What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
09-17-2006, 12:16 AM
#21
5th Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: DBN, MI
Posts: 2,578
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
Bush has ducked them for years and it has not only hurt the big 3 but American cars as well and maybe even americans economy.
Great points but most of these get overlooked.
Great points but most of these get overlooked.
ORIGINAL: Barbarino
Before the election, Bush will finally meet with the big 3, since the Dems will be going after that issue since Bush ignored them for years. Once the polticians get on board, and Ford cuts out of the crap, I think you'll have a better company, smaller? Yes, but better. The best work any American company does is when you are behind, GM did it, Apple did it, Harley did it, and Ford will do it.
Jag and Mercury must go! (god damm jag sucks)
There are issues GM and Ford can't fix without the Gov or even if they sell more cars, such as healthcare, legacy costs etc..
Lets give them some credit though, the Stang is a masterpiece at 25k, where are the foreign cars costing 25k that are as good as the Stang??
Before the election, Bush will finally meet with the big 3, since the Dems will be going after that issue since Bush ignored them for years. Once the polticians get on board, and Ford cuts out of the crap, I think you'll have a better company, smaller? Yes, but better. The best work any American company does is when you are behind, GM did it, Apple did it, Harley did it, and Ford will do it.
Jag and Mercury must go! (god damm jag sucks)
There are issues GM and Ford can't fix without the Gov or even if they sell more cars, such as healthcare, legacy costs etc..
Lets give them some credit though, the Stang is a masterpiece at 25k, where are the foreign cars costing 25k that are as good as the Stang??
09-17-2006, 12:51 AM
#22
I ♥ Acer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Fort Lauderdale Fl
Posts: 146
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
I forgot to add, that lincoln is an embarrasment to the USA! Front wheel drive crap, even pontiac and Buick are going back to RWD.. Then the name change crap and their entry level car is a Fusion with better seats... I have zero confidence in their lincoln division, they should give that up for a few years or atleast rebage some volvos...
09-17-2006, 01:15 AM
#23
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 311
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
ORIGINAL: petepete
less workers means they can cut the useless cars they make and focus on the cars they need to focus on
less workers means they can cut the useless cars they make and focus on the cars they need to focus on
How could I resist that one???
[8D]
09-17-2006, 01:28 AM
#24
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Laredo, TEXAS
Posts: 6,054
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
Why is Bush guilty of anything? Years of union control... $50/hr to screw lug nuts onto a car??? Fully paid medical care??? It's not Bush's fault... it's mismanagement on the part of Ford, and a fine example of how the unions have destroyed a perfectly good industry... [&:]
09-17-2006, 04:24 AM
#25
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 700
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
I agree with the previous poster that Jaguar needs to go. I'd also sell Land Rover. Astin Martin is already up for sale, right?
As much as I like Mercury (I used to own one...great car!), I agree, they probably just confuse consumers. I mean, isn't Mercury supposed to be a nicer version of a Ford? Heck, I used to own one and for the entire six years I don't think I could have told you what the difference between my vehicle and the standard Ford model.
They need to start differentiating Mercury more, or just get rid of it. Why not do something else with the Mustang and rebadge it as a Cougar. If they do that, though, it needs to look radcially different externally, you can't just add a few chrome details to the body!
Lincoln should stay. Zephyr (MKZ) is selling fine. Ford needs a luxury brand and probably can't afford to invest the time and money it takes to build brand recognition.
As much as I like Mercury (I used to own one...great car!), I agree, they probably just confuse consumers. I mean, isn't Mercury supposed to be a nicer version of a Ford? Heck, I used to own one and for the entire six years I don't think I could have told you what the difference between my vehicle and the standard Ford model.
They need to start differentiating Mercury more, or just get rid of it. Why not do something else with the Mustang and rebadge it as a Cougar. If they do that, though, it needs to look radcially different externally, you can't just add a few chrome details to the body!
Lincoln should stay. Zephyr (MKZ) is selling fine. Ford needs a luxury brand and probably can't afford to invest the time and money it takes to build brand recognition.
09-17-2006, 10:32 AM
#26
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 462
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
Yeah unions are so bad, instead of putting millions of more dollars in Mr fords pockets, it is helping out the smaller guy that only makes 50 to 75K a year, how dare they!
ORIGINAL: randy78045
Why is Bush guilty of anything? Years of union control... $50/hr to screw lug nuts onto a car??? Fully paid medical care??? It's not Bush's fault... it's mismanagement on the part of Ford, and a fine example of how the unions have destroyed a perfectly good industry... [&:]
Why is Bush guilty of anything? Years of union control... $50/hr to screw lug nuts onto a car??? Fully paid medical care??? It's not Bush's fault... it's mismanagement on the part of Ford, and a fine example of how the unions have destroyed a perfectly good industry... [&:]
09-17-2006, 11:35 AM
#27
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 131
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
ORIGINAL: siggy14
Yeah unions are so bad, instead of putting millions of more dollars in Mr fords pockets, it is helping out the smaller guy that only makes 50 to 75K a year, how dare they!
