Why do car makers starve their own brands and wonder why people don't buy into them? The entire Mercury division is the most redundant nameplate in all of America. Each vehicle is an exact clone of a Ford product. Miraculously, some people are willing to pay a slight premium just to have a different grill. It kills me to look at how proud and big Lincoln products once were.
 
During the Full Size SUV craze, Lincoln was making a killing on the Navigators, making nearly 10k per truck. Where did all of that money go? The Lincoln LS was a great car for its time, but it became long in the tooth. And why do they repeat the same mistake with the Focus, or Ranger for that matter?
 
Quick question: a few years back while Ford was celebrating its centennial, they used the sales number from all of its division: Aston Martin, Range Rover, Jaguar, Volvo, and Mazda to account for a huge increase in historical sales. When Ford finally unloads most of the marque's, is it still legal to consider it part of Ford's sales number?

Why in the world didn't they follow up with a second Lincoln LS? They used some of its platform engineering for the Mustang, didn't they? Couldn't they just re-stretch it? It seems dumb to not do more with that platform anyway. Give Mercury a Mustang-like car but with futuristic styling.
 
And why wouldn't Mr. Mullaly want to save Mercury? He could shrink it to one model and name it after himself. But seriously, after asking my non-car guy friends about Mercury, they said that ads and decent styling aside, it's too deeply an old person brand for them. And you can get the same car (or hybrid SUV, lots of interest in that one) without the baggage, as a Ford.
 
I also have to wonder about the wisdom of killing the Crown Vic and its ilk. Is it really so hard to update? Besides the funny names those 3 cars have, they obviously fill a role pretty well... nothing's wrong with them except they're old.

Don't get me started on this subject...........not enough space here or patience from others to read all that I could say. I am one frustrated and disappointed guy about what has been allowed to happen to this company and it's products.
 
Carlisimo, I completely agree with your take - especially the full sized rear drive cars. When Ford pretty much had the limo/car service/taxi/government/police business to themselves they should have capitalized on it instead of ignoring it. I have long thought that they could have created a special division that just built really beefed up versions of these models. I think there was / is a market for a Checker type manufacturer - just as a division of one of the big 3 though.

Is anyone surprised?
Using the Ranger, the Crown Victoria, and Focus as examples it appears that a minimum of 10 years must pass before a total redesign is introduced. Note- This only applies to North America.
Ford can not afford to engineer new vehicles for US and at the same time the Euro Focus is redesigned and Ranger is redesigned and produced in Thailand. Both products are superior to the US versions.
You would think that Ford was a German company, not American, since they keep the best products for sale only outside of the US.
Is it too much to ask for to expect a redesign every 3 to 6 years?
At this sad state of affairs, producing the Australian rear drive Fairlane, the Euro Focus, the Thai Ranger and the Mazda derived Fiesta in US facilities would be the quickest, best and most economical fix for the lack of product at Ford.
Give Mercury a version of the Mustang as a Cougar or Capri, exclusive versions of the Euro Focus Cabriolet and Hatch, and possibly import some Mondeo's and slap a Mercury badge on them.
It is too costly to buy out Mercury dealers with state laws protecting dealers and as happened with GM with Olds the only result would be decreased market share if Ford eliminated Mercury.

I'll go on record here predicting that Automotive News does NOT have the whole picture - i.e. that Ford has more up its sleeve than this.

Karl,
 
If this is all Ford has going for it for the next several years, do you think there will even be a Ford Motor Co. in 2012? I have my doubts.
 
It's all about the product. Build value and quality and the buyers will come.

Mirth, that seems like a reasonable assumption. No mention in Karl's bit on Automotive News of the Mazda 2/ Fiesta that is supposed to be headed this way.j (Please, please, please don't name it Fiesta! Or any "F" word for that matter)
 
I say your prediction is reasonable, but Ford has proven time and again that they are quite unreasonable in managing their business affairs. I will say this: I hope for their sake they've got more coming down the pike than what Karl summarized for us.

There'll be a subcompact before 2012, right?

A Mazda2-based Ford for the U.S. market is still only a possibility as far as I know -- not a done deal.
 
But would love to see them make it happen!!

Yeah, looks like bleak future for NA Ford. They will survive certainly – they are making good cars - just move headquarters to Germany where all Ford action is happening now anyway and sell German designed Ford cars here as imports.
 
Regarding Mercury – it is now just addition to support Lincoln sales. I see now more and more Lincoln-Mercury dealerships folding into Ford dealerships. They still keep it separate even though next to Ford. I personally bought Mercury because didn’t want to drive Ford and besides I would prefer to go to Lincoln dealership for service instead to any of Ford/Toyota/Honda/Chevrolet.
 
BTW there is a valid question – if someone doesn’t want to buy luxury car or lowly everyman cars what he supposed to do? Where is Oldsmobile? Suppose I do not want Ford/Toyota/Honda/Chevrolet – what can I buy? There is nothing in the middle. There is either very expensive cars or cheap cars. You can say go buy high end Honda or Toyota – well executed and good car, each in its own category. But still it is Honda or Toyota and I do not like to pay extra money for cars undistinguishable from low-end brethren.
 
