Ford Eyes More Cuts
Thread Starter
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 12,636
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin / Serbia
Ford Eyes More Cuts
Looks like Mulally is planing to sell Volvo and kill Mercury.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1208...onsub_page_one
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1208...onsub_page_one
Mach 1 Member
Joined: February 23, 2008
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
From: new castle, pa
I don't care so much about Volvo , but please not Mercury ! The Mercury brand has been around since 1939 ! I'm not a Mopar fan , but when Chrysler dropped Plymouth , I felt a little sad. The same for Oldsmobile at GM . Whether you like them or not, they were a part of our automotive culture.
Cobra R Member
Joined: May 8, 2006
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Great article. Thanks for the link. I'm always keeping up with the way the Ford Company is doing. Their stock has been performing great in the last couple of weeks and things are really looking up with Mulally. They still have a LONG way to go though.
I don't know if I agree with cutting Volvo though. I think they are a stable brand that has many good cars to offer.
The Mercury brand has been stagnant and stale for a while. I don't really see anything in Mercury that is worth keeping. Everything in Mercury can be had in another Ford brand.
I don't know if I agree with cutting Volvo though. I think they are a stable brand that has many good cars to offer.
The Mercury brand has been stagnant and stale for a while. I don't really see anything in Mercury that is worth keeping. Everything in Mercury can be had in another Ford brand.
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,851
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
Mercury is a badge-engineered fixed cost that Ford neither needs, nor can afford anymore.
If you're not going to differentiate the Mercury brand with different vehicles, then let it go and focus on the core brand.
Volvo I'm not so sure about - leveraging its technology could still be valuable.
If you're not going to differentiate the Mercury brand with different vehicles, then let it go and focus on the core brand.
Volvo I'm not so sure about - leveraging its technology could still be valuable.
Last edited by Hollywood_North GT; Apr 24, 2008 at 02:51 AM.
My C/T is cooler than Arin is.
Joined: August 6, 2004
Posts: 4,596
Likes: 4
From: Parkersburg, WV
Great article. Thanks for the link. I'm always keeping up with the way the Ford Company is doing. Their stock has been performing great in the last couple of weeks and things are really looking up with Mulally. They still have a LONG way to go though.
I don't know if I agree with cutting Volvo though. I think they are a stable brand that has many good cars to offer.
The Mercury brand has been stagnant and stale for a while. I don't really see anything in Mercury that is worth keeping. Everything in Mercury can be had in another Ford brand.
I don't know if I agree with cutting Volvo though. I think they are a stable brand that has many good cars to offer.
The Mercury brand has been stagnant and stale for a while. I don't really see anything in Mercury that is worth keeping. Everything in Mercury can be had in another Ford brand.
Bullitt Member
Joined: February 17, 2004
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
From: New Jersey
Really great article. Thanks for the post. Unfortunately, in regards to Mercury, anything that is offered in their cars right now should really be offered in a Ford. I just dont see Mercury doing anything spectacular either....like a total repositioning of the brand (which is what they should do) I just hope whatever they do, they do it efficiently and quick. Time is something that Ford really doesnt have right now.
Shelby GT350 Member
Joined: March 11, 2004
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
The Mercury brand is on pace to sell LESS than 140,000 vehicles in 2008. YTD in 2008 the Mercury brand sales is only 7% of the Ford brand sales The fixed costs associated with maintaining the Mercury brand are too high for such a small sales volume.
The entire reason for having multiple brands such as the Ford, Mercury, Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, Saturn, etc. is obsolete vestige of what the automotive business was like in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.
Back in those days there was essentually one Ford model, yes there were coupe, sedan, convertible models, but they were all built off the same mechanicals. Mercury served a purpose as a Merc. was a distinctively larger car built on a larger frame with a larger engine and features not available on a Ford.
That all changed in the 1960s when the proliferation of models within a brand started. When you have a small Ford, a mid-sized Ford, a full-sized Ford, a pony car Ford, 3 different CUV Fords, 2 different BOF SUV Fords, etc., etc. why in the world do you need to duplicate ANY of those models with different grilles, tail-lamps and Mercury badges? To paraphrase Mually in the WSJ article: can you imagine Boeing coming out with a new airliner nameplate where Boeing takes a 737 then changes the nose-cone, winglits, rear flaps then hires more sales & markeing people to sell that "new" model airplane as a Douglass? Such an idea sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.