Yeah unions are so bad, instead of putting millions of more dollars in Mr fords pockets, it is helping out the smaller guy that only makes 50 to 75K a year, how dare they!
09-17-2006, 11:55 AM
#28
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 462
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
It will depends on the company, Honda of america, even though it says america is still based off Japanese business which in general treat there employee's better. In general however a unionized shop will get better benafits and pay scales for employee's. Trust me at my job if i didnt have a union my health care would be outragious, my salary would have been cut and i would not enjoy alot of the benafits i get. But dont think I am getting alot, certainly not even close to $50 an hour.
As it is, even with a union my company only wanted to give us a 2% pay raise and increase our healthcare, if you looked at the numbers, we were actually getting a decrease in pay because the price the healthcare went up was far more then the 2% pay raise they wanted to give us. We fought and got alot better of a deal, took 4 years, but we got it.
In general big business in america will try to screw the little guy, they know there is enough workers out there that if someone does not like it they fire them and get someone else. This is evident just by seeing the greed in the gas companies, do you think the employee's saw any of those billions of dollars in profits?
As it is, even with a union my company only wanted to give us a 2% pay raise and increase our healthcare, if you looked at the numbers, we were actually getting a decrease in pay because the price the healthcare went up was far more then the 2% pay raise they wanted to give us. We fought and got alot better of a deal, took 4 years, but we got it.
In general big business in america will try to screw the little guy, they know there is enough workers out there that if someone does not like it they fire them and get someone else. This is evident just by seeing the greed in the gas companies, do you think the employee's saw any of those billions of dollars in profits?
ORIGINAL: CurtX
When I worked at Honda of America, it was not unionized (I think it still isn't although uaw keeps trying, employees don't want it). They had no need for the union. And yet they manage to have better pay and benefits than the uaw factories. Why, because Honda's sell better and are more reliable, they are able to make cars that cost a little more that people are willing to buy. If you pay workers well to begin with, then they will be happier with their jobs and make better cars. UAW factories always seem to struggle with the words quality and reliability.
ORIGINAL: siggy14
Yeah unions are so bad, instead of putting millions of more dollars in Mr fords pockets, it is helping out the smaller guy that only makes 50 to 75K a year, how dare they!
Yeah unions are so bad, instead of putting millions of more dollars in Mr fords pockets, it is helping out the smaller guy that only makes 50 to 75K a year, how dare they!
09-17-2006, 12:26 PM
#29
1st Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 131
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
I think my point, even though Honda of America is still run by Japanese, that American companies should try to figure out how the Japanese manage to pay their workers so well and make good products with global appeal, rather than keep ragging on their ancestors for bombing pearl harbor.
I have worked for a union once, although not the UAW. My pay and benefits were still crap after paying union dues. That union only helped the old farts who were on an "old contract". While people hired within the past 20 years got screwed under the "new contract". But we still had to pay the same dues. In my 7 years of employment there, I think I saw the local union leader show his face only once.
I have worked for a union once, although not the UAW. My pay and benefits were still crap after paying union dues. That union only helped the old farts who were on an "old contract". While people hired within the past 20 years got screwed under the "new contract". But we still had to pay the same dues. In my 7 years of employment there, I think I saw the local union leader show his face only once.
09-17-2006, 01:06 PM
#30
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 700
RE: What Ford layoffs mean to existing owners
Remember that Honda and Japan are Japanese companies, regardless of what they manufacture in Kentucky or Ohio. The management is in Japan, a lot of the cars are designed in Japan, they still build vehicles in Japan, and a lot of the parts still come from Japan. The majority of their workers are, of course, in Japan. All of those Japanese workers have government health care plans with prices set by the government, like all Japanese citizens. Healthcare costs are dirt cheap in Japan.
Total number of Toyota employees...265,753.
Total number of Toyota employees in USA (2003)...29,135, that's it.
http://www.hoovers.com/toyota/--ID__...actsheet.xhtml
http://www.autointell-news.com/News-...S-28-05-p5.htm
US auto companies pay more for healthcare than they do for steel to actually build the vehicle! For GM it's $1,500 per vehicle or 5 billion dollars. They could tool up at least a few new vehicles for 5 billion dollars! Ford has the same problem.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north370.html
To generalize all unions based on the UAW is probably not accurate. After looking at what's going on at Walmart (now a HUGE employer), I'd say they could use a union for a little protection. Not all unions are bad and not all companies are out to satisfy their workers.
Case in point. Ford's successful triplets are assembled in Mexico (probably why the price is so good on these!). I understand some major parts (not sure which or how many, someone will have to help me here) are still made in the US. Don't get an ideas, though, the vast majority of Ford employees are American.
