Ping
Posted on 01/24/2007 5:37:16 PM PST by Flavius
DETROIT (AP) -- Ford Motor Co. could post the worst annual loss in its storied 103-year history when the automaker releases its 2006 earnings on Thursday.
The old record net loss was $7.39 billion in 1992, but through three quarters of this year, Ford already had lost $7 billion.
Fourteen analysts polled by Thomson Financial expect more red ink in the fourth quarter, predicting an average quarterly loss of $1.01 per share and $1.35 per share for the year, excluding special items.
"The fourth quarter's going to look real ugly," said Erich Merkle, director of forecasting for the auto consulting company IRN Inc. in Grand Rapids, Mich. He predicted Ford would get as much bad news out of the way as it can for the end of 2006, beating the 1992 record.
"Let's just air all our dirty laundry all at once. Take the medicine and then we can move on. I definitely think that's their philosophy, knowing it's going to be real poor," Merkle said.
Burnham Securities analyst David Healy said in a note to investors that Ford has yet to recover from its finances being wrecked by collapsing sales of its F-series pickup trucks and truck-based sport utility vehicles.
The company made a profit of $1.44 billion in 2005, and in the fourth quarter of that year, it produced and shipped 355,000 of the high-profit large and mid-sized truck models, Healy said. That dropped by 40 percent to 213,000 in the final quarter of last year, he said.
"In our view, most of the year-to-year increase in losses lies in the 142,000 year-to-year decline in these high-profit models," Healy said.
Production of other Ford models dropped by 53,000 in the fourth quarter of last year compared to the last quarter of 2005, driven by dealer stock reductions and the company's strategy to reduce traditional low-profit sales to rental car companies, Healy said.
Efraim Levy, senior industry analyst for Standard & Poor's, predicted Ford would post a $2 billion net loss for the last quarter of 2006.
Like other analysts, he sees bottom-line improvement in 2007 even though he predicts revenues will drop by 7 percent compared to 2006. He still sees a loss for this year, but said the improvement will come as Ford becomes more efficient and cuts costs by slicing its blue- and white-collar work forces.
About 38,000 hourly workers have signed up for buyout or early retirement offers from the company, and Ford plans to cut its white-collar work force by 14,000 with buyouts and early retirements.
The company has mortgaged its assets to borrow up to $23.4 billion to fund a massive restructuring plan and cover billions in losses expected until 2009. It expects to burn up $17 billion in cash during the next two years before returning to profitability.
Ford's revenue will continue to suffer in 2007 from intense competition, an expected lower overall auto market and weakness in Ford's financial services business, Levy said.
Ford has rolled out or will introduce several new or updated products during 2007, including the Edge crossover, new F-series Super Duty pickups, a redesigned Focus small car and an updated Five Hundred larger sedan.
But Levy said the company's new vehicles won't be strong enough for it to recover much this year.
"The new products aren't that exciting overall," he said.
Ford's sales last year were 8 percent below 2005 figures at about 2.9 million vehicles. Ford attributed the decline to a drop in truck and sport utility vehicle sales and the end of production for the Taurus sedan, which largely was sold to fleet buyers last year.
Ford is the first of the Detroit-area automakers to release its earnings for the year. General Motors Corp., which lost more than $3 billion in the first nine months of last year, will release its fourth-quarter and annual earnings on Tuesday.
DaimlerChrysler AG, which lost $1.5 billion in the third quarter, is to release its earnings on Feb. 14.
Ford Motor Co.: http://www.ford.com
Needed the AC worked on last summer. IIRC, that's it in the four years I've used it.
If that's the sort of lifespan and reliability you're after, there's your truck.
Full disclosure: I work for a Toyota dealership, in the parts department. I make no money on the sale of vehicles. The truck gets serviced by the book, by our service department.
It's gold, and was a Christmas present when I was three, in 1967.
It's still in my mom's basement.
"We are trapped in a mono-cultural environment that is dominated by old white males," and, "We need to change. We need more employees who are more reflective of our consumer base," said Richard Parry-Jones, vice president of product development and quality.
