EDITORIAL: Free-market Ford laps Government Motors

The Washington Times ^ | April 1, 2011 | Editorial

[jazusamo]

Bureaucrats can’t run a car company, let alone the whole country

Ford Motor Co. beat General Motors in March sales, another small but significant victory of private enterprise over government micromanagement. Since the 2009 government takeover of GM, competition between the two leading domestic auto manufacturers has taken on strong ideological overtones. It serves as an ideal test case, a microcosm of the competition between two worldviews, the automotive equivalent of North vs. South Korea. Right now, the good guys are winning.

Ford has been giving GM a run for its money since the competition began. In October, Ford recorded a 68 percent increase in its third-quarter net income, the sixth straight profitable quarter during the worst economy since the Great Depression. The blue oval passed Toyota to become the second largest auto brand sold in America. In March, Ford sold 212,295 vehicles, beating GM by 5,674 units - only the second time since 1998 that Ford won the monthly sales race. It did this without the supposed “benefits” of government intervention, except to the extent government minders have kept GM from maintaining its historically dominant position.

March sales numbers also highlight the lax public response to the Obama administration’s continued emphasis on “green” technology. One of Ford’s mainstays is the F-series pickup, sales of which are up 25 percent over the previous year. This full-sized truck gets 19 miles per gallon, very fuel efficient for a pickup in its class but not exactly a poster vehicle for environmentalists...

[COBOL2Java]

[saganite]

I drove a Lincoln last year and wasn’t impressed. Ford has neglected the Lincoln marque, even treatened to do away with it back in the day when they thought Jaguar would replace it. I’m leaning toward a Japanese model and it’s too bad because I would prefer to buy a Ford.

[jazusamo]

Those are beautiful, hate to think of what one would cost if they made them again.

[whd23]

Sadly, Ford doesn't deserve our support either.

Why Bill Ford wants a gas tax

I heard him interviewed on the radio a few weeks back and he hasn't altered his position.

Sorry Bill, I don't feel the need to pay more money at the gas pump so your company can invest in fuel efficient cars. If it's so darned important why not levy an internal "Ford Tax" on the dividends of your shareholders and use the proceeds to develop the small cars you love so much? Leave my family's finances alone!

[hinckley buzzard]

If I ever buy a "new" car again, it will most likely be a Ford. just to make a point.

[hinckley buzzard]

F-150: Luxury, American-style.

[Doulos1]

Everything you said is true, but with a new line coming out in 2012 I think most Fords can compare with most international car makers “apples to apples”. Heck, many ‘American’ cars are made in Mexico, while most Jap’ cars sold here are made here in USA. Go figure. Good luck. God bless.

[Debi911]

Ford, BMW, Toyota Took Secret Government Money
Jalopnik ^ | 12/5/10 | Justin Hyde

Posted on Sunday, December 05, 2010 11:47:58 AM by null and void

[Debi911]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2637728/posts?page=63

[SC Swamp Fox]

The UAW has already told Ford they want everything they gave up to Ford back.

Ford should pull a Boeing and tell the UAW to pack sand...and start moving operations to right-to-work states.

[xzins]

2010 Ford Focus EcoNetic Gets 74 MPG

http://dieseldig.com/2009/09/16/2010-ford-focus-econetic-gets-74-mpg/

For some reason, these European Fords are not permitted to be sold in the US. This is not a future car...it is a car currently being sold in Europe. I believe the problem is some kind concern over its being a “diesel” engine. It is very clean, new-diesel technology.

Ford would kick GM’s butt if they could bring this car to the US.

[jazusamo]

tell the UAW to pack sand...and start moving operations to right-to-work states.

Exactly! It would cost Ford to do that initially but it would ensure their success down the road.

[jazusamo]

I’m not familiar with the problem but they are diesels from what I understand. There’s been a couple other posters refer to them in other threads.

[xzins]

It is a super-clean diesel engine that compares with any other engine on the road....especially when one takes into account the 70 mpg.

I believe the real problem is that 70 mpg would SHOCK the auto fuel industry.

[jazusamo]

I just finished reading the article you linked, good piece, should have read it before I posted.

I think you’re right about the mileage SHOCK!

[xzins]

No super-sized batteries to replace for thousands of dollars every 90,000 miles; no neat plug into an outlet recharging; no pretense that it’s green as could be.

Just a clean diesel engine getting 70+ mpg.

[truthguy]

Ford chose capitalism and clobbered socialist Government Motors and Obama.

Rubbish, and this article is rubbish as are most of the comments here. This subject is complicated and the reasons for the situation GM finds themselves in has a lot more to due with bad luck and timing then with some sort of affinity for government.

Both car companies have had their ups and downs over the last few decades. Ford to their credit brought in Mulally in 2006 as CEO and Ford made some really sound financial decisions regarding Mazda that put them in a better cash position when the recession hit in 2008. GM made a big commitment to improving quality and new technology in early to mid part of 2000s or so and the CEO Rick Wagner, invested heavily in new models and technology. GM didn't have nearly as much cash to weather the storm of the 2008 recession and had to go chapter 11. But Ford lost big money during the same period. They were just in a better position to absorb the shock of the government caused recession. But Ford didn't have better product. They didn't have better technology. I'd argue with anyone that GM has better and more advanced product with more to come.

It would have been better for GM to go through a standard Chapter 11 bankruptcy but I don't believe that was in the cards with Obama being elected. It was Obama who forced the resignation of Rick Wagner, a guy who did a lot to turn GM around. The Washington Times simply didn't invest any effort in this lousy editorial. It's a lot more complicated than their simple and lousy editorial.

[muawiyah]

GM had been sufficiently hollowed-out and gutted by its own management that anything short of wholesale bankruptcy with sale of assets to more responsible owners simply wouldn't work.

New owners would have come to the business with OTHER assets as well as connections to financial resources ~ the government trick left GM with little more than the $25 billion Obama had promised them for development of high efficiency vehicles.

The inevitable is catching up with GM. This time next year they will be GONE.

[sheana]

I believe it is BMW that also has a very high mileage diesel engine that they are not allowed to sell here. I’d buy one if I could.