Mustang V6 versus Mini?
Member
Joined: August 3, 2005
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
I do have the 2005 V6 Mustang and LOVE IT!. But I would NEVER tell somone else they should like any car, all personal taste. As for the mini, I do know many who have them. The one I work with every day just sold his, couldn't take the problems anymore. For him, not a good car at all in the cold weather. The door locks would FREEZE and he couldn't get in. He thought it was cheaply made. Much too small for me I am 6'4". Good luck and have fun with what ever you get.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
I agree that VW/Audi is doing better than the rest -- and the German company to watch for. Some of it has been that the Dollar is so weak to the Euro -- but I think that's going to change (and put pressure on American makers).
The Japanese build more global with some American appeal. (Lots of econ-boxes and small displacement, because that's what most the world wants). And only a few American SUV's/Trucks. But that is changing. Whether it will be 5 years or 10, the Japanese aren't stupid.
As for the American cars like the stang (pony/muscle/etc). My concern is still oil. We love these cars -- but if oil goes to $80/barrel too quick, then American companies are going to suffer in a BIG way, and American tastes will change quickly. Personally, $100/month difference in gas in nothing compared to the cost of the car/insurance/etc. But there's emotional reactions far greater than reason/economics. (Like why people buy green or hybrid). So even if I love the cars, they could be very high risk/economic suicide depending on middle-east or oil.
As for retro, the score according to the auto mags was, the VW beetle did well initially, but is far from a raging success now. The PT cruiser dropped off radically after a while, and they've been unable to keep sales high. The Thunderbird made a ploppy sound. The SSR made a wet meat smack sound. The Prowler was good initially, but dropped off (and it was very specialized). The HHR is too new. The Mustang is doing good in its first year, but people are more concerned with its 4th. Mini is raging good. The 300/Magnum/Charger flirt with it (high belt line). But again, it is far from clear. Most retro's seem to have a faster fall-off rate when people get tired of them. But some companies (Porsche) have kept their classic look and done well -- but they are low volume specialty cars. I like the classic and unique look -- so hope they succeed. And I suspect that the cars that fell, did so for other reasons. (T-Bird, SSR, etc., too expensive, etc). But a 1-2 year success isn't a huge win yet. So keep your eye's open. I do like the "American Style" and variety it brings to the road. Every car shouldn't look like a little egg or wedge.
The Japanese build more global with some American appeal. (Lots of econ-boxes and small displacement, because that's what most the world wants). And only a few American SUV's/Trucks. But that is changing. Whether it will be 5 years or 10, the Japanese aren't stupid.
As for the American cars like the stang (pony/muscle/etc). My concern is still oil. We love these cars -- but if oil goes to $80/barrel too quick, then American companies are going to suffer in a BIG way, and American tastes will change quickly. Personally, $100/month difference in gas in nothing compared to the cost of the car/insurance/etc. But there's emotional reactions far greater than reason/economics. (Like why people buy green or hybrid). So even if I love the cars, they could be very high risk/economic suicide depending on middle-east or oil.
As for retro, the score according to the auto mags was, the VW beetle did well initially, but is far from a raging success now. The PT cruiser dropped off radically after a while, and they've been unable to keep sales high. The Thunderbird made a ploppy sound. The SSR made a wet meat smack sound. The Prowler was good initially, but dropped off (and it was very specialized). The HHR is too new. The Mustang is doing good in its first year, but people are more concerned with its 4th. Mini is raging good. The 300/Magnum/Charger flirt with it (high belt line). But again, it is far from clear. Most retro's seem to have a faster fall-off rate when people get tired of them. But some companies (Porsche) have kept their classic look and done well -- but they are low volume specialty cars. I like the classic and unique look -- so hope they succeed. And I suspect that the cars that fell, did so for other reasons. (T-Bird, SSR, etc., too expensive, etc). But a 1-2 year success isn't a huge win yet. So keep your eye's open. I do like the "American Style" and variety it brings to the road. Every car shouldn't look like a little egg or wedge.
Shelby GT350 Member
Joined: April 29, 2005
Posts: 2,133
Likes: 5
Originally posted by StangerX@August 3, 2005, 10:16 AM
WARNING: THE FOLLOWING IS A DISSERTATION ON JEWISH LAW (or the extended version of war and peace). Either way... it's long. Just be warned.
<---sniiiip--->
WARNING: THE FOLLOWING IS A DISSERTATION ON JEWISH LAW (or the extended version of war and peace). Either way... it's long. Just be warned.
<---sniiiip--->
:worship: :worship: :worship:
GT Member
Joined: July 3, 2005
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
As for the American cars like the stang (pony/muscle/etc). My concern is still oil. We love these cars -- but if oil goes to $80/barrel too quick, then American companies are going to suffer in a BIG way, and American tastes will change quickly. Personally, $100/month difference in gas in nothing compared to the cost of the car/insurance/etc. But there's emotional reactions far greater than reason/economics. (Like why people buy green or hybrid). So even if I love the cars, they could be very high risk/economic suicide depending on middle-east or oil.
Here's another comparison Mustang vs. imports in the 2 door coupe 300HP range.
Pretty good for a working man's car priced under 30K. I'm not a tree hugger if gas starts to get too pricey I'll start running methanol, totally renewable resource burns cleaner (and i'm sure the ole moonshine still needs a work-out)
gas electric is not the only answer Ford has flex fuel cars right now. More mony should be invested in finding a grain fuel replacement.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Just so you know -- it costs more than a gallon of oil, to create each gallon equivalent of methanol. (Methanol doesn't have as much energy by like 20% I think -- so you need 1.2 gallons to be equivalent). Some greens think we'll make it up in volume though.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Also one mistake. You're comparing HP equivalents in MPG. That's not how consumers do it. When consumers are thinking fun -- they look for the most horsepower (even though torque may be more important). When they go economical, they look for MPG and ignore horsepower, etc. The 6 in the Mustang isn't that good in milage -- and the Mustang is a heavier car. When consumers go paranoid about gas prices, they start comparing Civic Hybrids and Rabbit (er Golf) Diesels to the Mustang 6 -- and go 40-50 MPG versus low 20's. The mustang is twice as bad.
