• Nov 27, 2010
According to Ford, 70 percent of the company's growth in the next decade will come from the Asia-Pacific region and Africa. The Blue Oval had only planned to have 310 dealerships in China at the end of 2010, but having sold nearly half a million cars this year and expecting the boom to continue, the number has jumped to 340 dealers. This is part of Ford's larger plan to add 100 new dealerships in China, mostly in smaller cities and inland provinces where new car demand is high.

Ford is planning a new plant with its Chinese joint venture partner, Changan, and will introduce four more models into the Chinese market next year, including the 2011 Edge. Elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific market, Ford has already spent $500 million on increasing production capacity in India, where it now sells the Figo subcompact.

[Source: Automotive News – sub. req. | Image: STR/AFP/Getty]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 21 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      Then Audi must have given Europe the finger years ago, same for Mercedes, BMW, Fiat and many others do business outside of the EU. Ford didn't beg for a dime like GM or Chrysler either. They will have paid off a majority of their debt by year end as well.

      That comment aloing with many others you have made shows you are a special kind of stupid.

      The Chinese may be invested in Ford but they certainly don't "own" it. The average investor cannot buy stock that allows them to vote on any board member. So they can own all the stock they want but techicnally the Ford family owns the company the best you can do is go for the ride.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Well where else are they going to get profit from? The US market is over saturated. The profits are in India and China. These are emerging economies..with high potential. It will be a years if not decades before they become over saturated. And congestion while it will increase will be mitigated by the massive investments being made in High speed rail.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @gua: China is cca the same size as US. As for China being 2nd largest country, Canada disagrees... China is 3rd or 4th. Unless you include other countries, like Mongolia or Taiwan.
        Get over yourself. You don't make good example of education in China. :(
        • 4 Years Ago
        Actually I think gua has a point about the population density, but didn't express himself clearly.

        Here's is a list of the top 50 cities in the world by population density, not a single one is from China mainland:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_population_density

        List of countries by density, China is placed 78th:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density

        Having been to China, their cities are quite crowded, but no more than major metropolitan areas in North America. We kinda take for granted that in North America the majority of the land are uninhabited. If you look at a map, cities are tiny blobs surrounded by large swaths of wilderness. It's the same for China, but a bit less so than North America. They make it up by having more cities than we do. Keep in mind that they have 4 times more people than the US, not 40 times, and about the same amount of land.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Gua: Every country regardless of population has wide open spaces with virtually no inhabitants. Well, except maybe Monaco and Luxembuorg.

        Look at Siberia ( It makes up about 77% of Russia's territory (13.1 million square kilometres), but has only 25% of Russia's population (36 million people). What matters is density of people in it's large population centers.

        Yes China is a large country, but her population is rapidly shifting from rural (farming) to industrial. All the large cities in China are getting larger (population-wise). That is where the congestion and pollution problems arise.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @Yaroukh:

        Depending on the definition of "total territorial area" China is 3rd or 4th with Canada 2nd and USA 3rd or 4th BUT in terms of land area only, China is 2nd with USA 3rd and Canada 4th. The reason why is because the total area of Canada includes Canada's share of the Great Lakes plus other lakes in the Northwest of the country but when you exclude these the figure is a bit smaller.


        Sources:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_outlying_territories_by_total_area

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_outlying_territories_by_land_area



        • 4 Years Ago
        Um, China's land mass is 9,640,821 km^2. USA is 9,826,675 km^2.

        Population density of USA is 32/km^2. China is 139.6/km^2.

        Looks like you have no idea about magnitudes OR ratios.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Gua: You make no sense at all. The Chinese infrastructure is no where as developed as the US infrastructure. They have quadruple the population of the US, and nowhere near as much developed roads and bridges per capita. Yes, I know that they are building more as we speak, but they are adding cars at a much faster rate.

        BTW: The northeast does have huge traffic issues. Wanna see how bad it can get? Shut down AMTRAK, NJ Transit, Long Island RailRoad and Metro North. Boston to DC would be in permanent gridlock. Yep, the same AMTRAK that everyone loves to pick on, the North Eastern US would be lost with its commuter rail systems. Now image what it would be like as China approaches the same car per person ratio as the US.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @Dr. Greenthumb

        Actually I was following up on gua's discussion of density as a matter of technicality, just throwing out some facts for consideration. I usually refrain from taking sides on complex issues; you make people smarter and more considerate by being a devil's advocate than being a preacher. :)

        Though personally, I don't think we are disagreeing on any point in particular.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Huurrr, the Big 3 are screwing us because both GM and Chrysler just announced last week that they are investing on plants that protect about 2400 jobs. I guess America can only hit rock bottom from there.

      I translated your comment for you. Who's making a fool out of themselves now?
      • 4 Years Ago
      Um, Ford didn't go 'cry in front of congress'. They were the one that managed to survive without a government bailout, remember?

      It's a dumb comment either way, but you also manage to be completely ignorant of the facts as a bonus. Wake up, fool.
      • 4 Years Ago
      @Noz and "Gua"


      It is pretty pathetic when you reply to your own comments using a second screen name you created. I find it pretty strange whenever either of those names makes an appearance on a thread, the other name soon follows and both names spam the comments.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Doesn't Ford make a boatload of sales to government fleet contracts? They got their bailout, but in a roundabout way, and you can count on that.
        • 4 Years Ago
        If GM could have been saved simply by selling more cars they wouldn't have gone bankrupt.
        • 4 Years Ago
        That is not a "bailout", that is just doing what they do, sell cars!! Selling cars and straight up asking Congress for billions of dollars are two totally different things.

        Using that argument, they have all been getting their bailout money "in roundabout ways" selling their products to state, local, and federal governments to be used as secret service, police cruisers, ambulances, fire trucks, school buses, etc.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I'm really curious to know how sustainable the Chinese auto market is going to be. My point is, I seriously doubt that China & India will treat cars as we do in our culture. Some of them may keep their cars 7 - 10 years, as opposed to the US on a 3 - 5 year cycle.

      This could be like the Y2K boom and bust run with technology, with a protracted slow selling period once everyone who wants a car gets one, or the government steps in and decides to control how many cars are added to their national fleet annually. Two main reasons that the government may be forced to step in:

      1). Infrastructure, at the rate that the Chinese are buying cars, over congestion may become a real problem.

      2). Pollution. This is already a beast of a problem for the Chinese, and it going to get worse before it gets better.

      I ask these questions, because Ford, GM and other foreign car makers, might pour so much money into their Chinese operations, only to watch them grind to a halt.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Purplewon: Absolutely do not think that this market should be ignored, just that they may want to keep an eye on their cash outlay.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Your points are all valid. However, the fact remains, there are a billion cars to be sold in China, and any large manufacturer would be foolish to ignore a market that represents 1/6 of the world (1/3 if you include India). Also, 340 dealerships isn't exactly putting all their eggs in one basket.
        • 4 Years Ago
        "Some of them may keep their cars 7 - 10 years, as opposed to the US on a 3 - 5 year cycle."

        Hmm, maybe this is a good thing. If the market wants longer-lasting cars, companies will make cars that last longer.

        Toyota Hiluxes sell like hot cakes in developing countries, because they are built like tanks.
      • 4 Years Ago
      What, you expected automakers to save the entire country in one day?

      *rolls eyes*
      • 4 Years Ago
      @Noz and "Gua"


      It is pretty pathetic when you reply to your own comments using a second screen name you created. I find it pretty strange whenever either of those names makes an appearance on a thread, the other name soon follows.
    • Load More Comments