[ZTWsquared]

OAC_Sparky,Sep 15 2006, 07:21 PM Wrote:It's not my intention to get into a "my dick is bigger than yours" argument, but I'm not entirely ignorant of Ford history myself. My Ford ties go back further than '88 when I started here; my father was IN management since 1970. I'm well aware of how Ford got to where it is.

Ditto about the nature of the argument – I mentioned I knew my Ford history in response to your “do the research” comment.

For me this is about an exchange of knowledge, nothing more. I am interested in your point of view and value it, but I do think you were being overly critical of Drivesthebeast’s comments, and I also think you're mistaken as to the difference between Ford NA and Ford Europe.

BTW - if your dad spent any time with Ken Harrigan, Jim O'Connor, Mark Hutchins, Bobbie Gaunt and/or Alain Batty - then we undoubtedly know each other and perhaps even worked together. If he wasn't on the fifth or sixth floor at COB however, then probably not. And FWIW – my perspective comes from spending time and working directly with all the aforementioned execs.

Yes … Nasser’s “cradle to grave strategy” did detract from Ford’s investments in product development. Even in Canada that strategy resulted in debacles like Young Drivers and Green_____ auto recycling.

But even so, Ford of Europe now has exciting, competitive vehicles in every important segment of their market. Compare that to NA; for the past decade Ford NA has knowingly ignored 50% of the market by seriously short-changing the development of cars.

And they decided to do that, not because of Kwik-Fit or Young Drivers, but because it was more expedient to cover legacy costs, and the cost of inefficiency and over capacity by focusing solely on high profit trucks and SUVs, and glamourous low volume niche vehicles.

Well that strategy didn’t work … they sold lots of trucks and SUVs but they still have to close plants, layoff tens of thousands of salaried, buy off as many hourly as they can … share value has tanked … Ford bonds are deep into junk territory … and they still don’t have a competitive car lineup in NA.

I’ve got a lot more info but it’s getting late and anyone reading this is probably cross-eyed by now …

Bottom line: I think that fundamentally Drivesthebeast is right – Ford Europe is selling a full-range of exciting, competitive vehicles appropriate to their market and that’s in stark contrast to what’s happening here. And it is IMO no coincidence that Ford Europe is profitable and Ford NA isn’t.

We will probably have to agree to disagree … but if you think this is all because Nasser decided to invest in non-core ventures, I think you are seriously mistaken.

And IMO you would also be mistaken if you think things wouldn't be substantially different for Ford NA had they followed the same strategy as Ford Europe.