• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ford Posts Biggest Quarterly Loss In History

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Detroit is getting curb-stomped by the recession and record gas prices. And it doesn't look like the forecast will get any brighter for another year or two at minimum; their decision to react slowly means that new plants and converted plants (making smaller vehicles) won't be online until roughly 2010.

Text

By DEE-ANN DURBIN and TOM KRISHER

Ford Motor Co. posted the worst quarterly performance in its history Thursday, losing $8.67 billion in the second quarter.

The company also said it will retool two more North American truck and sport utility vehicle plants to build small, fuel-efficient vehicles, and it announced plans to bring six new small vehicles to North America from Europe by the end of 2012.

The net loss includes $8.03 billion worth of write-offs because the sharp decline in U.S. truck and SUV sales has reduced the value of Ford's North American truck plants and Ford Motor Credit Co.'s lease portfolio. Even excluding those items, Ford lost 62 cents per share, worse than Wall Street expected. Twelve analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial, on average, expected a 27 cent loss per share.

Including the write-downs, Ford lost $3.88 per share in the April-June quarter, compared with net profit of $750 million, or 31 cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago.

The second-quarter loss surpassed Ford's previous record quarterly loss, $6.7 billion in the first quarter of 1992.

Second-quarter revenue was $38.6 billion, down $5.6 billion from the year-ago period. Analysts expected $34.6 billion.

Ford has been successful selling cars in Europe, and the company is banking on the new European models to boost sales and revenue as it deals with a market shift from trucks to cars brought on by high gasoline prices.

The company said it has sufficient liquidity to weather the latest downturn in the U.S. auto market without additional borrowing. Ford borrowed $23.4 billion in 2006 to fund its North American turnaround.

"We are pleased that we went to the capital markets at the right time," Ford President and CEO Alan Mulally said in a conference call with investors and media. "We have the scale, the expertise and the financing to execute our plan."

Wall Street wasn't impressed, at least initially. Ford shares dropped 58 cents, or 9.6 percent, to $5.45 in morning trading.

The company said it will retool the Michigan Truck plant in suburban Detroit, shifting its products from large SUVs to make global vehicles off the European Focus platform by 2010.

The SUVs made at Michigan Truck ? the Lincoln Navigator and Ford Expedition ? will be shifted to the Kentucky Truck plant in Louisville, which makes Ford Super Duty pickups.

The company also will retool the Louisville Assembly Plant, which now builds the Ford Explorer midsize SUV, to produce vehicles on the European Focus frame, starting in 2011.

The company had previously announced it would retool its pickup truck factory in Cuautitlan, Mexico, to build the Fiesta subcompact for North America starting in 2010.

Ford also said its Twin Cities Assembly Plant in St. Paul, Minn., will continue producing the Ranger small pickup through 2011. The plant was scheduled to close next year, but Ranger sales are down just 4 percent in the first half of this year, versus 18 percent for the U.S. light truck market as a whole.

The company also plans to revamp the body shops in nearly all its North American assembly plants so that they will be more flexible and able to respond more quickly to changes in market demands. Chief Financial Officer Don Leclair said it costs about $250 million per plant to make those changes.

Leclair said Ford's capital expenditures will reach $6 billion annually between now and 2010 because of the cost of revamping plants and introducing new products and engines. Ford plans to upgrade or replace all of its engines by 2010.

"What you're seeing is kind of a bubble that we're going to go through ... but early on we're going to see cost savings because of the economies of scale that we're getting as we develop more and more vehicles off of fewer platforms," he said.

Cost cuts also will come from employee layoffs. Ford said 4,000 U.S. hourly workers took buyouts in the second quarter, and the company will continue offering buyouts at targeted U.S. plants. Ford also has announced plans to cut its salaried costs by Aug. 1 through voluntary and involuntary layoffs.

The company said its write-offs included $5.3 billion in North American auto operations and $2.1 billion for Ford Credit because of the drop in the value of the plants and equipment that make trucks and SUVs, and the lower price Ford Credit can fetch for them at auction when leases expire. Leclair said 85 percent of the Ford Credit write-down was triggered by the drop in truck and SUV values.

