FORD'S BALLSY MOVE: C1 Focus, CC, Kuga, CMax, TransitConnect, Transit, F100 approved!

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Bravada

1. Ford will bring the Focus C1 stateside in some two years. GM already sells the Astra, and given the arrangement, the switch to the upcoming 2009-or-so model would be imminent for the US market too.

Wescoent already said it but it is worth mentioning again. Until this info appeared the prevailing wisdom leaking from within Ford motor was that the debut of C2 was too near to bother with bringing C1 over at this point. Apparently that has changed. As I said earlier we weren't going to get a Focus replacement until the 2011MY at the earliest and now we might be getting one two years quicker than that.

As for the Astra, the reality is that GM has positioned that model within a low volume, low visibility brand while they are replacing the higher volume Cobalt with a Korean model. Ford's strategy is to simply offer the good stuff as the mainstream offering while GM is choosing to offer the low buck Korean piece as the volume offering and the no doubt higher spec Astra as an alternative for those who don't mind plunking down the extra bucks. Both companies are bringing their best players to market, but they are doing it in vastly different fashion and the truth is that makes a difference, Given the fact that sales of cars in this segment have exploded of late I'm not certain GM's plan is as sound.

Originally Posted by Bravada

2. Ford mulls bringing the Kuga too and making it in North America. Meanwhile, GM already offers the VUE which is to a large extent identical to the global-market Opel/Vauxhall Antara (Holden Captiva Maxx) - for better or worse.

Yes, and once again GM inexplicably decides to limit their best vehicle in the small suv segment to their lowest volume car brand?

Originally Posted by Bravada

3. Ford will bring its anticipated new Fiesta to the US and perhaps even build it stateside. GM, which is arguably weaker in this segment, already has a fairly decent seller in North America and will replace it with an improved, global series of models around the same time the Fiesta debuts.

Yes, but once again after we put the global nature of these two cars aside they couldn't be more different. The Fiesta Ford is giving us looks more than a little likely to be the best B segment offering in the world, while GM gives us another sedate, cost saving Korean offering.

Originally Posted by Bravada

4. GM, grudgingly and reluctantly, gives their midmarket brands, Buick and Pontiac, a slow makeover based on slowly-dosed attractive models, it has also completely revamped Saturn (for better or worse, again). Ford has nothing but slow euthanasia for Mercury, and Lincoln is getting what should have been Mercuries instead.

I actually think Ford could do much better than they are and that the European product would be better served under the Mercury banner. That said if they are going the way of fast and simple their current plan is about as efficient as they could make it, and efficient might be the word that best sums up Ford's CEO. In the end I do think the plan to scrap Mercury demonstrates that Detroit still suffers from a severe lack of imagination, but the plan is fiscally sound even if I can't bring myself 100% on board. As for Buick and Pontiac, I don't think that anything going on at either remotely smacks of real revival, although GM is obviously trying. Ultimately I think the current plans for Buick and Pontiac are assured to fail, and thus they are little better than Ford's rumored plan to shoot Mercury and be done with it.

Further, while I find the MKS completely inappropriate for a Lincoln I agree completely with the notion of making Lincoln wait a bit while the Ford brand is fixed. In this instance I think Ford's priorities are spot on while GM's priorities in this respect haven't always been clear. We do have GRWD based product coming for Lincoln in the 2012MY or so, and if the long wait for the same is because Ford was giving extra attention to their primary brand I wont argue with the logic.

Originally Posted by Bravada

5. GM has a new hybrid system in store, along with the first serious Prius fighter since Honda's failed attempts. Ford licenses hybrid systems from Toyota and puts them into rather "experienced" SUVs.

As Wescoent already said Ford developed their own stuff with the truth being that they licensed what ended up being similar tech to avoid any patent infringement claims. In the end I think hybrids, at this stage, are primarily a marketing scheme (which happens to work very well) and were it my call I think Ford would be better served to spend the money used to develop the same elsewhere...even in the current climate.

Originally Posted by Bravada

6. GM will launch the next generation of their seven-sitter compact/midsize minivans in the USA in a big fashion (two models reportedly), Ford restrains the S-Max and Galaxy from US sales.

Once again you ignore the reality that, by US standards, the Galaxy and the S Max are small. The Galaxy has no chance of success here while the S Max might do alright but would likely be a case of gilding the lily. As A Mercury I could see it but with the Edge, upcoming redesigned Explorer, and Flex all in the lineup I don't see the point since S Max is unlikely to sell as well as any of those. You might like it personally, but the reality is that tall, multi-purpose vehicles like the S Max have typically done poorly in the US market.

