Mulally (again) professes faith in Mercury
Every product forecast for FoMoCo shows new products for Ford and Lincoln, but other than the Milan Hybrid, the shelf is bare for Mercury. To make the situation more dire, sales are down 11-percent this year, and last year was the worst for the beleaguered waterfall in 44 years. Regardless of the grim statistics for Mercury, CEO Allan Mulally insists that there is a place for Mercury at the Blue Oval. Mulally sees a "great set of products" at Mercury, but the 1,900 Mercury dealers must be wondering when help is on the way. We'd love to see a Saturn-like situation at Mercury, where Euro products come to the States donning the waterfall grille. Failing that, without products differentiated further from their Ford counterparts, Mercury is destined to fade off into the sunset whether Ford wants to keep the brand or not.
[Source: Automotive News - Sub. Req.]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Frank the Tank 8:45AM (10/16/2007)
My dog could do a better job managing Ford.
Reply
Mike 9:43AM (10/16/2007)
Your dog, my coffee cup, and a rock could manage Ford better.
Sometimes I wonder if Ford is just teaching some huge lesson in what not to do for MBA students...
tikirob 11:09AM (10/16/2007)
Well put him in a tie already...get him out there!
Rob
That One Person 5:34PM (10/16/2007)
Funny. Mullaly has been in office for just over a year and people are already calling him a crappy CEO. What a joke.
Mullaly inherited a MESS from Bill Ford. If you want to blame anyone, blame that moron. He had six years to straighten out the company and to turn it into something great or at least lay the foundations for creative vehicles. Yet, he did nothing. We got the Mustang and F-150...two of Ford's best products. The Fusion ain't bad and the Edge is nice. But what the hell was Bill thinking when he greenlighted the refreshes? And why didn't he do anything creative with Merc and Lincoln? He could have pulled a Caddy. The only truly good thing we got from Bill was better reliability.
Chaz 8:51AM (10/16/2007)
I love the idea of us getting the real Focus, Mondeo, S-Max in the US as Mercurys, sort of turning it into what Merkur should have been. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening.
Reply
DriverG 8:56AM (10/16/2007)
For all of it's problems Mercury still sells about 50% more cars than Lincoln thereby subsidizing all of those Lincoln/Mercury dealers. Ford will be hard pressed to pull this beleaguered, but better-than-nothing, line out from under them.
Reply
cheese302 9:04AM (10/16/2007)
i like the idea of euro fords being branded as mercurys, then there is a choice. Want a focus, buy a focus, want a euro focus by the merc. i think it could work. But will all mercury lines be brand new within 3 years like saturn did. That was an incredible changing of models that they did. The oldest configuration of a model right now is the ion, and that is in the proccess of being replaced as i type.
Reply
The Other Bob 9:40AM (10/16/2007)
"The oldest configuration of a model right now is the ion..."
In fact, Ion production ended in March.
The Other Bob 9:40AM (10/16/2007)
I don't think Euro Fords should be branded as Mercurys. Instead, I think they should be branded as Lincolns and expand the line. Then they should kill of Mercury.
psarhjinian 12:04PM (10/16/2007)
Isn't Mazda essentially filling thise role at the low and Volvo at the high? Mercury would end up squeezing one or both, much like how Saturn is going to squeeze either Pontiac or Saab.
Ford (and GM) need to decide what they want to do with their "we went on a silly shopping spree in order to keep up wioth each other" brands.
For GM, either Saab or Saturn need to be withdrawn from North America, especially if things improve at Pontiac. Mind you, Pontiac is damaged goods outside of the heartland and Saab/Saturn still have some brand equity left. This one will be unpleasant to watch.
For Ford, they need to make a decision on Mercury vs. Mazda/Volvo. This is an easy decision: Mazda and Volvo--especially Mazda--are healthy and growing; Mercury is essentially dead and has been for a decade. Mercury's trim levels ought to folded into Ford (and thusly improve Ford's model lines) and the entire division junked.
Ford shut down Mercury in Canada a few years ago. I don't think anyone noticed.
