Well, all this negative media exposure of the big 3's flight to DC caused me to throw this out there.
I don't think that ford OWNS a jet anymore..reason is because I flew to utah on ford's 737 in the spring--it was still painted 'ford blue', and the southwest pilot came on the horn before we left the gate and explained that they just bought it, and will be painting it 'soon'.
I doubt that they bought a new one, more likely they are leasing....which would put them in the same boat (no pun) as many other large companies, of which most ,if not all, have a smaller economic footprint...notice the lack of critisism for the wall st. thieves from our wonderfull media, they are practically attacking our industrial base. I bet they all drive japanese products, and will be the hondas first customers when their jet goes on sale.
(you did know honda makes jet aircraft, for sale in the US any day? Yea, they are the real 'green' organization, their actions prove it.)
Don't know about GM or chrysler, but we are a 3rd. world country without our automakers. Call/write your federal reps. to tell them so, if you feel the same way!

 

This hits hard home to me, being a long time participant in the industrial sector (Plastics). Ford can make as good a product as any of the Asian counterparts. I know I work in the industry. The specs are no different, infact Ford specs are ridiculously tight (not neccacarily a good thing!). I think where we fall down is the application of our technology & getting the right products out there in the right timescale.
You wont see me driving a Toyota!! (unless thats all there is)
Marty is right...... without a good manufacturing sector we are on a slippery slope. Do you think the Chinese are going to supply cheap goods forever! (remember how Japan recorded this story 50 or so years ago!)

ATB Aeroman.

 

Let it be known, that all of the big three have gotten themselves into this situation. They let the unions run the show 20 years ago with over the top benefits. The Japanese workers get no benefit guarantees, but their quality of life is better than ours. If our politicians were doing what they are supposed to be doing, which is in part, regulating trade with out nations, we might not be in such a mess, but truth is, all the big three are responsible for their own problems.

I would agree, Ford can make as good a product as any of the Asians, but understand this, the ability to make a good product is a result of staying on top of it. The Taurus was a better than average car when it came out, but by 2000, it was a below average car and people were buying other cars because they represented better values. Ford has a long standing tradition of developing a superior product, then letting it atrophy into oblivion. GM keeps trying to tell its customers what kind of cars they should buy (not the other way around), and Chrysler is well, Chrysler.

I find the fact that we have only three automakers as big of a problem as the fact that they are struggling and the imports are moving in. Wasn't it the big three who pushed all the other American cars out of the market? Doesn't what goes around come around? If we had say, six or seven domestic automakers, do you think the imports would be doing so well? Do you think the American marketplace would have stagnated so much? And wouldn't that represent more lobbyists in the American manufacturers defense, which would encourage our lawmakers to enforce proper import tarrifs?

The problem is big business strong arming the little guy. And now the bigger they are the harder they fall. Our automakers do not need to be bailed out. What we need it to impose more taxes on imported automobiles. And if a foreign automaker build their cars on American soil, I like the fact that they are employing Americans. And I like that they are doing it in the south. Why can't our domestic automakers do the same?

We need more taxation on imported goods. And we need to restraint he unions, because they always take it too far. Unions do not understand things from the manufactures perspective, and we have seen it in Europe. They will demand benefits and pay till they break their economies. As I said, it is harder for unions to have such power when are markets give us more choice. If we had more independent or semi-independent automakers, the unions would not have been able to get away with the types of demands they got twenty years ago, the same demands that are killing the big three now. Sure no one saw healthcare costs rising so much, but honestly.

Our country is suffering from a disease. This country is ceasing to be free. To be free means we are all responsible for our own destinies. Instead, we have all these people in this country which believe that we have the right to demand things that are not ours to have. We are demanding to be taken care of. Last time I checked, I was perfectly capable of taking care of myself. I I don't save enough money to retire on, that is MY problem. Why should I let the government do it for me.

I think its time for change in this country and this change starts with us. We need to stop buying cheap chinese good, and boycott he companies that sell them, including (especially) Wallyworld. We need to write our legislators at tell them not to bail out the big three, but rather to help restore economic balance buy increasing taxation on the import autos that are not built on American soil, and increasing taxation on parts that are not built in America. And as an alternative to a bailout, come up with a plan to break the big three into smaller self sustaining companies that are free from their former union problems. I know its a messy solution, but its the only way to break the cycle. And the government bailing out companies is not acceptable to me unless we convert to communism or fascism.

 

Great points, Bear, It is important to note that there is a difference between assembly of an auto, VS truly manufacturing it..case in point is hyandi (and others) who make the parts in their 'homeland', ship them here, and US guys/gals bolt the items together...a lot of the value is in the parts, maybe most of it..and then there is design/engineering to consider..the asians have design studios here, what do they employ, a handful?
The latest issue of car+driver has a chinese car/motorcycle test, it is sold from Ohio.
Check it out, I can think of a good phrase for it: "extreme junk" or "death trap".
I fear there will be people who buy it, furthering the chicoms' industrial base.
Of course, it does not meet any automobile standards here, because it is sold as a "motorcycle". More deception from the land of intellectual piracy.

 

seems to me protectionism is not a way out. really automotive industry have to change marketing police radically. really redically. But this is the other story....

 

I certainly dont believe that the big three cannot be improved upon. They certainly can improve their business strategy, this is where they fall down; you cannot pay unrealistic wages to the extent that they do & get away with higher benefits, pensions, etc, & agree many problems imposed by the unions. We do need unions though........ , just that they need restrictions!

