[analogbubbles]

We need to stop buying into destructive criticism of "Lincoln sucks because i say so.."
lift our knuckles off the floor and realize that luxury buyer have different priorities
than the "look at me knobbers" that wants to go around corners at 90 mph.

But you basically troll this site, which is (in majority) people who want Cadillac to do well, and despite the fact that Lincoln does (to be objective about it) suck in that it loses money and it's products are probably the least critically acclaimed of any brand out there. Think of it this way; you wouldn't go into, for example, a Chicago Bears bar dressed in Packers gear and then run your mouth about scoring the last touchdown when the score is 28-10.

 

[Envoy4Life]

But you basically troll this site, which is (in majority) people who want Cadillac to do well, and despite the fact that Lincoln does (to be objective about it) suck in that it loses money and it's products are probably the least critically acclaimed of any brand out there. Think of it this way; you wouldn't want to go into, for example, a Chicago Bears bar dressed in Packers gear and then run your mouth about scoring the last touchdown when the score is 28-10.

It's hilarious that you accuse him of being a troll, yet it's always you who comes in trolling every Lincoln thread with the same unsubstantiated statements that you have NEVER given us proof about.

 

[Jesda]

Sure there is still Luxury performance buyers but we need to stop lumping the two together
and insisting that all Lux buyers want performance and handling as a key / prominent feature

They're lumped together because people who pay more expect to have a lot of both.

Since Lincoln is competing at a lower level it doesn't really matter. They just need to meet expectations that match the brand's position in the market. That's good enough for me.

 

[analogbubbles]

It's hilarious that you accuse him of being a troll, yet it's always you who comes in trolling every Lincoln thread with the same unsubstantiated statements that you have NEVER given us proof about.

Here you go.

Lincoln, with U.S. sales down 65 percent from a 1990 peak, is such a big money loser for Ford that Mulally suggested killing it last year, according to two people familiar with the internal discussions.

 

[Envoy4Life]

Show me a spreadsheet or hard numbers. No offense, but those words from a two year old Bloomberg are just as useless as yours here.

Ford says nothing about Lincoln losing money in their most recent quarterly report for Q1/2016. Your link is 2 years old and from a third party website.

https://corporate.ford.com/content/...estors/investor-events/Quarterly Earnings/2016/2016-1Q-Corp-Earnings-Slides.pdf

Ford isn't stupid. If they were losing big money on Lincoln, they would have closed it and it would have joined Pontiac, Oldsmobile, etc. in that big junkyard in the sky.

I have zero doubt in my mind that Lincoln makes money for Ford.

 

[paul8488]

But you basically troll this site, which is (in majority) people who want Cadillac to do well, and despite the fact that Lincoln does (to be objective about it) suck in that it loses money and it's products are probably the least critically acclaimed of any brand out there. Think of it this way; you wouldn't want to go into, for example, a Chicago Bears bar dressed in Packers gear and then run your mouth about scoring the last touchdown when the score is 28-10.

You're one of the most dishonest and misleading posters here.

Who cares what the critics think, the critics love ATS and CTS, but they are the two biggest losers in the luxury market over the past two years, last year, TYD, and last month. Lincoln is up 20% last month, 17% YTD, despite being generally not loved by the critics. And yet, there's this review, on their newest product:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/05/2016-lincoln-mkx-review-lincoln-beats-lexus-luxury-game/

In the end though, it's real critics, the ones that put their money down on luxury cars, have spoken.

As for your 'losing money' statement, you should have to prove it or be blocked from this site, because you're a broken record that needs to stop. If Lincoln loses money on their platform-shared cars, Cadillac is losing money on everything but Escalade.

 

[paul8488]

Here you go.

They studied the numbers in-depth and decided to keep it. Biggest vote of confidence I can imagine from a chop-happy company that shed 4 brands in the last decade. Try again.

