[darkpuppet]

Quote:Monday October 23, 9:22 AM EDT

By Poornima Gupta

DETROIT (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co. (F) on Monday posted a quarterly loss of $5.8 billion -- its largest loss in 14 years -- as restructuring charges related to planned job cuts in North America and declining sales of its trucks hampered results.

Ford also said it will restate financial results from 2001 through the second quarter of 2006, citing an accounting change on interest rate derivatives used to hedge its long-term debt.

Ford shares fell 3 percent in early electronic trade.

Ford, which is closing 16 plants and cutting up to 45,000 jobs in North America, recorded a net loss of $3.08 per share in the third quarter. A year ago, it posted a loss of $284 million, or 15 cents per share.

A series of charges reduced third-quarter results by $4.6 billion after taxes, or $2.46 per share.

JP Morgan analyst Himanshu Patel said while the loss per share was smaller than he projected, the loss at Ford's Premier Automotive Group, which includes luxury brands such as Jaguar, was much worse. "We expect a modestly negative reaction," he wrote in a note for clients.

The third-quarter loss from continuing operations was 62 cents a share, matching analysts' average expectation as tracked by Reuters Estimates.

The loss was its largest since the first quarter of 1992, when the automaker lost $6.66 billion, company representatives said.

"These business results are clearly unacceptable," said Chief Executive Alan Mulally, who took over at Ford in early September. "Our focused priorities are to restructure aggressively to operate profitably at lower volumes, and to accelerate the development of new, more fuel efficient vehicles that customers really want."

Ford lost $1.8 billion in its worldwide automotive operations before taxes, including a loss of $2 billion in North America, the company's main market.

Argus Research analyst Kevin Tynan said Mulally now faces the task of making Ford a more flexible company.

"Simply shrinking again is not necessarily the answer. Ford needs to become a company flexible enough to be profitable at lower production volumes on each line on each platform," Tynan said. "The industry is now getting into niche markets, with so many products and technologies and vehicle offerings. They just can't depend on huge volumes anymore."

High gasoline prices have caused consumers to shift away from sport utility vehicles and large trucks, which had been areas of relative strength for Ford.

REVENUE DOWN

Revenue totaled $36.7 billion, down $4.1 billion from the same period a year ago. The company's overall North American light vehicle production was down 12 percent in the quarter.

Auto sales were $32.6 billion, down $2.1 billion from a year earlier.

Ford ended the quarter with total cash of $23.6 billion, unchanged from the end of the previous quarter.

"The more intense the restructuring gets, the more that's going to come under pressure," analyst Tynan said of Ford's cash position.

Ford, which is in the midst of its third restructuring in five years, is offering buyouts to all of its nearly 75,000 unionized workers to reduce its factory work force by nearly one-half.

The automaker also wants to reduce its white-collar U.S. payroll by an additional 10,000 job cuts by the end of March next year.

In the quarter, Ford took pretax charges of $861 million for job cuts related to plant closings in North America, $259 million for job cuts elsewhere, and $437 million to pay out pensions earlier than planned for employee buyouts.

Ford also took pretax charges of $2.2 billion to write down the value of North American assets and $1.6 billion for the impairment of Jaguar and Land Rover assets.

Ford Motor Credit's net profit fell to $262 million from $577 million a year earlier in part because of higher financing costs driven by the automaker's junk credit rating.

"The reduced profitability at Ford Motor Credit now shines a more intense light on the weakness of Ford's fundamental operation -- the automotive business," Tynan said.

The stock fell to $7.77 from a Friday close of $8.01 on the New York Stock Exchange.

(Additional reporting by Jui Chakravorty)

[NefCanuck]

Hrm, but I notice, unless my math is completely out to lunch here, that the writedowns that Ford has taken this quater amount to 3.5 billion of that loss.

Now a 2.3 billion dollar loss is nothing to be proud of, but its certainly better than saying you lost 5.8 billion in the quarter...

