Only after Ford "retired" Jac Nasser (his cost pressures propmted Explorers to be shod with cheap tires, and then stonewalled fixing the problem).

Explorer sales were taking a serious beating for awhile, but Ford did an amazing recovery:

1. Changed CEOs
2. Finally fixed the problem without consideration of price, by replacing tires on every single Explorer not just on the lots, but of any Explorer buyer who wanted them replaced.
3. Had the crazy luck of having an all new redesigned, IRS Explorer going on sale just when the problem broke cover.
4. Had CEO Bill Ford himself on commercials.

Probally the best damage control execution in automotive history.

 

I wouldn't say the Explorer made a complete recovery. So far this year its sales are down over 40,000 units. It used to be the undisputed leader in mid-sized SUV sales, outselling the Blazer by a huge margin. Now, the Trailblazer is running neck and neck with it. Actually, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Trailblazer is in the lead in the 4-door category, since the whole Explorer line has a 282,000 to 197,000 lead YTD, and I'm sure Ford sold more than 80,000 2-doors and SporTracs.

Granted, the competition improved greatly while the 2003 Explorer didn't really move the bar all that much. But I think people still associate "Explorer" with exploding tires.

 

Actually, the reason that Explorer sales are down is competition.......... plain and simple. Where there used to be only a couple of choices in the midsize SUV market............ now there are dozens. In the last couple of years, the choices have exploded. Also, Ford has even eroded their own market a bit with the Escape. It will do 9/10 of what the Explorer can do, for alot less money.

The fact that the Explorer has still held the lead, under these conditions, is rather amazing. They do have a very loyal core of buyers.

I don't think the name has been tarnished much at all. Ford did do a commendable job of taking care of the customer, in that fiasco. It makes you wonder how any of the other major players would have handled it.

 

I think #3 is probably the most important of all of that.

I wonder how much thought went into dropping the Explorer name on the new vehicle...

 

Sorry dude, I stand with you in most positions, and I understand what you are trying to say, but I just can't see this the same way you do.

To me, your post above states (heavily too) that Ford ADVERTISED the Mustang and Chevy didn't on the Camaro. You then state that "More advertizing would have pointed out that Camaro's powerplants got better fuel economy & more horsepower, making consumers aware of it's dent resistant doors & fenders would have won a few more people...
I think we all agree that better advertising would have sold more Camaros, but...
isn't advertising just a quick-blip 30-second impression that the seller uses to influence a potential buyer?
I mean honestly, who really thinks that every little thing in a TV spot or rag-ad is the gospel truth?!?! Heck guionM, every truck ad I've ever seen has the truck being "best in class" for something, whether it's headroom, seating, towing capacity, torque, hp, cargo box length, or suspension travel... You see "BEST IN CLASS" in huge letters, but then these goofy claims have tiny asterisks with disclaimers, saying "equipped with base engines" or "when properly equipped". Who actually reads those disclaimers? Truth is - nobody... the reader simply sees what they want to see, and IGNORES everything else.

To hit another one of your points, you nailed it all in one tiny segment,"Ford advertized the Mustang, sales people actually knew something about the Mustang, and it was packaged in a way that more people wanted. "
Now, THAT says it all.

Ford gives the people what they ask for. The problem (morally) with this is that people in general do not know anything technical about cars - period. They want to look good in it, and it needs to run OK - that's it, they are happy. Like you said yourself, if the salesman doesn't know the engine size and ratings, how the heck can you expect the consumer to know them?!?!

Ford could have made it better, used better materials, better fit/finish, lower NVH, more HP in the GT, and so on... but they didn't - they kept it cheap, functional, and utilitarian, which is all most people wanted. In their ignorance, 90% of the people buying a GT had NO IDEA that Ford could slap 10 more HP to the rear wheels with a different program in the EEC. The average buyer had no clue how 5 more pounds of matting could reduce road noise inside. 90% or more of the people jumping in their new Mustang had no clue if the car came with General blah-blah radials, Good Year so-so roundies, or Michelins - NOR DID THEY CARE!!! They were just smiling from ear to ear driving away in their new Mustang - oblivious to the details lying underneath.

