Taurus name may return
01-11-2007, 11:24 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Taurus name may return
Not an announcement, but Ford CEO is asking serious questions lately about why a car once that routinely sold 400,000 cars per year, had a reputation as a great middle America family car, and 20 years worth of name equity was dumped for new names on 2 different cars.
Doesn't seem like something that would be asked and points made if there wasn't at least the idea of bringing the name back.
Taurus was a ground breaking car when it came out in design, price, quality, and value.... and was mopping the floor with Toyota and Honda in sales.
By the time Taurus died, it was dull, hadn't been redesigned in years...... and STILL was selling 200,000 cars per year (not including the sales of the Sable).
It's been a mystery ever since as to why Ford walked away from the name. It's even more a mystery why even Ford's own marketing chief doesn't know why.
I had grave reservations on Ford hiring outsider Alan Mulally, a Boeing executive, to run Ford. Now, after shaking out the old guard, successfully buying out half of it's factory workers, breaking Paul Mascarenas' seeming lock on making all large Fords FWD/AWD and bringing back the Nasser era plan of a large Ford based on the Mustang's platform, and asking very serious questions that alot of people seemingly don't have answers to, I got to say it seems I was dead wrong about the guy.
I liked Bill Ford because of his devotion to the Mustang, and his commitment to making Fords high in quality, but either he was a disaster in everything else, or he was too easily influenced by those who didn't exactly have the company's best intrest at heart.
Doesn't seem like something that would be asked and points made if there wasn't at least the idea of bringing the name back.
Mulally: Five Hundred Should Have Been Taurus
BusinessWeek: Marketing/Advertising, Sedans, Ford, Automotive News January 5th, 2007 8:33 AM
Businessweek’s David Kiley isn’t so sure that Ford’s Taurus name is gone for good, and from the sounds of his quotes from the company’s new CEO, Alan Mulally isn’t sure, either.
After the company’s one-time best seller was dropped in favor of three separate cars (Fusion, Five Hundred, and Freestyle) and production ended late last year, many have wondered why the Blue Oval walked away from a name with decades (and untold millions of dollars) worth of equity. Of course, the 2006 Taurus was nothing like vehicle the company launched twenty years ago, but that still doesn’t change the fact that name had tremendous value. More than a few bright marketing executives have preached the value in saving damaged brand names, rather than starting over again. Perhaps most unfortunately for the Taurus name is that it didn’t start with the letter “F,” which made its euthanizing somewhat easier given Ford’s obsession with their naming conventions.
But with Mulally in the company asking difficult questions and planning a “deep dive” (an age-old CEO favorite phrase) on why the company stopped investing in the Taurus name, there should be some developments on this front soon. Kiley had his tape recorder rolling when Mulally let slip, “the Ford Five Hundred should have been the new Taurus.”
Ford’s own marketing chief, Barry Engle, is quoted in the Businessweek piece as saying “I don’t know why we invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a name over 20 years and then walk away from it.”
Touché, my friend. Touché.
BusinessWeek: Marketing/Advertising, Sedans, Ford, Automotive News January 5th, 2007 8:33 AM
Businessweek’s David Kiley isn’t so sure that Ford’s Taurus name is gone for good, and from the sounds of his quotes from the company’s new CEO, Alan Mulally isn’t sure, either.
After the company’s one-time best seller was dropped in favor of three separate cars (Fusion, Five Hundred, and Freestyle) and production ended late last year, many have wondered why the Blue Oval walked away from a name with decades (and untold millions of dollars) worth of equity. Of course, the 2006 Taurus was nothing like vehicle the company launched twenty years ago, but that still doesn’t change the fact that name had tremendous value. More than a few bright marketing executives have preached the value in saving damaged brand names, rather than starting over again. Perhaps most unfortunately for the Taurus name is that it didn’t start with the letter “F,” which made its euthanizing somewhat easier given Ford’s obsession with their naming conventions.
But with Mulally in the company asking difficult questions and planning a “deep dive” (an age-old CEO favorite phrase) on why the company stopped investing in the Taurus name, there should be some developments on this front soon. Kiley had his tape recorder rolling when Mulally let slip, “the Ford Five Hundred should have been the new Taurus.”
Ford’s own marketing chief, Barry Engle, is quoted in the Businessweek piece as saying “I don’t know why we invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a name over 20 years and then walk away from it.”