NefCanuck

[ANTHONYD]

[NOS2Go4Me]

So much for everyone's warranties then? :o

I guess I'd better go Subaru for the next ride!

[NefCanuck]

NOS2Go4Me,Oct 23 2006, 02:07 PM Wrote:So much for everyone's warranties then? :o
[right][snapback]213046[/snapback][/right]

:lol: That would just be my luck having paid $2K for a 7/150K warranty only to have Ford go bankrupt before it expires and saying "Warranty? What warranty?" :P

NefCanuck

[mo_focus]

WTF is Eleventy?

[meford4u]

you guys worry too much

[bluetoy]

If the labour costs were more reasonable (read that --wages in line with the real world) maybe Ford and all other NA automakers might see less negative numbers. When paying someone 450 to spend 1 shift in a plant doing nothing is no longer done then maybe the auto industry will recover.

Sorry Meford. Not a union fan.

[OAC_Sparky]

bluetoy,Oct 23 2006, 06:28 PM Wrote:If the labour costs were more reasonable (read that --wages in line with the real world) maybe Ford and all other NA automakers might see less negative numbers. When paying someone 450 to spend 1 shift in a plant doing nothing is no longer done then maybe the auto industry will recover.

Sorry Meford. Not a union fan.
[right][snapback]213100[/snapback][/right]

Maybe if you got a clue you'd know what you were talking about.

To make $450 on one shift that would be a Sunday. Based on our sched of very little actual production, why would you call in people on a weekend? Perhaps because non-union management can't get their s*** together?

Now that you have people in on a weekend, should they not be paid?

Because if you're free this weekend I could probably set up something capable of your abilities . Know how to operate a fertilizer spreader? Unsupervised I hope. I have better things to do.:rolleyes:

[bluetoy]

I actually have more of a "clue" than most people know. No I don't know how to operate a fertilizer spreader. Maybe you can show me. Oh never mind I couldn't afford to hire you.

Why should someone make 450 dollars because it's Sunday. Should the guys at walmart make 450 to open on sunday!! It's just another day of the week. That's just the example I used but you know as well as I do that is just the tip of the iceberg. The CAW/UAW has one of the highest paid memberships going. Pay=hourly wage plus benefits plus vaction plus retirement plans etc etc.. The average hourly rate for a CAW worker is nearly $7hr higher than other industrial wages, that's just the cash part of the wages. The Union really has no place in Today's world. Their time has passed. With all the laws and departmentslooking out for the workers it is not necessary.

Yes I was in a union. The Teamsters. I was happy to get out.

I work every weekend. I don't get any extra pay for it, like 90% of people who work weekends. No I am not jealous. I make plenty of money without the help of a greedy union.

[OAC_Sparky]

If you couldn't afford me at Ford, you wouldn't be able to outside of Ford either.

A licensed electrician (outside if Ford) makes the same an hour or more. I know, because I do work outside of Ford, too. My hourly rate is about $40 an hour. If you're an asshat (which is apparent) and it's a weekend I can charge double that. Easy. A six hour panel change will cost you $500 and up labour (straight time, not on a weekend). And that's cheap. A guy that does it as his business full time will charge about $200 more than that.

And not only am I a licensed electrician (Interprovincial). I'm a licensed general machinist as well. I specialize in PLC programming, robotics and weld equipment. Not something you can just go down to the street corner to find.

Meford paints. Although I haven't visited him on the job, I have worked in the paint plant so I am well familiar with what he does. I would venture to say that during a shift (at full production) he would ALONE paint the equivalent of 10-12 whole cars in a day. Go down and ask a body shop what the labour charge on painting 10 cars is. I'll wager one of my huge paycheques that they charge way more than what Meford makes. But then of course, a body shop painter can't paint 10 whole cars in a day, because he's not actually holding a spray gun for 6+ hours straight. He spends a good portion of his day doing peripheral tasks instead of actually painting.

Plenty of people get overtime on weekends (really, it's not just because it's the weekend, it's anything over of 40 hours, which is what the weekend IS for us).

