot of work to do," he said. "But I'm confident we can continue to do this."

There is alot of honesty, responsibility taken and clarity in what they are doing and saying. Great to see.

[vztrt]

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1667...le_lb_articles

Ford China Posts Staggering Sales 3 comments
by: Zacks.com October 15, 2009

Ford Motor (F) has revealed that its sales in China have shot up 79% to 119,338 vehicles in the third quarter of the year. The growth has vaulted an overall sales increase of 78% to 1.33 million vehicles across China .

This was driven by China ’s economic policies to spur auto sales. The Chinese Government halved taxes on purchases of small autos. It is also spending 5 billion yuan ($730 million) on subsidies for purchases of light trucks and minivans in the countryside, where the population density is high.

Considering the first nine months of the year, Ford’s sales grew 32% to 316,639 vehicles. This compared to a 34% rise in sales to 9.66 million vehicles across China , making it the world's top auto market. The U.S. ranked second in terms of sales volume, with the nine months’ sales totaling 7.8 million vehicles.

The sale of Ford’s mid-range Focus sedan soared 72% to an all-time monthly high of 13,891 units in September. Meanwhile, sale of Ford Fiesta compact car totaled 32,178 units since its launch in March. Ford has tie-ups that delivered excellently in China . Sales in Changan Ford Mazda – a tie-up with Chongqing Changan Auto and Mazda Motor (7261.T) – rose 43% to 227,839 cars in the first nine months of the year.

Jiangling Motors Corp, a commercial vehicle maker partly owned by Ford, sold 82,718 vehicles in the same period including 23,520 Ford Transit models. Several global automakers including Ford are looking forward to maintaining a strong foothold in China to foster revenue growth as demand in other big markets remains sluggish.

The nation has raised possibilities that could make economic growth surpass the Government's target of 8% for the year. We continue to recommend the shares of Ford as Neutral with a target price of $8.

[Ohio XB]

Then they ripped the masking tape off the badge on the hood and revealed Ford's Blue Oval. For the first time anyone could remember, the price actually went up.

THAT was amazing to see. So many times when Ford has done this the price people expected for the car DROPPED when the blue oval was revealed. This makes me feel good.

"We still have a lot of work to do," he said. "But I'm confident we can continue to do this."

Yeah, they are doing this right now. Two weeks ago I saw a company video (presentation) showing the numbers of what Ford's financial committments are compared to GM and Chrysler. It was us being set up for the new "contract revisions" that were brought to us last week. I will not go into detail on the contract but there is wording that, to me, says they want to be able to set our wages and benefits to those of the other US competitors without us being able to strike over them doing this. This is what I get out of the wording.

Of course the big question then is, will the top brass take a cut to the wages of their counterparts at those other competitors? I doubt it.

It seems to me that Ford wants all the accolades of not going into bankruptcy but ALSO wants the same benefits that GM and Chrysler got for going through bankruptcy.

We have used "Pattern Bargaining" for decades now, where it is taken for granted that the "other" two US companies will get a very similar deal so that no company is at a competitive disadvantage. Well, Ford is saying that since the UAW renegotiated contractual agreements with GM and Chrysler the UAW needs to provide the same concessions to them. Now, many of these concessions that were given to GM and Chrysler were REQUIREMENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT in order to keep these companies solvent.

Ford and their workers were not subject to these government requirements, but because Ford did the honorable thing, by not declaring bankruptcy and took on their financial responsibilities, they seem to feel they are entitled to the benefits of going through the embarrassing and shameful act of bankruptcy anyways.

Ford is not in the same boat as the other two companies. The boat that the other two companies are in aren't even in the same lake. This is like someone that has a steady job and a decent income stating that they still want welfare and food stamps.


Needless to say, I am a little miffed.


Steve

[deesun]

If I have a steady job and my neighbour is on welfare he isn't my direct competitor in business. If I were Ford I would want what they had too.

[Ohio XB]

They are asking for even more than what the others have, in a very clever way.


Steve

[vztrt]

Ford Motor (F) has been the best performing S&P 500 stock since the 2008 election.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1715...n?source=yahoo

[vztrt]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=ajgRmYFJv8HA

Mulally Spurs Ford Growth With $2,700 More Revenue per Vehicle

By Keith Naughton

Nov. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co. Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally, after cutting nearly half the automaker’s North American employees, is commanding $2,700 more revenue per vehicle as he looks to put the company on a path to growth.

Mulally posted his first back-to-back quarterly profits at Ford yesterday with a $997 million net income. The carmaker was expected to make a $632 million loss, based on the average of eight analyst estimates. Ford’s U.S. market share grew even as it cut discounts, delivering $1.9 billion in additional revenue, 74 percent of it in North America.

That progress, boosted by Consumer Reports magazine declaring Oct. 27 that Ford’s quality is now “world-class,” had a bigger effect on the bottom line than the additional $1 billion in savings the automaker recorded in the quarter. New models, like the redesigned Ford Taurus and Fusion sedans, also sold with more options, like voice-controlled audio systems.

“During the worst of times when we were restructuring ourselves to the lower demand to get back to profitability, we also continued to invest in a new product line,” Mulally said on Bloomberg Television yesterday. “It’s both having the vehicles that people really do want as the economy recovers but also having a very competitive cost structure to compete with the best.”

Ford will again seek savings from the United Auto Workers union, whose members rejected proposed concessions yesterday. And it is continuing work to strengthen its balance sheet, seeking to raise as much as $3.3 billion in convertible notes and common stock.