 

[paul8488]

How sad that it looks so uninspired and derivative...nothing about it says "Lincoln". Lincoln really seems to be following Mercury to the grave.

Up 17% YTD, up 20% last month, up around 10% last year after around 10% the year before... you're a smart guy john, what are you just making stuff up to play along? Don't like the looks, fine, that's personal, but Lincoln couldn't be any LESS on a track to the grave, this couldn't be more simple to see.

 

[Envoy4Life]

I really think that part of the problem is that the Continental doesn't photograph well.

Someone posted these about a week ago on FIN. I think it looks great in these pictures, and it looks even better in person:

It looks rather upscale and stately IMHO.

 

[jpd80]

Bloomberg made an assumption that Mulally's desire to end not just Lincoln but every other non-Ford brand owned for the sake of achieving the simplest most cost effective business model.

The fact that our friend has never delivered concrete evidence of Lincoln's profitability or otherwise tells us his opinion is bankrupt of credibility. That Analogbubbles feels so aggrieved by my non-GM referenced post to call me out as a troll on this site tells us this has gotten way too personal. I expressed an opinion to Jeseda an then he responded but there was no red to pile on with deliberate baiting when a civil conversation was in place.

 

[analogbubbles]

Show me a spreadsheet or hard numbers. No offense, but those words from Bloomberg are just as useless as yours here.

Do you have any spread sheets or hard numbers showing that they do make money?

You're one of the most dishonest and misleading posters here.

Who cares what the critics think, the critics love ATS and CTS, but they are the two biggest losers in the luxury market over the past two years, last year, TYD, and last month.





As for your 'losing money' statement, you should have to prove it or be blocked from this site, because you're a broken record that needs to stop. If Lincoln loses money on their platform-shared cars, Cadillac is losing money on everything but Escalade.

Now this is both dishonest and just incredibly hypocritical in it's downright stupid analyst and reasoning. You are accusing me of being dishonest by saying that Lincoln doesn't make money, and yet you are saying that Cadillac loses money on everything but the Escalade, despite the fact that I have provided evidence and you haven't. Let's parse it this little gem you just laid.

1) You think Cadillac loses money on everything but the Escalade and think that Lincoln actually does make money. And yet:

2) The SRX outsold the MKX by a freaking 4:1 margin. If Cadillac loses money on the SRX, what kind of disaster does that make the every Lincloln sedan and CUV? I mean, all 3 Lincoln CUV combined can't outsell the SRX and yet they have, you know, 3x the cost to develop.

3) The ATS outsold the MKZ by more than 2:1 and the CTS outsold MKS by 3:1, plus it has higher ATPs on top of it. And guess what, they're build on shared platforms also. If the Alpha Cadillacs are losers, then the Lincoln sedans are absolute dogs.

 

[paul8488]

Now this is both dishonest and just incredibly hypocritical in it's downright stupid analyst and reasoning. You are accusing me of being dishonest by saying that Lincoln doesn't make money, and yet you are saying that Cadillac loses money on everything but the Escalade, despite the fact that I have provided evidence and you haven't. Let's parse it this little gem you just laid.

1) You think Cadillac loses money on everything but the Escalade and think that Lincoln actually does make money. And yet:

2) The SRX outsold the MKX by a freaking 4:1 margin. If Cadillac loses money on the SRX, what kind of disaster does that make the every Lincloln sedan and CUV? I mean, all 3 Lincoln CUV combined can't outsell the SRX and yet they have, you know, 3x the cost to develop.

3) The ATS outsold the MKZ by more than 2:1 and the CTS outsold MKS by 3:1, plus it has higher ATPs on top of it. And guess what, they're build on shared platforms also. If the Alpha Cadillacs are losers, then the Lincoln sedans are absolute dogs.