Touché, my friend. Touché.
By the time Taurus died, it was dull, hadn't been redesigned in years...... and STILL was selling 200,000 cars per year (not including the sales of the Sable).
It's been a mystery ever since as to why Ford walked away from the name. It's even more a mystery why even Ford's own marketing chief doesn't know why.
I had grave reservations on Ford hiring outsider Alan Mulally, a Boeing executive, to run Ford. Now, after shaking out the old guard, successfully buying out half of it's factory workers, breaking Paul Mascarenas' seeming lock on making all large Fords FWD/AWD and bringing back the Nasser era plan of a large Ford based on the Mustang's platform, and asking very serious questions that alot of people seemingly don't have answers to, I got to say it seems I was dead wrong about the guy.
I liked Bill Ford because of his devotion to the Mustang, and his commitment to making Fords high in quality, but either he was a disaster in everything else, or he was too easily influenced by those who didn't exactly have the company's best intrest at heart.
01-11-2007, 11:59 AM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yadkinville, NC USA
Posts: 3,180
Problem is, when you run a business the size of Ford, it's impossible to do.
I think he couldn't make the hard decisions that needed to be made and then go home to his family and forget about it.
He was the most interactive with plants and employees by far, actually stopping to ask factory workers how they were and what ideas they had.
He spent more time in private interviews and conversations than any CEO ever at Ford outside of Henry I.
He waived all his salary and bonuses from the day he walked in the door.
He allowed the biggest birthday party ever for a corporation.
You can go on and on about his good, personable side.
However, I think after 4 years and lots of economic changes it became apparent that he was going to have to hurt some peoples' feelings and make some cuts. So he decided to bring in somebody from outside that was capable of doing it for him. That would be Alan.
I like Alan. He comes across as concerned, interested, and willing to challenge the status-quo - all good IMO. He's been honest so far - referencing his conversation with Toyota about cancelling his order for the Lexus. That was also a classy move IMO.
It does not bother me that he knows nothing about making CARS... as long as he LISTENS to what his TECHNICAL STAFF tells him, and responds they way they advise him, I'm good with it. He needs to know BUSINESS, not cars (it would help, but not critical IMO). When the engineers come out with an awesome interior with perfect "everything", DON'T allow the guys in accounting to force redesign or changes to go to cheaper materials, plastic substitutes, etc. Don't allow the exterior to be cheapened for $.20/fender when the cheaper one looks and fits like a turd. Don't allow production to substitute Robby's Radials for Michelins or GoodYears on the line. THINGS like this are where "business" decisions kill good designs and end up saving a few pennies today, but costing millions of dollars tomorrow in recalls, warranty work, and lost repeat sales.
So, Alan, my advice is to listen to your technical people (the engineers, designers, etc) who are trying to put out products that people actually WANT. Do that, and everything else will fall into place.
Likewise, Bill is far from "out of power and control" - he is still the Chairman. I think he can now cater to the environmentalists, the specialties, the influential people in the industry, etc and not have to lie or alienate himself from the common workers either. Best of all, ponycar lovers (of any brand) still have a guy in a very powerful position that loves 2-door, RWD, V8 powered cars, and his influence alone bodes well for the continued life of such cars in our marketplace!
As for the Taurus thing... well duh. I think we all here have questioned the move to drop it from the lineup. It won borrowed time as a fleet-only car and still sold like hotcakes. Kinda makes you wonder what they were smoking at Ford when they had to try several times to actually kill a best-seller, huh?!?!
01-11-2007, 12:17 PM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Agree with all your assesments. Bill seems likeable, and I was a huge fan of his when he took over from Nasser (who I thought was taking Ford in wrong directions).
Lately, although I haven't changed my opinions of Nasser, I now think if he and Bill Ford had learned to compromise (or I should say if Nasser had learned to compromise) Ford might have been unbeatable. They certainly had some intresting products in the pipeline. Mercury would have been dead, but it's still really no better off than it was back then. SVT would probally still be around along with it's expanded influence.
Anyhow, here's another Business Week item on the prospect of the Taurus name returning. Turns out Ford's new CEO is...... a Taurus..... fan?!
I get a feeling the Taurus name might not be the only name returning. 
