Ford Motor Company announced Wednesday that it has posted a $1 billion profit for the second quarter of 2012. That sounds like good news for the Blue Oval, until you take into account that Ford posted a $2.4 billion profit for Q2 a year ago. That is a substantial 58 percent loss.

Ford also posted $465 million in international losses, with $404 million of those losses coming directly from Europe. The automaker also increased its European loss projections to $1 billion for 2012, due in large part to the economic crisis overseas, which has resulted in increased unemployment and decreased consumer confidence.
The $404 million loss actually beat out loss projections for this quarter, based on estimates from a month ago. The result was a 1.8 percent increase in Ford's stock, based on pre-market trading this morning.

Ford's North American unit posted a profit of $2 billion in Q2 – the second economic quarter in a row in which the company posted profits in excess of $2 billion.

Additionally, the investor service Moody's returned the Blue Oval's investment grade to its 2006 status. If you recall, that was when the company leveraged nearly everything, allowing it to avoid government bailout. Before this news, Fitch Ratings had restored Ford's investment grade as well.

Show full PR text
FORD EARNS SECOND QUARTER 2012 PRE-TAX OPERATING PROFIT
OF $1.8 BILLION, NET INCOME OF $1 BILLION

• Second quarter pre-tax operating profit was $1.8 billion, or 30 cents per share, a decrease of $1 billion
from second quarter 2011. Ford has now posted a pre-tax operating profit for 12 consecutive quarters
• Second quarter net income was $1 billion, or 26 cents per share, a decrease of $1.4 billion from second
quarter 2011, reflecting lower operating results except for Ford North America and higher tax expense
• Solid second quarter results were driven by Ford North America and Ford Credit; challenges at Ford Europe and Ford South America are being addressed through the company's One Ford plan
• Total Automotive pre-tax operating profit was $1.4 billion, a decrease of about $900 million from second quarter 2011
• Ford North America recorded second straight quarter with profits of more than $2 billion and operating margin exceeding 10 percent
• Ford Credit reported a pre-tax operating profit of $438 million, a decrease of $166 million from second quarter 2011, in line with expectations
• Revenue was $33.3 billion, a decrease of $2.2 billion from second quarter 2011
• Ford ended the quarter with $33.9 billion in total Automotive liquidity, an increase of $1 billion compared with first quarter 2012
• Ford expects full year total company pre-tax operating profit to be strong, but lower than 2011, with positive Automotive operating-related cash flow

DEARBORN, Mich., July 25, 2012 – Near-record profits in North America and continued strong performance from Ford Credit helped the Ford Motor Company [NYSE: F] deliver its 12th consecutive quarterly pre-tax operating profit as it reports second quarter 2012 results today.
The company reported a pre-tax operating profit of $1.8 billion, or 30 cents per share, and net income of $1 billion, or 26 cents per share. The company also continued to generate positive Automotive operating-related cash flow, and ended the period with a strong liquidity position of $33.9 billion, an increase of $1 billion during the quarter.
"The Ford team delivered another solid quarter driven by the strength of Ford North America and Ford Credit," said Alan Mulally, Ford president and chief executive officer. "We remain absolutely committed to continuing to make progress on our One Ford plan, including dealing decisively with near-term challenges, investing for future growth, and developing outstanding products with segment-leading quality, fuel efficiency, safety, smart design and value."
Second quarter 2012 net income was affected by lower operating results and the impact of higher tax expense compared to a year ago that resulted from the release of the tax valuation allowance in the fourth quarter of 2011.
Ford finished the second quarter with Automotive gross cash of $23.7 billion, an increase of $700 million during the quarter. Automotive debt of $14.2 billion at the end of the second quarter was up from $13.7 billion at the end of the first quarter, primarily reflecting additional drawdowns of low-cost loans for the development of advanced vehicle technologies. The company will make its last draw on these loans by August 2012, and repayment of the loans begins in September 2012.
Ford also made payments of $800 million to its worldwide funded pension plans, of which $500 million were discretionary payments to U.S. funded plans, in line with the company's previously-disclosed long-term strategy to de-risk its funded pension plans. Dividends paid in the quarter totaled nearly $200 million. Automotive gross cash exceeded debt by $9.5 billion at the end of the second quarter, a net cash increase of $200 million during the quarter.