Ford gained 58 cents, or 8.3 percent, to $7.58 yesterday in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares have more than tripled this year.

Growth Begins

Ford has already begun growing. It increased its U.S. market share 2.2 points to 14.6 percent in the third quarter over last year, the automaker said. The biggest growth, though, came in pricing power. Ford reduced discounts and boosted prices to gain $1.4 billion in higher payments for its models in North America, equating to $2,700 per vehicle.

This year, Ford has posted a net income of $1.8 billion and a pretax operating loss of $1.3 billion.

Mulally has now promised that the Dearborn, Michigan-based automaker will be “solidly profitable” in 2011. Analysts and investors say he’s being conservative.

“He’s under-promising in hopes of over-delivering,” said Bernie McGinn, president of McGinn Investment Management of Alexandria, Virginia, which owns about 320,000 Ford shares. “He has enough good news out there, why spoil people? But I absolutely do expect profit in 2010.”

First Annual Profit

If so, it would be Mulally’s first annual profit since he arrived at Ford from Boeing Co. in October 2006, just as the automaker was sliding into the biggest crisis since the Great Depression. Shortly after taking over, Mulally, 64, signed off on a plan brought to him by then-Chief Financial Officer Don LeClair to mortgage the entire company for $26 billion in loans.

Those loans, which came just before credit markets froze, saved Ford from needing a government bailout and falling into bankruptcy like General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC.

He also focused Ford on its namesake brand and sold off European luxury lines Jaguar, Land Rover and Aston Martin.

Next to go is Volvo. On Oct. 28 Ford said it selected as its “preferred bidder” a team of investors led by Geely Holding Group Co., China’s largest private automaker. Geely is offering about $2 billion, less than a third of what Ford paid for the Swedish automaker a decade ago.

Debt Disadvantage

Ford can use the money. Its debt load is larger than GM’s or Chrysler’s, whose debts were reduced in their restructurings. GM’s liabilities will be $22.3 billion in 2011, while Ford’s will total $38.1 billion, Barclays Capital auto analyst Brian Johnson said in an Oct. 20 research note.

After the market closed yesterday, Ford announced a plan to raise as much as $3.3 billion, while paying down and pushing back the maturity of a $10.7 billion credit line by two years to 2013 to give it breathing room to pay its debts.

“We expect the moves will enhance Ford’s automotive liquidity and over time reduce the company’s debt burden, providing an additional cushion given the still-uncertain state of the economy,” Mulally said in a statement.

Economic anxiety played a role in Ford’s 41,000 U.S. hourly workers rejecting $1,000 bonuses in exchange for concessions Mulally sought to gain labor cost parity with his U.S. rivals. The UAW agreed to givebacks in March that Ford said cut its annual labor costs by $500 million.

This time production workers turned it down by 70 percent, while 74 percent of skilled-trades employees rejected it, the union said.

‘Had to Push Back’

“Ford has been seeking concessions from the UAW for three years and at some point they had to push back,” McGinn said. “Will it cost them? Yes. Will it cost them much? I doubt it.”

Mulally has already closed 13 factories since arriving in 2006 and has plans to shut five more by 2011. He isn’t ready to give up achieving parity with GM and Chrysler, who received a six-year ban on strikes over wages and benefits and a freeze on wages for new hires until 2015.

“The last thing we were talking about was the two or three things GM and Chrysler had coming through the bankruptcy,” Mulally said on Bloomberg Television. “So we’ll continue to work on these because everybody knows that our future is based on being competitive with the very best in the world.”

Even without new concessions from the UAW, Mulally is over- achieving in his cost cutting. Through September, the company said it had cut $4.6 billion in structural costs, overshooting the annual target of $4 billion in reductions. Now Mulally has raised the bar to $5 billion in cost-cutting this year.

Showroom Test

The real test of Mulally’s plan, though, starts now as new products roll into showrooms. The early results are good.

Sales of the redesigned Taurus increased 60 percent in September over the old model that was once popular in rental-car fleets. Sales of the Fusion family car are up 14.5 percent this year, when the overall U.S. auto market is down 27 percent so far this year. Ford’s total U.S. sales are down 22 percent through September.

Ford has said its data shows it is attracting buyers who are impressed that it didn’t take a bailout or go bankrupt. Mulally’s challenge now is to hold onto those buyers with better offerings than Ford has had in a long time, said Jeffrey Spotts, a New York-based portfolio manager at the $250 million Prophecy Fund, which has been accumulating Ford shares since February.

“The image of not going into bankruptcy is great,” said Spotts. “But they’re just making better cars now and that’s really the message that Mulally has to get out.”

[Falc'man]

Thanks again Daniel, a very good read.


The bottom line, as I see it, is as follows;

Debt Disadvantage

Ford can use the money. Its debt load is larger than GM’s or Chrysler’s, whose debts were reduced in their restructurings.

versus

“The image of not going into bankruptcy is great,” said Spotts. “But they’re just making better cars now and that’s really the message that Mulally has to get out.”

[vztrt]

http://www.freep.com/article/2009112...ut-not-forever

Ford chief is staying, but not forever
Mulally prepares for the future

BY BRENT SNAVELY

Ford's Executive Chairman Bill Ford likes to joke that President and CEO Alan Mulally, who saved his great-grandfather's auto company from the brink of ruin and has become a beloved and respected figure at Ford, won't be leaving anytime soon.