Lately, although I haven't changed my opinions of Nasser, I now think if he and Bill Ford had learned to compromise (or I should say if Nasser had learned to compromise) Ford might have been unbeatable. They certainly had some intresting products in the pipeline. Mercury would have been dead, but it's still really no better off than it was back then. SVT would probally still be around along with it's expanded influence.
Anyhow, here's another Business Week item on the prospect of the Taurus name returning. Turns out Ford's new CEO is...... a Taurus..... fan?!
January 04, 2007
The Taurus Could Rise Again At Ford
David Kiley
Ford CEO Alan Mulally as a fan of the recently discontinued Taurus, so much so that he recently rented one while traveling to check it out. Mulally, who joined Ford from Boeing last September, became a fan of the Taurus 20 years ago when he studied Ford's production system for the car for a project he was doing at the aircraft company.
"I havent had time to do the deep dive on why we stopped investing in Taurus, but I'd like to," says Mulally.....the Ford Five Hundred should have been the new Taurus."
The day after Mulally said this, Ford Division's new marketing chief Barry Engle was kvetching about the fact that the Fusion is a name known only to 30% of buyers in the mid-size car segment, the name having been launched just a year ago. Asked why Ford doesn't rename the Fusion or the Five Hundred "Taurus," Engle said, "Stranger things have happened." "I don't know why we invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a name over 20 years and then walk away from it," he added.
Ford's naming skills are comical. Mulally joked this week that he was still looking for his Lincoln Zephyr to drive. Of cource, the Zephyr name was dropped in favor MKZ for this model year. Even Ford sales analysis chief George Pipas referred to the Zephyr in this week's sales call before correcting himself.
Ford got down on the Taurus name because they all knew that they had damaged the name after so many years of botched design and no investment, and then by turning the car into a rental donkey. But I'm not sure I wouldn't be tempted to ditch the Five Hundred name and give it the Taurus badge with a whole new positioning. Given how Ford has screwed up the marketing of the Five Hundred, I could think of worse ideas than rechristening it Taurus.
The Taurus Could Rise Again At Ford
David Kiley
Ford CEO Alan Mulally as a fan of the recently discontinued Taurus, so much so that he recently rented one while traveling to check it out. Mulally, who joined Ford from Boeing last September, became a fan of the Taurus 20 years ago when he studied Ford's production system for the car for a project he was doing at the aircraft company.
"I havent had time to do the deep dive on why we stopped investing in Taurus, but I'd like to," says Mulally.....the Ford Five Hundred should have been the new Taurus."
The day after Mulally said this, Ford Division's new marketing chief Barry Engle was kvetching about the fact that the Fusion is a name known only to 30% of buyers in the mid-size car segment, the name having been launched just a year ago. Asked why Ford doesn't rename the Fusion or the Five Hundred "Taurus," Engle said, "Stranger things have happened." "I don't know why we invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a name over 20 years and then walk away from it," he added.
Ford's naming skills are comical. Mulally joked this week that he was still looking for his Lincoln Zephyr to drive. Of cource, the Zephyr name was dropped in favor MKZ for this model year. Even Ford sales analysis chief George Pipas referred to the Zephyr in this week's sales call before correcting himself.
Ford got down on the Taurus name because they all knew that they had damaged the name after so many years of botched design and no investment, and then by turning the car into a rental donkey. But I'm not sure I wouldn't be tempted to ditch the Five Hundred name and give it the Taurus badge with a whole new positioning. Given how Ford has screwed up the marketing of the Five Hundred, I could think of worse ideas than rechristening it Taurus.
01-11-2007, 01:09 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,646
Do you think bringing back a once hallowed name that ultimately became a running joke can lift up what's generally agreed to be a rather uninspiring car of underwhelming performance?
Oh...and accoring to recently revealed pics is getting uglier?
Oh...and accoring to recently revealed pics is getting uglier?
01-11-2007, 01:22 PM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Yadkinville, NC USA
Posts: 3,180
Except on sales spreadsheets!
People who would recognize Taurus' name would not likely be looking for 0-60 times and 1/4 slips. They would be looking for fit/finish, a quality ride, GREAT dependability and durability, usefullness, roominess, and a moderate price.
Kinda sounds like the FiveHundred, don't it?
I think they could do worse things right now than renaming it myself.
I think they need to do the rename with a reskin job too though, and throw in something totally unexpected and unique to the car so that the Taurus will again be something "different" than other cars of the same class.