AUTOMOTIVE SECTOR The decrease in total Automotive pre-tax operating profit and operating margin was more than explained by lower results at Ford Europe, Ford South America, and Ford Asia Pacific Africa.
Ford North America

For the second straight quarter, Ford North America pre-tax operating profit exceeded $2 billion, and operating margin exceeded 10 percent. The increase in pre-tax results compared with strong performance in 2011 reflected higher net pricing, improved contribution costs, and other factors, offset partially by higher structural costs for growth, and unfavorable volume and mix including an adverse change in U.S. dealer stocks.
The company's outlook for full year North America 2012 profits remains unchanged. Ford expects significantly higher pre-tax operating profit and margin compared with 2011, as consumers continue to respond to the company's strong product line-up, including the recently-launched all-new Escape and the all-new Fusion launching in the second half of this year. Ford also remains committed to maintaining its competitive cost structure in North America.
Ford South America
Pre-tax operating profit and operating margin, while slightly positive, declined substantially compared with a year ago due to lower volume, higher costs, and unfavorable exchange. Although net pricing was higher compared with a year ago, it was constrained compared with recent periods by a more intense competitive environment.
Although the company continues to expect that Ford South America will be profitable for the full year, it now expects the level to be substantially lower than 2011, reflecting increased competitive pressures, weakening currencies, and changes in government policies affecting areas such as trade and access to foreign currency.
Ford continues to work on actions to strengthen competitiveness in this changing environment, looking at all areas of the business to improve operating results. These actions include fully leveraging the One Ford plan, including the introduction of an all-new lineup of global products over the next two years, starting with the launch of the all-new Ranger, EcoSport, and Fusion in the second half of this year.

Ford Europe
Ford Europe's results compared with a year ago largely reflected unfavorable market factors. Volume was unfavorable due to lower industry, share and associated production adjustments to maintain dealer stocks at appropriate levels. Net pricing was lower as the industry responded to excess capacity with higher incentives. Higher contribution costs also contributed to the profit decline.
Given the deteriorating external environment in Europe, Ford now expects its full year loss in Europe to exceed $1 billion. The magnitude of this loss will be affected by a number of factors, including the overall economic environment, competitive actions, and Ford's response to these developments.
The company recognizes the seriousness of the situation in Europe, and views the challenges the industry faces as more structural than cyclical in nature. While Ford is affected significantly because of its strong presence in the region, the company understands what is needed to achieve profitability and to generate an appropriate return on investments.
"We have faced challenging situations in other parts of the business before, and successfully addressed them through our One Ford plan," said Bob Shanks, Ford executive vice president and chief financial officer. "We will continue to use our plan as the guide to address challenges and opportunities in our valued European operations.
"We are reviewing all areas of our business to address the near-term challenges, while ensuring we build a strong foundation for our future," said Shanks. "It is premature to discuss details of what our plans may be in response to the situation in Europe, but we will continue to communicate our plans at the appropriate times with all of our stakeholders."

Ford Asia Pacific Africa
In Asia Pacific Africa, market factors were strongly positive compared with a year ago, but more than offset by higher costs associated with new products and investments to support higher volumes and future growth, as well as other factors.
Ford expects results to improve in the second half of 2012, due mainly to favorable volume and mix as Ford benefits from added capacity in China and Thailand and the all-new Focus and Ranger.

Other Automotive
In the second quarter of 2012, Other Automotive reported a loss of $163 million, compared with a loss of $76 million a year ago. The loss mainly reflects net interest expense and an unfavorable fair market value adjustment, primarily from the company's investment in Mazda.

FINANCIAL SERVICES SECTOR

Ford Motor Credit Company
The decrease in Ford Credit's pre-tax results was in line with expectations and is primarily explained by fewer lease terminations, which resulted in fewer vehicles sold at a gain, and lower financing margin. Ford Credit continues to expect full year pre-tax profit of about $1.5 billion, and total distributions to its parent of between $500 million and $1 billion. Ford Credit now projects managed receivables at year end to be in the range of $85 billion to $90 billion, and managed leverage of 8-9:1 for the foreseeable future, which is a decrease from the prior target of 10-11:1 and is consistent with its goal of achieving and maintaining a strong investment grade balance sheet.
Ford Credit remains a strategic asset for Ford, delivering high levels of quality and customer satisfaction with operating efficiencies that are among the best.