Nope. That isn't proof, not sure why you think that's proof. I suspect Cadillac doesn't lose money on XTS, but lost an insane bundle on ELR. Think about it, it cost as much for GM to engineer and build ELR as it did any of the Lincoln models, but sold a tiny fraction of the volume. Makes MKS look like a smashing success. Not sure about Alpha, since it IS also sold in China, but if they haven't made money on them yet, going forward, with decreasing global volumes on three body styles coming out of two half-running factories, they're not adding much if anything to GM coffers.

I don't have proof, but neither do you, and you insisting in every thread that Lincoln loses money is laughable. What I do recall is that Lincoln ATP was up $2100 in March, despite selling more and more of the MKC, which one would expect would drag ATP down.

 

[paul8488]

And guess what, they're build on shared platforms also.

LOL, a platform they share with each other! Two low-volume models that have been sinking fast ever since introduction, and down double-digits last month... only now is the Chevrolet volume coming into play, and it's actually a modified version of the platform, no? ATS, ATS-L, CTS, and Camaro with their unique versions of the platform, and 5 different bodystyles, it's going to take alot more volume to make money on that complicated, expensive manufacturing combination.

Lets not talk Omega yet, how long will it take to make money on that?

 

[analogbubbles]

Lincoln, with U.S. sales down 65 percent from a 1990 peak, is such a big money loser for Ford that Mulally suggested killing it last year, according to two people familiar with the internal discussions.

Nope. That isn't proof, not sure why you think that's proof.

Nice argument. You surely can see the hypocritical nature of what you are doing; it's childish and irrational to accuse me of being dishonest even though I have supporting evidence whilst at the same time you are making claims without evidence, and discrediting my evidence simply because, well, you don't like it. Sheesh.

 

[jpd80]

All this proves is that threads are easily derailed if we allow
the opinions of a few distract us from relevant discussion.

 

[johnstarnes]

Up 17% YTD, up 20% last month, up around 10% last year after around 10% the year before... you're a smart guy john, what are you just making stuff up to play along? Don't like the looks, fine, that's personal, but Lincoln couldn't be any LESS on a track to the grave, this couldn't be more simple to see.

Does Lincoln have the "new look" out for sale yet? Are people counting on it to sell well in the future?

 

[2b2]

Does Lincoln have the "new look" out for sale yet? Are people counting on it to sell well in the future?

FiN just heard today that some dealers have started receiving the 2017my MKZ

 

[jpd80]

Mulally's last suggestion to Kill Lincoln came in 2013...remember what happened?

MKZ launch was fouled up badly with all kinds of quality issues that simply didn't exist
on the Fusion. I'm no betting man but I'd lay good odds that Mulally saw that as an
example of how the cost of differentiated vehicles can become expensive very fast
when things go badly wrong...

From that depth of disgust, Mulally probably had all the ammunition he needed to say
that Lincoln and the new MKZ was a very costly exercise in both rework and credibility
in the market place.

So how did Fields convince him to keep Lincoln?

CHINA and export of North American produced models.

In 2013, Development of MKC and CD3 based MKX were both well underway and Continental project had also begun and would have been almost two years down the road when Mulally retired. So clearly Mulally and Fields had the pulse of Lincoln and were reviewing every allocation and approval decision back then.

The issue is not that Mulally considered axing Lincoln, it's how Ford managed to justify
keeping the brand, if it was the heavy money loser portrayed, then no amount of argument
to the contrary would ever make the business plan fly, but the inclusion of China changed everything...

As it did for Cadillac.

 

[NoStopN]

Back on topic, those pictures of the Continental look good. I would prefer a different design for the wheel, but that's just me & can be fixed easily. Just as long as the leather on those seats are as soft as a baby's bottom.

 

[jpd80]

I really think that part of the problem is that the Continental doesn't photograph well.

Someone posted these about a week ago on FIN. I think it looks great in these pictures, and it looks even better in person:

It looks rather upscale and stately IMHO.

Beautiful and if Lincoln is to be believed, the interior should be a nice, quiet place to be.
as in free of annoying disturbances like squeaks and rattles....