October 2009 Ford Sales: Up 3%

[Butz]

Originally Posted by Simon says

The MKZ is up 26.9% I see nothing wrong in that. The MKS is down 22.3% which represents a recovery in relation to previous months (-27.5%) AND a numeric gain of over 300 units in relation to September. The Navigator is dead as far as Ford is concerned, it will be kept in life support for its followers and because is cheaper than killing it.

The MKZ's refresh was underwhelming, I love the MKS and the Navigator was ugly from day one. Maybe Ford should consider refreshing the Navigator?

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by fp115

I love how you are showing a chart of 2008 when 2009 is known to be drastically different. GM's overall fleet sales are down by more than 30%. Some months in 2009 down by more than 50%. Showing 1 year old data is like me telling you the gas prices are $4 per gallon.



Right... Fleet sales up 17% in August, up 23% in September. Still waiting for October.
http://www.automotive-fleet.com/News...in-August.aspx
http://www.silobreaker.com/ford-flee...43327281135638

Unlike you, I can show accurate facts that relate to today's numbers. Keep up the personal attacks and deflection, this gets funnier.

I would say that you are getting funnier too, but that would be some kind of understatement.

Ford's fleet sales are composed mainly of livery (Town Car, Crown Victory, Escape Hybrid), construction (F-150) and government (Crown Victoria). You are implying somehow (some much for "accurate facts") that the Taurus increase in sales are related to fleet sales, and that is BS anyway you look at it. Ford has a very steady fleet business that is not dependent of rental fleet sales like the Impala or the G6.

Finally GM has lowered their fleet sales because they shed half the company . . . the loss of Pontiac definitely affects fleet sales.

The chart I posted may be 10 moths old but is the only real data available. You find me a breakdown of Ford fleet sales proving your points or frankly you don't have any.

Questions:
How do you know that the Impala fleet sales are down to 40%? here, you said it as fact, just to say a few post later "No idea". Accurate facts indeed.

Originally Posted by fp115

Even based on the 40% fleet sales the Impala . . .

and, again
How can the Taurus have increased its fleet sales while triplicating its retail sales?

Originally Posted by fp115

No idea on YTD. I was listening to a conversation and they said fleet sales on the Impala have gone down to about 40% in Sept/October. I know from the top of my head January was very low as well.

Oh, wow, talk "accurate facts". Did they say in that conversation that the Impala's overall sales were down 40% for the year too? Sounds like the ratio has been kept intact . . .

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Btw fp115, you are one of my favorite posters and while we all bobble the ball sometimes its worth noting you are besides more informative and interesting to read - you are also much more accurate much more of the time than your harshest critics are themselves.

Keep up the good work, tighten up your game and either way I look forward to reading your posts.

You are very right,

When it comes to makeing data to support made up facts, few come close to FP...

I think I over heard a converstation between two people who I can't remember say that Impala fleet sales are down.

Yup! you don't get much more accurate then that!

[fp115]

Originally Posted by Simon says

I would say that you are getting funnier too, but that would be some kind of understatement.

Ford's fleet sales are composed mainly of livery (Town Car, Crown Victory, Escape Hybrid), construction (F-150) and government (Crown Victoria). You are implying somehow (some much for "accurate facts") that the Taurus increase in sales are related to fleet sales, and that is BS anyway you look at it. Ford has a very steady fleet business that is not dependent of rental fleet sales like the Impala or the G6.

Finally GM has lowered their fleet sales because they shed half the company . . . the loss of Pontiac definitely affects fleet sales.

The chart I posted may be 10 moths old but is the only real data available. You find me a breakdown of Ford fleet sales proving your points or frankly you don't have any.

10 months old in a market that has been changing on a month-to-month basis is simply irrelevant. What do fleet sales from all of 2008 have to do with 2009, especially when the company has been cutting them since January. Additionally there is a wealth of data elaborating on GM's shift from fleet to retail. GM's retail share has been going up since July/August while Ford has started selling more fleet vehicles.

You're being even more delusional to blame it solely on Pontiac's demise, when we all know models from each of the other brands are still accountable. Pontiac and Saturn still had 15,000 sales last month. GM's overall sales were up, retail sales and market share continues to increase, fleet sales continue to decrease. Yet you manage to somehow attempt to twist this in saying "it is only natural"? You're a class act, but I guess you will do anything to make Ford look better, especially when right now they are looking for as many sales as possible to attempt to break even.

Ford's product push rather than focusing on the restructuring turns out is a terrible idea. If Ford does not continue to increase sales, does not get concessions from UAW, and doesn't fix their debt, they will go down a road much worse than GM or Chrysler. Only makes sense for Ford to push fleet sales up in the double digits to make up for a lack of retail sales.