SECOND AND THIRD QUARTER PRODUCTION VOLUMES

The increase in the company's anticipated production volume for the third quarter, compared with a year ago, is more than explained by higher volumes for Ford North America and Ford Asia Pacific Africa. Compared with second quarter 2012, the company anticipates that third quarter 2012 production will be down 45,000 units, primarily reflecting seasonal summer shutdowns in North America and Europe.

About Ford Motor Company
Ford Motor Company, a global automotive industry leader based in Dearborn, Mich., manufactures or distributes automobiles across six continents. With about 168,000 employees and about 65 plants worldwide, the company's automotive brands include Ford and Lincoln. The company provides financial services through Ford Motor Credit Company. For more information regarding Ford's products, please visitwww.ford.com.


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
  • 52 Comments
      That Guy
      • 2 Years Ago
      This is absolutely fantastic news. And it really shows how insanely shortsighted Big Al's "one Ford" plan really is. Taking mediocre appliances and selling them all over the world is only going to mirror the results in Europe. Meet the new Ford, same as the old Ford. Except this time, they have a different baboon at the helm.
        merlot066
        • 2 Years Ago
        @That Guy
        That's interesting, because in case you didn't (or couldn't) read the whole 10 sentences of this article, Ford North America and all of its, in your words, "bland, terrible appliances" reported a profit of $2 BILLION. Factor in the rest of the world that is somehow in worse shape than we are despite our president and congress that are getting nothing done and overall Ford's profit worldwide is "only" $1 BILLION.
        • 2 Years Ago
        @That Guy
        [blocked]
          That Guy
          • 2 Years Ago
          Wow.....you couldn't be more wrong. In Europe, Ford doesn't have a wave of unwarranted goodwill to ride. Here they do.....because Ford lies and says they didn't take tax payer dollars (when in reality, they took tax payer dollars....billions of 'em). However, and fortunately for us, the wave of good will is beginning to diminish. With the pitiful sales of once strong nameplates (Taurus, Explorer, Focus, etc), cost of their appliances going through the roof, terrible styling (Taurus, fiesta, Explorer, Fusion, Edge, Fiesta, Flex, F-Series, Focus, Escape, etc, and all the hopeless Lincoln rebadges), and faulty products (my Ford touchy, Focus, Escape, etc) its clear that Ford will soon see the same results here that they see in Europe. Europe is not America....as such, their products won't work here. Slapping a Fusion sticker on a Mondeo will not work. There has to be fundamental changes. As for GM, I could care less.....I don't follow GM
          Josh
          • 2 Years Ago
          @That Guy And this is why nobody with any sort of ability in business would ever listen to your ignorant short sighted observations regarding the auto industry. Funny how your 'doomsday' comments are not unlike the same ones that claimed FoMoCo wouldn't live to see 2008, that the way forward will result in bankruptcy. Ford has the no 2 selling nameplate IN THE WORLD. Seems like there's no shortage of goodwill for Ford on this planet at least (maybe not on yours).
          • 2 Years Ago
          [blocked]
          Oscar
          • 2 Years Ago
          @ That Guy: "As for GM, I could care less.....I don't follow GM". Yeah right, Silvy....go play with your pushrods.
        Robert Ryan
        • 2 Years Ago
        @That Guy
        Totally agree. "One Ford" is an idiotic strategy that in the long run will kill Ford. Ford Australia has been on a rapid decline since "One Ford" was introduced. Ford Europe is really struggling. Ford has little presence in Asia. Pickup sales make up 60 % of Ford Revenue in North America. Not exactly a balance product range.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        • 2 Years Ago
        [blocked]
          • 2 Years Ago
          [blocked]
        Sir Duke
        • 2 Years Ago
        Rick, those things that make up the forest, are called trees. The people in the market for a Focus are more likely to be affected by the economic malaise than the people in the market for a BMW, Porsche or Mercedes Benz. Most of the folks driving a Focus class car likely OWNS them, whereas the folks driving 3 series and higher class cars likely lease them. When lease contracts are up, you MUST act. When you payoff your car loan, you don't HAVE to do anything.
        Papi L-Gee
        • 2 Years Ago
        I love how you show the dollar amount of the Kuga (£21,900) yet the pound-sterling amount of the (considerably smaller and less powerful) Dacia Duster. Yeah, that's plenty fair...
        Daniel D
        • 2 Years Ago