01-11-2007, 01:40 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: northeast Miss.
Posts: 2,887
With the exception of Taurus SHO, the words "Taurus" and "performance" never went together.
Except on sales spreadsheets!
People who would recognize Taurus' name would not likely be looking for 0-60 times and 1/4 slips. They would be looking for an eggshell colored washing machine, and a moderate price.
Kinda sounds like the FiveHundred, don't it?
I think they could do worse things right now than renaming it myself.
I think they need to do the rename with a reskin job too though, and throw in something totally unexpected and unique to the car so that the Taurus will again be something "different" than other cars of the same class.
Except on sales spreadsheets!
People who would recognize Taurus' name would not likely be looking for 0-60 times and 1/4 slips. They would be looking for an eggshell colored washing machine, and a moderate price.
Kinda sounds like the FiveHundred, don't it?
I think they could do worse things right now than renaming it myself.
I think they need to do the rename with a reskin job too though, and throw in something totally unexpected and unique to the car so that the Taurus will again be something "different" than other cars of the same class.
01-11-2007, 02:01 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,646
Quality and Tuarus, from what I remember, were not synonymous in it's last years.
The 500 is underwhelming in most driving situations from what I've read.
And lastly, do you run the risk of confusing your customer base? "The car formerly known as the 500....?"
The 500 is underwhelming in most driving situations from what I've read.
And lastly, do you run the risk of confusing your customer base? "The car formerly known as the 500....?"
01-11-2007, 02:48 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N Falmouth MA
Posts: 2,597
I'm wondering the same thing... Granted the Taurus helped Ford out of that rut they were in in the early 80's, but they also have two vehicles that are basically replacing it. I've heard that the sales of the Taurus were declining in recent years.
Do they really think that a similar sedan to the 500 and Focus, granted the focus is a smaller boxier vehicle, would really make a huge bit of a differance?
The mustang is selling. Once that GT500 hits the floor, it'll sell! How are the sales of the mustang doing in relation to the sales of their sedans?
Do they really think that a similar sedan to the 500 and Focus, granted the focus is a smaller boxier vehicle, would really make a huge bit of a differance?
The mustang is selling. Once that GT500 hits the floor, it'll sell! How are the sales of the mustang doing in relation to the sales of their sedans?
01-11-2007, 03:03 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
Well, the good thing about the Taurus name is that everyone recognized it.
But the bad thing about the Taurus name is that everyone recognized it.
Rental fleet sales numbers fail to impress.
I saw a dealer advert with a brand new 2006 Taurus for $10,500
-- which gives you an idea what Ford was selling these for.
But the bad thing about the Taurus name is that everyone recognized it.
I saw a dealer advert with a brand new 2006 Taurus for $10,500
-- which gives you an idea what Ford was selling these for.
01-11-2007, 03:29 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N Falmouth MA
Posts: 2,597
200,000 a year and they call that declining sales?!!?
Add the Sable Sales into it. And yes, the Taurus need a facelift... I was never a big fan of thoes cars, but they did sell! I've seen a lot of them for Company cars and Taxis (well, around here).
Add the Sable Sales into it. And yes, the Taurus need a facelift... I was never a big fan of thoes cars, but they did sell! I've seen a lot of them for Company cars and Taxis (well, around here).
01-11-2007, 05:21 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Annapolis MD
Posts: 2,802
Anyone remember the first Robocop? That movie made Taurus famous as a futuristic car before it was even on the road. I had thought they made the car up for the movie. All the cars at that time had square headlights. Thats the way it seemed anyway.
01-11-2007, 07:33 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Mack and Bewick
Posts: 1,600
Dont really know what else to say. The moment the 300 forced them to drop the price on the 500, not to mention stole any possible thunder out of the name, they should have called it taurus and been done with it.
Ive driven one, a washing machine yes, but definetly a high capacity one. I would say its much better than the taurus it replaced.
Ill go out on a limb and say Ford would have been far more succesful with a "New Taurus" that was 50% better than the last then a "All new 500" that had no history and no outstanding qualities.
Another new nose, prefferably one that doesen't suck, and an AWD v8 or turbo v6 version... Id say its a salvegeable project.
Last edited by Good Ph.D; 01-11-2007 at 07:41 PM.