Mercury was a perfect candidate for that “in the middle� car. But it should be more differentiated and be more upscale than Ford. I am talking about more upscale interior (like Camry XLE e.g.) and more refined engine/transmission (like in Mazda e.g.). But what I know. Probably nobody cares about style anymore. Just give them Camry XLE – and everybody is happy, not like old days when cars had characters and style meant something

Savetheland-
 
Most folks lump Acura, Volkswagen, and Chrysler into an odd, sub-luxury but plu-plebeian category. The rationale is that all of these automakers play in the $30,000 to $45,000 range. Their products end up being slightly more premium than the Ford/Chevrolets/Hondas/Toyotas of the world, but not quite nice enough to compete with or as expensive as the BMW, M-Bs, Audis, Lexus' of the world.
 
Some might also argue that Mazda, Infiniti, Volvo, and Saab should be included here. I'd agree with the Mazda and Infiniti assessment (esp. now that the Q45 is dead), nevermind that Infiniti's been trying to climb out of this segment for years. Volvo seems to be slinking down into thi segment, but Saab I'd argue is more clueless than anything.

I am kinda surprise that nobody post sales numbers for last month, Out of all the big 4,GM is the only one that recorded any sales gain, Toyota was down a little over 2%, Chrysler cannot remember, Ford ,over 14% down, How do you explain that? With all the new products they now have that is hard to believe, Congrats to gm for the turnaround, But why is ford still in the tank? I still think there is a chance ford will not make it. source( MSNBC)

Based on Sales Numbers, the only GM divisions that saw increases were GMC and Chevrolet, which I am willing to bet was a result of the increase in incentives on the trucks.
 
What I don't understand, is why Saturn sales are actually down. They have a completely new lineup, things should be better.

The Aura is not working out for Saturn like they hoped (i.e. nobody is buying it). If this same result happens with its platform mate -- the Chevrolet Malibu -- it will be a major blow to GM's turnaround plan.
 
The company has already proven it can sell trucks and SUVs, but they need to recapture the car market. So far the Aura has delivered on that goal -- which puts even more pressure on Malibu...

Does any car with a totally new name ever sell well its first year?

Ford Mustang

Sales numbers are good ,But where can i find info on numbers per nameplate sold ?And who makes the most profit at the end of each month ? With all the good press Ford and Saturn are getting they should be doing better, GM claims that the new Malibu will be best in class ,I dont see it from the pics ,But i will never know because i will never test drive one ,They recently change there minds about putting the Camry and Accord in the Malibu showroom , they still have them in the Aura showroom i believe, Wonder how that is working out?

I don't think GM ever recovered the lost sales from killing Oldsmobile, which is probably the only reason why I would support keeping Mercury alive.

roar02ram - Acura, Volvo and etc are too expensive. I bought Mercury Sable for 20+ fully loaded. Similar Volvo would cost 40+ and Acura probably same if not more. I am talking about Mercury being little bit more expensive that Ford, may be 2-3K more. It is acceptable price increase if they make it also little bit more style\ish, better interior and power plant. Mazda is very close to my ideal, but it is boy racer kind of car, like Pontiac. I am too old to accept it. I want something understated, but still stylish, for grown up man, like Audi but not for inflated price.

I think the Malibu is going to be a big disappointment for GM. Not that it's not a good car. But to get consideration from the general public, you first have to get their attention. And the styling on the new Malibu, while pleasant, is pretty bland. About all it's got going for it is a well-known name.

I'll keep the focus on the FLEX. It should be able to compete with the Scion being that you can customize a number of parts & accessories. Scion seems to know who their target market is and have they ever catered to them on the web....a whole game around building out your own vehicle. I want to Ford Flex it up for their target market too!
I first became interested here http://jenningsandersonford.com/blog/2007/04/flex-at-the-new-york-auto-show

The Flex is interesting for sure.....will it actually create a new category? Is it the blending of a crossover and a minivan? I like it for the most part, however, I saw it in person at the NYAS as well and thought that it looked a little awkward overall. What's with that long straight beltline going directly into a really long hood? Not a deal breaker but not a homerun either, something doesn't look right to me. Time will tell.

The Flex is a two box design, only this time it looks like they are using real boxes. I don't care for it based on the pictures I've seen.
 
I have read somewhere, that the MKS will have a twin turbo 3.5L V6. If this is true power should not be a problem. I know they are different size cars, but the lack of a V8 hasn't hampered BMWs 3 series. I suspect most 5 series BMWs are 6 cylinders as well.
To me the bigger questions are; will it have enough eye appeal, will the price be "right", and will Lincoln provide real marketing support (or abandon it like they did the LS, what a waste)?
 
If you like Scions, does that make you a Scionist?