Ford reported a pretax loss of $1.3 billion in North America because of the deteriorating U.S. market and the shift away from trucks. U.S. sales overall were down 10 percent in the first half of the year, with Ford's sales down 14 percent.

The company, though, continued to be profitable overseas, posting a $582 million profit in Europe and $388 million in South America. The company also made $50 million at its Asia-Pacific-Africa division.

"The second half will continue to be challenging, but we have absolutely the right plan to respond to the changing business environment and begin to grow again for the long term," Mulally said in a statement.

Ford said it does not expect a U.S. economic recovery to start until early 2010.

The company identified only three of the European small vehicles it will bring to North America: the Transit Connect small van, the European Focus and the subcompact Fiesta. Most will be built in North America, and Leclair said some might be exported. Ford already has announced that the Transit Connect will be imported from Turkey.

Ford said the other three vehicles would be identified later, including one that is unique within its segment.

Other possible vehicles are the Kuga small crossover, the C-Max small van and the Mondeo midsize car.

Ford also announced that the next-generation Ford Explorer midsize SUV will come out in 2010 and be built on car underpinnings, making it more fuel efficient than the current truck-based model. And it announced it will build a seven-passenger car-based crossover vehicle for Lincoln in mid-2009.
 
They will get bailed out to the tune of another 100 billion. Spending spree in congress. Democrats havent even got their yes man in yet and are giving the previous republicans a run for your money.
 
This might be a good time to sell Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover. The Swedes and Brits must have some wealth lying around to buy back these home grown industrial companies.
 
Originally posted by: Zedtom
This might be a good time to sell Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover. The Swedes and Brits must have some wealth lying around to buy back these home grown industrial companies.

I thought India's Tata Motors bought Jaguar and Land Rover already?

China snubbed it's nose at Volvo, IIRC also.
 
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Zedtom
This might be a good time to sell Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover. The Swedes and Brits must have some wealth lying around to buy back these home grown industrial companies.

I thought India's Tata Motors bought Jaguar and Land Rover already?

China snubbed it's nose at Volvo, IIRC also.

You are correct.
 
Originally posted by: JS80
Ford bankrupting would not cause contagion. Them going bk is good the for country.

Really? Tens of thousands of lost jobs will certainly hurt the economy. Those people will all default on their mortgages, causing banks to fail.

Ford is too big to fail.
 
The company also said it will retool two more North American truck and sport utility vehicle plants to build small, fuel-efficient vehicles, and it announced plans to bring six new small vehicles to North America from Europe by the end of 2012.

:thumbsup: I'm looking forward to more small and fuel-efficient cars to choose from and welcome them on the road.
 
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JS80
Ford bankrupting would not cause contagion. Them going bk is good the for country.

Really? Tens of thousands of lost jobs will certainly hurt the economy. Those people will all default on their mortgages, causing banks to fail.

Ford is too big to fail.

Bk doesn't mean liquidation and cease operation. BK would allow them to restructure their debt and get rid of the unions.
 
Originally posted by: Zedtom
This might be a good time to sell Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover. The Swedes and Brits must have some wealth lying around to buy back these home grown industrial companies.

They're not selling Volvo anymore. It's a stupid decision - selling their only strong brand.
 
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JS80
Ford bankrupting would not cause contagion. Them going bk is good the for country.

Really? Tens of thousands of lost jobs will certainly hurt the economy. Those people will all default on their mortgages, causing banks to fail.

Ford is too big to fail.

Bk doesn't mean liquidation and cease operation. BK would allow them to restructure their debt and get rid of the unions.

I'm starting to think that it's not the current unions killing Ford/GM/Chrysler, it's all of the former union retirees killing the system. It's been shown that Toyota's current workers in Georgetown (other areas?) are now making more than the average UAW employee. Toyota and other's aren't saddled with generations of retirement pay and benefits (especially medical) though.

And for the record, I'm by far from pro union. I routinely call them "Onions" because they usually stink. I've been involved (not by choice) 3 of them and they all stunk.
 
