Here I am

bye,bye FORD

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Address

Turbo kit for Honda Accord

Check this article out! Don't miss where it says that "Ford would probably be bankrupt if not for its name" It also says they are counting on the new f150 to do well!? I think it is ugly. Looks like Ford is headed for the drain. (I am not happy about this. This is one of the last true american companies out there. Too bad they are producing junk for diesels (6. 0) why dont they team with cat) Navistar is trash. IMO



(This article is from Foxnews)



DETROIT — Wall Street's doubts about Ford Motor Co. (F)'s long march to profits mounted Friday, as analysts wondered how the world's second-largest automaker could meet its financial goals after a 17 percent cut in second-quarter production.











Ford's major targets for this year -- corporate earnings of 70 cents a share and breakeven profits in its automotive operations -- were already under suspicion before the production estimates Ford announced Thursday. Now, many analysts are predicting the company will fall far short of its earnings goals and post losses in its automotive unit.



That scenario would trigger a downgrade in Ford's credit ratings to one step above junk.



"While we were skeptical that the company could reach its aforementioned goal ... before, this latest downward revision to production makes it highly unlikely, in our opinion," said Bear Stearns analyst Domenic Martilotti in a research note.



Ford officials Thursday stuck by their forecast of 70 cents a share, or roughly $1. 2 billion in earnings, after losing $6. 4 billion over the past two years.



Ford also retained its outlook for U. S. industry sales of a little more than 16 million vehicles. This signaled to some analysts that Ford is counting on a post-Iraq sales rebound to meet its targets, along with the launch of the redesigned F-150 pickup later this year and perhaps a stronger-than-expected boost from its highly profitable Ford Credit arm.



But Chairman and Chief Executive Bill Ford Jr. 's goal of making Ford's centennial year the turning point in his turnaround plan already faced a growing challenge before Thursday's announcement.



Auto sales have been weak this year despite near-record incentives; unemployment has been rising; and data released Friday showed U. S. consumer sentiment fell in early March to its lowest level in a decade.



"The near-term outlook for profitability is becoming increasingly negative," said Deutsche Bank analyst Rod Lache in a research note. "Particularly for companies that have sacrificed variable profit in an attempt to sustain demand. "



Ford's turnaround plan has been slow to gain momentum; the automaker was the only one of Detroit's Big Three not to make money selling cars and trucks last year. While Ford has been pushing cost cuts to improve its profits, it also plans massive capital spending of $8 billion this year to tool factories for new vehicles.



Ford had been expected to set its second-quarter production estimate when it reported February sales results on March 3. Its decision to delay the announcement fed investors' worries, and the stock plunged this week to an 11-year low. Some 78 million Ford shares were sold "short" last month by investors who bet the stock will contine to fall.



And yields on Ford's $125 billion in bonds soared after a credit analyst suggested the automaker would be bankrupt were it not for the Ford name.



Ford shares were down more than 4 percent Friday in New York Stock Exchange trading, while its bond prices were flat.



Automakers book revenue from vehicles when they are built instead of when they are sold, making production estimates a harbinger of revenues and earnings. Ford hasn't released a second-quarter earnings estimate, but had predicted 20 cents a share for the first quarter.



Several analysts lowered their second-quarter EPS estimates Friday to between 8 cents and 15 cents, and the average third-quarter forecast is a loss of 4 cents a share, according to Thomson First Call. Even if those forecasts are slighly low, Ford would have to have its best quarter in two years to hit 70 cents a share.



All this makes the launch of the F-150 pickup even more crucial; Bill Ford Jr. said earlier this year it was "hard to overstate" the importance of the F-150.



"It is clear, in our opinion, that absent a collapse in auto demand, the success of Ford Motor Co. in 2003 is predicated on its ability (or lack thereof) to launch the high volume F-150 full-size pickup without any major stumbles," Martilotti said.



The larger and more upscale F-150 that will begin rolling off a Virginia assembly line in June will cost $1,500 more to build than the current model. But after several vehicle launches were botched by last-minute changes, Ford has said getting the F-150 out on time will take priority over altering the vehicle to save money.



Ford has been more successful than other Detroit automakers at holding its prices steady, but even with the reduction in incentives typical for a new model analysts question how profitable the new F-150 will be, especially with growing competition from General Motors Corp. , DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler:cool: arm and foreign automakers.
 
This is their fault as they are reaping the whirlwind from the SUV rollover problem. How in the world Ford could ever recommend such low tire pressures on a heavy vehicle is beyond me. The liability payouts for that had to be just devastating. That was the primary impetus behind the personnel layoffs last year, as I understand this situation. Now the lack of good people is leading to some embarrassing situations with the new PS engine. It's one vicious cycle. While there are probably other causal factors to consider, I see the SUV tire fiasco as the catalyst.
 
Although I agree with John that the Exploder fiasco may be the straw that has broken the camel's back, Ford's problems (as far as I'm concerned) predate the Explorer/Firestone by more than a decade.



The first car I ever owned was a 1956 Ford Fairlane 500. After that, I owned a 1965 Mustang, a 1970 Mercury Cyclone GT, a 1962 Ranchero (289/4-speed swapped in), a 1975 Ford Granada, a 1978 Fiesta GT, a 1986 Mercury Sable and a 1990 AWD Aerostar. Do you see a pattern here? The only non-Ford product I owned during this period was a 1983 Volvo 245 Turbo.



Before the 1986 Sable had 50,000 miles on it, we had experienced broken head bolts, broken main bearing cap bolts, wiring harness meltdowns (3), defective cooling fan motor, defective heater/AC fan motor, and a failed automatic transmission - those were only the things I can remember right now. Once the car passed 36K miles, Ford took the attitude that it was totally our problem. At that point, Ford lost a dedicated customer. I haven't owned a Ford product since.



Since then, I've purchased a 1993 Volvo 850GLT, a 1996 Dodge Ram 3500, a 1999 Honda Civic Si. Our current car/truck inventory:



2003 Acura 3. 2TL-S

2002 Dodge Ram 3500 ETH/DEE

2000 Dodge Durango SLT+ 360



Ford deserves whatever happens to them.



Rusty
 
Last edited:
"one step above junk. "- just like their trucks! Actually, up until the early '70's, Ford built some fairly decent vehicles.
 
I think the fact that ford built great vehicles into the 70s is what gained them most of their diehard loyalists(read:people w/blinders who own ford products). Those who scoff at any negative remark pointed in fords direction. Even though they are on their 4th engine and its only got 6k on it. But it is a new product launch and problems were predicted.

I think the 6. 0 fiasco might truly be the straw that broke the camels back. Hitting them when they are off balance. If the transmission is bad I think its over. Put a fork in em they are done.

I have had incredible luck with my fords. They were well built. I lost my love when they killed the 4. 9. Jeeps still got their 4. 0. Why didnt the 4. 9 make it.
 
When did these new 6. 0 engines come out? My neighbor just bought a slightly used PSD and I'm wondering if his has that engine.



Roy
 
If the badge on his door is black with silver letters, he's got the 7. 3 engine. If the badge is silver with red letters, he's screwed.
 
Big_Daddy_T, Unfortunately the 4. 0 Jeep motor is on it's way out, the un-equal length intake runners lead to coking of the intake manifold, ports and valves on the far end cylinders. Not a "clean" engine from an emissions point of view. Look for the 4. 0 I6 to be replaced by the 3. 7 V6.
 
Back
Top