And one last note about the Mustang/Camaro comp...
You stated that the Mustang received "freshening" in appearance. I agree, that was a key factor in sales. Many on this very board stated that they didn't buy an F-bod after '97 or so because their '93-'95 models looked the same, and they couldn't (or wouldn't) justify jumping into more payments for a new car that looked the same as their old one.
Now after saying that, I challenge you to refute that people wouldn't buy a car just because it looks fresh, new, and cool. There are DROVES of people who buy a car based simply on HOW IT LOOKS - PERIOD.
How can a buyer like that not be blamed for being an ignorant buyer? You lose me there.
If I took the new '05 Mustang body and put a 1974-vintage 2V-carbureted 2.8 V6 engine and a C3 automatic under it - it would be LUDACROUS, but I guarantee you I could sell it! And the buyer would drive away smiling. See my point?

I'm not arguing your points that advertising and freshenings make sales guionM, not at all. I'm trying to show that people en-masse are generally uneducated in technical issues and are easily influenced by even the simplest propaganda. All they need to make them open their wallet is a little coaxing... from a friend, a test drive, a weekend rental, peer pressure, family pressure, a barage of ads on TV, one rag article, an awesome picture, chic-models laying all over it, you name it - just any little thing can set the purchase in motion. But more often than not, there is little or NO significant investigation done on the purchased item by the buyer - especially before the purchase. The only thing they are interested in is the price.

 

 

I don't see many people trading in their Toyotas for domestic products. If Toyota has become a sort of "Japanese Buick," it's because the domestics have burned too many consumers, too many times. Unless Detroit can improve resale values, and produce genuinely reliable cars - not the sort of "Exploders" that eat you alive with repairs after the 50,000 mile mark - the trend won't change.

So, does anyone know somebody that traded a 4Runner for an "Exploder?"

 

I still see problems with Toyota in the long run. Bottom line, Toyotas aren't cool. Celica notwithstanding, they have a much bigger perception problem among teens than any of the Big 2.5. Believe it. You don't buy a Toyota to be cool. You buy one because your 40-something buddy at work swears by their dependability. GM and Ford just need to keep building quality cars, build a stronger reputation, and above all keep building cars that excite the senses! I refuse to believe that the majority of people in this country would want to drive a kitchen appliance over a solid, fun to drive vehicle at a similar price.

 

most people in this country don't care about cars at all. they ARE road appliances! do you care about your refrigirator as long as it keeps your food fresh for years? most people don't care about their cars as long as they take them where they need to go reliably for years.

we auto enthusiasts are few and far between. this is true even among camaro owners, imagine how true this is among the general public!?

 

Whew now that was some good content. I just graduated over the summer with a BS in Mechanical Engineering and cannot find a job, I haven't even been asked to come to an interview despite having sent out well over 100 resumes and going to a good school (U of Mich).
I am now selling electronics at the moment (putting my degree to good use ) and can tell you that 99% of the DVD players, MP3 players, CD players and most other electronics are made in Vietnam, Singapore, Taiwan but most are made in China (yes even sony is not made in Japan). No not one of those products are made in the US, with the exception of Toshiba Proj TV's. I am certain most know why COST!! That is why manufacturing jobs are disappearing incredibly fast.
They can pay workers there next to nothing an hour, pay no benifits and make big bucks.

I own a GM and a Ford product and plan to hopefully buy another domestic car if I find a job. I work with a guy, my age who drives a Mitsubishi Eclipse, and he would NEVER concider buying a domestic car because they are 'poor quality' and none are really cool like the RX7 he wants to buy.

So image and cost are the two main factors when it comes to what people are buying, and where it is coming from.