(I'm not saying that's the right way to do it -- I'm just noting what happens and happened in the 70's/80's)
(I'm not saying that's the right way to do it -- I'm just noting what happens and happened in the 70's/80's)
GT Member
Joined: July 3, 2005
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
BTW with the exception of the Mercedes(which has a larger displacement engine), we win in torque also. Please tell me why does it matter anyway? Are you trying to feel better about leasing an M3? Would your friends have looked down on you if you bought an American car? Sorry, leased an American car? You said that your wife bought a Mini. Great it fits her life style. Why poke and prod Mustang owners on why their car will fail, or its short comings as compared to cars that aren't relevant to Mustang? I'm sorry that the V6 Mustang that you looked at didn't meet your expectations. I'd say don't buy one but you're not in the market to buy one any more you got a Mini. I think that this should have been posted on a Mini forum... I bought a Mini over a Mustang!!! Mustang is here it is good if gas prices change it will change. If customers sell their Mustangs and go buy Civics great, somebody else will be able to experience an American car. When gas prices go off the chart what will be the next car you lease? I'll just buy gas because mine will be paid for... The lease your paying I'll be buyin gas.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Huh? I bought an M3 10 years ago. (You should ask before you assume). I'd made a $150K on stocks in the dot com boom (I also lost $100K when the bubble burst, years later, but bought before that happened). I bought the BMW because the E36 was one of the best balanced cars around. I drove the stang, saleens, vette, Z-coupe, etc., and the E36 was the best car to drive (for me), while still seating 4, and not being a cop-magnet. It was also California with good roads, and so on. Since I had the money, why not? Now, I'm a lot more frugal/wise and things change
None of my points was to attack a mustang/ford. I suggest you go back and read what I wrote. I want Ford to do better. I owned quite a bit in Ford stock and watched it go from $35/share to $15 and sold (on a spike up to $18). Now they're down to $10'ish. When a company is evaluated at less than 1/3rd what they were, it's a bit of an indicator. I'd like that to turn around. (I might buy again, when they start proving they are a good investment). To do that, you have to first admit ways to do better or reasons why people buy other cars over them, and so on. You can be in denial and assume everything is perfect now -- but from my perspective, there's a lot of room for improvement. So I listed what I thought they should do to improve.
1) Others (like mini, Scion, etc.) offered much more customization and better dealer experience because I could get the options I wanted. That upsells people and turns more to each top-line sale.
2) Ford is doing OK with the stang, but failing to forecast and capitalize as well as they should. That's just business. And that's one of their biggest "successes".
3) They are slow to expand the reach of the car and upsell people. It's like they're buying their own hype/dogma. (That's bad for anyone). They need to act like they're scared of the competition, and then fight like they mean it.
4) They aren't well diversified/global as they should be (as Ford/Mercury division -- not as Fo Mo Co which is much better). They sell mainstream American cars and trucks (including SUV's). Mazda, Volvo, etc., are beating them with their own platforms in many areas. And they have major gaps in their product line.
5) I didn't get into why Ford has such low residuals -- and they are working on fixing it anyways. But if you're comparing leasing cars (as many are), then suddenly the Mustang IS competing with cars like the Lexus and BMW. So in order to do good business, Ford needs to remember that.
So I'm sorry if you're offended that I wanted to look at what Ford could do better at their dealerships, business, or with their models. This was never a "ha ha, my wife bought a Mini and you all stink" kinda post. It was just, "here's some areas where I think Ford/Mustang could improve". I think it is fine that you want to compare Mustangs only in HP to other cars -- but that's not how most customers do. I do think Ford excels in that area -- but I want them to excel in many areas so they can broaden the reach of the product/company. But I've learned long ago, people see what they want to. If you want to see attacks, or see me as some poser-leaser out here to attack your purchase, then it doesn't really matter what I say. And if you don't want to discuss ways that Ford could improve the buying experience because your delicate ego can't handle anything but assumption that Ford is blue-oval perfection, then so be that too. Take it easy...
None of my points was to attack a mustang/ford. I suggest you go back and read what I wrote. I want Ford to do better. I owned quite a bit in Ford stock and watched it go from $35/share to $15 and sold (on a spike up to $18). Now they're down to $10'ish. When a company is evaluated at less than 1/3rd what they were, it's a bit of an indicator. I'd like that to turn around. (I might buy again, when they start proving they are a good investment). To do that, you have to first admit ways to do better or reasons why people buy other cars over them, and so on. You can be in denial and assume everything is perfect now -- but from my perspective, there's a lot of room for improvement. So I listed what I thought they should do to improve.
1) Others (like mini, Scion, etc.) offered much more customization and better dealer experience because I could get the options I wanted. That upsells people and turns more to each top-line sale.
2) Ford is doing OK with the stang, but failing to forecast and capitalize as well as they should. That's just business. And that's one of their biggest "successes".
3) They are slow to expand the reach of the car and upsell people. It's like they're buying their own hype/dogma. (That's bad for anyone). They need to act like they're scared of the competition, and then fight like they mean it.
4) They aren't well diversified/global as they should be (as Ford/Mercury division -- not as Fo Mo Co which is much better). They sell mainstream American cars and trucks (including SUV's). Mazda, Volvo, etc., are beating them with their own platforms in many areas. And they have major gaps in their product line.
5) I didn't get into why Ford has such low residuals -- and they are working on fixing it anyways. But if you're comparing leasing cars (as many are), then suddenly the Mustang IS competing with cars like the Lexus and BMW. So in order to do good business, Ford needs to remember that.
So I'm sorry if you're offended that I wanted to look at what Ford could do better at their dealerships, business, or with their models. This was never a "ha ha, my wife bought a Mini and you all stink" kinda post. It was just, "here's some areas where I think Ford/Mustang could improve". I think it is fine that you want to compare Mustangs only in HP to other cars -- but that's not how most customers do. I do think Ford excels in that area -- but I want them to excel in many areas so they can broaden the reach of the product/company. But I've learned long ago, people see what they want to. If you want to see attacks, or see me as some poser-leaser out here to attack your purchase, then it doesn't really matter what I say. And if you don't want to discuss ways that Ford could improve the buying experience because your delicate ego can't handle anything but assumption that Ford is blue-oval perfection, then so be that too. Take it easy...
GT Member
Joined: July 3, 2005
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Take a look at GM vs Ford... and Chrysler vs Ford... I don't know if you've noticed but the economy stinks, everybody's stock is down, I want my RadioShack stock stock to be at $75 dollars a share again its at $25. The point is if Ford changes the Mustang enough to draw customers that would normally buy imports for economy, or for features and creature comfort it would no longer be a Mustang. Did you see how well the Cougar did? Sold well to the origional group it was focused at. Those who wanted a V8 car with some performance plus all the plush stuff. They took a good thing and turned it into a FWD joke. They wanted a car that would appeal to a larger group. Did it work? NO. Did I ever say that Mustangs are perfect? NO. But they are just right. Cheap enough to afford, more power than you need, great looks. As for dealerships go, you may have had a bad experience because the salesman read you and said to himself, "This guy doesn't want a Mustang" and brushed you off to find a customer that he can sell to. I've worked in sales, I can tell right off whether or not a customer wants to buy something or if they want to look, or just play twenty questions.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Wow, at first I was impressed that you were going to listen and look things up, and support a point with graphs. (I love that). It lasted about 10 seconds until I looked at your comparison.
A 50 year comparison of Ford versus GM (the worst performer in the segment)? Or a 30 year comparison of Diamler-Chrysler versus Ford (when they only became DCX 6 years ago). Come on, you were serious? You honestly think that's reflective of Ford's issues in the last few years? It's good at confusing the issue, or hiding real info in the noise of obfuscation. But let's HONESTLY look at my point.
How about a 5 year of Ford versus DJ30 (Industrials)? -60% of Ford versus the index is "down all over"?