The first year the Focus hatchback was here in the US (98 I think?), it was actually built in Europe, and it was a rock-solid fantastic car. A girl I dated had one and I drove it on several occasions.. nice vehicle. Assuming the quality has stayed the same, bringing over the European Focus is a great move.

Also, is Jpeyton asking the Democrat-controlled congress to bail out Ford?
 
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JS80
Ford bankrupting would not cause contagion. Them going bk is good the for country.

Really? Tens of thousands of lost jobs will certainly hurt the economy. Those people will all default on their mortgages, causing banks to fail.

Ford is too big to fail.

Bk doesn't mean liquidation and cease operation. BK would allow them to restructure their debt and get rid of the unions.

I'm starting to think that it's not the current unions killing Ford/GM/Chrysler, it's all of the former union retirees killing the system. It's been shown that Toyota's current workers in Georgetown (other areas?) are now making more than the average UAW employee. Toyota and other's aren't saddled with generations of retirement pay and benefits (especially medical) though.

And for the record, I'm by far from pro union. I routinely call them "Onions" because they usually stink. I've been involved (not by choice) 3 of them and they all stunk.

See, that is the irony. If they get rid of the union, I guarantee you workers will be more productive and will get paid more than UAW wages. And Ford would be cranking out cars competitive to Toyota.

The biggest problem with union (from a business standpoint) is that they are lazy and unproductive. There is no incentive to perform. This happens with almost all guaranteed contracts. I remember reading a study on sports athlete contracts how players tend to perform best when they are in a contract year, and tend to underperform when they are in a fatty contract.
 
Originally posted by: hellokeith
Also, is Jpeyton asking the Democrat-controlled congress to bail out Ford?
And the airlines too. Money is just fiber and ink; keep the printing presses running 24/7.
 
Originally posted by: Zedtom
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Zedtom
This might be a good time to sell Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover. The Swedes and Brits must have some wealth lying around to buy back these home grown industrial companies.

I thought India's Tata Motors bought Jaguar and Land Rover already?

China snubbed it's nose at Volvo, IIRC also.

You are correct.

Not about Volvo. There were rumors, nothing more.

 
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JS80
Ford bankrupting would not cause contagion. Them going bk is good the for country.

Really? Tens of thousands of lost jobs will certainly hurt the economy. Those people will all default on their mortgages, causing banks to fail.

Ford is too big to fail.

Bk doesn't mean liquidation and cease operation. BK would allow them to restructure their debt and get rid of the unions.

I'm starting to think that it's not the current unions killing Ford/GM/Chrysler, it's all of the former union retirees killing the system. It's been shown that Toyota's current workers in Georgetown (other areas?) are now making more than the average UAW employee. Toyota and other's aren't saddled with generations of retirement pay and benefits (especially medical) though.

And for the record, I'm by far from pro union. I routinely call them "Onions" because they usually stink. I've been involved (not by choice) 3 of them and they all stunk.

See, that is the irony. If they get rid of the union, I guarantee you workers will be more productive and will get paid more than UAW wages. And Ford would be cranking out cars competitive to Toyota.

The biggest problem with union (from a business standpoint) is that they are lazy and unproductive. There is no incentive to perform. This happens with almost all guaranteed contracts. I remember reading a study on sports athlete contracts how players tend to perform best when they are in a contract year, and tend to underperform when they are in a fatty contract.

I would agree to a certain extent, although, the unions are good for many other things (protecting workers from certain nefarious actions of management and/or supervisors).

That being said, the domestic car companies had decades to prepare reserves for this eventuality. They didn't because they were too focused on hitting home runs rather than doubles. Now they're paying.

Not to mention they had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.
 
Originally posted by: JS80
The biggest problem with union (from a business standpoint) is that they are lazy and unproductive. There is no incentive to perform. This happens with almost all guaranteed contracts. I remember reading a study on sports athlete contracts how players tend to perform best when they are in a contract year, and tend to underperform when they are in a fatty contract.
I dunno about the auto industry, but in the heavy construction I work in the union workers are by far a much better deal for us. We've tried non union a few times and we lost money almost each time. The union workers are far more productive. Lazy & unproductive are not the words I would use to describe our workforce and I'm the manager. Yes there is the odd slacker or two but you find them everywhere and we manage to phase them out over time.

