Tweet
I know it's a Ford, but com'mon it's a historical American Car. Another one that bites the dust.
My take is that import will continue to dominant the market now and we are helping them. There's a part there that say how much GM is hurting too.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Say goodbye to the Taurus.
After 21 years and sales of nearly 7 million cars, Ford Motor Co. is giving up on what some call the most influential automobile since Henry Ford's Model T. The Taurus is credited with moving America away from boxy V-8 powered gas-guzzling bedrooms-on-wheels to aerodynamic, more efficient cars with crisper handling.
To many, the Taurus' death was slow and painful as Ford in recent years abandoned the car that saved the company, focusing instead on high-profit trucks and sport utility vehicles.
The Taurus, so futuristic that critics called it a "jellybean" or a "flying potato," made its debut late in 1985, with 1979 gasoline shortages still fresh in consumers' minds. The U.S. economy was just pulling out of a downturn when the scalloped Taurus, initially equipped with V-6 and four-cylinder engines, hit showrooms. It was an immediate hit, with buyers snapping up more than 263,000 in 1986, its first full year on the market.
It became the best-selling car in America in 1992 with sales of nearly 410,000, unseating the Honda Accord just as Japanese imports were starting to take hold in the U.S., and it held the top spot for five straight years until it was supplanted by the Toyota Camry in 1997. Even near death in September, it remained Ford's top-selling car.
Ford also sold another 2 million Mercury Sables, the Taurus' nearly identical twin.
Ford was losing billions in the early 1980s when Taurus was just an idea. Philip Caldwell, chief executive at the time, challenged designers and engineers to come up with a radically different car that would return Ford to profitability.
"We were in terrible condition financially," recalled Jack Telnack, chief designer on the original Taurus, who retired in 1998. "He said 'Look, we need something really different, really new, that will kind of set the pace out there.'"
Nearly 1,000 people worked on the car, many coming from Ford's European operations. They had spotted a trend that U.S. buyers were moving away from big, cushy cars to better-handling European models, Telnack said.
Engineers met that trend with a stiffer suspension, and they also gave the car more interior room, firmer seats, better ergonomics and more trunk space, said Telnack.
The car also had a lot of new "surprise and delight" features including a cargo net to hold grocery bags in the trunk and rear-seat headrests and heat ducts, said Joel Pitcoff, the Taurus' marketing manager at the time.
It was a hit in market research tests, and sales beat expectations, said Sam Pack, owner of three Dallas-area Ford dealerships, who took part in Taurus research.
The car's sales remained strong until it got a makeover in 1996. Although the second version sold well, it never matched the original's numbers.
Still, company officials said the Taurus restored Ford's reputation for quality.
Frank Ribezzo, a lawyer in North Smithfield, R.I., is selling a 1997 Taurus for $950 after running up 210,000 miles. It's his third Taurus, with the first two going over 220,000 miles.
"As far as used cars, their value just goes to hell in a handbasket in a couple of years. But they run," Ribezzo said.
In the late 1990s, the Taurus became symptomatic of Ford's current ills. The company focused on high-profit trucks and sport utility vehicles, leaving the car almost unchanged for 10 years with little advertising support. In the meantime, competitors had copied the Taurus and refined their models, and the Taurus eventually became solely a rental car and fleet vehicle.
"It didn't keep pace. That's the whole story in four words," said Pitcoff.
Ford, left with few desirable cars, was caught flat-footed this year when consumer tastes shifted away from trucks. Sales have dropped 8.6 percent through September, and the company lost $1.4 billion in the first half of the year.
"They put no money into that product for the last several years," Telnack said of the Taurus. "They just let it wither on the vine. It's criminal. The car had a great reputation, a good name. I don't understand what they were waiting for."
Ford has also announced plans to cut 30,000 jobs and close 14 plants within the next 6 years. They've already cancelled one of the Jaguar models (the cheapest -- the 2.5 X-Types).
While Ford as a whole is still making a profit, its North American division lost $1.6 billion last year. It's share of the US market is down to 18% from about 26% just 10 years ago.
