Jac Nasser, who created Ford's Premium Auto Group (and was Ford's last CEO), is intrested in regaining control over PAG. Says he can do a better job than is being done now.

Hmmmm..... can't argue with that.


Meanwhile, Robert Rubin....yes, THAT Robert Rubin, as in President Clinton's Treasury Secretary.... has resigned from Ford's Board Of Directors (you did know he was there, didn't you?) because the company he draws his paycheck from (Citibank's CitiGroup financial) may end up handling the selling off of Ford assets.

Seems things are starting to brew at Ford.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...014/BUSINESS01

 

Interesting

 

This is just a thought. but with gas prices being high. having a truck or SUV right now is not what people really are wanting.. They are much more likely to by a fuel efficient car. So perhaps if the compaines cut the truck/SUV divisions down, and upped the car divisions perhaps they could turn more profit? I dunno..

All i know is there are alot of people who have those big things that really do not need them... which is good they bought a vehicle.. but prolly could have done a car rather than a truck they have to have a ladder to get into. Would be intersting to see what plans are laid with ford in order to turn the profit and try to get something back.

 

Autoline Detriot this morning said something big was going to happen with Ford today...is that it?

not sure how credible the show is...but it never seems like outrageous information or speculation like magazines and what not.

 

Is Jac Nasswer coming back a good thing for F.M.C.? I don't remember him being on Guy's chistmas card lst.

 

It would be the best thing for Fords PAG in my opinion.

 

I don't he's trying to come back to Ford. It sounds like he wants part ownership of PAG.

 

From what I read it sounds like he's the main guy for a group that wants to buy PAG from Ford. I think it would be in Ford's best interest because he's the guy who knows what PAG is about because he created it. I think part of the problem with PAG is that as great as some of the brand names are, they have been dogs. A lot of Land Rovers are a bit junky (especially when they were under BMW) and Jag has produced a misunderstood looking car (S-type) and and that entry level joke called the X-type.

 

jack is trying to pull together a bunch of private equity people into a company to buy PAG off Ford, but it won't work.

jaguar is the key in the Nasser argument, because it's worth nothing and would have to be given away with at least a billion dollars to cover all the expenses ford would have paid to shut it down anyway (which, looking at the sales trend lines, is the only inevitable outcome). Not dissimilar to the way the Phoenix Group took over MG Rover.

Land Rover is the key in the Ford sale of PAG, because it makes more profit per car than anything else in the Ford empire and this is why it's the key. it's the only really attractive thing in the PAG deal right now, which is why Ford will ask stupid money for it and nobody will buy PAG.

Where Volvo fits into it is anybody's guess, though there are rumours that Renault is sniffing around its former joint-venture partner again.

Aston has hit black zero, but still doesn't make what Land Rover makes per car.

So if the sale of Volvo is neither here nor there to Ford (it isn't the most profitable, but it's got potential big gains around the corner with the H30 hatchback and a smaller SUV) and it will try to milk Land Rover for too much, that leaves Jaguar.

who would want a company that loses billions a year and hasn't turned a profit since ford bought it in, i think from memory, 94?

Well, Jac's accustomed to managing companies that don't turn a profit...

the big whisper has been Hyundai to buy Jaguar, because it's never going to be a prestige brand on its own, and privately-owned British earthmoving manufacturer JCB has expressed an interest as well.

so, sorry if that's a bit convoluted, but that's Jac's interest in PAG...

 

Intresting points.

Still, Jac Nasser put together PAG with the intention of creating an intergrated high dollar division.

I don't like the guy too much, but I do have to give credit where it's due. The guy's real good at making alot of money on things that should be impossible. He was a d*ick regarding the Explorer/Firestone episode, but you gotta give grudging admiration to a guy who not only made Ford enough money to buy GM if it wanted, but also made a play to buy both Honda and BMW.

Nasser created PAG, and probally understands it better than anyone at Ford right now save J. Mays.

One question. If Jac's company does succeed in buying PAG, does that mean things have gone full circle? All Ford cars, save the Mustang and Crown Vic, will either be based on Mazda (which he consolidated under Ford) or Volvo (which he would in essence be running)?

Good way of putting it.

 

I did not know that about Rubin. Frankly I'm shocked somebody that is so far off in left field in terms of understanding how the macro level economy, tax policy, unemployment, etc. interplay could be sitting on the board of one of America's largest corporations.

I'll step off the soapbox before I start something big, but it is interesting to see the musical chairs game starting up at Ford.

 

??? Rubin was a Wall Street guy before he joined the Clinton administration neither he (nor Clinton) were really that left field. Are you confusing him with Robert Reich? (liberal economist that had a figurehead position at Dept of Labor but little influence on economic policy)

 

Nothing wrong with Rubin. Can hardly look at the 90s boom and not give credit where it's due. You can hate everything else about Clinton, but between having Wall Street insider Rubin at Treasury and keeping economic guru Greenspan in the FRB produced probally the best economic team the country's ever seen.

Plus flowmotion is right. Neither he nor Clinton could seriously be considered left wingers, and you probally are thinking of Labor Secretary Reich. Like the HUD secretary position, not exactly a position of great influence.

 

You're right, I'm thinking of Reich. I'm getting my R dudes mixed up. Rubin makes much more sense on Ford's board, LOL.

You're also right Billy boy was not a far out left winger...more of a pragmatic moderate because that's what kept him in office. But I'd say that the make up of Congress after '94 forced him to be that way.

I would agree keeping Greenspan around was smart, but I'd have to argue the economy trucked along DESPITE the big '94 tax hike. If you jacked taxes like that today, the economy would tank overnight. I guess $1.20/gal gasoline left more room for people to squeeze their wallets.

 

Doubtful. It's not just the tax that determines things, it's who the tax is aimed at. A tax similar to the '94 one probally wouldn't do much for the economy either way right now. Congress has run so wild with spending the past 5 years that it makes the early 90s deficit look like nothing.

The economics crowd credits the tax hikes (which were targeted to the $100K+ gang... it actually went down for most everyone else & was neutral for the middle class), the drop in defense spending, and finally, the deadlock in federal spending after the GOP took congress (Clinton kept congress' local pork barrel spending in check, while congress kept the lid on Clinton's programs) with the budget surplus and cheap money which fueled the economy.

But, this isn't an economics website. Let's get back to cars.