No bailout: Ford earns $1.7b in 3Q, pays down health care debt

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Ford earns $1.7b in 3Q, pays down health care debt

DEARBORN, Mich. – Ford Motor Co.'s third-quarter net income rose 68 percent as it grabbed a bigger share of the U.S. auto market and buyers paid more for its highly-rated cars and trucks.

It was Ford's sixth straight quarterly profit and the company's best third-quarter performance since at least 1990.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally said popular new cars, such as the Ford Fiesta subcompact and Ford Edge wagon, and aggressive cost-cutting helped the company make money despite lower global sales.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_earns_ford

'nuff said
 
Rana said:
I buy Fords. I have owned two in twenty years! My latest is a 1999 Explorer and she runs like a dream! I only have 99,000 miles on her and she has never been in the shop, except for maintenance!
Click to expand...
I own two Fords (no complaints there), I own Ford stock (made a good turn around on the purchase) and my sister works at Ford and I'm still wondering what Yurts point was.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I own two Fords (no complaints there), I own Ford stock (made a good turn around on the purchase) and my sister works at Ford and I'm still wondering what Yurts point was.
Click to expand...

Healthy companies don't need no stinkin' bailouts?

Seems like a no brainer to me, but hey....
 
Onceler said:
Healthy companies don't need no stinkin' bailouts?

Seems like a no brainer to me, but hey....
Click to expand...
Well thank you Captain Obvious. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China (again, what the hell is your point)? Ford never asked for bail out money nor did they need it.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well thank you Captain Obvious. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China (again, what the hell is your point)? Ford never asked for bail out money nor did they need it.
Click to expand...

Don't misunderstand - I was making fun of Yurt, not you. I thought this thread was a head-shaker myself.

It's like saying Lake Ontario did just fine without all of the oil-cleaning equipment they had to use in the Gulf....
 
I think I can understand Yurt's point. Ford did it right. Even in tough financial times they were able to turn a profit...a good profit without help from the government's (American's) money. I can appreciate that. I own an old Dodge pickup and a Chevy Tahoe. My next vehicle will likely be a Ford precisely because of how they handled business during the past few years as opposed as to how Chevy handled it.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well thank you Captain Obvious. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China (again, what the hell is your point)? Ford never asked for bail out money nor did they need it.
Click to expand...

ford was very close and could have used the bailouts, to say they didn't "need" it is false, they couild have used it and chose instead to buckle down on costs....but they didn't...they slashed costs and created better cars

fact is, the other companies did not need the bailouts...they could have easily followed ford's lead...

pretty simple concept
 
Yurt said:
ford was very close and could have used the bailouts, to say they didn't "need" it is false, they couild have used it and chose instead to buckle down on costs....but they didn't...they slashed costs and created better cars

fact is, the other companies did not need the bailouts...they could have easily followed ford's lead...

pretty simple concept
Click to expand...

That's inane. Ford's situation was even close to where GM was at that time.

Wanna try again?
 
Onceler said:
That's inane. Ford's situation was even close to where GM was at that time.

Wanna try again?
Click to expand...

yes it was....short memory huh...lets see what some where saying


Ford Motor (NYSE: F) recently indicated that it doesn't anticipate needing federal bailout money. The automaker is in the same heap of trouble as its competitors, but has handled costs and other infrastructure items better with CEO Alan Molal at the wheel in recent years.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/03/ford-may-need-bailout-money-after-all-says-barclays/

now lets see opinion backed up with figures that show ford was in the same situation:

Ford Needs The Bailout Package

Half a century ago, it was said that what was good for General Motors was good for America. Nowadays, it's the exact opposite: what's bad for the United States is terrible for its auto industry.

Just ask Ford Motor (NYSE: F - news - people ). On Wednesday the automaker announced that sales tumbled 34.6% in Septmebmer, to 120,788 vehicles, for all its brands, down from 184,612 vehicles in the prior year as the weakening U.S. economy pulled Ford’s September sales to the lowest level of the year.

Its Ford, Lincoln and Mercury brands sales slid 19.4%, crossover sales plummeted 30.2%, sport-utility-vehicle sales lost 57.0%, and truck and van sales fell 38.8%.

“Given all the uncertainty around the failure of the House of Representatives to pass the bailout package it’s not too surprising to me that sales were particularly weak,” said Calyon Securities analyst Mark B. Warnsman. Sales in the auto industry, Warns man said, tend to be concentrated during the last week of the month and, given the turmoil in the U.S. stock market in the last week of September, results were negatively impacted. (See "Stocks Flutter Ahead Of Bailout, Take Two.")

Ford shares sank 11.5%, or 60 cents, to $4.57, in afternoon trading.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/10/01/ford-auto-bailout-markets-equity-cx_ra_1001markets29.html


do you wanna try again? ford was hemorrhaging as badly as gm...to claim otherwise is nonsense
 
Ford wasn't in as bad a shape. Again - you have a difficult time separating concepts. Yes, their sales suffered as much as the others, but because they were run better up until that point, they were in a much stronger position financially to withstand the downturn; the downturn didn't take them to the brink, as it did GM.

It's also interesting to note on this that Ford had a clear stake in the gov't bailing out GM; if GM had failed, it would have hurt Ford much worse because they share a lot of the same suppliers.
 