The other force I see here is increased competition. GM market share used to be something like 50%, I think. Anyway, there are many more automakers now. How many can you count? I could think of at least 13 major auto companies doing business in the USA (not individual brands, there are A LOT more than 13 of those).
The market is heading towards fragmentation by a number of different companies. You could have the best product in the world and you're just not going to have the HUGE market share that existed in the past.
I see Toyota is on the rise, right now. Not news, but they should watch out for the Koreans, I see more Kia's and Hyundai's every year. These cars used to be a complete joke, now, people are taking them seriously. As soon as one company is one top, then the other dozen are going to bump them off.
GM and Ford have been outselling the Japanese for decades. In July Toyota posted their first month with a sales volume higher than Ford.
In Ford's defense they decided to concentrate on their niche. They decided that what they did really well was the Explorer and the F-150. Those vehicles have very high sales and made Ford profitable. What they didn't count on was a sharp rise in gas prices. Demand for mid sized SUV's crashed and truck sales slowed, that's what caused the problem.
Ford was making a profit and was building vehicles the market wanted. So much so that if you add the number of Camry's sold in 2005 with the number of Accords sold last year, it doesn't equal the number of F series trucks sold last year.
"Build vehicles consumers want to buy" is a bit of a trite analysis, it gets repeated a lot. If you're the number two seller in America, then you're selling a lot of vehicles. The bigger problem is NOT sales (those will naturally decline as competition becomes fierce), it's profitability. It's all about how much money you make.
Hey, has anyone noticed how poorly some other automakers are doing? Even worse than Ford and GM! Isuzu is dead probably won't be selling cars in the US much longer, Mitsubishi is doing very poorly (new Eclipse is being absolutely leveled by the Mustang), Suzukis have been doing a little better, but still have a miserably low market share and poor sales volume. Nissans sales were down a lot last time I checked...and talk about recalls, Nissan Sentras had to be pulled this year because they were catching on fire. Aren't BMW sales down, too?
Total number of Toyota employees...265,753.
Total number of Toyota employees in USA (2003)...29,135, that's it.
http://www.hoovers.com/toyota/--ID__...actsheet.xhtml
http://www.autointell-news.com/News-...S-28-05-p5.htm
US auto companies pay more for healthcare than they do for steel to actually build the vehicle! For GM it's $1,500 per vehicle or 5 billion dollars. They could tool up at least a few new vehicles for 5 billion dollars! Ford has the same problem.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north370.html
To generalize all unions based on the UAW is probably not accurate. After looking at what's going on at Walmart (now a HUGE employer), I'd say they could use a union for a little protection. Not all unions are bad and not all companies are out to satisfy their workers.
Case in point. Ford's successful triplets are assembled in Mexico (probably why the price is so good on these!). I understand some major parts (not sure which or how many, someone will have to help me here) are still made in the US. Don't get an ideas, though, the vast majority of Ford employees are American.
The other force I see here is increased competition. GM market share used to be something like 50%, I think. Anyway, there are many more automakers now. How many can you count? I could think of at least 13 major auto companies doing business in the USA (not individual brands, there are A LOT more than 13 of those).
The market is heading towards fragmentation by a number of different companies. You could have the best product in the world and you're just not going to have the HUGE market share that existed in the past.
I see Toyota is on the rise, right now. Not news, but they should watch out for the Koreans, I see more Kia's and Hyundai's every year. These cars used to be a complete joke, now, people are taking them seriously. As soon as one company is one top, then the other dozen are going to bump them off.
GM and Ford have been outselling the Japanese for decades. In July Toyota posted their first month with a sales volume higher than Ford.
In Ford's defense they decided to concentrate on their niche. They decided that what they did really well was the Explorer and the F-150. Those vehicles have very high sales and made Ford profitable. What they didn't count on was a sharp rise in gas prices. Demand for mid sized SUV's crashed and truck sales slowed, that's what caused the problem.
Ford was making a profit and was building vehicles the market wanted. So much so that if you add the number of Camry's sold in 2005 with the number of Accords sold last year, it doesn't equal the number of F series trucks sold last year.
"Build vehicles consumers want to buy" is a bit of a trite analysis, it gets repeated a lot. If you're the number two seller in America, then you're selling a lot of vehicles. The bigger problem is NOT sales (those will naturally decline as competition becomes fierce), it's profitability. It's all about how much money you make.
Hey, has anyone noticed how poorly some other automakers are doing? Even worse than Ford and GM! Isuzu is dead probably won't be selling cars in the US much longer, Mitsubishi is doing very poorly (new Eclipse is being absolutely leveled by the Mustang), Suzukis have been doing a little better, but still have a miserably low market share and poor sales volume. Nissans sales were down a lot last time I checked...and talk about recalls, Nissan Sentras had to be pulled this year because they were catching on fire. Aren't BMW sales down, too?