 

OK...I'm gonna step right in this one...with both feet.......(again, go get a cup of coffee..it's gonna be a long one..........)

GuionM, I can understand some of what you say, but to say the consumer shouldn't be blamed, to me at least, is I think what brings up a bigger issue: LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY. I'm tired of the American Public not taking responsibility for their actions. People will complain and yell.....and blame someone else. To wit: in the small town I'm from in Pennsylvania, a hardware store went out of business......everyone felt terrible...including those who drove ten miles to the Home Depot instead of supporting the hardware store to begin with. Now..I'm not saying that Home Depot is bad...in fact, I spend money there...but only if I can't find the product at the local nursery or the local hardware store.....but the point is: if you don't support your local business, it ain't gonna be there! So it's something we all should be thinking about.

Now, because most of you know who I work for, I will not talk about automobiles and trucks here, so that you can't say "well, yeah, but you have a vested interest here!"

SO: I'll talk about commercial aircraft.

The Airlines need bailout money...actually, bailout is probably a bad term....because the plan is low interest loans thru the government. (Hint #1....that's you and me.......) As to whether or not "the government" (please refer back to hint #1) will ever see that money back remains to be seen.

Yup.....we probably need to do that because we as a nation need strong airlines.

Here's what makes me go crazy: The American Airline Industry, the last time I looked.....is purchasing over 70% of their future aircraft from AIRBUS INDUSTRIE................NOT BOEING.

Airbus Industrie is a consortium owned by 7 european nations...and companies. They receive government subsidized loans....this allows them to build "white tails" which means they build aircraft and park 'em til they're sold. Now..they don't just have a big field sitting there with A320s......but it DOES happen that they build more than are actually sold......the interest alone on one aircraft is staggering.......and thus, Boeing does not do this....Boeing is a publicly owned company.....with a responsibility to its stockholders.

This year, Airbus, for the first time, outsold Boeing. Furthermore, Boeing is laying off people......the numbers, again, staggering. I know that there are a few Fcar enthusiasts that WERE employed by Boeing...but after 20 some years, have found themselves without jobs.

Now...it's true that Boeing is now outsourcing components. There are a couple of reasons for that. One is to stay competitive.....you can't continue to pay wages here in the U.S. and compete with wages paid in foreign countries when you are fighting for your survival. Two: pressure from other foreign countries saying "You want to sell us aircraft? We want part of the action." Furthermore, the consortium knows what's good for them. They say: Mr. Airline CEO...you want more landing slots in one of our European nations' airports? Then buy our aircraft and we'll think about it............

Now....before you jump in and start ranting...I will admit....to post everything about this airline situation on this post would bring the server down....(and probably make the lights dim........) and I am not a subject matter expert........this is just some food for thought....and I welcome FACTS about this situation if I'm wrong..... (hint #2....note the word Facts)

My point to Mr. Airline CEO is this: Mr. Airline CEO: If you want the United States Government to loan/bail you out, then you'd BETTER start thinking of what's good for the United States.

I cannot say that every thing I buy is built in the United States or Canada. I wish I could. In many cases, the consumer has no choice. But you can BET that when I have the chance, I support the economy of the country/continent that I live in.

I remember a few years back when Carl Ichan had taken over an airline. (I believe it was Continental, but I could be wrong)

I saw a flight attendant get into a Honda.......a Japanese built Honda, by the way..........and it had a bumper sticker attached:
"Save American Jobs - Fire Carl Ichan!" The evil side of me wanted to walk over and unleash.........but I didn't.

Some of you have heard me talk about the difference in wages between the U.S. Automaker and the wage of the Korean automaker.........you may also have heard me say "I don't personally have a problem with the American/Canadian Wage....because the money will be spent, for the most part, in the American/Canadian Economy......and that's a good thing. (I'm not so sure that it DOES get spent in the american/Candian Economy, unfortunately.....)