Onceler said:
Ford wasn't in as bad a shape. Again - you have a difficult time separating concepts. Yes, their sales suffered as much as the others, but because they were run better up until that point, they were in a much stronger position financially to withstand the downturn; the downturn didn't take them to the brink, as it did GM.

It's also interesting to note on this that Ford had a clear stake in the gov't bailing out GM; if GM had failed, it would have hurt Ford much worse because they share a lot of the same suppliers.
Click to expand...

:palm:

seperating concepts....i give you links showing they were in the SAME boat as their competitors....yet...instead of taking the bailout...they slashed costs and rolled out more competitive cars....they had not done that up until that point...maybe if you try one more time you will get it...doubtful as you've more than likely dug your heels in because you're never wrong

your last sentence is pure speculation...but nice that you try and pass it off as fact...and i know you will use ford saying so...but its pure speculation and opinion just like my belief we didn't need the stimulus, at least i'm honest and don't try to pass it off as fact
 
leaningright said:
I think I can understand Yurt's point.
-------------snip-------------
Click to expand...

Really?! Well, congratulations, you are the new Yurt-to-English translator.

And don't try and get out of it. I had to translate Topspin's posts into English for a good year. I think finally people just stopped reading him. But it was a job! And now you've got one.
 
Yurt said:
:palm:

seperating concepts....i give you links showing they were in the SAME boat as their competitors....yet...instead of taking the bailout...they slashed costs and rolled out more competitive cars....they had not done that up until that point...maybe if you try one more time you will get it...doubtful as you've more than likely dug your heels in because you're never wrong

your last sentence is pure speculation...but nice that you try and pass it off as fact...and i know you will use ford saying so...but its pure speculation and opinion just like my belief we didn't need the stimulus, at least i'm honest and don't try to pass it off as fact
Click to expand...

Neat; you ignored my entire post.

Ford was better run up until the time of the downturn - that's why the downturn didn't take them to the brink. They were more prepared for it. GM was on its last legs, by comparison.

As for "pure speculation," you clearly didn't follow the bailout very closely. It's not speculation at all. GM failing might have benefited Ford down the road, but would have had an immediate negative impact that Ford wanted to avoid.
 
Darla said:
Really?! Well, congratulations, you are the new Yurt-to-English translator.

And don't try and get out of it. I had to translate Topspin's posts into English for a good year. I think finally people just stopped reading him. But it was a job! And now you've got one.
Click to expand...

Ohhh no....I don't want the job. And after reading the ensuing discussion I'm not sure I do understand his point after all. I was proud of Ford for not taking the bailout money and being run more efficeintly. Still am. Father-in-law worked for GM at the time and was "encouraged" to retire...and then finally forced to, though he really couldn't afford it. It seems that Chevy doesn't run their place much better now, even after the bailouts. I'm sure the bailouts probably saved some jobs and that is a good thing, but what would have happened if......if Chevy and others were made to stand on their own two legs? We'll never know.
 
Onceler said:
Neat; you ignored my entire post.

Ford was better run up until the time of the downturn - that's why the downturn didn't take them to the brink. They were more prepared for it. GM was on its last legs, by comparison.

As for "pure speculation," you clearly didn't follow the bailout very closely. It's not speculation at all. GM failing might have benefited Ford down the road, but would have had an immediate negative impact that Ford wanted to avoid.
Click to expand...

i did not ignore your entire post...how could that be when you directly responded to my rebuttals of each of your points? lol...you're insane

i've given you evidence and opinions that show your claim ford was better run up until the time of the downturn is false and really has nothing to do with the way they handled their company after the downturn....but i know you want to ignore those facts and you can't present any of your own to counter them

you're right onceler, you're never wrong, you win
 
leaningright said:
I think I can understand Yurt's point. Ford did it right. Even in tough financial times they were able to turn a profit...a good profit without help from the government's (American's) money. I can appreciate that. I own an old Dodge pickup and a Chevy Tahoe. My next vehicle will likely be a Ford precisely because of how they handled business during the past few years as opposed as to how Chevy handled it.
Click to expand...

its not complicated to understand my point

consider the people claiming they don't understand....they don't "understand" because they don't agree with...its nothing but political hackery
 
leaningright said:
Ohhh no....I don't want the job. And after reading the ensuing discussion I'm not sure I do understand his point after all. I was proud of Ford for not taking the bailout money and being run more efficeintly. Still am. Father-in-law worked for GM at the time and was "encouraged" to retire...and then finally forced to, though he really couldn't afford it. It seems that Chevy doesn't run their place much better now, even after the bailouts. I'm sure the bailouts probably saved some jobs and that is a good thing, but what would have happened if......if Chevy and others were made to stand on their own two legs? We'll never know.
Click to expand...

she is just trying to drive a wedge between us...don't let her hatred of me get in your way
 
Yurt, it's a plain fact that Ford was run better than the other 2. At the time of the bailout, they could have used it, but it wasn't necessary to keep them from going over the cliff - that's because they were in better financial shape.

With GM, it was a question of should we let them fail, or not. They were in a much worse position.

Your links don't show at all what you're claiming they show. Anyone who even paid attention on a casual basis during the bailout mess understands the different situations those companies were in at that time.

As LR said - good on Ford for being a better run company overall; hopefully, the changes that GM has made will put them on the same kind of course going forward...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top