Ford. What are its short and long-term prospects?
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 140
From: Dacula, GA
Like many who read this particular forum I've kept an eye on Ford stock ever since it dipped into the low $2 range. I noticed this article a few days ago on one of my preferred sites for info on financial markets. It's somewhat long reading by this forum's standards so I'll only link to it.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10807.html
Okay, I'll paste a little. Claptrap maybe, but interesting reading.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10807.html
Okay, I'll paste a little. Claptrap maybe, but interesting reading.
So why did Patrick Archambault, of Goldman Sachs, recommend buying Ford stock on April 22, 2009? Here are some key reasons conveyed in his recommendation:
* Goldman Sachs does not foresee bankruptcy at Ford as the automaker has sufficient liquidity to make it through 2010 without additional funding.
* Ford’s earnings will improve by $9.3 billion from this year through 2012.
* It is estimated that Ford will pick up about 25 percent of the market share GM and Chrysler will lose as they reorganize in bankruptcy and shed brands.
Based upon these factors, and others, Patrick Archambault predicts that Ford’s stock may climb by "…58% percent to $6 within six months."
Mr. Archambault, Goldman Sachs, and Wall Street are depending upon something very important. They are counting on the fact that business analysts on television and in the print media will not question this recommendation. These Wall Street charlatans also know Americans are financially illiterate and can’t read a balance sheet – I’m certain the same holds for members of the aforementioned mainstream media. For if someone actually analyzed Ford’s 12/31/08 fiscal year-end audited financial statement, it would be painfully obvious Goldman Sachs recommended the stock of a company that is insolvent.
Ford Motor Company, indeed, possesses cash and marketable securities totaling $15.7 billion. Yet, this does not overcome the facts that Ford has a deficit working capital position of $15.1 billion and a deficit equity position of $17.3 billion. Plain and simple, Ford is broke and will not survive, intact, America’s current economic depression. For those who own Ford Motor Company stock, be assured it will head to $0 when Ford goes into bankruptcy; and most likely becomes another state-owned automaker.
Why in the world did Goldman Sachs recommend buying Ford stock? The answer came nearly three weeks after Goldman’s recommendation. On May 12, 2009, Ford announced it had raised approximately $1.4 billion in a stock offering consisting of 300 million common shares. Shortly before Goldman made its buy recommendation, Ford’s common stock was selling for $3.80 per share. Immediately after Goldman’s recommendation, Ford’s stock zoomed up to $4.33 per share. By May 12th, Ford was able to price its 300 million share offering at $4.75 per share. I’d say Mr. Archambault’s recommendation netted Ford an additional $285 million in proceeds, from this stock offering, due to his recommendation (this is the difference between offering 300 million shares at $4.75 vs. $3.80). One could also argue this stock offering may not have transpired at all had a heavyweight, such as Goldman Sachs, not put out a prior buy recommendation on Ford. Is there, nevertheless, a more sinister motive behind this recommendation?
* Goldman Sachs does not foresee bankruptcy at Ford as the automaker has sufficient liquidity to make it through 2010 without additional funding.
* Ford’s earnings will improve by $9.3 billion from this year through 2012.
* It is estimated that Ford will pick up about 25 percent of the market share GM and Chrysler will lose as they reorganize in bankruptcy and shed brands.
Based upon these factors, and others, Patrick Archambault predicts that Ford’s stock may climb by "…58% percent to $6 within six months."
Mr. Archambault, Goldman Sachs, and Wall Street are depending upon something very important. They are counting on the fact that business analysts on television and in the print media will not question this recommendation. These Wall Street charlatans also know Americans are financially illiterate and can’t read a balance sheet – I’m certain the same holds for members of the aforementioned mainstream media. For if someone actually analyzed Ford’s 12/31/08 fiscal year-end audited financial statement, it would be painfully obvious Goldman Sachs recommended the stock of a company that is insolvent.
Ford Motor Company, indeed, possesses cash and marketable securities totaling $15.7 billion. Yet, this does not overcome the facts that Ford has a deficit working capital position of $15.1 billion and a deficit equity position of $17.3 billion. Plain and simple, Ford is broke and will not survive, intact, America’s current economic depression. For those who own Ford Motor Company stock, be assured it will head to $0 when Ford goes into bankruptcy; and most likely becomes another state-owned automaker.
Why in the world did Goldman Sachs recommend buying Ford stock? The answer came nearly three weeks after Goldman’s recommendation. On May 12, 2009, Ford announced it had raised approximately $1.4 billion in a stock offering consisting of 300 million common shares. Shortly before Goldman made its buy recommendation, Ford’s common stock was selling for $3.80 per share. Immediately after Goldman’s recommendation, Ford’s stock zoomed up to $4.33 per share. By May 12th, Ford was able to price its 300 million share offering at $4.75 per share. I’d say Mr. Archambault’s recommendation netted Ford an additional $285 million in proceeds, from this stock offering, due to his recommendation (this is the difference between offering 300 million shares at $4.75 vs. $3.80). One could also argue this stock offering may not have transpired at all had a heavyweight, such as Goldman Sachs, not put out a prior buy recommendation on Ford. Is there, nevertheless, a more sinister motive behind this recommendation?
Last edited by Dest98; May 24, 2009 at 09:00 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Like many who read this particular forum I've kept an eye on Ford stock ever since it dipped into the low $2 range. I noticed this article a few days ago on one of my preferred sites for info on financial markets. It's somewhat long reading by this forum's standards so I'll only link to it.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10807.html
Okay, I'll paste a little. Claptrap maybe, but interesting reading.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article10807.html
Okay, I'll paste a little. Claptrap maybe, but interesting reading.