[attachmentid=29470]
How about a 5 year of Ford versus DCX (Chrysler)? -60% for Ford versus -20% for DCX? (And DCX is getting dragged down because of the Daimler/Benz side, not the Chrysler side).
[attachmentid=29469]
How about a 1 year of Ford versus Toyota? -30% for Ford versus -5% for Toyota?
[attachmentid=29471]
Things may be down all over, but they are down more for Ford. You had to do mental gymnastics to not get the point, and try to confuse others.
My point still isn't to bash Ford, but to be a businessman, look at problems with the business, so they can be addressed and thus GET BETTER! Not try to cover them up with obfuscating comparisons or misinformation.
Does Mustang help Ford? Yes. As much as it should? I don't think so. (They're missing opportunities) Would Cougar spread the car out and eat into BMW and Lexus and spread the brand? Probably. I don't think Ford needs to make it a Cougar brand, they could just add the same luxo options under the Ford/Mustang brand. But the purists seem to get whiney if you make a car too pleasant to drive.
As for the rest, you know nothing about me or my dealer experiences, so stop building your pathetic strawmen arguments. I liked the Ford dealers, and liked the convenience of them being close. I said as much. I just felt that the options and customization capabilities of other brands was even better -- letting people tailor the car to their needs. Can you just not get this point? It seems mind-numbingly simple to me, not to get it. But you managed anyways.
You claim you worked in sales. Here's a hint; the first rule of sales is to LISTEN to the other guy, so you can figure out what he wants, and then figure out how to give it to them (thus make the sale). Ignoring my points, or making up things to fit your agenda wouldn't close a sale to me. Maybe if you listened more, you'd still be in sales. Whatever.
I hope the charts help others understand what I'm saying about Ford. Their branding and business is only a small part of the problem. But it's still part of the problem. I like the company, I want them to get better. First we should look at it to understand it, and not go into ego-inspired denial.
A 50 year comparison of Ford versus GM (the worst performer in the segment)? Or a 30 year comparison of Diamler-Chrysler versus Ford (when they only became DCX 6 years ago). Come on, you were serious? You honestly think that's reflective of Ford's issues in the last few years? It's good at confusing the issue, or hiding real info in the noise of obfuscation. But let's HONESTLY look at my point.
How about a 5 year of Ford versus DJ30 (Industrials)? -60% of Ford versus the index is "down all over"?
[attachmentid=29470]
How about a 5 year of Ford versus DCX (Chrysler)? -60% for Ford versus -20% for DCX? (And DCX is getting dragged down because of the Daimler/Benz side, not the Chrysler side).
[attachmentid=29469]
How about a 1 year of Ford versus Toyota? -30% for Ford versus -5% for Toyota?
[attachmentid=29471]
Things may be down all over, but they are down more for Ford. You had to do mental gymnastics to not get the point, and try to confuse others.
My point still isn't to bash Ford, but to be a businessman, look at problems with the business, so they can be addressed and thus GET BETTER! Not try to cover them up with obfuscating comparisons or misinformation.
Does Mustang help Ford? Yes. As much as it should? I don't think so. (They're missing opportunities) Would Cougar spread the car out and eat into BMW and Lexus and spread the brand? Probably. I don't think Ford needs to make it a Cougar brand, they could just add the same luxo options under the Ford/Mustang brand. But the purists seem to get whiney if you make a car too pleasant to drive.
As for the rest, you know nothing about me or my dealer experiences, so stop building your pathetic strawmen arguments. I liked the Ford dealers, and liked the convenience of them being close. I said as much. I just felt that the options and customization capabilities of other brands was even better -- letting people tailor the car to their needs. Can you just not get this point? It seems mind-numbingly simple to me, not to get it. But you managed anyways.
You claim you worked in sales. Here's a hint; the first rule of sales is to LISTEN to the other guy, so you can figure out what he wants, and then figure out how to give it to them (thus make the sale). Ignoring my points, or making up things to fit your agenda wouldn't close a sale to me. Maybe if you listened more, you'd still be in sales. Whatever.
I hope the charts help others understand what I'm saying about Ford. Their branding and business is only a small part of the problem. But it's still part of the problem. I like the company, I want them to get better. First we should look at it to understand it, and not go into ego-inspired denial.
GT Member
Joined: July 3, 2005
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Okay lets make it simpler, Toyota makes cars right? Their first attempt at what is now the Scion segment was the Toyota Matrix, didn't do what they wanted. Hence the Scion line. Can you get a Corolla with all the options you get with a TC?
Toyota luxury car = Lexus. Nissan = Infinity. BMW, Mercedes Benz, are only luxury cars here in the states. Now that you see the route I'm going. Ford = good, Mercury = better, Lincoln = best. Ford does have a car designed to compete with BMW and Lexus, it's the Lincoln LS. Mustang is to Ford what 350Z is to Nissan, a S197 platform Couger would be the equivalent to the Infinity G35 coupe. Ford's lineup is always Ford as a starting point and the Lincoln/Mercury variants are a little better. Same thing with GM, same thing with Daimler Chrysler. What I do know is what works for one company will not neccessarily improve things for another company.
As for being in sales, I don't know if you realize it or not but sales people are going the way of the dodo. I didn't leave sales because I wasn't good at it I left because customers are purchasing merchandise through alternate channels. Namely the internet. Like I said the economy is down, fewer people are buying things they want and the people that are shop the internet for the best deals. I've never sold cars, but let me give you a scenario:
I work for a Ford, Lincoln/Mercury Dealer
Salesperson: Hey how are you doing? I'm Kenny what are you looking for today?
Customer: I'm looking for a cheap car that gets good gas mileage.
Salesperson: Okay what did you have in mind? A certain price range? Any special features?
Customer: Well, I want some thing that I can commute back and forth to work in.
Salesperson: Great, let me show you what I have... I walk the customer over to the Focus lineup. It fits their needs: cheap, good gas mileage.
Say the customer said they didn't like the econobox? I'd move up to the V6
Mustang... Still cheap okay fuel economy, plus agressive styling all in one package.
Features tell, benefits sell. "What does this car do for me that this one doesn't?" If Ford wants to sell more cars they need to offer cars with more benefits than their competetors. American cars do not sell because of their economy, they sell because they follow the American Dream, bigger is better. If every one bought for economy would there be so many SUVs and pickups out there? What else can For do to improve sales? Set a price for each vehicle like Saturn and Scion do. No haggling with the dealer. This is the price, now the customer has the thought of being ripped-off out of their mind and they open up about what the car needs to do for them. Ford also needs to work on marketing. Chrysler and Toyota have some really cool commercials. Seems like every week Chrysler has a new funny commercial out. I can't take much more Toby Keith talking about frames...
The point that I'm making is that not every car is for everybody. The majority of people that buy a Mustang would not even consider a Mini, Scion or the like. And vice versa. Like I said my sister owns a Scion XB. I respect it for what it is, but would I buy one? Heck no. Do I think the Mini is a cool car? Yeah, its a nifty little car. But the fact that it has factory options to make it special is not what would sell me on it. Why did the PT Cruiser do so well? Because it was something new, something different. Same for Mini, same for Scion. Now, the one difference is Mustang has had its ups and downs for the last forty years but it is a consistent performer. It does very well at the begining of a model change, by the time the new wears off there is a new improved version.