"It's a 25-year contract," Ford gleefully told the Free Press in March.

By all accounts, Mulally, known for his laser-like focus and folksy, upbeat attitude, also enjoys working at Ford.

After three years of hard work, Mulally's "One Ford" -- as he likes to call it -- has posted a profit of $1.83 billion through Sept. 30 and earned respect for building stylish, high-tech and high-quality cars.

"I really love it here," Mulally said in October.

But at 64, Mulally isn't likely to stay at Ford for decades.

Many have suggested that Mulally, who was passed over for the CEO job at Boeing Co. before joining Ford in 2006, should be rehired to fix the airline company where he worked for 37 years.

Boeing has repeatedly delayed the launch of its 787 Dreamliner and posted a recent quarterly loss.

What's more, Mulally has been dedicated to grooming future leaders at Ford, which was accused of having a light bench before he arrived.

Mark Fields, 48, Ford's president of the Americas, is widely viewed as the front-runner to succeed Mulally.

But Ford has other quality candidates, including Jim Farley, the former Toyota executive leading Ford's global marketing and operations in Canada, Mexico and South America, and Joe Hinrichs, who is set to run Ford's Asia division starting Dec. 1.
The men who would run Ford

Fields, Ford's president of the Americas, is viewed as the front-runner to succeed Mulally, experts say Ford has developed a talented roster of executives that could be ready for the top leadership position soon.

Mulally, 64, who has gained the respect of the auto industry since arriving at Ford in 2006, has shown no signs that he expects to leave soon -- and virtually nobody wants to see him go.

"We'd like Mr. Mulally to stick around as long as he would like," said Beau Boeckmann, vice president of California auto dealer Galpin Motors, one of the largest Ford dealers in the nation. "He's doing just a spectacular job."

But someday, Mulally will go -- and who will take his place could determine whether the changes he has installed at Ford to promote teamwork around the world will live on.

"There are a lot of good options," Aaron Bragman, an automotive analyst for IHS Global Insight, told the Free Press.

That's a change from before Mulally came to Ford. Years of turnover in the executive suite -- a result of the company's dog-eat-dog corporate culture and turnaround plans that repeatedly shed executives -- led to a view that Ford had a weak bench.

But today, there are at least four viable internal contenders, according to analysts, dealers and insiders: Fields, Jim Farley, Joe Hinrichs and Lewis Booth. All but Booth are in their 40s and could have long careers leading Ford into the future.

Having that many contenders can serve as both an asset and a liability, said John Challenger, CEO of consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

"If there is a clear-cut successor, there is not the risk of politicking," Challenger said.

But Fields, who has worked at Ford for 20 years, told the Free Press on Wednesday that the "parlor games of the past" have ended as a result of Mulally's collegial, team-oriented approach.

"We not only committed to a plan, but committed to each other," he said.

Mark Fields

Fields, 48, initially made his mark at Ford when he led the successful turnaround of Mazda from 2000 to 2002. Fields also is one of the architects of Ford's Way Forward reorganization plan for North America in 2006, which has led to progress as the long-troubled division. Ford North America posted a profit in the third quarter -- its first since 2005.

"He's been at it since before Mulally," said Peter Morici, an economist and professor at the University of Maryland. "If I were Bill Ford, I'd pick Mark Fields to be Mually's successor."

When Fields became president of the Americas, he blew in with a rock-star executive image that made him seem difficult to approach, said Mark Smith, president of Dick Smith Ford, a dealership in Raytown, Mo. In person, however, Fields is approachable and has won over many dealers, Smith said.

"He has turned out to be a key piece of the leadership team," Smith said.

Joe Hinrichs

Hinrichs, 42, Ford's group vice president of global manufacturing and labor affairs, is expected to become Ford's group vice president and president of Asia Pacific and Africa on Dec. 1.

That promotion could give Hinrichs -- who, like Fields, has a master's degree in business administration from Harvard -- the experience he needs to eventually lead Ford.

"They have sent him to the land of opportunity," Bragman said.

Hinrichs joined Ford in December 2000 as plant manager of the Van Dyke Transmission Plant in Sterling Heights.

He came from General Motors, where he had a stellar career that included becoming the company's youngest plant manager. He was 29 then and so successful that the nation's top business schools still study how he performed in that post. He also has experience in private equity.

In his recent assignments, Hinrichs has led Ford through several rounds of union negotiations that have led to favorable contract adjustments. That included, however, a deal that Ford workers rejected in voting earlier this month.

Jim Farley

Farley, 47, came to Ford in November 2007 from Toyota, where he was group vice president and general manager of Lexus.

Although he came to Ford as an outsider, Farley has emotional, family ties to Ford. His grandfather was one of Ford's first workers at the Rouge foundry and later a Lincoln dealer.

Since arriving at Ford to lead marketing, Farley has proved successful. He has helped the automaker boost market share, even while reducing incentive spending, by targeting digital marketing efforts through savvy social media efforts. That includes one campaign to promote the Fiesta subcompact, which has created 60% brand awareness for a car Ford won't begin selling in the United States until next year.

In July, Ford gave Farley the additional responsibility of leading Ford's operations in Canada, Mexico and South America. Farley reports to Fields for that portion of his duties.

Lewis Booth

Of all the top contenders, Booth, 61, has the longest résumé. Booth was born in Liverpool, England, to the son of a Ford dealer. He has developed deep management, financial and global experience over the years. He was named the company's executive vice president and chief financial officer on Nov. 1, 2008, and could step in immediately as CEO if Mulally leaves sooner than expected.

