Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Ford To Follow In GM's Footsteps By Reporting Sales Quarterly

      Will begin in April

    Ford will soon be joining General Motors in reporting sales every quarter. Automotive News is reporting that Ford will transition to a quarterly call and release of sales numbers beginning in April. The company will still be proving monthly sales numbers to various data agencies.

    "We feel it's kind of transitioning to more of an industry standard. We think the intense focus on month-to-month numbers is just not how we want to run the business. We believe quarterly will provide great transparency," said Mark LaNeve, Ford's vice president of U.S. marketing, sales and service during a call with analysts and the media.

    Various analysts have cautioned that moving to quarterly reporting may lead "less transparency and more speculation and errors," especially if some automakers still report monthly.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Boo. This move to quarterly is a bad thing

    I agree. 

    58 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    I assume the move to quarterly reporting is to try and hide bad short term sales. 

    Better all the pain at once 4 times a year, i suppose. 

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Boo. This move to quarterly is a bad thing

    I actually have to disagree with you my friend as I think too much speculation by the rich using robot trading is hurting businesses who need to change over product lines and make long term changes for survival.

    4 times a year I think is more than enough info for people to research and decide if they want to invest in the company and how long they want to hold onto it.

    I welcome this as long as they do continue to grant the transparency of how the business is being run to the investment community.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    smk4565

    Posted (edited)

    I think they want to report sales declines 4 times a year rather than 12.  Because we know they are going to have a lot of declines the next 2 years when you take away all the sedans some of the SUVs are dropping already.  Bad combo to kill 4 product lines and have Escape and Explorer in decline at the same time.

    I remember when they named the Furniture guy CEO thinking this can't go well, and it seems like Ford is starting to struggle now.

    Edited by smk4565
    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    51 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    Selling fewer products at a higher price point worked out great for Saturn with the Astra, really turned things around for GM. 

    one might see similar results across town for Ford. Yes, I know the F series sells a ton at high Volume, but the pickup market is getting increasingly competitive. If nothing else, I would love to get rid of the chicken tax, so other companies could compete in the light truck market. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Oh the Detroit 3 (or 2 and FCA) would never allow it unless it allows them to offshore pickup production too. And the Tacoma should be made in San Antonio, Toyota is printing money with that thing riding on super old underpinnings and weak frames.

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, Suaviloquent said:

    Oh the Detroit 3 (or 2 and FCA) would never allow it unless it allows them to offshore pickup production too. And the Tacoma should be made in San Antonio, Toyota is printing money with that thing riding on super old underpinnings and weak frames.

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    How a company could say a C frame that flex's is an off road feature is beyond me.

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Going quarterly has an effect on incentive offerings.

    when you report monthly, your monthly sales are live or die.  You have to dive into the incentive basket each month.  Your corporate financials depend on it, one bad month, boom. 

    When its quarterly, the GM's get desperate on December 30th or whatever because they leave month one and two without much for incentives, and then they panic and discount the shit out of their product in month 3 to make quarterly numbers.  You have to break out the huge incentives in the last week or two of the third month now.  I think they can sit on their marketing plans longer but then panic at the end of the quarter.  Its only panic 4 times a year instead of 12.  And only 4 bad reports to the press and investors instead of 12.  Come to think of it, when we got the Malibu with all the huge discounts it was a June 30, last day of Q2.

    This doesn't even reflect any additional possible 'private offer' nor my GM card.

     

    B5F724D0-5500-4408-8E69-26797C0C3F7E.jpeg

    Edited by regfootball

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    I think they want to report sales declines 4 times a year rather than 12.  Because we know they are going to have a lot of declines the next 2 years when you take away all the sedans some of the SUVs are dropping already.  Bad combo to kill 4 product lines and have Escape and Explorer in decline at the same time.

    I remember when they named the Furniture guy CEO thinking this can't go well, and it seems like Ford is starting to struggle now.

    ^^^^^YUP^^^^^^

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    How many times have we all read 'February is a notoriously slow month' or 'There was that huge blizzard in the Northeast in Dec'? as a modifier for sales numbers? I am leaning toward quarterly reporting as a tool to average out the numbers as being a good thing. I expect more OEMs to follow suit, especially as everyone's sedans continue to crater.
    Look at Porsche- they don't publish % change numbers. Of course you can pull out a calculator, but IMO it (perceptually) minimizes declines.