We have the design , the technology, the manufacturing efficiency could def be improved (as far as manufacturing time/ product, we probably do have too high a reject ratio, which is generally a processing issue). We need effective business sense. That part of the equation must be wrong. You cant spend what you don't have the means to pay for. It amazes me that companies like Ford , GM etc will screw their suppliers into the ground, just to add on thousands of dollars at the most expensive part of the build .... the production line !

Import duties would be a help, some good dose of patriotism would be a good thing & manufacturing business sense would be a GREAT thing. If these things are not overcome, I fear very soon N.A. as we know it, will become a relic of the past.

ATB, Aeroman.

 

seems to me Asian markets gonna fall this spring. This is a chance for the USA and Europe

 

But my question is, if you got rid off all the imports, would you really want an America with just three basic brands of automobile? I would prefer a six or seven way split. And in terms of shipping and geography, more makes sense. Build some automakers in the south, some out west, some in the east. Shipping is a big deal, but with localized markets, it can be beneficial to that companies local customers. The same company might be at a disadvantage. And as far as R&D is concerned, the companies can have their own, or they could work together. Some of these companies will have higher quality, others will be known for affordable economy cars, others would be known for luxury. Still others would be known for fuel economy or safety. Many of these titles are currently held by foreign automakers because our domestic automakers would not and cannot step up to the mark. Sure Fords now rival Hondas for reliability, but when you think Ford is that the metal image you conjure? Ford is so many other things too, and depending on your past experiences you may or may not associate for with that. Honda only makes reliable fuel efficient vehicles. This gives them the edge in that market. But if you had more automakers, or at least more specialized branding, perhaps we could have our own American fuel efficient and reliable brand. More diversity means more new ideas, more new ideas means more innovation, and that leads to better products and a better marketplace. If you ask me, Ford should run their Mercury and Lincoln divisions as separate companies. Ideally, they should have their own factories, ideally in different geographical locations. For should also create a separate company for fuel efficient economy cars. Each company should be responsible for their own marketing and profits. Each company should be responsible for their own expenses, and each company should be responsible for their own workforce. GM should also revive Geo as their fuel efficient earth friendly brand, and as Geo has done in the past, they can be rebranded cars from other companies (which was another way of saying that GM had no earth friendly vehicles of their own to offer)


GM could be broken down even more. In fact, because GM has so many brands, all they really have to do is restructure. And GM could become such that all they do is sell completed engines and transmissions to the various other companies.

Chrysler is already restructuring. Dodge needs to be just trucks. Chrysler needs to become a luxury label. Plymouth should be revived as an economy brand. Jeep can stay the same, but needs to be sure that they remain as an off-road utility vehicle, and not try to be something else. Chrysler should also invest in Tesla Motors in California to give rise to the American electric vehicles.

Such a change would be a difficult transition, most most of the most successful companies because successful not by trying to be a little bit of everything, but rather by building specific recognizable brands. If I say facial tissue, why is Kleenex always the name that pops into your head, many people just call facial tissue Kleenex regardless of what brand they actually use. Kleenex is the best selling and most profitable brand of facial tissue. SC Johnson makes a great many different products, but their products are not known as Johnson brand, but rather each product is known by its own brand. This same model does work for automakers. And when a brand tries to be something else, they suffer. Volvo used to be, and to many still is, a safe car. But Ford has tried to change Volvo into a luxury sport car, with devastating results. Subaru is known for AWD, and is the best selling AWD brand, even though many other companies offer AWD vehicles.

I don't mean to ramble on, but I have given this subject a great deal of thought, and when you look at who is succeeding and who is not, and understand why, everything becomes clear. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have tried to be everything to everyone, and have not been good at any particular segment. GM may be the largest automaker in the world, but they are not the #1 selling brand of luxury car, trucks, economy cars, safe cars, AWD cars, SUVs, crossovers, minivans, full sized vans, sedans (large or small), etc. Ford is the #1 seller of pickup trucks, and they should place their focus on retaining that market, or even increasing their share. The Mustang is also the best seller in its market, and they should do what they can to improve the recognition, largely by making the fact that it is a Ford less prominent, and focus more on the fact that it is a Mustang. Ford should be known as trucks. Their cars should gradually be known as their own brands.

 

may be there is some reason to pay attention to commercial trucking as for rising market even in crisis conditions.

Ford may build cheap, really cheap semi for local trucking but with good cabine, becouse ford makes really good interiour.

They started Ford Cargo project in EU for local trucking. it is a typical cabover truck with Ecotorq engine (seems to me made on base of Cummins engines). It is on our market now, but Ford semis are rare. Comparing with Mercedes, Volvo, MAN, Freightliner, Mack, Renault this is really simple truck. No EBS (ABS only), no VECU.... very simple truck, but really cheap. It is made in Turkey, with ruther weak for semi (7.3L 300HP) engine, but anyway, good sucsess for new product. Now it is time when shipper wants to save money and Ford can make semi for the USA. It should not be cabover (long nose is cheaper), truck should be as simple as possible but reliable and with bigger (12-16L) engine. Ford makes really good frames and chassis. This crisis is a real chanse to make Volvo truck, MAN, Paccar and Dimler-Crysler to let new brand get some pice of pie.