[Wally]

November sales for US Ford have fallen back to 2008 levels (~123k units), although Ford is confident first quarter sales next year will be up and intend increasing build numbers by 58%.

[Wally]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Thanks again Daniel, a very good read.


The bottom line, as I see it, is as follows;

Debt Disadvantage

Ford can use the money. Its debt load is larger than GM’s or Chrysler’s, whose debts were reduced in their restructurings.

versus

“The image of not going into bankruptcy is great,” said Spotts. “But they’re just making better cars now and that’s really the message that Mulally has to get out.”

True, Ford have around US$130b debt, although they are quick to point out that ~US$100b is balanced by repayments from customer's hire purchase/lease obligations. The markets consider Ford are making the right moves and lifted it from CCC+ junk rating to B- junk status, which is a quantum leap.

As one analyst wrote :

CEO Alan Mulally and his management team are moving the company through its turnaround plan in impressive style. If they keep it up, Ford's turnaround will be a legend for the ages -- or at least, a key MBA case study for decades.

And good on them for perservering. They deserve the cudos.

[Ohio XB]

If I had a vote for a successor to Mulally it would be Fields. He has successful experience running a car company (turning it around) and a large portion of Ford, and he was also the key contributor to the Way Forward plan. Basically, Mulally made it possible to accelerate the Plan that Fields drafted the majority of and make the gains built into the plan sooner.

I don't feel the others have the experience of running a company like Fields does. The others have specialized in portions of the business, and while they may be excellent in their departments I don't feel it means they can handle the all encompassing business of auto manufacturing.


If I had to put my future in someone's hands, post Mulally, it would be Fields.



Steve

[vztrt]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Mullal...17360.html?x=0

Mullaly says Ford plans to speed up debt repayment
Ford CEO says automaker will speed up debt repayment, keep competitive edge with new vehicles

By Tom Krisher, AP Auto Writer , On Friday December 18, 2009, 4:06 pm EST

WAYNE, Mich. (AP) -- Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally says the automaker plans to speed up debt repayment as its financial condition continues to improve.

Mulally also told reporters at a briefing Friday on its new vehicles that Ford will keep its advantage over Chrysler and General Motors next year. Ford has gained sales and market share while its Detroit competitors were forced to take government aid and go through bankruptcy protection.

Ford has about $27 billion in debt. Mulally says the company repaid $10 billion this year and has sold $1.6 billion worth of stock.

He says the automaker will accelerate payments as it continues to move toward profitability in 2011.

Ford mortgaged all of its assets three years ago to borrow $23.5 billion. The loans allowed it to avoid bankruptcy and the government aid that GM and Chrysler needed to survive.

"Everybody knows how fast we are getting back to profitability and free cash flow," Mulally said. "Then we'll just accelerate the improvements to the balance sheet."

In November, Ford reported a third-quarter profit of nearly $1 billion and said it would be solidly profitable in two years.

Mulally said the borrowing and improved cash position have allowed Ford to revamp its product lineup so it will soon be the freshest in the industry. He made the statements in the Detroit suburb of Wayne, at a former truck factory being retooled to make the new European version of the Focus compact car.

New versions of the Focus are expected to be in showrooms early in 2011.

Ford's U.S. sales through November are down 19 percent from the same period last year, but that's a smaller drop than the overall market's 24 percent drop. The Dearborn, Mich., automaker has fared far better than GM, with sales down 32 percent, or Chrysler, which has seen a 38 percent decline, according to Autodata Corp.

Mulally said Ford would continue to see a competitive advantage over GM and Chrysler because of its solid products and because it avoided government aid and bankruptcy protection.

"They want to know that not only are they getting great products that will work for them, they want to know that the company is going to be there," he said.

Mulally also said the economy is starting to show signs of improvement throughout the world, slowly moving out of the recession. Yet Ford has still planned conservatively to have growth going forward, he said.

[vztrt]

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...ach-model.html

Report: Ford’s ‘Green Plan’ Includes Cutting at Least 250 Lbs. From Each Model

Ford has set a target of at least 250 lbs, which it aims to cut from the company’s future vehicles in order to help meet increasingly strict emissions regulations and extend fuel economy. News of the plan was unveiled during a technology seminar at the company’s Advance Engineering Center in Dearborn, MI. The timeline isn’t exact, but Ford has set this goal as a part of its “mid-term strategy” which stretches from 2011 to 2020.

Even more surprising is that some models will far exceed that number, weighing up to 750 lbs less. Those vehicles are likely to be larger models, like the Ford trucks.

The weight-reduction strategy is part of a four-pronged process that also includes using more efficient design, technology and aerodynamics to achieve Ford’s new goal to, “establish fuel economy leadership in every segment,” says Sue Cischke, Ford Group VP for Sustainability, Environment and Safety Engineering. Cischke also said it is Ford’s goal to make fuel economy a major deciding factor for consumers to choose a Ford product.

In terms of design, Ford is referring more to the design of vehicle components than the physical shape of its cars. In this area company engineers are looking to further the use of low rolling resistance tires; creating transmissions and software that will keep an engine in the highest possible gear without affecting ride quality; and also developing electric systems that produce less drag on the engine and battery.