I do not believe that Mustang sales will go up because of options available to be purchased with the car.
What has hurt Ford? Gas prices of course. But Ford trying to be Toyota will not fix the problem. Loyal Ford customers will leave. A small market share will go after the new brand but not as many as ford will loose. I've never been to Ohio but here in the south you will count 10 domestics to 1 import on the road.
By the way heres a fair comparison between the Big Three. You will clearly note that Ford is down the highest percent. The other two are following the same trend. As for trying to fool anyone, I simply selected max to get a broad scope. Here is a five year comparison that should be more relevant. What has affected Ford stock? Remember the problems with rollovers and defective Firestone tires?
Toyota luxury car = Lexus. Nissan = Infinity. BMW, Mercedes Benz, are only luxury cars here in the states. Now that you see the route I'm going. Ford = good, Mercury = better, Lincoln = best. Ford does have a car designed to compete with BMW and Lexus, it's the Lincoln LS. Mustang is to Ford what 350Z is to Nissan, a S197 platform Couger would be the equivalent to the Infinity G35 coupe. Ford's lineup is always Ford as a starting point and the Lincoln/Mercury variants are a little better. Same thing with GM, same thing with Daimler Chrysler. What I do know is what works for one company will not neccessarily improve things for another company.
As for being in sales, I don't know if you realize it or not but sales people are going the way of the dodo. I didn't leave sales because I wasn't good at it I left because customers are purchasing merchandise through alternate channels. Namely the internet. Like I said the economy is down, fewer people are buying things they want and the people that are shop the internet for the best deals. I've never sold cars, but let me give you a scenario:
I work for a Ford, Lincoln/Mercury Dealer
Salesperson: Hey how are you doing? I'm Kenny what are you looking for today?
Customer: I'm looking for a cheap car that gets good gas mileage.
Salesperson: Okay what did you have in mind? A certain price range? Any special features?
Customer: Well, I want some thing that I can commute back and forth to work in.
Salesperson: Great, let me show you what I have... I walk the customer over to the Focus lineup. It fits their needs: cheap, good gas mileage.
Say the customer said they didn't like the econobox? I'd move up to the V6
Mustang... Still cheap okay fuel economy, plus agressive styling all in one package.
Features tell, benefits sell. "What does this car do for me that this one doesn't?" If Ford wants to sell more cars they need to offer cars with more benefits than their competetors. American cars do not sell because of their economy, they sell because they follow the American Dream, bigger is better. If every one bought for economy would there be so many SUVs and pickups out there? What else can For do to improve sales? Set a price for each vehicle like Saturn and Scion do. No haggling with the dealer. This is the price, now the customer has the thought of being ripped-off out of their mind and they open up about what the car needs to do for them. Ford also needs to work on marketing. Chrysler and Toyota have some really cool commercials. Seems like every week Chrysler has a new funny commercial out. I can't take much more Toby Keith talking about frames...
The point that I'm making is that not every car is for everybody. The majority of people that buy a Mustang would not even consider a Mini, Scion or the like. And vice versa. Like I said my sister owns a Scion XB. I respect it for what it is, but would I buy one? Heck no. Do I think the Mini is a cool car? Yeah, its a nifty little car. But the fact that it has factory options to make it special is not what would sell me on it. Why did the PT Cruiser do so well? Because it was something new, something different. Same for Mini, same for Scion. Now, the one difference is Mustang has had its ups and downs for the last forty years but it is a consistent performer. It does very well at the begining of a model change, by the time the new wears off there is a new improved version.
I do not believe that Mustang sales will go up because of options available to be purchased with the car.
What has hurt Ford? Gas prices of course. But Ford trying to be Toyota will not fix the problem. Loyal Ford customers will leave. A small market share will go after the new brand but not as many as ford will loose. I've never been to Ohio but here in the south you will count 10 domestics to 1 import on the road.
By the way heres a fair comparison between the Big Three. You will clearly note that Ford is down the highest percent. The other two are following the same trend. As for trying to fool anyone, I simply selected max to get a broad scope. Here is a five year comparison that should be more relevant. What has affected Ford stock? Remember the problems with rollovers and defective Firestone tires?
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Sorry, this is long....
Mr. Speedy. You used the idea that Ford was Nissan, and specifically compared the 350Z to the Mustang. (While they had Infiniti/Mercury for their more luxo brands). My point has been that Ford isn't capitalizing on the options of the competition.
So Infiniti has the G35, and had it since the release of the Z. They even have a 4-Door and AWD version. Mercury has the Cougar right --- oh wait, Ford hasn't released one, which is my fricken point! They have less options that the competition and are failing to capitalize as well as the very competitor you used as an example!!!
So I went to build the down-scale to just the Z-car. I could get it with more/better transmission choices. I could get different back ends (limited slip diff, or not). It had a better rear suspension. More traction control options. I could get it with heated seats and mirrors (cold weather package that I keep mentioning). Two tone seats. Etc. They had variants of the car that spread it over more range and more options. While the mustang has less range/appeal -- and the biggest difference is only the motor. That's before I went to Infiniti, and started looking at the 2+2 version of the car, or the 4 door. If a sunroof was a deal-breaker, well, I could get it in the infiniti, but Ford/Mercury did not. Which again, was the same ficken point I've been making. With Ford, you can alter the motor size and be completely Horse-Power Focused, but you can't get near the variety of options of the competition. The competition has much wider reach with their cars! What's so darn hard about this simple point?
But at least, finally, you addressed it and said that you don't think the mustang's sales will go up just because Ford offers the options that people want on it. And that the reason Ford was hurt with Mustang sales in the past was because of Gas prices.
First, I don't know why you think that offering people the options they want wouldn't increase sales. By the very definition, it should. Poll people that didn't buy Mustangs and ask them why they didn't buy. (Improving sales is more about figuring out why you are losing customers). I bet features/options comes in to the decision! I've already told you that I want certain cold weather options or sunroof, and I can't get it in Ford, but can get it in all their competitors and that is working against the sale You think I'm the only one?
My point was never that Ford was losing major sales to Scion/Mini. (Listen/focus). My point was that many companies were offering better buying experiences and options LIKE Scion and Mini. (It didn't seem like a difficult point to get). But let's go with your point; even that is wrong. some people buy across segments and have radically different cars that appeal to them. Some people are trying to decide between a pickup, a Mustang and a motorcycle. Some are comparing in the same price segment. Certainly a few are considering a V6 Mustang versus a Scion or Mini -- and something that's helping divert sales away from Ford is the better buying experience (more options) of the competition! Ford needs to do better.