Azrael4h 7:46PM (10/16/2007)
Pontiac currently is looking to move to RWD only, or at least mostly RWD. Rumors have the next G5 as RWD, as well as the G8. Vibe... no telling where it'll go to, but since it's AWD capable, they could make it a Scooby-fighter. Solstice = RWD, both coupe and 'Vert. Only the G6 looks to retain the WWD, and then that may end as there is a RWD, smaller midsize platform being built for Caddy.
Saab has an entirely different customer base, with small, premium-priced AWD cars.
Saturn won't compete against either, save for the Sky with the Solstice. And who's to say the Sky won't be moved upmarket, to a point that it doesn't compete at all with the Pontiac Solstice (and theoretically giving them the profit to push Solstice pricing down a bit, to undercut the MX5)?
Of course, that has nothing to do with the current Ford issue. Mercury is nothing more than rebadged Fords. The thing Ford needs to do is look hard at both Lincoln and Mercury, as Volvo is a better fit for Lincoln's spot. I say cut Lincoln, and use the Euro-spec and Aussie Fords badged in as Mercury cars. It'll slot above the volume Ford brand, so they'll have to be contented as such.
That is only a stop gap, however. They need to do what both GM and Chrysler has done; have a smaller range of platforms which deal with all markets, instead of more expensive, market specific platforms. Just build all cars and engines to the strictest standards around (emissions and safety), and you'll do fine. One 4 cylinder family, one 6 cylinder family, one 8 cylinder family. On B segment platform, one C segment, and on and on and on.
Gene B 11:06AM (10/16/2007)
Ford continues it's slow self destruction with a glaring lack of competent products. Look at how many Toyota models there are - more than Ford, Mercury and Lincoln combined. Ford has failed to cover the market bases. Expect a share decline to 10%. It's heartbreaking.
Reply
Thomas 9:29AM (10/16/2007)
I love the idea of selling Euro Fords here in America as Mercury's and me personally I think there is still hope for Mercury. And like I have said before I don't understand why Mercury doesn't sell because it is one of the best brands in America when it comes to quality and reliability.
1. Mercury Takes 4TH Place in J.D. Power 2007 Vehicle Dependability Study
2. Mercury Takes 6TH Place in J.D. Power 2007 Body & Interior Dependability Ratings
3. Mercury moved from 17TH to 8TH Place in J.D. Power 2007 Initial Quality Ratings
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/j-d-power-2007-vehicle-dependability-study/346679/
http://www.jdpower.com/util/ratings/results.aspx?study_id=214&vertical=Autos&order=1&orderDir=4
http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pdf/2007088.pdf
Reply
John 4:54PM (10/23/2007)
I agree with Thomas in everything that he wrote.
Devin 9:30AM (10/16/2007)
Mercury, as much as I want them to be successful, does not reallyl have a place in the industry. Ideally, they should be Ford's answer to GM's Buick, while Lincoln should be the answer to Cadillac, but that is not even close. I honestly would rather see the euro Fords come over as Fords than as Mercury's. The kinetic design is soooooo much better than the gay "red, white, and bold" design theme some execs are trying to push through Ford. Unfortunately, with Ford getting rid of Jag and LR, all that will be left will be Volvo, Lincoln, Mercury, and 33% of Mazda. Maybe Ford should start making Mercury more upscale, give them a sports car (the cougar), a delicous looking CUV (ala enclave), and really work at building the brand.
Reply
mk 1:01PM (10/16/2007)
Buick????
Mercury was never a near-lux old-folks brand like buick has been.
Mercury used to be an american sportier, nicer version of Fords. Sable kind of diluted that sporty bit.
Cougar, Capri, etc. were sporty-premium versions of their ford counterparts.
Mercury is a stylish and nice change from bland Fords.
I think Mercury and Mazda can co-exist, and Volvo is Volvo, just like Saab is Saab.
New sporty small-ish-to-medium japanese cars from Mazda can co-exist with medium size and larger cars from europe, branded as Mercury.
I agree with maybe an olds/pontiac analogy, which should now be going toward saturn.
What I don't understand is some of the other comments here saying that Mercury would harm Mazda and Volvo, and thus should be ignored.