In terms of aerodynamics, Ford’s plans include further use of underbody trays as well as air vents that can be closed at speed in order to reduce drag. On top of those measures, engineers are also committed to working hand-in-hand with designers from the earliest stages in order to maximize the efficiency of the vehicle’s physical shape.

Finally, technology will also be a large part of the company’s new fuel-economy plan. Items highlighted by Ford include the ability to shut off fuel delivery during deceleration and further use of electric power steering, which is projected to go from 32 percent of the Ford lineup currently, to over 80 percent in 2013.

In addition, there is also the planned increasing use of Ford’s EcoBoost turbocharged engines across the product range – a rollout that will compliment the reduced vehicle weight. Ford says that its direct-injection EcoBoost technology allows for engine downsizing of roughly 40 percent, something that will aid in meeting the lofty 250 lb per vehicle weight reduction target. With a 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 currently offered in vehicles like the Taurus SHO, Flex and several Lincolns, look for the introduction of a 2.0-liter 4-cylinder EcoBoost model, which would be used in vehicles like the Fusion and Escape.

[mik]

good to see Ford have a clear direction that can only lead to better and better cars.

[Fordman1]

The Weight reductions are interesting !

An AWD Falcon won't be any lighter that's for sure - a FWD one though ? :togo:

[Ohio XB]

Mulally said Ford would continue to see a competitive advantage over GM and Chrysler because of its solid products and because it avoided government aid and bankruptcy protection.

Just back on October 31 Ford was saying that without the passage of the latest proposal on the contract by the UAW members that "Ford has said that it needs the further cuts from the UAW to avoid a cost disadvantage over the long term."

http://www.autonews.com/article/2009...310319996/1200


I pointed that out in November, and how Ford had said they were "competitive" after the March union concessions. See how fast Ford has a competitive advantage now?




Ok, now that that's off my chest, it is nice to see ambitious projects not only get announced, but also to know that they will get implemented. I know Ford has been using a lot of high strength steel in their vehicles in order to reduce weight and to increase safety.


Steve

[vztrt]

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articl...volt-in-price/

How Ford Plans to Undercut GM’s Volt in Price

Ford and GM are taking different approaches to plug-ins. And Ford says its will be cheaper.

DEARBORN, Mich. -- We will likely have a spirited debate over plug-in hybrid philosophy after all.

Ford Motor Co. will release its first plug-in hybrid in 2012, two years after rival General Motors releases the Volt. Ford executives, though, argue that their company should be able to limbo under the anticipated $40,000 price of the Volt as well as potentially come out with a wider range of plug-ins.

The difference comes down to architecture. The Volt is a series hybrid, meaning that the car is powered predominantly by electricity. The gas engine largely exists to recharge the battery. Ford's plug-in will be a power split hybrid with the gas engine and electric motor working in tandem to propel the car.

Power split hybrids generally speaking tend to get lower gas mileage than series hybrids, according to Sherif Marakby, chief engineer for global hybrid core engineering, during a briefing at company offices. But they can also be less expensive to make. Power split hybrids can get by with smaller batteries, one of the most expensive single components in plug-ins and all electrics, because the gas engine directly participates in getting you down the road. Potentially, a battery in a power split hybrid can be up to 25 percent smaller than one in a series hybrid, he added.

"You don't have to size the battery for the worst case scenario," he said. "The battery will be lower in cost."

"It is a better value," he added later.

How all this plays out in the market will be one of the more interesting dramas in electric cars. The Volt will be able to go 40 miles before the battery needs recharging. As a result, consumers will mostly drive on electricity pulled from a wall socket, which in turn could give the Volt a three digit miles per gallon rating (GM has publicly said the car gets 230 miles per gallon). Consumers are amped to a fever pitch: an informal, no-deposit waiting list sponsored by the blog GM-Volt has over 50,000 names. The company hasn't seen this much excitemenbt over its cars since muscle cars ruled the earth. GM has also put the weight of its engineering behind the Volt: the technological decisions and design trade-offs have been intensely scrutinized.

A power split hybrid might only go 20 to 30 miles on electricity alone and the stated mileage as a result will be a lower. Still, the mileage could still be high enough to appeal to consumers attracted to the lower price if there is a sizeable delta. The Volt is expected to cost around $40,000. (Ford will also come out with its first electric cars next year, but target them initially at fleet car buyers.). Then again, if the Volt is an early hit, Ford will come into the segment as a late bloomer.

How far will Ford's plug-in go on electric power? Marakby wouldn't say, but added "it is not necessarily 40 miles. We will develop for the appropriate range."

If consumers flock to the cars, the company could even make a range of plug-ins with different sizes of batteries. Arguably, GM may have a tough time going below the 40 mile mark because it represents the average number of miles Americans drive a day. Twenty Ford plug-ins are currently being driven in pilots with, among others, Southern California Edison.

Most other manufacturers are expected to adopt a power split architecture or a close variant. GM in the end could be the only major series hybrid maker. Marakby further added that Ford could have made a series hybrid, but decided to go with the power split architecture.

Mileage stickers on plug-ins ultimately include four figures: highway and city mileage estimates for all-electric driving and another for blended gas-electric driving.

Power splits could, maybe, also leverage technology and components from conventional hybrids. The two architectures are similar. Ford will further try to wring out economies of scale by designing cars around standard platform. The Global C platform, the basis of the recently unfurled Fiesta, will be used as the foundation for seven different cars, including gas, electric, plug-in hybrid, hybrid and diesel cars. These different cars can share an extensive number of components, according to Gunnar Herrmann, the Global C Car Vehicle Line Director.