Though, I didn't know that Ford would hope to consume 25% of volume, voided by GM & Chrysler's predicament. Remains to be seen.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,178
From: Payson, AZ USA
You must be seeing things that most customers apparently don't.
Ford is still a Detroit company. It's no better or worse than it's domestic rivals in the eyes of analysts, as well as the true measure, the actual buyers. Even some of Ford's new models are not as convincing as some cheerleaders would have me believe.
On a personal level, I can't see myself ever driving uninspiring cars like Fiesta, Focus, Taurus, Fusion etc... BLAND with a capital "B"! The only Ford I'd seriously consider owning would be the Mustang... but not when there is a legitimate GM rival like a Camaro (or even a Chev "G8") around. You could say, "well that's just you!" but how many other buyers out there have suddenly found faith with Ford? The sales figures suggest not many, not even when GM and Chrysler are both down on their knees.
Still looks like the same Ford, 'pre-Mulally', to me... so what am I missing?
Ford is still a Detroit company. It's no better or worse than it's domestic rivals in the eyes of analysts, as well as the true measure, the actual buyers. Even some of Ford's new models are not as convincing as some cheerleaders would have me believe.
On a personal level, I can't see myself ever driving uninspiring cars like Fiesta, Focus, Taurus, Fusion etc... BLAND with a capital "B"! The only Ford I'd seriously consider owning would be the Mustang... but not when there is a legitimate GM rival like a Camaro (or even a Chev "G8") around. You could say, "well that's just you!" but how many other buyers out there have suddenly found faith with Ford? The sales figures suggest not many, not even when GM and Chrysler are both down on their knees.
Still looks like the same Ford, 'pre-Mulally', to me... so what am I missing?
That is your perogative.
There have been article after article, many of which have included polls, on the subject. If you think the buying public sees Ford as being exactly the same as GM and Chrysler, then you are picking and choosing what you read.
As for you not liking any of Fords new and upcoming offerings, again, that is your perogative. It is quite obvious that you are a diehard GM fan, and that is great. Whatever works for you.
One small thought, though................ do you honestly believe that there is no difference between pre-Mulally Ford, and current Ford??? Have you even been paying attention???
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,887
From: northeast Miss.
seems good but in 06 they put all pphysical assets up to get 18bil...
ford already gave themselves an 18bil bailout 3 years ago.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,214
From: City of Champions, MA, USA
Ford is riding high right now and I am happy for them. What about 6-8 months down the road if we are still in the recession and GM and Chrysler are operating almost debt free? Ford will still have its debt.....................
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Mulally hasn't transformed the range, just mortgaged Ford up to their eyeballs so that they could ride out the turbulent period.
On the subject of product, Ford still seem unable to give its range real style and distinction and appear (to me) to be just Ford appliances on wheels. At least Mazda is able to bring out the character in its Ford clones. We wait to see how general public perceives Ford in light of what's going on around them and see if sales will actually 'take off'.
I eagerly await the new range of V8s that will soon give Ford back some of its character. The sort of character that only Mustang has managed to retain. That said, Mustang is still lacking 'real bite' compared to Camaro and Challenger.
My point being, no matter where you look into the Ford range, there's better product elsewhere... even if my opinion is entirely subjective.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,597
From: oshawa,ontario,canada
Correct.
Mulally hasn't transformed the range, just mortgaged Ford up to their eyeballs so that they could ride out the turbulent period.
On the subject of product, Ford still seem unable to give its range real style and distinction and appear (to me) to be just Ford appliances on wheels. At least Mazda is able to bring out the character in its Ford clones. We wait to see how general public perceives Ford in light of what's going on around them and see if sales will actually 'take off'.
I eagerly await the new range of V8s that will soon give Ford back some of its character. The sort of character that only Mustang has managed to retain. That said, Mustang is still lacking 'real bite' compared to Camaro and Challenger.
My point being, no matter where you look into the Ford range, there's better product elsewhere... even if my opinion is entirely subjective.
Mulally hasn't transformed the range, just mortgaged Ford up to their eyeballs so that they could ride out the turbulent period.
On the subject of product, Ford still seem unable to give its range real style and distinction and appear (to me) to be just Ford appliances on wheels. At least Mazda is able to bring out the character in its Ford clones. We wait to see how general public perceives Ford in light of what's going on around them and see if sales will actually 'take off'.
I eagerly await the new range of V8s that will soon give Ford back some of its character. The sort of character that only Mustang has managed to retain. That said, Mustang is still lacking 'real bite' compared to Camaro and Challenger.
My point being, no matter where you look into the Ford range, there's better product elsewhere... even if my opinion is entirely subjective.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
My point being that the car must attract customers in the first instance. No point me sitting in a car if it doesn't appeal to me. I only walk into dealerships when I like what I see and the interior design is what will clinch the deal... ultimately.
Though your point is taken in regards to Mulally's influence, would you really take Mustang over Camaro? :Me:
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Is this car an indication of the excitement building at Ford? :yawn: Count me out!
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...n-14-flat.html
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...n-14-flat.html
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 253
Whether it's true or not, the perception will still be 'Ford didn't take a hand out, GM/Chrysler did'
No different than 'Toyota has ultra high quality compared to anything NA'
It's all perception
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 163
From: Tulsa,OK
Is this car an indication of the excitement building at Ford? :yawn: Count me out!
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...n-14-flat.html
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...n-14-flat.html
So yes I'm excited about Fords, because from top to bottom there cars and trucks are very competitive with anybody out there, including GM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Is this car an indication of the excitement building at Ford? :yawn: Count me out!
http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightlin...n-14-flat.html
Granted, I'd take the styling of the CTS all day long, but those times are pretty impressive for a heavy sedan....