Just because you're not one of them, instead of getting out the crying towel, ask yourself "Why not?"

Isn't your personal time, and time with your family worth something?

By the time you work more than 40 hours, on a week to week basis straight time, your actual hourly rate actually GOES DOWN, thanks to a tax system that isn't flat rate based. The more you make, the less you take home per hour.

So if you want me in on the weekend so that your plant can run on Monday, you're going to have to cough up the coin. Because paying me to come in on the weekend is cheaper than hiring someone else with all of their benefits and vacation and safety equipment and training and insurance and and and....you get the picture.

[meford4u]

Bottom line...............Ford pays out about 1200-1500 per vehicle on wages.
Yes, that's it.
So the expensiveness of a vehicle won't be cut with the cutting of wages.
I make what was negotiated for my contract.
If I was paid less i would not be at Ford with my education.

[NOS2Go4Me]

It's not the wages from what I've done some (admittedly smalltime) research on - it's the health benefits, the pension, the perks.

I've gotta agree with Bluetoy here (and we normally don't see eye to eye)... unions are done. They're passe. They either extort massive amounts of cash out of a company or they do s*** all for their workers (No Frills amongst others) which leads me to question why they still exist in this day and age.

Labour laws protect your job a lot better now than they used to. And as I'm sure Bryan is quite skilled at being an automotive painter, I'm sure he could be quite successful running his own shop and doing "signature" cars or cars for friends and known contacts while leaving the prep, detailing and "other" cars to junior painters. I'd wager that's the automotive painter equivalent to being a consultant... which is where the serious money is.

Or, negotiate a salary and benefits and join a private, well-known automotive finishing business as a senior painter and work his own hours and terms.

If you're that good and you're that experienced, working the night shift isn't where you belong.

[OAC_Sparky]

NOS2Go4Me,Oct 24 2006, 08:30 AM Wrote:If you're that good and you're that experienced, working the night shift isn't where you belong.
[right][snapback]213173[/snapback][/right]

Working the nighshift is what allows Bryan to golf whenever he wants, and avoid traffic to work.

Which is the same reason I do.

Let's see. Take my kids to school, meet my wife for coffee at her work break. Go out and watch my kids at their track and field day (at 11AM, try doing that with a day job), then head over to Niagara Falls, NY to pick up a package. Estimate a job on the way back, and then go to bed .


Try getting all that in on dayshift.

[oldeguy]

Ford's losing money because nobody is buying their vehicles for the price Ford wants, most of their vehicles are rather boring, or not marketed to the right people, their dealerships, from what you guys are telling me, don't service their customers properly, their vehicles have the perception of being poorly built with too many recalls and costly repairs. I've had four Fords in the last 12 years.
A 93 Aerostar, no real problems, just a lousy design, unless you are a mechanic
A 95 Taurus, great car until the Transmission died at 45,000 kms.
A 95 Escort, 450,000 kms, rebuilt transmission at 150,000 Kms, engine at 300,000, plus an alternator or five.
2000 Focus, so far, replaced Throttle Body (with a Stock one, dumb move.) and an Alternator. 114,000 kms.
Ford needs to send some of it's "World Cars" here, without dumbing them down, offer more standard equipment, and make the cars more reliable, oh and make the dealerships more "user friendly"

Labour costs are already being addressed by Ford, but it isn't the guys and gals on the line who are causing the problems.

[darkpuppet]

You can group me with the people that dislike unions.. but to be honest, I'm not sure the unions are Ford's biggest problem. My biggest grief with unions is that you get skilled workers (like OAC and Meford), and unions actually hold them back (to an extent), and the mediocre workers profit.

And union interests don't tend to align with the business interests. .. which was good for a time, but nowadays, unions can't really offer significantly more protection for it's workers than are available without a union.

I think to a point, that further hurts the good employees, because they aren't seen as contributing individuals in all aspects of work to the company they work for. They are pooled along with the union (which to business is a dirty word).