"You want to do it on a large scale," Marakby said. "We want to make sure that the technology is real. The durability, the testing have to be done right."

GM, though, also has plans to leverage components across platforms and if the Volt goes well, it will come out with variants.

It should be an interesting debate.

[Ohio XB]

I was confused when I read this a few days ago. The Volt will have an engine that only recharges the batteries. I am not aware of a vehicle being prototyped by Ford with this configuration. I know they are full bore on full electric only vehicles that will be plug-ins. I am still considering the 2011 electric Focus as a daily driver, being able to drive 100 miles on a single charge for about $1.50 USD.


Steve

[Bossxr8]

$40,000 for a crappy Volt. : 40k in the US would buy you a very decent car, who would pay that much for something as ugly,boring and as per most GM's, low quality, as a Volt.

A Prius is 22k in the US, Volt is nearly twice the price. How far would you have to drive to save the 18k in fuel?

[Wally]

Things must have been pretty bad for the workers to give up guaranteed income for life for the survival of the company. One can only hope Ford executives value the sacrifices of it's loyal workers.

DETROIT (AP):

Ford Motor Co has offered buyout or retirement incentive packages to all of its 41,000 United States (US) hourly workers as it tries to further reduce its factory workforce.

Ford, the healthiest of Detroit's three automakers and the only one to avoid government aid and bankruptcy protection, still has more workers than it needs to produce cars and trucks at current sales levels, said company spokesman Mark Truby.

He would not say how many workers Ford expects to take the packages, which include cash payments and other incentives such as vouchers to buy cars and short-term health-insurance coverage.

"We're just going to try to right-size our manned capacity and align it with demand," Truby said.

Ford currently has 634 blue-collar workers on layoff in the US.

Under the terms of a new contract with the United Auto Workers' Union, the employees get most of their pay for a year depending on seniority, and a portion of their wages for another year before they are removed from the company payroll.

In the past, laid-off workers went into the 'jobs bank' and were paid indefinitely, even if their factory had been shut down. But the union agreed to scrap the jobs bank earlier this year when all three Detroit automakers ran into financial troubles.

The buyout package, offered to workers with at least a year of service, includes US$50,000 cash and the choice of a US$25,000 voucher to buy a vehicle or US$20,000 more in cash. The deal also includes basic health care coverage for six months, Ford said.


Retirement-eligible workers can take the buyout but must wait up to 18 months before retiring.

The retirement package includes US$40,000 for skilled trades workers and US$20,000 for non-skilled employees. To be eligible, workers have to have either 30 or more years of service, be age 55 or older with 10 or more years of work, or they can be 65 with at least one year of service, the company said.

Earlier this year, only 1,000 workers took similar packages, the company said in July.

Ford started 2009 with 89,000 employees in North America but reduced that number to 80,200 as of September 30 through attrition, buyouts and layoffs.

Truby said the additional offer has nothing to do with the UAW membership rejecting a second round of contract concessions earlier this year. Workers at General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC approved the concessions, so Ford is operating at a small cost disadvantage.

Ford sales were down 19 per cent through November when compared with the same time last year. But the company has fared better than the US auto market as a whole, which is down 24 per cent for the year. GM and Chrysler sales are both off more than 30 per cent.

In 2006, Ford had 75,000 unionised workers in the U.S., but since then it has closed 12 factories and reduced its work force with buyout and early retirement offers as part of a massive restructuring plan. The company plans to close four more factories by the end of 2011.

[MercurySilver]

40 grand to retire on
for 30+ years of skilled labour

pathetic really...unless thats yearly

[naddis01]

In the US do they have superannuation, long service leave and a government pension like here in Australia?

[Wally]

They do/did have a pension plan. I haven't found the latest, but here is the 2006 collective bargaining agreement facts issued for the 2007 negotiation:

http://media.ford.com/pdf/07_UAW_Negotiations.pdf

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by naddis01

In the US do they have superannuation, long service leave and a government pension like here in Australia?

I don't know what information Wally has written about this since he is on my ignore list.


What there is for retirement in the US for a 30 year Ford worker, under normal circumstances, is a pension of about $2,500 - $3,000 a month, plus reduced healthcare benefits with more out of pocket costs for the retiree. After the retiree turns 65 (if retired before age 65) their retirement from Ford is reduced by the amount of government Social Security they are elligible for. That amount is based on their lifetime earnings. If they retired after the age of 65 then their retirement already includes the reduced amount of Social Security. So let's say they are elligbile for $1,000 Social Security a month (which is expected to run out of money in 20 - 40 years), then Ford keeps $1,000 each month from the retiree's pension.

The retiree's pension is taxed just like any other income.

Buy outs are as follows:

STEP: (Special TERMINATION of Employment Program) Employees with at least one year of seniority.

$50,000 lump sum, will be taxed at maximum rate before paid to employee (total of 41% tax).

$25,000 New Vehicle Purchase voucher, will also be taxed before employee receives the voucher at maximum tax rate; $14,750 after taxes.

Basic healthcare for 6 months. Sever all ties with Ford.


SRI: (Special RETIREMENT Incentive) 30 or more years of service, or age 55 or older with 10 or more years, or age 65 or older with 1 or more years of service.

$40,000 pre-tax for skilled trades employees (41% total rate)

$20,000 pre-tax for production employees (41% total rate)

$25,000 pre-tax New Vehicle Purchase voucher ($14,750 after taxes)

Retiree would receive whatever retirement benefits they would normally be elligbile for. This is just an incentive to get them to retire.