Second, as for Gas prices -- thanks again for supporting my point that American car companies weren't diversified and global enough. In America gas is cheap. In the world, it isn't, some places have taxes on displacement, weight or horsepower. Which is why world competitors work on having the most HorsePower per Displacement, instead of just adding more displacement to get HorsePower. The mustangs motors are larger displacement and lower output motors, which hurts them in those places, and makes them seem "low-tech" even in America. Also the larger displacement tends to mean lower milage -- which hurts them less in the U.S., but more globally.
I compared the sportiest mustang (GT) versus the sportiest Z. In the world, they were taxed for more for the Mustang, and it got less MPG. I realize that isn't fair, because the V6 Mustang does better -- but people don't always think that way (even when they should). That was looking at one car, when you look at the product line and sales, Nissan has a much better variety of cars and is more global than Ford. The Euro's are even better at offering more motor choices than the Japanese. In America Ford sells low-milage vehicles and is hated by the greens, and is setting themselves up for another fall if oil prices change, because they AREN'T diversified enough. GM is adding a Green-Line to the Saturn; they're thinking ahead. Chrysler has displacement on demand (GM is looking at adding it, but is cautious because of their 8-6-4 fiasco a decade ago). Ford has the Hybrid escape and others coming -- but what about a hybrid mustang, hybrid Focus, etc.? MY point is they are in a dangerous place right now (as are some others). They aren't thinking very global in Ford (the brand), they're trying to cover themselves by having many other brands that diversifies them. (Volvo, Mazda, etc.). That puts Ford (the brand) at greater risk. They're headed in the right direction, in their slow, myopic, American-centric way. While others, even slow American companies, seem to be more aggressive about it. That's reflected in the stock price.
As for the Nations import/domestic rates. Go to Calfornia and you'll count 10 imports to one Domestic. Ohio is more Domestic (as is the South). But Urban areas, all over, tend to be more import friendly. It also matters how close to auto-plants you are. If you're near one, then that car tends to go up. Whether Honda, BMW, or Ford. And in truth, with so much of every car being made somewhere else, it's hard to know what is what. Is an Australian made GTO more American than an American made Honda/Toyota/BMW? How about a Chrysler that has most of it's parts made in Germany or East Europe? Globalization blurs borders.
Finally, as I said, Ford is down more than the other two American car companies in Stock. But the point is they are down both absolutely, and relative to the competition. (Three times further down than DCX). One reason is the segment (autos) is down, because oil is up, and competition is up. But Ford is doing particularly poorly because business is losing confidence in their ability to compete, just compared to other American companies -- and worse compared to many other car companies. Why? Because of the examples I've given. Even in one of their best opportunities like the Mustang, they're failing to capitalize on the opportunity as they should. They're supply constrained, feature constrained, and American focused, and not looking towards the future. You're comparing Ford/Mustang to what they've done in the past -- but business/Wall Street compares them to what they're doing in the present and their competition in the future. And they don't see Ford cutting the mustard. So let's not make excuses and ignore problems, but look at them so that they can be fixed!
Mr. Speedy. You used the idea that Ford was Nissan, and specifically compared the 350Z to the Mustang. (While they had Infiniti/Mercury for their more luxo brands). My point has been that Ford isn't capitalizing on the options of the competition.
So Infiniti has the G35, and had it since the release of the Z. They even have a 4-Door and AWD version. Mercury has the Cougar right --- oh wait, Ford hasn't released one, which is my fricken point! They have less options that the competition and are failing to capitalize as well as the very competitor you used as an example!!!
So I went to build the down-scale to just the Z-car. I could get it with more/better transmission choices. I could get different back ends (limited slip diff, or not). It had a better rear suspension. More traction control options. I could get it with heated seats and mirrors (cold weather package that I keep mentioning). Two tone seats. Etc. They had variants of the car that spread it over more range and more options. While the mustang has less range/appeal -- and the biggest difference is only the motor. That's before I went to Infiniti, and started looking at the 2+2 version of the car, or the 4 door. If a sunroof was a deal-breaker, well, I could get it in the infiniti, but Ford/Mercury did not. Which again, was the same ficken point I've been making. With Ford, you can alter the motor size and be completely Horse-Power Focused, but you can't get near the variety of options of the competition. The competition has much wider reach with their cars! What's so darn hard about this simple point?
But at least, finally, you addressed it and said that you don't think the mustang's sales will go up just because Ford offers the options that people want on it. And that the reason Ford was hurt with Mustang sales in the past was because of Gas prices.
First, I don't know why you think that offering people the options they want wouldn't increase sales. By the very definition, it should. Poll people that didn't buy Mustangs and ask them why they didn't buy. (Improving sales is more about figuring out why you are losing customers). I bet features/options comes in to the decision! I've already told you that I want certain cold weather options or sunroof, and I can't get it in Ford, but can get it in all their competitors and that is working against the sale You think I'm the only one?
My point was never that Ford was losing major sales to Scion/Mini. (Listen/focus). My point was that many companies were offering better buying experiences and options LIKE Scion and Mini. (It didn't seem like a difficult point to get). But let's go with your point; even that is wrong. some people buy across segments and have radically different cars that appeal to them. Some people are trying to decide between a pickup, a Mustang and a motorcycle. Some are comparing in the same price segment. Certainly a few are considering a V6 Mustang versus a Scion or Mini -- and something that's helping divert sales away from Ford is the better buying experience (more options) of the competition! Ford needs to do better.
Second, as for Gas prices -- thanks again for supporting my point that American car companies weren't diversified and global enough. In America gas is cheap. In the world, it isn't, some places have taxes on displacement, weight or horsepower. Which is why world competitors work on having the most HorsePower per Displacement, instead of just adding more displacement to get HorsePower. The mustangs motors are larger displacement and lower output motors, which hurts them in those places, and makes them seem "low-tech" even in America. Also the larger displacement tends to mean lower milage -- which hurts them less in the U.S., but more globally.
I compared the sportiest mustang (GT) versus the sportiest Z. In the world, they were taxed for more for the Mustang, and it got less MPG. I realize that isn't fair, because the V6 Mustang does better -- but people don't always think that way (even when they should). That was looking at one car, when you look at the product line and sales, Nissan has a much better variety of cars and is more global than Ford. The Euro's are even better at offering more motor choices than the Japanese. In America Ford sells low-milage vehicles and is hated by the greens, and is setting themselves up for another fall if oil prices change, because they AREN'T diversified enough. GM is adding a Green-Line to the Saturn; they're thinking ahead. Chrysler has displacement on demand (GM is looking at adding it, but is cautious because of their 8-6-4 fiasco a decade ago). Ford has the Hybrid escape and others coming -- but what about a hybrid mustang, hybrid Focus, etc.? MY point is they are in a dangerous place right now (as are some others). They aren't thinking very global in Ford (the brand), they're trying to cover themselves by having many other brands that diversifies them. (Volvo, Mazda, etc.). That puts Ford (the brand) at greater risk. They're headed in the right direction, in their slow, myopic, American-centric way. While others, even slow American companies, seem to be more aggressive about it. That's reflected in the stock price.