Now...as to 'foreign cars' being built in the U.S. -- when I hear that, I ask the following questions: Oh really, so how much did "Brand X" pay in local school taxes? And in county taxes? And in State Taxes? And in Federal Taxes? I think most would be shocked to find out the answer is "nothing or next to it."

Now...these are my PERSONAL feelings and beliefs. I welcome facts to change my mind........the ole adage "a mind is like a parachute -- it only works when fully opened....."

The bottom line? If we want to continue to enjoy the standard of living that we, as a nation -- collectively -- enjoy, then we'd better start looking out for number 1.

Let the controversy continue:

 

Sorry, you're just flat out wrong on the federal income tax for foreign subsidiaries. Toyota-USA pays the same 35% tax rate on corporate profits and any other U.S. company in its earnings range.

http://www.wicpa.org/PDF/1101foreigntaxiss.pdf

The foreign car makers get a local and state tax advantage because the states and localities are willing to bribe them to locate there. GM could and does exactly the same thing when locating a new plant. The only disadvantage is on the existing infrastructure of GM which has no bribe/taxation deal on it, ie GM headquarters.

But guess what? Boeing got fed up with state and local taxation in Seattle and moved to Chicago and engineered a sweetheart state and local tax deal. The whole damn comany moved, HQ, design and manufacturing.

As to the cars. Toyota is whipping GM in cars because they make BETTER cars. Simple as that. Their cars go well beyond the 3/36 before accessories start failing and oil leaks start showing up. They also seem to give damn about the styling and refinement of even the econoclass cars. How long has it taken before the low end FWD crap GM has been putting out finally got rid of the rear beam axle and went IRS?

Corvette, Cadillac, and GM Trucks are great. But everything else, at least up until the recent '04 intros, simply gets gets whupped in design, styling, and refinement when compared to the Japanese competition. Example? Honda Civic vs Chevy Cavalier. How about Grand Prix vs Maxima? Maybe the quality is improving but you oughtta read this article on the corporate culture at Toyota.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...8001_mz001.htm

Is there anything like that at GM? or Ford? I doubt it. The consumer is the most efficient distributor of wealth, and they are NOT stupid. The Japanese continue to march ahead into the U.S. market precisely because the U.S. consumer recognizes and appreciates value.

Now the last bastion of GM and Ford is under direct assault from the Japanese, trucks. The 25% chicken tax on imported light trucks managed to save the Big 3's asses for the last 25 years, but that daylight is fading fast, because they're building them here now and not just little trucks, but big honkin trucks. You guys along with Ford and DC are going to give up at LEAST 1/3 of your current fullsize truck marketshare to Toyota and Nissan by the end of this decade.

You better learn to make cars by then.

 

I wish someone could explain to me what is so freaking great about Toyota's styling??? Camry? Corolla? Is anyone buying these cars because they revolutionize exterior design?

 

let me ask you a question. when you are driving your car, are you on the inside of it, or the outside? WTF difference does it make if the outside is bland as long as its not flat out ugly? the Japanese are methodical about everything. every little fob, every little ****, handle and bob. interior is what sells most people on the Japanese cars. because people feel right at home there. the fact that it looks tidy and feels solid/nice isn't to be overlooked either. you look at any GM/Ford car up to the mid 90's. topperwear is more appealing and solid than the kind of crap that was passed of as interiors on those cars.

is that better?

 

I've driven some Toyotas... and came away from their interiors yawning. Both my 02 Trans Am (now sold) and my 04 GTP have a more exciting and ergonomic interior than a typical Toyota. I find it hard to believe Toyota is 'sweating every little **** and fob' when I look at the 04 Camry dash, with its tiny HVAC buttons too small to operate reliably with a gloved hand and its lack of steering-wheel-mounted stereo controls. Any Toyotas with a HUD? Didn't think so. XM? Maybe one or two... soon... but nothing like the dozens of GM models offering it as an option.