You can also take $20,000 pre-tax in leiu of the New Vehicle voucher, taxed at the same 41% rate.



The feeling among the majority of Ford employees at our plant is that the company is looking to get rid of as many people as possible, even if it is too many. Then they can hire as many people at the $14/hr rate as possible. This is done without regard to the amount of training, experience, knowledge, and other benefits of a senior employee. Also, how will these $14/hr employees feel working next to someone doing the same, or slightly less debilitating job, for twice the money? Fresh, healthy bodies get put on the roughest jobs. The more senior employees already have carpal tunnel, artificial knees, shoulder surgery, and fused discs in their backs and necks from working the line for years.

The amount of labor to build a vehicle at Ford was roughtly 7% the cost to build a vehicle. Now with more work being done with less employees, at less pay, and other costs savings related to labor such as work rules, reduced break times, elimination of performance and holiday bonuses, etc, let's say that the amount of labor in each vehicle goes down to 5%. Whew!!!! What a savings!


Ford has done an amazing job at reducing operating costs. I have been amazed by what has been accompished, and relieved. Now I fear they are looking once again to get the HUGE savings for the company from the same 7% of the operations, even after it's been reduced to only 5%.

Let's look at that other 95% of the operations again.



Steve

[GK]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

I don't know what information Wally has written about this since he is on my ignore list.


What there is for retirement in the US for a 30 year Ford worker, under normal circumstances, is a pension of about $2,500 - $3,000 a month, plus reduced healthcare benefits with more out of pocket costs for the retiree. After the retiree turns 65 (if retired before age 65) their retirement from Ford is reduced by the amount of government Social Security they are elligible for. That amount is based on their lifetime earnings. If they retired after the age of 65 then their retirement already includes the reduced amount of Social Security. So let's say they are elligbile for $1,000 Social Security a month (which is expected to run out of money in 20 - 40 years), then Ford keeps $1,000 each month from the retiree's pension.

The retiree's pension is taxed just like any other income.

Buy outs are as follows:

STEP: (Special TERMINATION of Employment Program) Employees with at least one year of seniority.

$50,000 lump sum, will be taxed at maximum rate before paid to employee (total of 41% tax).

$25,000 New Vehicle Purchase voucher, will also be taxed before employee receives the voucher at maximum tax rate; $14,750 after taxes.

Basic healthcare for 6 months. Sever all ties with Ford.


SRI: (Special RETIREMENT Incentive) 30 or more years of service, or age 55 or older with 10 or more years, or age 65 or older with 1 or more years of service.

$40,000 pre-tax for skilled trades employees (41% total rate)

$20,000 pre-tax for production employees (41% total rate)

$25,000 pre-tax New Vehicle Purchase voucher ($14,750 after taxes)

Retiree would receive whatever retirement benefits they would normally be elligbile for. This is just an incentive to get them to retire.


You can also take $20,000 pre-tax in leiu of the New Vehicle voucher, taxed at the same 41% rate.



The feeling among the majority of Ford employees at our plant is that the company is looking to get rid of as many people as possible, even if it is too many. Then they can hire as many people at the $14/hr rate as possible. This is done without regard to the amount of training, experience, knowledge, and other benefits of a senior employee. Also, how will these $14/hr employees feel working next to someone doing the same, or slightly less debilitating job, for twice the money? Fresh, healthy bodies get put on the roughest jobs. The more senior employees already have carpal tunnel, artificial knees, shoulder surgery, and fused discs in their backs and necks from working the line for years.

The amount of labor to build a vehicle at Ford was roughtly 7% the cost to build a vehicle. Now with more work being done with less employees, at less pay, and other costs savings related to labor such as work rules, reduced break times, elimination of performance and holiday bonuses, etc, let's say that the amount of labor in each vehicle goes down to 5%. Whew!!!! What a savings!


Ford has done an amazing job at reducing operating costs. I have been amazed by what has been accompished, and relieved. Now I fear they are looking once again to get the HUGE savings for the company from the same 7% of the operations, even after it's been reduced to only 5%.

Let's look at that other 95% of the operations again.



Steve

Thanks for the informative post Steve. I am saddened to hear of the injuries to long-term line workers. It seems they give their all for the company and their bodies really pay for it.

In your opinion are your collegues happy to be working the line, or do they accept that it's their lot? It may be that they're proud to work for Ford, or do many wish they could be employed in another type of work?

I know there would be many and varied feelings among workers about such things, but if you could give us a bit of a clue as to what you see I'd appreciate it.

GK

[naddis01]

Thanks for the informative post Steve.

What I meant though in general, ignoring Ford for a moment, is an employer in the US required to put away superannuation on behalf of the employee for their retirement? Also is there a long service leave for those that stay with a company for say 10years or more? Is social security the same as an old age pension?

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by GK

Thanks for the informative post Steve. I am saddened to hear of the injuries to long-term line workers. It seems they give their all for the company and their bodies really pay for it.

In your opinion are your collegues happy to be working the line, or do they accept that it's their lot? It may be that they're proud to work for Ford, or do many wish they could be employed in another type of work?

I know there would be many and varied feelings among workers about such things, but if you could give us a bit of a clue as to what you see I'd appreciate it.

GK

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to elaborate on this subject.

