ClubWRX Forum banner

21 - 32 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
Discussion Starter #21
Here's why that matters:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/opinion/ford-green-cars-suv.html

"Call it the S.U.V. Profit Paradigm: Added height elevates the price people are prepared to pay for what is essentially the same vehicle. S.U.V.s and crossovers sell at higher prices than cars of equivalent size, but they cost little, if anything, more to build."

I agree to each his own, but more SUV's adversely affects those of us who drive sedans, as presumably most people on this forum do. (I shouldn't have to point this out, but...not as easy to control, more dangerous in an accident to the other vehicle, more demand for petrol, more emissions and environmental issues.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
The market dictates what the manufacturers make. MFRs have to chase the $$ to make a profit to stay in business and do R&D on the next best thing and advance tech, sooooo they make what people want because that is what people will buy. Unfortunately for the "govt knows best" crowd, people dont always want what some think they should.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
We don’t really want to advance technology. That costs money. We strive to make the same thing as long as possible to have the least possible investment per dollar earned.

We are capable of making far more advanced vehicles than we already do, we don’t because it costs money and investors don’t like when we spend money on things we are not yet turning profits on. This is also why Tesla is always sitting on news of how broke they are, yet they have money and continue to grow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
Of course companies do what's in their financial interests, but--A) it seems shortsighted, in light of the strong potential gas prices will go up in the future; and B) it's hypocritical, because as the article above points out, just a few years ago Ford was singing the praises of more fuel-efficient cars.

Ford got a lot of government money a few years ago when they misjudged the market: "A Ford TV ad slams competitors for accepting bailout funds, even though the company’s CEO lobbied for the bill. The company — the only one of the Big Three not to receive a bailout — feared a collapse of GM and Chrysler at the time would have hurt suppliers and, in turn, Ford itself. Ford Chief Executive Officer Alan R. Mulally also asked Congress for a “credit line” of up to $9 billion in case the economy worsened. In other words, Ford was for government bailouts before it was against them. Although Ford did not need money from the $80 billion bailout program, Ford did receive $5.9 billion in government loans in 2009 to retool its manufacturing plants to produce more fuel-efficient cars, and the company lobbied for and benefited from the cash-for-clunkers program — contrary to the ad’s testimonial that Ford is 'standing on their own.'"

https://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-on-bailouts/

While increased mileage standards are good public policy in my opinion (and despite a pause I predict the trend will continue), it doesn't have to be the heavy hand of government choosing winners and losers. Most of you are too young to remember the gas crises of the 70's, but big gas guzzlers became undesirable almost overnight. My Dad had a '71 Bonneville and within a year had bought a Datsun 510 when gas prices tripled.

So, the market is fickle and putting all the eggs in one basket exposes a company to big problems when the market changes suddenly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
I'm not anti-Ford btw. My mom drives a Ford Fusion.

Though the only Ford I have personally owned was a Windstar, which caught fire and exploded when my daughter was driving it. Not hurt, thank G-d. That was back when the Explorers were catching fire like crazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
We are capable of making far more advanced vehicles than we already do, we don’t because it costs money and investors don’t like when we spend money on things we are not yet turning profits on. This is also why Tesla is always sitting on news of how broke they are, yet they have money and continue to grow.
Confused: if investors don't want to invest until there's a profit, why are they still backing Tesla?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
Confused: if investors don't want to invest until there's a profit, why are they still backing Tesla?
Because Tesla reaches outside of the automotive world into the technology world. He has a lot of backers from that alone. Do you think for a second of gm was having that kind of production issues and a weak cash flow compared to the rest of the market it would make it on their own? They didn’t last time and had to be bailed out.

I work in the industry and have to follow it. Not only do I make tools and parts for our company I make tools and parts for other companies. A few years back Ford GM and Toyota were looking for weight savings and our suspension division spend a considerable amount of time and money looking to cut weight and still function on light and medium duty trucks. They were all on board until they realized they had to spend money on it. Suddenly I treat from all three stopped.

What some see as innovation is more marketing. Remember all those fuel mileage tests and super economical engines that were being developed when gas was nearing 5 bucks a gallon? Yeah it’s all gone now because it’s not important to the consumer and investors in general are not into companies wasting billions of dollars
 

·
something else forever
Joined
·
3,838 Posts
Tesla is also run by the same guy who taps into his other companies such as Solar City and Space-X in order to help fund the company.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
I agree Doc that it is very shortsighted on FORDs part to dump their car business. The market can change fast and carmakers are NOT agile enough to respond in a timely fashion. Getting rid of all cars will make that nearly impossible for them to react and adjust when trucks and SUVs fall out of favor. I AM old enough to remember the arab oil embargoes., Luckily my family had a car with an odd and an even plate, particularly since my dad drove 150 miles a day round trip for work.

I wasnt a fan of the auto bailout but understand since it would have swept away a giant part of our economy but Im also not a fan of paying for other peoples stupdity, and I think other companies would have filled the void eventually and hired many of those out of work employees. No industry or company should be "too big to fail". you make stupid decisions, you fail in the marketplace, you close your doors.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
I guess I don't understand why the average person won't settle for a sedan which will fill 99% of their needs at less cost for them and for the environment.
Because it helps people feel like they are rising above their social class by having a roomy vehicle. Also, as Americans we are fat and fit better in larger vehicles.
 

·
Super Modulator
Joined
·
19,446 Posts
User was a spammer and was banned.

Comment was relevant and I will leave it for context.
 
21 - 32 of 32 Posts
Top