Originally Posted by Simon says

Questions:
How do you know that the Impala fleet sales are down to 40%? here, you said it as fact, just to say a few post later "No idea". Accurate facts indeed.

I'm sorry, I should dumben things up for you.

Above was asked YTD. I am replying on a month per month basis.

Originally Posted by Simon says

and, again
How can the Taurus have increased its fleet sales while triplicating its retail sales?

Oh, wow, talk "accurate facts". Did they say in that conversation that the Impala's overall sales were down 40% for the year too? Sounds like the ratio has been kept intact . . .

So you gave one example of places where fleet haven't had a chance to pick up any sales. If you read carefully, I know it must be hard, but I never said Taurus fleet sales were up, I said Ford fleet sales are up. You even said that Ford's fleet sales were going down since 2007, which I showed to be false.

What other postings are you going to attempt to twist in your favour? Its a shame Ford isn't as good as you make it to be isn't it?

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by fp115

10 months old in a market that has been changing on a month-to-month basis is simply irrelevant. What do fleet sales from all of 2008 have to do with 2009, especially when the company has been cutting them since January. Additionally there is a wealth of data elaborating on GM's shift from fleet to retail. GM's retail share has been going up since July/August while Ford has started selling more fleet vehicles.

Impressive . . . we must look at the particulars with a magnifying glass when it comes to GM but when it comes to Ford just a few generalities suffice.

You fail to acknowledge that Ford has fleet only vehicles and a whole bunch of models that are sold for fleet purposes (almost like the Impala is for Chevy). The Ford Taurus isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by fp115

You're being even more delusional to blame it solely on Pontiac's demise, when we all know models from each of the other brands are still accountable. Pontiac and Saturn still had 15,000 sales last month. GM's overall sales were up, retail sales and market share continues to increase, fleet sales continue to decrease. Yet you manage to somehow attempt to twist this in saying "it is only natural"? You're a class act, but I guess you will do anything to make Ford look better, especially when right now they are looking for as many sales as possible to attempt to break even.

I guess its Ford's fault that cab drivers, police forces and governmental agencies like Ford better.

Originally Posted by fp115

Ford's product push rather than focusing on the restructuring turns out is a terrible idea. If Ford does not continue to increase sales, does not get concessions from UAW, and doesn't fix their debt, they will go down a road much worse than GM or Chrysler. Only makes sense for Ford to push fleet sales up in the double digits to make up for a lack of retail sales.

. . . and then I am the delusional one

Originally Posted by fp115

I'm sorry, I should dumben things up for you.

Above was asked YTD. I am replying on a month per month basis.

Believe me. It was dumb enough.

You know its not about the question that was asked by Tiburon, it is in post. Its when you volunteered this pearl of wisdom . . .

When GM was selling 20-25k units per month, fleet sales accounted for 55% or so of sales. Now GM managed to get it down to 40%.

No reference about YTD or monthly. Just manipulation of dubious facts. Yes dubious as they were gathered eavesdropping while grownups were talking. Or so you say.

Originally Posted by fp115

So you gave one example of places where fleet haven't had a chance to pick up any sales. If you read carefully, I know it must be hard, but I never said Taurus fleet sales were up, I said Ford fleet sales are up. You even said that Ford's fleet sales were going down since 2007, which I showed to be false.

You have shown nothing to be false. In 2007 Ford fleet sales went down 50% after the Taurus was retired. In 2008 Ford fleet sales were down 21%. You just posted two monthly increases (although you claim 4 months) which mean nothing out of context.

Context? Who knows? Maybe those "places where fleet haven't had a chance to pick up any sales". Maybe San Francisco and New York just replaced their initial fleet of Escape Hybrids. Or maybe a few police departments replaced their CVs, or who knows maybe, like so many other things it can be blamed on the Federal Government. In 2009 you know, federal agencies have purchased more than 3,000 hybrids from Ford. Included in the sales were 1,900 vehicles acquired through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for the purpose of improving the fuel economy of the federal fleet. Or maybe all of the above . . .

So many things. So many business not going GMs way.

Originally Posted by fp115

What other postings are you going to attempt to twist in your favour? Its a shame Ford isn't as good as you make it to be isn't it?

Sure! That's probably why Ford posted $1 billion in profit for the last quarter and has posted sales gains for four out of the last 5 months . . . you know, while their domestic competitors . . . you know the drill, don't cha?

[vcs2600]

Originally Posted by fp115

Last I checked the Ford Taurus competed with the Impala. Lacrosse is NOT a large premium (full-size) sedan.

Chevy Impala: 12,721

So yes, the Taurus is doing dismal in sales compared to where it should be.

And Impala is not especially large or premium either.

I admit LaCrosse not an exact comparison, but if you check the price tags, the Taurus comes in much closer to the Lacrosse than the budgetmobile Impala.