As for the Nations import/domestic rates. Go to Calfornia and you'll count 10 imports to one Domestic. Ohio is more Domestic (as is the South). But Urban areas, all over, tend to be more import friendly. It also matters how close to auto-plants you are. If you're near one, then that car tends to go up. Whether Honda, BMW, or Ford. And in truth, with so much of every car being made somewhere else, it's hard to know what is what. Is an Australian made GTO more American than an American made Honda/Toyota/BMW? How about a Chrysler that has most of it's parts made in Germany or East Europe? Globalization blurs borders.
Finally, as I said, Ford is down more than the other two American car companies in Stock. But the point is they are down both absolutely, and relative to the competition. (Three times further down than DCX). One reason is the segment (autos) is down, because oil is up, and competition is up. But Ford is doing particularly poorly because business is losing confidence in their ability to compete, just compared to other American companies -- and worse compared to many other car companies. Why? Because of the examples I've given. Even in one of their best opportunities like the Mustang, they're failing to capitalize on the opportunity as they should. They're supply constrained, feature constrained, and American focused, and not looking towards the future. You're comparing Ford/Mustang to what they've done in the past -- but business/Wall Street compares them to what they're doing in the present and their competition in the future. And they don't see Ford cutting the mustard. So let's not make excuses and ignore problems, but look at them so that they can be fixed!
Bullitt Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
I think the topic is being taken carelessly off course. Generalization is starting to happen here. Remember, this started as a specific targeted glimpse into what Ford could do better. It also was about how well/not well the Mustang was targeting its audience.
I think we are fast aproaching (with wreckless abandon) the tail chasing portion of the topic.
We need to avoid the topic of Fuel consumption to a degree here. If you tackle that topic, you begin down a road of pure speculation and assumption. You know what they say... when you assume, you make an *** out of U and ME. We are starting to compare totally different classes of vehicles with totally different target audiences, and in my opinion, it's not quite a fair comparison.
No, the Mustang is not a fuel sipping hybrid like the prius. It's not a 4 cyl like the civic. We really can't compare it to such. If someone has fuel economy on the mind, the farthest they would reach is for a V6 Mustang (and if you're really concientious, even that is a bit far). These are sports cars. Sports cars are not fuel sippers unless you want something as small as a miata.
Companies are keeping fuel in mind, and their cars are getting MUCH better milage than ever before, but that's compared to the same car in the past. Technology has advanced them. That's about as far as the comparison is reasonable.
If folks want a fuel sipping car, they will buy an econo-box or a 4 cyl coupe offering. Less power, more economy, similar sportyness, dissimilar thrill factor. The Mustang targets an entirely different group of folks from say - a Toyota Celica or Subaru WRX.
Let's stay on course (even though I think we have already arrived at the destination).
This topic is primarilly about what Ford could possibly do better than it is currently doing to keep their product competative. That is the 1 line factual purpose of the topic, nothing more, nothing less. No offense ment, but if we start wandering off with stock charts and fuel economy comparisons, we'll get lost in an endless war of who is good, and who is evil. I see where you are trying to go, but I think it's getting more general and we're loosing sight of the target. Gotta tackle one issue at a time, ya know?
Now, as for the topic, it boils down to this:
dke, you feel that Ford still has room to improve its offerings to reach a bit farther up market as well as capturing a few more folks from the fringes of the segment. Wise observation. I will agree that that is possible, and that Ford should not simply rest on their laurels with this car.
At the present moment (taking a snapshot of this exact moment in time - not looking ahead or behind), Ford is doing extremely well. They are building a car that is edgy, inspiring, has outstanding quality, and is in hot demand. We sit here in August (and it was long before this point when it happened) and as of right now, Ford has sold out the model year. They have hit the scene with an extremely powerful product that has run away sales.
This product's sales numbers are making cars that aren't even in the segment look all kinds of stupid. Scion with the combined sales of 3 cars (one of which is very successfull) is not outselling the Mustang right now - 3 CARS! What's more, the Mustang's average price is far higher than any of the Scion cars. That's not to downplay Scion. It's an impressive display by Toyota that fills a much needed niche in the market. It's also been brilliantly executed. It's teaching companies around the globe how to aproach younger buyers.
Just think about that though. 3 cars combined cannot outsell 1 2 door sports car. Even the elegant Chrysler 300 has fallen behind. A 2 door sports/muscle car is outselling a 4 door luxo-lite. That's impressive.
It is only fair to admit that this car with its nearly 200,000 units of production and sales (by model year end) is a smashing success. It's undeniable and irrefutable. I think we all see that and acknowledge it. No point into beating it into the ground.
Given all circumstances, it is impossible for Ford to do any better at the present moment in time. Whether it was smart or not, whether it is legitimate or not, it's the best they can possibly do given this moment in time, and I would say that they did a safe job of estimating the car's success. Had they over produced, the market would be saturated with cars that wouldn't sell. Now they can press forward and build like it's nobody's business. Production will increase to meet demand (while not overpopulating the market), I'm certain. This keeps resale values high.
In fact, this is the first time in recent history that a new model of a car has been selling out AND subsequently raised the value of the previous model. 2004 Mustangs have gone UP in value since the 05 was released. Why is that? People are clammering for the 05. If they can't get it... dealers want 04's on the lot to offer a sale. People are buying too. The last time a car did anything similar was when the banglized 7 series was released. People started buying the previous generation like hot cakes, but that was because they hated the styling of the new one.
I'm wandering off topic again, so I'll digress. Let's talk about the future. I think that's where the meat of the topic is. This is where your point is really focused dke, and I think this is where the conversation will stalemate. The point you're making is that Ford needs to look forward. They need to keep the car successful. I'm going to make your point even more succintly than that. I agree with you, and here's what you're really saying:
If Ford wants the Mustang to be a CONTINUING success in the market, they need to acknowledge that the competition (challenger, camaro, firebird) is coming AND they need to stay ahead of the curve.
They may have success now, but it's not the time for lazyness. Take a page out of the other team's play book. Learn from the one secret that makes Toyota the only car company in the world to be actually making gobs of money. Take your product and refine and improve it throughout the lifespan. Better it, fix it, improve it. Offer more features and options to keep people interrested.
Give folks more choices so that they don't tire of the car. Make sure that there is something out there to keep them coming back and something to make them CONTINUE to feel like they have something more special than the previous model. Refinement is a must. Don't sit on your hands with a success because you will loose your run.
There are many ways that Ford can execute on that. We can sit around and kick out great ideas about it. Perhaps some of the Execs are reading and will see them.
In the end though, it becomes a stalemate, and the reason is that it is all speculation and assumption. None of us have a chrystal ball. We can't read the future. I have spent a great deal of time peering into the automotive fish bowl. I've been watching closely, and I feel (my speculation) that Ford knows the competition is coming. Right now, they're all high-fiving, but the real work lies ahead. They need to continue to refine and improve on an already amazing car, and I feel they will do just that. The Mustang has been Ford's #1 selling car in recent years. It is the one car that continues to get more and more attention from the execs because it's the one car that continues to carry Ford on its back.