Ford isn't even alone in the industy. GM announced that it lost $10.6 billion in 2005 and is "restructuring" (i.e. cutting 30,000 jobs in North America over the next two years) and closing or cutting back productions in 7 plants while closing 8 parts plants just to avoid bankruptcy. It also sold 51% of its financial division to raise $14 billion to cover it's losses.
Ford created their own situation, that is not debatable. When rising gas prices caused consumers to turn away from high end SUVs and trucks and towards more fuel efficient cars, Ford was left in a lurch because they had ignored that segment for nearly a decade.
However, they have chosen to focus their attention on a newly remodeled Mustang (and a new version of the Shelby) while cancelling the one vehicle that would seem to be the best bet to return them to profitablity. The family car market is larger than the market for muscle cars or high end SUVs.
With the car market as it is currently, the decision to cancel the Taurus is a real head-scratcher. I have to wonder if Ford is compounding an early mistake (the ignoring of the Taurus) by making an even larger one (the decision to cancel it).
I worked for a car dealership very briefly about a year after the redesigned Taurus hit the market. It was poorly received by both consumers and by those within the dealership (the mechanics hated it). The redesigned dash (featuring an oval stereo/ac control) was one of the most frequent complaints that I heard. Even today, when I speak with car salesmen, they still mention that the redesigned dash is one of the most frequent complaints they receive. I owned a 1998 model and mechanics told me repeatedly that they hated working on it.
Despite this though, I still think cancelling the Taurus is a bad idea. While I think Ford is too large to really close shop for good, I think the problems within the industry bear watching.
Politicians have attempted to downplay the impact of high gas prices on the US economy. Yet, while gas companies are recording record profits, we have two of the largest auto makers in the world trying everything they can to avoid bankruptcy.
Given the decision by both companies to cut 30,000 jobs each and the closing of a combined 22 plants and reduced production at 7 others, I am left wondering how much that will affect the economy.
It is clear to me that the high gas prices haven't just hurt the average person but also very large companies. While gas prices have fallen recently, I still wonder what the long term effects of the high costs will be.
My take is that import will continue to dominant the market now and we are helping them. There's a part there that say how much GM is hurting too.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Say goodbye to the Taurus.
After 21 years and sales of nearly 7 million cars, Ford Motor Co. is giving up on what some call the most influential automobile since Henry Ford's Model T. The Taurus is credited with moving America away from boxy V-8 powered gas-guzzling bedrooms-on-wheels to aerodynamic, more efficient cars with crisper handling.
To many, the Taurus' death was slow and painful as Ford in recent years abandoned the car that saved the company, focusing instead on high-profit trucks and sport utility vehicles.
The Taurus, so futuristic that critics called it a "jellybean" or a "flying potato," made its debut late in 1985, with 1979 gasoline shortages still fresh in consumers' minds. The U.S. economy was just pulling out of a downturn when the scalloped Taurus, initially equipped with V-6 and four-cylinder engines, hit showrooms. It was an immediate hit, with buyers snapping up more than 263,000 in 1986, its first full year on the market.
It became the best-selling car in America in 1992 with sales of nearly 410,000, unseating the Honda Accord just as Japanese imports were starting to take hold in the U.S., and it held the top spot for five straight years until it was supplanted by the Toyota Camry in 1997. Even near death in September, it remained Ford's top-selling car.
Ford also sold another 2 million Mercury Sables, the Taurus' nearly identical twin.
Ford was losing billions in the early 1980s when Taurus was just an idea. Philip Caldwell, chief executive at the time, challenged designers and engineers to come up with a radically different car that would return Ford to profitability.
"We were in terrible condition financially," recalled Jack Telnack, chief designer on the original Taurus, who retired in 1998. "He said 'Look, we need something really different, really new, that will kind of set the pace out there.'"
Nearly 1,000 people worked on the car, many coming from Ford's European operations. They had spotted a trend that U.S. buyers were moving away from big, cushy cars to better-handling European models, Telnack said.
