Jump to content
William Maley

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

Recommended Posts

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)


View full article

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
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 post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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
Reply to this topic...

×   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.


  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 65 Guests (See full list)



  • Social Stream

  • Similar Content

    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford is adding 550 workers to their Kentucky plant that builds the Navigator and Expedition in order to meet surging retail demand for the big SUVs.  Retail sales were up 35% which has netted Ford a 5.6% gain in market-share for the Expedition.  The Navigator is doing even better with a 70% increase in sales. 
      Ford has already increased line speed and split some jobs to multiple people in an attempt to increase  production. Vehicle production will be increased after the July shutdown. 
      Along with the increase in production, Ford will be starting an advertising campaign focusing on the size and spaciousness of the Expedition.  
      Ford increasing job and production in the US stands in sharp contrast to the steep cuts of over 6,000 jobs Ford announced for Europe. 

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford is adding 550 workers to their Kentucky plant that builds the Navigator and Expedition in order to meet surging retail demand for the big SUVs.  Retail sales were up 35% which has netted Ford a 5.6% gain in market-share for the Expedition.  The Navigator is doing even better with a 70% increase in sales. 
      Ford has already increased line speed and split some jobs to multiple people in an attempt to increase  production. Vehicle production will be increased after the July shutdown. 
      Along with the increase in production, Ford will be starting an advertising campaign focusing on the size and spaciousness of the Expedition.  
      Ford increasing job and production in the US stands in sharp contrast to the steep cuts of over 6,000 jobs Ford announced for Europe. 
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford's operations in Europe books a 351€ billion loss for 2018 in contrast to a 324€ billion profit the year prior.  Already in the midst of a major restructuring, Ford has now announced job cuts in Germany and the UK.
      Ford employs roughly 24,000 people in Germany with expectations to lower that by 5,000 to 19,000 total. Most of the cuts are expected to come from voluntary redundancies and early retirement.   Ford aims to make the cuts "in the most socially responsible way possible."
      In addition to the German job loses, another 1,150 employees will lose their positions in the UK. 
      Ford has already shuttered an assembly plant in France and cut its vehicle lineup. 
      Ford's moves follow that of Honda which is closing its plant in Swindon, Nissan which is reducing output in Sunderland, Infiniti leaving Western Europe and Volkswagen laying off 7,000 workers.

      View full article
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Ford's operations in Europe books a 351€ billion loss for 2018 in contrast to a 324€ billion profit the year prior.  Already in the midst of a major restructuring, Ford has now announced job cuts in Germany and the UK.
      Ford employs roughly 24,000 people in Germany with expectations to lower that by 5,000 to 19,000 total. Most of the cuts are expected to come from voluntary redundancies and early retirement.   Ford aims to make the cuts "in the most socially responsible way possible."
      In addition to the German job loses, another 1,150 employees will lose their positions in the UK. 
      Ford has already shuttered an assembly plant in France and cut its vehicle lineup. 
      Ford's moves follow that of Honda which is closing its plant in Swindon, Nissan which is reducing output in Sunderland, Infiniti leaving Western Europe and Volkswagen laying off 7,000 workers.
    • By dfelt
      In the latest round of Trade War rhetoric is a question that has ended up in the courts, when is a passenger van really a cargo van and does this tariff engineering really justify getting around the 25% chicken tax?
      In response to President Donald Trump's tariff war, automakers are find interesting ways to play the grey area of the legal system. According to BNN Bloomberg and Bloomberg news, trade attorneys are closely watching the Ford Motor Co. legal case play out in federal court. This case deals with the importation of passenger vans that are then stripped down once they clear customs and sold as cargo vans. The difference here is that Ford pays 2.5% import duty on passenger vans versus te 25% import duty on light trucks / cargo vans. This challenge against Ford brought by U.S. Customs is challenging the practice of tariff engineering. The art of building a product one way, then changing it once cleared by customs for another use. With all the increased tariffs imposed by the Trump administration this could have critical impact on a region that many automakers have used to bring in a profitable product for market needs. 
      According to the news stories, a ruling by the Court of International Trade ruled in Ford's favor in 2017 but is being challenged by the administration in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Regardless if the U.S. and China come to terms for a new trade agreement, there are no promises that the in place tariffs would be repealed. Ford's argument is that tariff engineering is a legitimate maneuvers for firms exploring ways to mitigate duties by project reclassification, shifting production to other countries which changes the origins of product assembly.
      Trade lawyers across the country say this case will help establish legal guidelines for tariff engineering. To quote the story from BNN Bloomberg: 
      The U.S. Court of International Trade has stated that under the well-established customs law, manufacturers can intentionally make a product that can avoid higher tariffs with simple changes. What cannot be done is situations such as hiding a higher quality product in a lower quality product like high grade tobacco inside a case of lower grade tobacco. This case has come down to the wording on the import paperwork of "principally designed for the transport of persons". The current administration says this is a scheme for avoiding taxes and local jobs. Ford argues that the goods must be classified in their condition as imported, regardless of later alterations and ended use by consumers.
      Appeals court is expected to rule in the coming weeks.

      View full article
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...