I feel that they will make little improvements to the features of the car. Options will be added as the run goes on. Some may be dramatic (a blue ICAP perhaps), others may be more subtle (the addition of metal lock pins to the IUP interior).
The most important addition and revision will come in the form of a Special Edition. This is where Ford will get more radical and experiment with some cooler features. If the public loves those features, they may incorperate them into the mass production models. Most importantly, this will let Ford specialize the car to compete with the coming storm. They can also offer these parts in their catalog as dealer upgrades (making even MORE money).
The bonus to this is that the generic success story remains in tact. For the folks wanting simply a cheap car with no frills - the form, but not the function - the el cheapo base model V6 Mustang will ALWAYS be there waiting for them. Not only that, it will be (most likely) the cheapest offering on the market in the segment. Those sales will support Ford's need/habit to specialize the car to compete for the smaller niches of the segment. The battle lines will be drawn in that specialized niche, however.
Ultimately, we need to wait and see. I hope you stick around on the forums for a while dke, because I would LOVE to revive this topic again as time goes on. I think that after next year's detroit show, there will be much to talk about. For now though... I think we have reached the point where we must put an arm around each other's shoulder, stand side by side, point strait ahead and say... "Let's see what happens".
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
I don't expect the Mustang to be a Prius. However, when looking at Ford's models, they are clumped in the high fuel consumption category, which makes them more vulnerable to fuel price fluctuations. And in each car segment, their cars are among the worst performing (except the small SUV category). That was the only point I was trying to make. I'm not looking at gas guzzling as good/evil; I'm looking at it as a business risk to be too clumped. Huge difference.
The same with displacement. Ford (brand), doesn't think very global. Their cars tend to be very displacement heavy and low-tech. The Mustang, which is one of the cars that defines the brand, casts this image. Heavy right foot, low-tech, low-features, and so on. Ford said they want to go up-brand (in customers), well then, I think they're going to need to spread the products, starting with the one that defines them; the Mustang. (They already do better with their trucks and SUV's).
As for a snapshot of this exact moment; we disagree. Ford is doing OK at best. They weren't able to meet demand, and they have no leveraged a brand/model nearly as well as the competition. Yes, they sold out the model year; but they missed selling many more. The competition would have done a better job with such a cool car; that's part of the reflection of the stock price. I agree quality is improving, but they were seen as low and as climbing up to average. I think that's short-changing them, but that's still market perception. Scaling in slowly, and being conservative, and not having lots of SE's to upsell, or lots of options, is exactly the point. They're missing opportunities that more aggressive competition would take, and THAT is a contributing factor to their stock/perception slide.
Selling 200,000 cars going from zero sales, like the Mini did. That's a smashing success. Going from 220,000+ sales 5 years ago, to 200,000 sales this year (on a new version of the same model) is less a success. Especially if we factor out fleet sales. Less a smashing success if you figure the potential was more like 250,000-300,000 if they'd had more options, more features, model/variants, more availability / ability to meet demand. Then throw in that Ford's selling price was probably 20-50% lower than they could have been, if they'd had SE's, and features that added to the average selling price. So you see that they made money. Business is also about how much potential sales/momentum they lost, under-forecast, and so on.
So you're saying eureka; Ford grossed $4B in sales because of the Mustang.
I'm saying; If Ford had executed perfectly, they would have had 50% more sales, and 40% more average selling price for about $8.4B in gross sales because of the Mustang.
That extra $4.4B wouldn't have fixed Ford's problems. But it would have helped, and show they were on-top of their business (in this niche). The fact that they missed all that potential, is one of the things that is hurting them on Wall Street. (The cronies aren't aggressive enough or keeping up with their competitors). And future price pressures by GM, et al, is going to make that worse.
As for the Future, we agree. Ford needs to expand the model, and expand the image. They need more options, features and more variants. (Get the selling price up, which changes the perception of the car/brand/company). SE's will help. Not one Shelby model for 2007, but a couple for 2006. The cheapo V6 needs to not be seen as cheapo -- but as economical (high value) and have more options/extras like the big boy. Not everyone is buying the Mustang just for HP. But as you said, we need to see what they're going to do, and we're starting to go in circles. I just think you and I have significantly different views of what they've done -- but for me, if we can't accept the lost potential and continue to delude ourselves by ignoring the failures, then Ford is going to continue to be seen as an also-ran in the business world.
The same with displacement. Ford (brand), doesn't think very global. Their cars tend to be very displacement heavy and low-tech. The Mustang, which is one of the cars that defines the brand, casts this image. Heavy right foot, low-tech, low-features, and so on. Ford said they want to go up-brand (in customers), well then, I think they're going to need to spread the products, starting with the one that defines them; the Mustang. (They already do better with their trucks and SUV's).
As for a snapshot of this exact moment; we disagree. Ford is doing OK at best. They weren't able to meet demand, and they have no leveraged a brand/model nearly as well as the competition. Yes, they sold out the model year; but they missed selling many more. The competition would have done a better job with such a cool car; that's part of the reflection of the stock price. I agree quality is improving, but they were seen as low and as climbing up to average. I think that's short-changing them, but that's still market perception. Scaling in slowly, and being conservative, and not having lots of SE's to upsell, or lots of options, is exactly the point. They're missing opportunities that more aggressive competition would take, and THAT is a contributing factor to their stock/perception slide.
Selling 200,000 cars going from zero sales, like the Mini did. That's a smashing success. Going from 220,000+ sales 5 years ago, to 200,000 sales this year (on a new version of the same model) is less a success. Especially if we factor out fleet sales. Less a smashing success if you figure the potential was more like 250,000-300,000 if they'd had more options, more features, model/variants, more availability / ability to meet demand. Then throw in that Ford's selling price was probably 20-50% lower than they could have been, if they'd had SE's, and features that added to the average selling price. So you see that they made money. Business is also about how much potential sales/momentum they lost, under-forecast, and so on.
So you're saying eureka; Ford grossed $4B in sales because of the Mustang.
I'm saying; If Ford had executed perfectly, they would have had 50% more sales, and 40% more average selling price for about $8.4B in gross sales because of the Mustang.
That extra $4.4B wouldn't have fixed Ford's problems. But it would have helped, and show they were on-top of their business (in this niche). The fact that they missed all that potential, is one of the things that is hurting them on Wall Street. (The cronies aren't aggressive enough or keeping up with their competitors). And future price pressures by GM, et al, is going to make that worse.
As for the Future, we agree. Ford needs to expand the model, and expand the image. They need more options, features and more variants. (Get the selling price up, which changes the perception of the car/brand/company). SE's will help. Not one Shelby model for 2007, but a couple for 2006. The cheapo V6 needs to not be seen as cheapo -- but as economical (high value) and have more options/extras like the big boy. Not everyone is buying the Mustang just for HP. But as you said, we need to see what they're going to do, and we're starting to go in circles. I just think you and I have significantly different views of what they've done -- but for me, if we can't accept the lost potential and continue to delude ourselves by ignoring the failures, then Ford is going to continue to be seen as an also-ran in the business world.