We're now full union for all the trades we work and while the company isn't making a lot of money, it enough to pay the bills and give all of us a decent living, including the workers. Everyone's happy and thats the way we like it.



 
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

They had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.

That is why GM and Ford should be dissolved immediately.

At least Chrysler has been cranking out the Smart car.

 
Originally posted by: Genx87
They will get bailed out to the tune of another 100 billion. Spending spree in congress. Democrats havent even got their yes man in yet and are giving the previous republicans a run for your money.
$100B is nothing these days. I think it's worth it because "not to is much worse."
I've been involved (not by choice) 3 of them and they all stunk.
The nursing union in Canada is a key reason we never went back and don't intend to. Merit-less ladders of seniority FTL.

 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

They had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.

That is why GM and Ford should be dissolved immediately.

At least Chrysler has been cranking out the Smart car.

Personally, I consider Chysler to be the shittiest of all of the domestic shit. I've never seen a Chrylser that hasn't had problems, ever. My brother had a Durango, peeling paint after 2.5 years, electrical problems...etc. Before that he had a Ram with lesser problems, but enough.

Now he has a Pacifica (wife demanded it), which has had nothing but problems.

They then topped off their shittiness by putting Nardelli, who is an absolute idiot, into the captains chair. Now they're pumping out even crappier land barges.

What a disgrace.
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

They had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.

That is why GM and Ford should be dissolved immediately.

At least Chrysler has been cranking out the Smart car.

Daimler owns Smart, not Chrysler.

And if that's your benchmark, Ford has the Ka. It looks better, performs as well and isn't assreamingly overpriced.

It's also not simply the unions. The benefits they gave to all employees, particularly the pensions, are what's killing them. There are more people on pensions than GM and Ford have current employees -- and it's not just union workers who receive them. There was an article the other week about GM cutting pensions of salaried workers (I.e. non-union).
 
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

They had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.

That is why GM and Ford should be dissolved immediately.

At least Chrysler has been cranking out the Smart car.

Personally, I consider Chysler to be the shittiest of all of the domestic shit. I've never seen a Chrylser that hasn't had problems, ever. My brother had a Durango, peeling paint after 2.5 years, electrical problems...etc. Before that he had a Ram with lesser problems, but enough.

Now he has a Pacifica (wife demanded it), which has had nothing but problems.

They then topped off their shittiness by putting Nardelli, who is an absolute idiot, into the captains chair. Now they're pumping out even crappier land barges.

What a disgrace.

Different strokes for different folks!

I have 8+ year old Jeep GC with 180K miles and, other than age, I can't find a reason to replace it. Runs and looks almost new and still fun to drive. At the office we now have almost all Dodge trucks which have been the least trouble compared to the Ford vehicles we had earlier. 3 people within the company have sued Ford under lemon laws for their personal vehicles and won (all switched to Chrysler products are appear happier). We just sold a Durango after virtually trouble free 7 years.

To each his own I guess.


 
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

They had decades to make good cars, but preferred to make shit.

That is why GM and Ford should be dissolved immediately.

At least Chrysler has been cranking out the Smart car.

Personally, I consider Chysler to be the shittiest of all of the domestic shit. I've never seen a Chrylser that hasn't had problems, ever. My brother had a Durango, peeling paint after 2.5 years, electrical problems...etc. Before that he had a Ram with lesser problems, but enough.

Now he has a Pacifica (wife demanded it), which has had nothing but problems.

They then topped off their shittiness by putting Nardelli, who is an absolute idiot, into the captains chair. Now they're pumping out even crappier land barges.

What a disgrace.

Different strokes for different folks!

I have 8+ year old Jeep GC with 180K miles and, other than age, I can't find a reason to replace it. Runs and looks almost new and still fun to drive. At the office we now have almost all Dodge trucks which have been the least trouble compared to the Ford vehicles we had earlier. 3 people within the company have sued Ford under lemon laws for their personal vehicles and won (all switched to Chrysler products are appear happier). We just sold a Durango after virtually trouble free 7 years.

To each his own I guess.

Sure
 
Back
Top