Mercury needs to either have models that are distinctly different from Ford models, or the brand needs to be killed. Unfortunately given the proliferation of models within the Ford brand, the first option (distinctive models) cannot be done with making a profit. The only rational option is killing the Mercury brand.
The entire reason for having multiple brands such as the Ford, Mercury, Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, Saturn, etc. is obsolete vestige of what the automotive business was like in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.
Back in those days there was essentually one Ford model, yes there were coupe, sedan, convertible models, but they were all built off the same mechanicals. Mercury served a purpose as a Merc. was a distinctively larger car built on a larger frame with a larger engine and features not available on a Ford.
That all changed in the 1960s when the proliferation of models within a brand started. When you have a small Ford, a mid-sized Ford, a full-sized Ford, a pony car Ford, 3 different CUV Fords, 2 different BOF SUV Fords, etc., etc. why in the world do you need to duplicate ANY of those models with different grilles, tail-lamps and Mercury badges? To paraphrase Mually in the WSJ article: can you imagine Boeing coming out with a new airliner nameplate where Boeing takes a 737 then changes the nose-cone, winglits, rear flaps then hires more sales & markeing people to sell that "new" model airplane as a Douglass? Such an idea sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.
Mercury needs to either have models that are distinctly different from Ford models, or the brand needs to be killed. Unfortunately given the proliferation of models within the Ford brand, the first option (distinctive models) cannot be done with making a profit. The only rational option is killing the Mercury brand.
Last edited by V10; Apr 26, 2008 at 09:10 AM.
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,851
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
The Mercury brand is on pace to sell LESS than 140,000 vehicles in 2008. YTD in 2008 the Mercury brand sales is only 7% of the Ford brand sales The fixed costs associated with maintaining the Mercury brand are too high for such a small sales volume.
The entire reason for having multiple brands such as the Ford, Mercury, Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, Saturn, etc. is obsolete vestige of what the automotive business was like in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.
Back in those days there was essentually one Ford model, yes there were coupe, sedan, convertible models, but they were all built off the same mechanicals. Mercury served a purpose as a Merc. was a distinctively larger car built on a larger frame with a larger engine and features not available on a Ford.
That all changed in the 1960s when the proliferation of models within a brand started. When you have a small Ford, a mid-sized Ford, a full-sized Ford, a pony car Ford, 3 different CUV Fords, 2 different BOF SUV Fords, etc., etc. why in the world do you need to duplicate ANY of those models with different grilles, tail-lamps and Mercury badges? To paraphrase Mually in the WSJ article: can you imagine Boeing coming out with a new airliner nameplate where Boeing takes a 737 then changes the nose-cone, winglits, rear flaps then hires more sales & markeing people to sell that "new" model airplane as a Douglass? Such an idea sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.
Mercury needs to either have models that are distinctly different from Ford models, or the brand needs to be killed. Unfortunately given the proliferation of models within the Ford brand, the first option (distinctive models) cannot be done with making a profit. The only rational option is killing the Mercury brand.
The entire reason for having multiple brands such as the Ford, Mercury, Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, Saturn, etc. is obsolete vestige of what the automotive business was like in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.
Back in those days there was essentually one Ford model, yes there were coupe, sedan, convertible models, but they were all built off the same mechanicals. Mercury served a purpose as a Merc. was a distinctively larger car built on a larger frame with a larger engine and features not available on a Ford.
That all changed in the 1960s when the proliferation of models within a brand started. When you have a small Ford, a mid-sized Ford, a full-sized Ford, a pony car Ford, 3 different CUV Fords, 2 different BOF SUV Fords, etc., etc. why in the world do you need to duplicate ANY of those models with different grilles, tail-lamps and Mercury badges? To paraphrase Mually in the WSJ article: can you imagine Boeing coming out with a new airliner nameplate where Boeing takes a 737 then changes the nose-cone, winglits, rear flaps then hires more sales & markeing people to sell that "new" model airplane as a Douglass? Such an idea sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.
Mercury needs to either have models that are distinctly different from Ford models, or the brand needs to be killed. Unfortunately given the proliferation of models within the Ford brand, the first option (distinctive models) cannot be done with making a profit. The only rational option is killing the Mercury brand.
Time to dissolve the marque.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RRRoamer
2015 - 2023 MUSTANG
33
Jan 19, 2017 05:27 PM
tj@steeda
2015 - 2023 MUSTANG
0
Jul 30, 2015 06:47 AM