How about, FoMoCo should try to sell as many cars as they can, from any brand name they have, even if there is some slight overlap. Slight overlap in the market is better than GAPS, where you have no product and people buy from your competition.
If people choose between a Mazda, Mercury, or Volvo, they ARE STILL BUYING FROM FORD! And Ford bolsters it's business by hopefully offering quality products that more people will buy.
I would venture a guess that for every person who considers all three brands and cross-shops, there are also people who are brand loyal to Volvo, or who prefer the sportier image of a Mazda, and there are some, like me, who would love a Mercury, especially if they were selling the quality products that are currently not available to buyers in the US, but in Europe and Australia.
In what way is a bit of internal competition a bad thing, if it overall helps compete in the larger market for marketshare for FoMoCo? Especially when Mazda, Mercury/EuroFord/AussieFord, and Volvo are not completely selling the exact same car with different nameplates. The cars may share a chassis or two, but they are different looking and configured cars.
Between the Mazda3 5-door, the euro focus 3-door(which could be a mercury), and the Volvo S40 4-door, they share the same basic platform, but they are all distinctly different cars.
Even the Mondeo/new Mazda6 look different, although fill similar roles. More good choices should mean more customers, though. It would be very little different than Fusion/Milan, which are even more closely visually related.
GM's problems with badge engineering in the past was that the cars weren't even visually different, let alone diversified from the same base platforms. That is not the case here.
I think it is tragic that Mercury is so ignored by FoMoCo.
I've said it before. You can't be suprised that something is starving to death, when you (FoMoCo, in this case) are responsible for feeding it, and haven't been for some time.
volvfan88 9:40AM (10/16/2007)
so whats gonna happen with Volvo, are they going, staying, sharing..................
Reply
Rene Curry 9:40AM (10/16/2007)
The problem is a Mercury is exactly like the Ford in too many ways, even the appearance. Almost every option at Mercury is available on the Ford counterpart.
I would bring the Ford down market and lower the cost. I would limit the high end options. For the Mercury counterpart I would have very different styling cues, interiors, and premium options. Yes, of course a higher price tag. It should even be more sporty. Wheels, handling, power. The Mercury group should be where the profits are mined. Lincoln should remain the Mercury stable mate. This will draw both buyers that are looking for an above average auto experience.
Think of the late 60s how the Mercury Cougar was so much different from Ford Mustang, but had the same mechanicals. Only car guys knew it was the same platform. Take that concept even further.
And a Mercury cannot be a low end rebadged Lincoln or the other way around. Mercury needs it's own identity, otherwise it will drag down Lincoln.
Reply
Travis Rassat 9:51AM (10/16/2007)
I agree that it would be smart to use Mercury as a means to bring European models here. They definitely need to get away from a lineup of rebadged Fords and do more to make the Mercury brand unique and compelling. Ford, Mercury and Lincoln need to be truly unique vehicles designed for unique groups of buyers. How will a Milan hybrid be better or different than a Fusion hybrid? Once you load it up with all the options it'll be the same car as the Fusion, plus $40. That's not unique.
I think brand uniqueness is a big issue plaguing most of the manufacturers these days. Sure, it makes sense from a manufacturing point-of-view to share drivetrains and other non-cosmetic resources across brands for efficiency's sake, but it doesn't make much sense anymore from a marketing point-of-view. Manufacturers need to draw the line on what can be shared and not cross it, and I think in today's style-conscious market, they need to draw the line at the body designs - quit rebadging vehicles.
One advantage of having multiple product lines is that a certain line can provide a means for a manufacturer to test the waters with a more radical, more "like it or hate it" product offering. GM has Saturn, Saab and Hummer, Toyota has Scion, and Chrysler has Jeep. Maybe that's not necessarily the intent of those lines, but they do have those options - Ford doesn't really have that, except for maybe Land Rover but they're probably too upscale. Perhaps Mercury could be reborn as the radical yet affordable FoMoCo product line?
Reply
Resh 9:59AM (10/16/2007)
put all-new sheet metal on the Mustang for a new Cougar... that would be the easiest and probably best selling product they could do, quickly.
Reply