That being said, Ford's got bigger issues. A sever lack of foresight being one of them. The execs seem to have put on their horse blinders and missed all of the changes taking place around them. Their only choice now IS to scale back until factories are back to 100% capacity rather than the paltry 70-80% some of them have been pulling...

Ford's losing money because they're not selling vehicles... they need to become profitable again, and for the time being, I think they're going to continue cutting until the losses are stemmed. Only then can they concentrate on rebuilding..

[NOS2Go4Me]

OAC_Sparky,Oct 24 2006, 08:45 AM Wrote:

NOS2Go4Me,Oct 24 2006, 08:30 AM Wrote:If you're that good and you're that experienced, working the night shift isn't where you belong.
[right][snapback]213173[/snapback][/right]

Working the nighshift is what allows Bryan to golf whenever he wants, and avoid traffic to work.

Which is the same reason I do.

Let's see. Take my kids to school, meet my wife for coffee at her work break. Go out and watch my kids at their track and field day (at 11AM, try doing that with a day job), then head over to Niagara Falls, NY to pick up a package. Estimate a job on the way back, and then go to bed .


Try getting all that in on dayshift.
[right][snapback]213174[/snapback][/right]

I guess it depends on your boss and your work environment. I'd post up the flexibility I have at the office but you'd likely call me a liar. You certainly do have the advantage for accessing businesses directly during the day... but otherwise, I'd rather work the day and spend time with family at night.

One good one, though - Me - "I'm going to go down to City Hall to have a coffee with my cousin and talk email storage and backups"

Boss - "OK, bring me back a danish will you?" :lol:

It's all about the environment you work in, and more importantly the people you work directly under.

[NOS2Go4Me]

darkpuppet,Oct 24 2006, 09:35 AM Wrote:You can group me with the people that dislike unions.. but to be honest, I'm not sure the unions are Ford's biggest problem.  My biggest grief with unions is that you get skilled workers (like OAC and Meford), and unions actually hold them back (to an extent), and the mediocre workers profit.[right][snapback]213176[/snapback][/right]

I've always said that, and I always will. Good point, DP.

[OAC_Sparky]

I'm not going to pretend that I agree with every nuance and agenda that comes with being in the union.

And even I'll concede that unions were more important than thay are now.

However, working for a larger company presents different challenges. Given the choice between having a union or no union at Ford, I'd have to say we're better off.

As what has been already pointed out, the union has no control over poor designs, poor styling, bad business decisions and bad customer service. Which is really why Ford is in the shape it's in.

[ZTWsquared]

OAC_Sparky,Oct 24 2006, 10:05 AM Wrote:the union has no control over poor designs, poor styling, bad business decisions and bad customer service. [right][snapback]213183[/snapback][/right]

Absolutely true ... but the line begins to blur when you consider the nature of the bad business decisions you reference ... because you have to include among the worst of them the collective agreements over the years that gave your union brothers and sisters to the south some of the most lucrative retirement and health benefits in the U.S.

The so-called "legacy costs" of retired union workers is the real difference right now between the NA manufacturers and the Japanese/Koreans -- something to the tune of $1500 per new vehicle built -- and that number will only get higher for Ford as they reduce their volume.

I'm not saying that union workers shouldn't have received these benefits or were acting in bad faith in demanding them ... but you can't ignore the reality of what Ford could do in terms of quality and/or price (or importing hot stuff from Europe) if they didn't start each and every day 1500 bucks in the hole for every unit made.

So you can't simply say it's all Ford's fault, because union wages, health and retirement benefits are one of the most significant factors in Ford's inability to compete -- and that's not a knock on unions it's a statement of fact that most experts agree on.

Having said that ... the experts were also predicting this exact situation decades ago and the NA manufacturers chose to deal with it by focusing on high-profit vehicles that the Japanese and Koreans did not compete against -- and we all see now how that strategy worked out -- and so from that perspective (hindsight being 20/20) Ford management is culpable.