    1 hour ago, Suaviloquent said:

    Toyota actually touts the C channel rear of the cab as a feature for off-roading - it allows the frame to flex... 

    Holy crap; what a load of crap.

    Edited by balthazar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Colorado/Canyon twins along with the Ranger should take care of the Tacoma by imposing lost sales on THAT Toyota.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

    The thinking here is that Ford will lose some revenue and profits, but it will be selling more profitable products, so their margins will improve. The problem I see is that they boast how they increase ATP, when a good chunk of it is attributable to is getting rid of your most affordable products.

     

    The other problem is when you cut all these models our, aside from shrinking the number of people coming to your dealers, you drop revenue.  And Ford (or any car company) has massive overhead costs.   They have huge labor costs, pension and healthcare costs, that stuff doesn't go away, they have loads of factories unless they try to shutter some and sell off the real estate.  I know the F150 makes a ton of profit, but I would guess the F150's revenue isn't enough to keep the lights on at Ford.  According to their annual report they need to pay $500 million to the pension fund in 2018.  That is probably 100,000 F150's sales just to fund the pension plan.  Ford paid 73 cents per share dividends in 2018, they have 3.9 billion shares outstanding, so there is $2.5 billion dollars spent.    I think life gets rough if their revenue takes a big hit.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 hours ago, dfelt said:

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    How a company could say a C frame that flex's is an off road feature is beyond me.

    :confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕:confused0071:😕

    it means that they can ensure traction when the articulation of the rear suspension isn't quite enough to allow a wheel that would otherwise be off the ground. The frame flexes because of the unsupported weight pushing on it and bam you gain an inch, inch and 1/2 of effective wheel articulation...

     

    It's so stupid but I heard a birdie wearing a Toyota shirt and ID at an event say that with a straight face. I died laughing inside. Does anyone who considers a Taco ever think of how bad it is for towing? The frames man the frames, that's why it's a 5,000 limit. GVWR is piss poor too.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It wasn't that long ago that all pickups used full C-channel frames, and they were pretty darn good off-road, and at towing and hauling.  Fully boxed frames everyone uses today just mean a larger percentage of engineering time and money has to go into the suspension to achieve a functioning final product for sale.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    And Ford (or any car company) has massive overhead costs.   They have huge labor costs, pension and healthcare costs, that stuff doesn't go away...

    Ford had 364K employees 20 years ago, that's now about 200K, so labor costs have been reduced dramatically.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    16 hours ago, balthazar said:

    How many times have we all read 'February is a notoriously slow month' or 'There was that huge blizzard in the Northeast in Dec'? as a modifier for sales numbers? I am leaning toward quarterly reporting as a tool to average out the numbers as being a good thing. I expect more OEMs to follow suit, especially as everyone's sedans continue to crater.

    Look at Porsche- they don't publish % change numbers. Of course you can pull out a calculator, but IMO it (perceptually) minimizes declines.

    1

    Porsche isn't the only who does that. See Kia, Hyundai, Jaguar/Land Rover to name a few. Its slightly annoying for me when writing up the summary - but then I have sources like Automotive News and GoodCarBadCar.net to give me the percentages.

    (I know, first-world automotive writer problems).

    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Ford had 364K employees 20 years ago, that's now about 200K, so labor costs have been reduced dramatically.

    And they will cut more workers this year no doubt.  They still have to pay all those retirees though.  I feel like Ford is a shrinking company.  Wouldn't surprise me if in 10-15 years they say, "we can't make money on crossovers, and we are shift to trucks, and they just have commercial vehicles and F150s.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you go back to -say- the '90s, when an SUV was a large, V8, 4WD [Explorer], then you fast forward to the car-based, much less practical & capable teeny compact CUVs & their mainstream acceptance... I'd say the answer would be 'no'.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    I wonder if the whole crossover craze will have passed in 10-15 years.  

    i think what will happen is soft looking compact crossovers will probably be 2/3 of the market, it will be all people can afford due to regulations and strangulation with MPG requirements and such.  So soft puff mini marshmallows like what the 2020 Escape looks like will become the norm even more what is forced on the market.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    That disguised Escape prototype looks like a Corolla roof grafted on a Focus body.  Nothing new or different, just another appliance. 

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    I wonder if the whole crossover craze will have passed in 10-15 years.  