Bullitt Member
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Here's some fat to chew on and think about:
Early sales of Honda's Ridgeline truck disappoint; high prices pegged as main problem
Honda was building many more of these trucks than it ended up selling. It was hoping it would be a success, and everyone was saying it would be. Guess what... it is flopping. Now dealer inventories are bloated, and they can't get rid of them. What if Ford had been more risky with the volume of the Mustang and the same thing had happened? What if they were going to push 250-300,000 units and they didn't sell them? What if they pumped out that many units in the first year - met every inch of the demand, and then no one purchased the next year because demand subsided due to overproduction?
Ford would have been in far worse trouble - just like Honda is with the Ridgeline. What's more... the ridgeline is too expensive to compete. People see the price and the options, and suddenly the truck is niche... it's not an industry standard. More people are saying... I'll go buy a Tacoma. I'll go buy a Ranger. I'll go buy a Frontier. Heck... they're even saying... I'll go buy an F150, Silverado, or Tundra! It's just as expensive, and the options don't ofset the price.
By keeping demand reasonable, Ford will spread the demand for the car across the model life. That keeps sales stable and prevents a sharp spike with a quick drop off. They have come out of the gate strong and there is plenty of room to improve.
For the record, this is the second highest selling year for the Mustang in the past 30+ years (since the mid 70's). The only sales # higher was when the 1994 mustang was released. Other than that, they have sold fewer units. That says they are reaching out to new buyers with this car. The fact that they have sold out the model year with 3 months to go tells me that demand will extend into the next model year and possibly the next. That keeps sales #'s strong in the long haul. With SE's and added features, the numbers should (my guess) stay strong.
Early sales of Honda's Ridgeline truck disappoint; high prices pegged as main problem
Honda was building many more of these trucks than it ended up selling. It was hoping it would be a success, and everyone was saying it would be. Guess what... it is flopping. Now dealer inventories are bloated, and they can't get rid of them. What if Ford had been more risky with the volume of the Mustang and the same thing had happened? What if they were going to push 250-300,000 units and they didn't sell them? What if they pumped out that many units in the first year - met every inch of the demand, and then no one purchased the next year because demand subsided due to overproduction?
Ford would have been in far worse trouble - just like Honda is with the Ridgeline. What's more... the ridgeline is too expensive to compete. People see the price and the options, and suddenly the truck is niche... it's not an industry standard. More people are saying... I'll go buy a Tacoma. I'll go buy a Ranger. I'll go buy a Frontier. Heck... they're even saying... I'll go buy an F150, Silverado, or Tundra! It's just as expensive, and the options don't ofset the price.
By keeping demand reasonable, Ford will spread the demand for the car across the model life. That keeps sales stable and prevents a sharp spike with a quick drop off. They have come out of the gate strong and there is plenty of room to improve.
For the record, this is the second highest selling year for the Mustang in the past 30+ years (since the mid 70's). The only sales # higher was when the 1994 mustang was released. Other than that, they have sold fewer units. That says they are reaching out to new buyers with this car. The fact that they have sold out the model year with 3 months to go tells me that demand will extend into the next model year and possibly the next. That keeps sales #'s strong in the long haul. With SE's and added features, the numbers should (my guess) stay strong.
Thread Starter
Bullitt Member
Joined: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Sorry, doesn't matter. I agree the Ridgeline was a flop. That's irrelevant to Ford missing their opportunity. I realized fear is what motivated the conservative actions that mean Ford missed their opportunity. And I realize they wanted to conservatively ramp up, trim options to increase profits, reduce demand and simplify the supply-chain. Sure only sales of the 1994 model were higher, but adjust for population changes (upward), lack of competition in segment, retro-mania, new model releases drives sales, and you should have forecasted greater demand. None of what you said changes that Ford missed doubling revenues from this product line. Huge opportunity flushed because old cronies had no cajones or didn't do their job well.
As my Mom used to say, "excuses are made for failures". You're making very rational excuses for Ford. I hear them/you, and I don't disagree. That's why they failed. But I know why they did it, and agree with you on that. It still doesn't matter or change the outcome; they still failed to capitalize on an opportunity. And if they don't radically change, then they're going to repeat it again this year. (And based on the conservative changes we're seeing so far, I don't have confidence that they "get it", and I don't think Wall Street does either).
Sure, maybe in 4 or 5 years, they'll ramp to do what they should have done 4 years earlier. Now multiply all those lost sales and add them up, and what they would have been worth to Ford's bottom line, or to their business perception, stock value, future sales (as in earlier, refresh sooner), and so on. If someone made a $20B mistake, or repeated a $5B one 4 times in a row before getting it right, I'd have a bit of a problem.
But I agree. We have to wait and see if they really turn things around and get aggressive and do a good job, or continue to meander lazily towards success (or at least not abject failure), and succeed in spite of themselves.
As my Mom used to say, "excuses are made for failures". You're making very rational excuses for Ford. I hear them/you, and I don't disagree. That's why they failed. But I know why they did it, and agree with you on that. It still doesn't matter or change the outcome; they still failed to capitalize on an opportunity. And if they don't radically change, then they're going to repeat it again this year. (And based on the conservative changes we're seeing so far, I don't have confidence that they "get it", and I don't think Wall Street does either).
Sure, maybe in 4 or 5 years, they'll ramp to do what they should have done 4 years earlier. Now multiply all those lost sales and add them up, and what they would have been worth to Ford's bottom line, or to their business perception, stock value, future sales (as in earlier, refresh sooner), and so on. If someone made a $20B mistake, or repeated a $5B one 4 times in a row before getting it right, I'd have a bit of a problem.
But I agree. We have to wait and see if they really turn things around and get aggressive and do a good job, or continue to meander lazily towards success (or at least not abject failure), and succeed in spite of themselves.
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: February 8, 2004
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 7
From: Cincinnati, OH
Originally posted by dke@August 4, 2005, 8:51 AM
Sure only sales of the 1994 model were higher, but adjust for population changes (upward), lack of competition in segment, retro-mania, new model releases drives sales, and you should have forecasted greater demand. None of what you said changes that Ford missed doubling revenues from this product line. Huge opportunity flushed because old cronies had no cajones or didn't do their job well.
Sure only sales of the 1994 model were higher, but adjust for population changes (upward), lack of competition in segment, retro-mania, new model releases drives sales, and you should have forecasted greater demand. None of what you said changes that Ford missed doubling revenues from this product line. Huge opportunity flushed because old cronies had no cajones or didn't do their job well.
Also, MINI most likely was "rich" with BMW money to use the kind of manufacturing capability needed to be very flexible in the customization department. The marketers did a great job in connecting with the car owners on that through the MINI website. It's a model for Mustang in my book. It would have been awesome to have that kind of personalization experience, but I suppose the financial business case did not support it.
In my opinion, Ford did the best they could with the resources ($$, staff, manufacturing capability) they had, especially with the financial constraints they have operated under for the past 4 years. They could definitely do better, so I do look forward to the other variants that come to the Mustang line.
PS - My wife has a MINI Cooper, and she loved the buying experience.