Engineers met that trend with a stiffer suspension, and they also gave the car more interior room, firmer seats, better ergonomics and more trunk space, said Telnack.
The car also had a lot of new "surprise and delight" features including a cargo net to hold grocery bags in the trunk and rear-seat headrests and heat ducts, said Joel Pitcoff, the Taurus' marketing manager at the time.
It was a hit in market research tests, and sales beat expectations, said Sam Pack, owner of three Dallas-area Ford dealerships, who took part in Taurus research.
The car's sales remained strong until it got a makeover in 1996. Although the second version sold well, it never matched the original's numbers.
Still, company officials said the Taurus restored Ford's reputation for quality.
Frank Ribezzo, a lawyer in North Smithfield, R.I., is selling a 1997 Taurus for $950 after running up 210,000 miles. It's his third Taurus, with the first two going over 220,000 miles.
"As far as used cars, their value just goes to hell in a handbasket in a couple of years. But they run," Ribezzo said.
In the late 1990s, the Taurus became symptomatic of Ford's current ills. The company focused on high-profit trucks and sport utility vehicles, leaving the car almost unchanged for 10 years with little advertising support. In the meantime, competitors had copied the Taurus and refined their models, and the Taurus eventually became solely a rental car and fleet vehicle.
"It didn't keep pace. That's the whole story in four words," said Pitcoff.
Ford, left with few desirable cars, was caught flat-footed this year when consumer tastes shifted away from trucks. Sales have dropped 8.6 percent through September, and the company lost $1.4 billion in the first half of the year.
"They put no money into that product for the last several years," Telnack said of the Taurus. "They just let it wither on the vine. It's criminal. The car had a great reputation, a good name. I don't understand what they were waiting for."
Ford has also announced plans to cut 30,000 jobs and close 14 plants within the next 6 years. They've already cancelled one of the Jaguar models (the cheapest -- the 2.5 X-Types).
While Ford as a whole is still making a profit, its North American division lost $1.6 billion last year. It's share of the US market is down to 18% from about 26% just 10 years ago.
Ford isn't even alone in the industy. GM announced that it lost $10.6 billion in 2005 and is "restructuring" (i.e. cutting 30,000 jobs in North America over the next two years) and closing or cutting back productions in 7 plants while closing 8 parts plants just to avoid bankruptcy. It also sold 51% of its financial division to raise $14 billion to cover it's losses.
Ford created their own situation, that is not debatable. When rising gas prices caused consumers to turn away from high end SUVs and trucks and towards more fuel efficient cars, Ford was left in a lurch because they had ignored that segment for nearly a decade.
However, they have chosen to focus their attention on a newly remodeled Mustang (and a new version of the Shelby) while cancelling the one vehicle that would seem to be the best bet to return them to profitablity. The family car market is larger than the market for muscle cars or high end SUVs.
With the car market as it is currently, the decision to cancel the Taurus is a real head-scratcher. I have to wonder if Ford is compounding an early mistake (the ignoring of the Taurus) by making an even larger one (the decision to cancel it).
I worked for a car dealership very briefly about a year after the redesigned Taurus hit the market. It was poorly received by both consumers and by those within the dealership (the mechanics hated it). The redesigned dash (featuring an oval stereo/ac control) was one of the most frequent complaints that I heard. Even today, when I speak with car salesmen, they still mention that the redesigned dash is one of the most frequent complaints they receive. I owned a 1998 model and mechanics told me repeatedly that they hated working on it.
Despite this though, I still think cancelling the Taurus is a bad idea. While I think Ford is too large to really close shop for good, I think the problems within the industry bear watching.
Politicians have attempted to downplay the impact of high gas prices on the US economy. Yet, while gas companies are recording record profits, we have two of the largest auto makers in the world trying everything they can to avoid bankruptcy.
Given the decision by both companies to cut 30,000 jobs each and the closing of a combined 22 plants and reduced production at 7 others, I am left wondering how much that will affect the economy.
It is clear to me that the high gas prices haven't just hurt the average person but also very large companies. While gas prices have fallen recently, I still wonder what the long term effects of the high costs will be.
Comment