     

    2 hours ago, balthazar said:

    If you go back to -say- the '90s, when an SUV was a large, V8, 4WD [Explorer], then you fast forward to the car-based, much less practical & capable teeny compact CUVs & their mainstream acceptance... I'd say the answer would be 'no'.

     Its a legit thing. 

    For me, SUV and crossovers are the same thing. Let me explain. Its in the same category.  Intertwined and evolved. By different branches of the automotive tree, but eventually became one and the same branch...

    Its not as if there wasnt a crossover in the early 1970s to early 1980s with the AMC Eagle.  And the unibody mid 1980s Jeep Cherokee after that. And the body on frame small SUVs of the GMC Jimmy and Chevy Blazer (that got themselves hotrodded into the superfast Typhoon), and the Japanese 4runner and Pathfinder, The Suzuki Sidekick and its GM siblings. T he Ford small Bronco to become Explorer...and the advent of Audi Quattro and the like... All happened in the 1980s...

    So...Ill start the clock at about 1994 anyway.  1994-2004-2014-2019 That would be 25 years of SUVs and CUVs selling many units to be really counted as a segment.  As a real mainstream segment.  

    PS: I could go earlier than 1994. I could go 1990. Why?

    That small Chevy Blazer/GMC Jimmy/GMC Typhoon...  Well, Oldsmobile got a version of that in 1990.  The SUV/CUV craze was already starting to bubble and Oldsmobile saw that coming in 1990...

    So in reality, its closer to 30 years of the mainstream buyers getting their kicks with AWD and SUVs and CUVs...

    30 years.  At this point in time, it aint a fad, nor a craze. Its THE  bread and butter segment.  I think our transportation pods will be tall and hatchbacky and AWD for a long time to come.  

    PS: Poor AMC, if they could have just stuck around just another 5 or so years... 

     

     

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The CUV/SUV distinction is less clear than it used to be, and means nothing to most consumers.  I think of SUVs as being truck-based (Suburban, Tahoe, etc) or on purpose built RWD/AWD platforms like the Wrangler, Grand Cherokee, Land Cruiser, etc.   CUVs are on car-based platforms and almost always FWD/transverse engine...

    As far as mainstreaming, the early 90s when 5 dr midsize SUVs appeared in the Explorer and S10 Blazer marked a big growth point for the family hauler daily driver SUVs. 