I will get this part out of the way right now. Yeah, within the population of about 1,700 employees at our plant, there is a percentage of people I would rather see not working there. Even 1% of that population is still 17 people. Yeah, there are some that don't need to be there, if you know what I mean.

The majority of people working the line have pride in themselves, do a very good job, get things done, make sure things are right, and then go home. The fingers that catch in position, the knee that still doesn't need replacing yet (but hurts like a mother), the achy back, and the shoulder that doesn't have it's full range of motion anymore are part of the job. There is no getting around it, period.

You would be surprised how many people on the line have college degrees. Some were earned before coming to Ford, some after coming to Ford. Some things I am told by these people is less mental/emotional pressure on the line makes it worth not being in the field of their degree. Some would have to do a lot of traveling in their selected field and that is rough on family life. Working at the plant they get to go home everyday.

Some have earned degrees and left the company.

There are also "Supermen" and "Superwomen" that throw themselves completely into the company. They take an extreme amount of pride in what they are doing and work to the total benefit of Ford. These people also have some of the most debilitating injuries.

However, with this kind of work comes a different kind of mindset. One of the employees, upon the completion of his SECOND hip replacement surgery, brought in his first stainless steel hip and had a Toolmaker machine it into a putter for him to golf with.

I know a woman in her mid 50's that had her knee replaced last year. I watched her hobble around in great pain for about 7 years on that knee. She was afraid to have the surgery and also be out of work for so long to recover. Her concern was both for making her bills on "medical" pay, and also for the people that would have to do her job while she was away. Now that she had it done and has recovered she didn't know what she waited so long for. Initially she wanted to wait until she was older so that hopefully the new knee would last until she died.

I know a guy that was 42 years old and he had to run his hands under hot water every morning when he woke and have his wife work his fingers so that he could use them on his job.

There are a number of employees that have no feeling in their hands due to carpal tunnel syndrome, even after surgery or surgeries.

I know two guys that are having shoulder surgery (rotator cuff) over the Christmas holiday while we are down.

I know 2 guys that got hit by forklifts. Both times it was the forklift operator's fault. There was also two women that were injured by forklifts. One had a large, steel basket of parts set down on the back of her ankles, the other was driven into on a corner where the forklift should have stopped.

A 21 year old was killed at our plant in the early 1990's. He was being stupid though. He was one of that 1% I mentioned earlier.

Fingers have been caught in machinery. Fingers have been left in machinery.

My mother inlaw retired from the Cleveland Casting plant. She has 2 vertebra fused in her neck, arthritis in her back, and two bad knees.



I worked on the line for 4 years before getting into skilled trades. In just those 4 years my thumbs were ruined by inserting "push-pins" into plastic panels. My thumbs would lock and I would be unable to bend them without "cracking" them very loudly as I forced them to bend. A few years later it got so bad that I would drop objects after picking them up from a work bench because my thumb would not exert the amount of force I thought I was using. They got better to where I wouldn't drop anything and also they would only lock up sometimes, but now that I am on the line again I have to crack my thumbs past the locking point 3 times every morning before they will work normally again. Through out the day they still lock open.

Let it be said, nobody retires from working the line and is 100% for their age. Something is not going to work right, or something is going to hurt, or something will be operated on.



But we look at it as par for the course. Miners have it worse than us yet they feel it is worth it, and the hazards are part of what they are paid for. Same for us, the pay helps these issues to be viewed as part of the job.

This is why I would never do it for $14/hr. You can't take all this for that kind of pay.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Thanks for the informative post Steve.

What I meant though in general, ignoring Ford for a moment, is an employer in the US required to put away superannuation on behalf of the employee for their retirement? Also is there a long service leave for those that stay with a company for say 10years or more? Is social security the same as an old age pension?

Superannuation is not a known term here in the US. What little I know about it is from being on this board.

Ford is required to put into Social Security an equal amount that the government withholds from my paycheck. The money from my paycheck and the money from Ford is to pay the people that are PRESENTLY on Social Security.
If $100 is withheld from my pay for Social Security then Ford must also pay $100 into Social Security. Again, this money pays the people that already receive the Social Security benefit.

SS is like a guaranteed government assistance during your retirement that began after the Great Depression of the early 1930's. Unfortunately, any over budget money that went into the program was robbed by Congress instead of leaving it in the program. It is now expected to be broke in 20 - 40 years.

You can start collecting a reduced amount of your SS benefit at age 62. You are elligible for the full amount at 67. Funny thing is, when this was started back in the 1930's the average life expectancy of an American man was 65, and benefits began at age 65, so you were never expected to get it, if not for just a few years.

The amount you are to receive is based on what your lifetime earnings were. It has nothing to do with how much you put into it because all the money you put into it was to pay the benefits of the people already receiving SS.

My latest SS statement says if I retire at age 62 I will receive $1,510 a month. This would be starting in 2026. If I work until I am almost dead at age 67 I will receive $2,167 a month. I can also work until age 70 to get a benefit of $2,687 a month. These amounts would be deducted from my Ford pension.

Also on this statement is this wonderful note:

The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2041, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 78% of the scheduled benefits.

Well, at the rate that companies lay off people here and open training centers and huge office complexes in India and China, as well as other outsourcing and overseas manufacturing, I believe, like many politicians, that SS will be able to pay much less than 78% of the scheduled benefits, if any at all.



What exactly would a "long service leave" be? Is this a leave of abscence where you are just gone from work for a long time, without pay, and able to return?


Steve