"La Raza lists both Ford Motor Company and the Ford Foundation among their corporate contributers."
FoMoCo is ignorant to take sides against most of their customer base.
If they suffer for it, it is their own stupidity.
"So, how's THAT working for you?"
My mother-in-law just bought a new Mercury Gran Marquis fully loaded with leather, 4.6L V8 and rear wheel drive for $18,000. It's more comfortable than any Camry or Accord, has V8 power and is much more safer.
Not so.
You have claimed that all the others are "as bad" as is Ford. AFA claims otherwise.
It is necessary for you to show how the others are point-by-point as bad. It is not sufficient to demonstrate a few similarities.
IF that were the case, I could say that a cow is a dog.
Still around. I'd like to see the whole context of the comment, but on the face, I agree, it doesn't sound good (I have heard it before, BTW). Why? Because there are some fields in which it is important to have insight into your entire customer base. It doesn't mean you have to hire someone who is Asian to speak to your Asian consumers, but you do need someone who understands your Asian consumers. I could see how this could be taken out of context when it was referring to the need to understand the consumer base and instead making it sound like you need to establish quotas.
I'll just reserve judgement on quotes like this until I find better evidence of the context - no exoneration, but no conviction.
Also extraordinarily reliable. Of course, it takes a bit of time for that battleship to build up enough steam to set sail. :P
Now just wait for people to tell you that it will explode when rear-ended (at 100 mph, but they won't tell you that, or the fact that it is one of the safest vehicles in such accidents, but is simply subject to MORE of them when sitting on the side of the road while the officer writes a ticket)
Parry-Jones did not say he didn't like the sea of white faces. That was Nasser, who was fired. Parry-Jones said they were dominated by a old white culture and needed to be more reflective of their consumer base. But you've chosen one sentence out of a speech and failed to provide its context. Give me that context, and I may agree with you.
Perhaps old white males generally don't know how to market to the urban inner city youth? Maybe that's the sort of thing he was referring to? I know I sometimes my kids (who are good kids) seem to be living in a different world that I don't understand... I wouldn't be able to effectively sell them ANYTHING.
I accurately posted the remarks of both individuals. So, if Ford is more reflective of their consumer base now, and is losing billions, and will continue to lose billions more, is that a success? Does Ford need lots more geniuses like Parry-Jones? Or should Ford concentrate on a consumer base that is likely to actually buy their product?
I am not contesting that you accurately posted the remarks. The problem is that there was no context for the remarks. Nasser's is CONSIDERABLY worse than Parry-Jones, but Nasser was fired years ago. As for Parry-Jones' remarks, I am asking for the context to understand what he meant. The meaning of statements is often VERY easy to twist if you take it out of context.
Can you provide the context?
I'm not going to provide you with anything. Do your own thinking.
I *AM* doing my own thinking, unlike 99+% of the Ford bashers on this board.
The problem is that no searches I have done have come up with any hits other than the one sentence, with absolutely no context.
I'm simply asking if you can provide the context. If you can, great. If not, so be it - I'll keep searching, but I think its totally inappropriate to jump to conclusions (which you do if you have a single sentence out of context). If you jump to conclusions, you're remarkably close to worrying about being PC....
Tell you what then. YOU contact Ford and ask THEM why their top executives said these things, and ask THEM what they thought the context was. And ask them why they support a group like La Raza. Get back to me then, and not any sooner.
I spent some time at the North American International Auto Show and got to see the chassis exposed on the Tundra as well as the interior.
The Frame is not boxed and produced by "Hydroforming" like the Fords are. In-fact I have seen better looking welding and frames on Kit Cars.
As far as the Interior I have one word for you, Chezzie.
If you want to spend your hard earned dollars on that way, have at it....
This Ford Bashing is getting so old and it is beginning to sound like the lefties on the war. With that said are you with Ford's survival or against it?
Go to a dealership and test drive them.
The dramatically graded "500", The Re-bodied "Escape" and Focus", and the "Edge" which the South Texan thinks is Ugly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.