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford is recalling 338,332 Ford Explorers across North America for an improperly formed seat frame edge. The recall covers certain 2017 model year Explorers. The seat frame edge is sharp and could cause injury if driver or passenger reaches between the center console and the seat.  Ford is aware of 31 reports of hand injuries related to this recall. Dealers will install a flocked tape and a tab on the inside edge of the power seat frame. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford is recalling 338,332 Ford Explorers across North America for an improperly formed seat frame edge. The recall covers certain 2017 model year Explorers. The seat frame edge is sharp and could cause injury if driver or passenger reaches between the center console and the seat.  Ford is aware of 31 reports of hand injuries related to this recall. Dealers will install a flocked tape and a tab on the inside edge of the power seat frame. 
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Moody's Investor Service has downgraded Ford to junk status rating of Ba1, one step below investment grade.  They say that Ford's cash flow and profit margins are below expectations and are expected to remain weak for the next two years.  Outside of the financial sector, Ford is one of the top 15 issuers of corporate bonds.
      The primary cause for concern is a cash crunch brought on by a lengthy restructuring plan that includes closing factories and laying off thousands of workers. Investors are not impressed with CEO Jim Hackett's plans to ditch sedans and revive an aging lineup of SUVs and trucks. All new versions of the Ford Explorer and Ford Escape debuted this year.
      Back in July, Ford issued a disappointing profit forecast as it struggles to compete in China's slowing car market. So far S&P Global Ratings and Fitch Ratings have an investment grade of BBB on Ford, however both firms have a negative outlook on Ford's future. 
      After the Moody's announcement, Ford's shares dived 4.2 percent to $9.14.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Moody's Investor Service has downgraded Ford to junk status rating of Ba1, one step below investment grade.  They say that Ford's cash flow and profit margins are below expectations and are expected to remain weak for the next two years.  Outside of the financial sector, Ford is one of the top 15 issuers of corporate bonds.
      The primary cause for concern is a cash crunch brought on by a lengthy restructuring plan that includes closing factories and laying off thousands of workers. Investors are not impressed with CEO Jim Hackett's plans to ditch sedans and revive an aging lineup of SUVs and trucks. All new versions of the Ford Explorer and Ford Escape debuted this year.
      Back in July, Ford issued a disappointing profit forecast as it struggles to compete in China's slowing car market. So far S&P Global Ratings and Fitch Ratings have an investment grade of BBB on Ford, however both firms have a negative outlook on Ford's future. 
      After the Moody's announcement, Ford's shares dived 4.2 percent to $9.14.
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Quarterly:
      Ford Motor Company - Not Reported
      General Motors Co. - Not Reported
      Tesla - Not Reported
      FCA US LLC - Not Reported
      Monthly:
      Audi of America -  Up 3.0% for the month, Down 3.9 for the year
      BMW of North America -  Up 6.6% for the month, Down 0.3% for the year
      Genesis Motor America - Not Reported
      Honda Motor Co. -  Up 17.6% for the month, Up 1.2% for the year
      Hyundai Motor America -  Up 12.0% for the month, Up 4.3% for the year
      Infiniti USA - Down 14.9% for the month, Down 12.7% for the year
      Jaguar Land Rover North America - Not Reported
      Kia Motors America - Up 12.7% for the month, Up 4.6% for the year
      Mazda North American Operations - Up 6.5%  for the month, Down 11.5% for the year
      Mercedes-Benz USA - 24.9% for the month, Down 0.9% for the year
      Mitsubishi Motors North America -  Down 3.3% for the month, Up 2.5% for the year
      Nissan Group - Up 13.2% for the month, Down 5.9% for the year
      Porsche Cars North America Inc. -  Up 13.5% for the month, Up 6.2% for the year
      Subaru of America, Inc. - Up 9.3% for the month, Up 6.1% for the year
      Toyota Motor North America - Up 11.3% for the month, Down 0.7% for the year
      Volkswagen of America -  Up 9.8% for the month, Up 6.6% for the year
      Volvo Cars of North America, LLC - Up 2.5% for the month, Up 4.4% for the year

      Brands (Quarterly):
      Alfa Romeo - Not Reported
      Buick -  Not Reported
      Cadillac -  Not Reported
      Chevrolet - Not Reported
      Chrysler - Not Reported
      Dodge - Not Reported
      Ford - Not Reported
      Fiat - Not Reported
      GMC - Not Reported
      Jeep - Not Reported
      Lincoln - Not Reported
      Ram Trucks - Not Reported
      Tesla - Not Reported

      Brands (Monthly):
      Acura - Up 0.8% - 15,189 MTD / 101,715 YTD
      Audi - Up 3.0% - 21,531 MTD / 142,341 YTD
      BMW - Up 7.2% - 25,505 MTD / 204,960 YTD
      Genesis - Not reported
      Honda - Up 19.6% - 158,804 MTD / 990,569 YTD
      Hyundai - Up 12.0% - 63,737 MTD / 454,405 YTD
      Infiniti - Down 14.9% - 9,185 MTD / 80,903 YTD
      Jaguar - Not Reported
      Kia - Up 12.7% - 60,730 MTD / 418,979 YTD
      Land Rover -  Not Reported
      Lexus - Up 4.6% - 29,931 MTD  / 190,691 YTD
      Mazda - Up 6.5% - 27,482 MTD / 189,329 YTD
      Mercedes-Benz - Up 21.8% - 24,771 MTD / 196,779 YTD
      Mercedes-Benz Vans - UP 43.5% 5,373 MTD / 24,276 YTD
      MINI - Up 1.0% - 3,838 MTD / 24,248 YTD
      Mitsubishi - Down 3.3% - 8,139 MTD / 85,693 YTD
      Nissan - Up 16.2% - 118,045 MTD / 862,243 YTD
      Porsche - Up 13.5% - 4,636 MTD / 39,849 YTD
      Smart - Down 31.5% - 74 MTD / 626 YTD
      Subaru - Up 9.3% - 70,039 MTD / 473,670 YTD
      Toyota - Up 12.3% - 248,334 MTD / 1,609,646 YTD
      Volkswagen - Up 9.8% - 35,412 MTD / 251,208 YTD
      Volvo - Up 2.2% - 8,970 MTD / 65,214 YTD

      View full article
  • Posts

  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. jg95z28
      jg95z28
      (54 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...