Originally Posted by Bravada

7. Ford brings in the Transit and Transit Connect to the US, GM is playing fourth fiddle in the LCV market with nothing to bring - touche GM, but only in the 7th round...

Actually I'm not sure GM is missing much here. Transit Connect may do alright but the truth is we were slated to get the Connect long ago primarily because Ford is having difficulty selling the entire production run in existing markets. Put simply it hasn't done particularly well and the US is on the list of new markets because we are one more outlet to move them through.

The regular Transit will likely sell a little better than the Sprinter, meaning nowhere near as well as the somewhat dated Econoline. And if the Transit is too similar to the Sprinter it may have more serious issues since I have personally heard more than one driver of the same complain that Sprinters are terrible to drive, ridiculously expensive to fix, and relatively troublesome from a maintenance standpoint compared to the industry standard Econoline. The Transit's saving grace here may be that it is almost certain to use a diesel other than a Powerstroke V8, which has gained something of a stigma after the 6 liter debacle.

Originally Posted by Bravada

GM is horrendously slow at their revolution, but Ford is far worse - they've had they chance for "ballsy moves" back at the turn of the millennium, and wasted it, so now they are merely playing catch-up.

Nothing could be further from the truth. People are quick to applaud GM for their own supposedly 'ballsy moves' but the truth is that most of them have failed with several being ill timed or just poorly conceived. Bringing over European product only to limit it to a low volume brand made no sense whatsoever and hindered those vehicles ability to bolster GM's bottom line while giving Australia free reign to develop Zeta nearly assured that the platform would end up over-engineered and thus over-budget...which it did.

The way GM has been caught almost completely flat footed on a way to give consumers V8 power with seriously better fuel economy arguably finished what the decision to give Australia the Zeta program started as it has nearly, if not entirely, killed the practicality of the Zeta platform as a true volume piece in the US...the market intended to be Zeta's bread and butter. And we only now have GM talking about developing GTDi V6 engines and seriously more fuel efficient V8 options a year before Ford is set to unveil their first production versions of the same.

GM is the one playing catch up as they were arguably caught more unprepared for this shift in fuel prices than any automaker outside of Chrysler, and that is precisely why we are hearing about things like Zeta delays and cancellations or even the use of GTDi four cylinder powerplants within the same.

[Bravada]

while giving Australia free reign to develop Zeta nearly assured that the platform would end up over-engineered and thus over-budget...

I don't think that utilizing something more modern than a Panhard rod in the back is "over-engineering". If anything, the platform could still be more modern when it comes to interior fittings (three cheers for window controls in the console!) GM is able to import it from Oz and offer it for a hair more than Chrysler does the locally-made age-old 300C - how is that "over-budget"? Or perhaps you know the actual development budget and costs?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Bravada

I don't think that utilizing something more modern than a Panhard rod in the back is "over-engineering". If anything, the platform could still be more modern when it comes to interior fittings (three cheers for window controls in the console!) GM is able to import it from Oz and offer it for a hair more than Chrysler does the locally-made age-old 300C - how is that "over-budget"? Or perhaps you know the actual development budget and costs?

The answer to this is simple, GM is losing their financial *** on the G8 and it's pretty obvious. We've heard rumors of Zeta cost issues nearly as long as we've heard Zeta rumors about anything, everything from the possibility of a live axle under the Camaro's rear to program delays and cancellations have been on the table. (the fact that the G8's twin, the Holden Commodore, sells for vastly more money in it's home market of Oz despite a seriously weak dollar should also put up a rather large red flag, either Holden is literally fleecing the home market or they are giving them away here in the States...anybody care to guess which scenario is more likely?) We've also seen the Zeta program get hammered with delays and cancellations on a level beyond that of virtually any other GM program.

The nail in the coffin? Qe recently witnessed GM execs talking about the importance of making cars which actually return a profit to the company.
If this platform was in any way the answer to GM's profitability woes then it logically wouldn't be such a consistent target for delays and cancellations. On the contrary the fact that GM so readily takes the pruners to this program tells us that there obviously is something wrong, and GM's admissions regarding profitability, and the above mentioned rumors regarding this platform, do a pretty good job of filling in the blanks.

On top of all of that the V8 powered G8 just saw a year to year price increase of nearly 2k. Inflation is bad but it isn't that bad. The old saying says that where there is smoke there is fire, and the fact that Zeta seems to be GM's favorite place to trim fat at the moment speaks volumes.