        Ricks word of the month is "massive". Rick is bought to you by Ford Europe.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      throwback
      • 2 Years Ago
      With few exceptions all brands are struggling in Europe, especially the mainstream brands. I can imagine how bad PSA's numbers will look.
        • 2 Years Ago
        @throwback
        [blocked]
      BTCC
      • 2 Years Ago
      The Escort and Fiesta are NOT doing well. I think their styling is very offputting. I predict the KUGA 2 will drop also.
        The_Zachalope
        • 2 Years Ago
        @BTCC
        Of course the Escort isn't doing well. They haven't sold it in Europe since 1998.
      FuelToTheFire
      • 2 Years Ago
      Ford nowadays makes products which are worth a crap. Unfortunately, as usual, Europeans prove themselves to not be the smartest pople around. With the exception of the Irish, who are actually pretty decent.
        xxmixedxtapexx
        • 2 Years Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        I don't think that's the truth, I think this has to do with the economy taking a tumble and European products not coming out as quickly as they are here. The Mondeo won't come out till Late 2013, unlike the Fusion (which is essentially the same car) which is coming out at the end of the year. Same with the 2013 Ford Kuga, which doesn't come out until the end of the year, unlike the 2013 Ford Escape which came out in Late May/Early June in the States. How would you feel as a consumer if you researched these cars and saw that they're coming out, would you want to wait or actually buy what's on the market now? It's stuff like this that could keep Ford in trouble until they catch up with their new models overseas.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        Jonathan Knapman
        • 2 Years Ago
        Except there is no market whatsoever for pick up trucks in Europe, particularly large ones such as the F-Series and Ram which are quite simply too large for European roads. Equally we don't really buy 4x4s or luxury/large saloons in large numbers either ... Those cars may be the word's most profitable vehicles, however that most certainly wouldn't be the case in Europe.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Jonathan Knapman
          [blocked]
        Papi L-Gee
        • 2 Years Ago
        Ford Jellymoulds from BON, I KNEW it was you!
        Robert Ryan
        • 2 Years Ago
        Most profitable Automotive Companies 1. VW 2. Toyota Ford comes in 6th globally.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      Matt Frawley
      • 2 Years Ago
      Ford of Europe and Ford of Australia will out of the business near future.
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Matt Frawley
        [blocked]
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      Rick Cavaretti
      • 2 Years Ago
      Look, until things get in order in Europe, the slightest negative news coming out of Europe is going to continue to have a massive impact here. No one here has any control over this--that guy's papercut over there just caused my leg to be amputated over here.
        Sir Duke
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Rick Cavaretti
        The problem with Europe is the EU. In theory the idea of the EU is great, in practice, not so great. Monetary policies they works for the heavily industrialized (wealthier) countries, crush the less wealthy countries. Austerity in the face of a recession is equal to being pennywise pound foolish. Europe is the snake that's trying to swallow itself. Both Ford & GM should take this opportunity to further streamline their european operations. This is the perfect opportunity for GM to euthanize both Vauxhall and Opel. Chevrolet is now a GLOBAL brand, and these brands are no longer necessary.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          "aatbloke, just about every 3rd world country now days offers some basic economics classes in their secondary education programs. Before you start name calling and generalizing while commenting on Opel's generous contributions to the world, take a business 101 class. Any business that loses $1 billion on average every year for 13 years straight is broken and needs to be fixed or left to die. Cutting Opel's loses and selling other brands that do generate a profit, regardless of how small, makes more sense than continuing to feed the giant black hole that is Opel." I qualified as an accountant in 1989 and have spent fifteen years involved in industry and in cross-border taxation. How about yourself? If you took the same course that you are preaching, you'd be aware that simply eliminating Opel would not necessarily make the GM group necessarily any more profitable. Your rationale is so basic you're not even taking account of economic or accounting aspects. You need to learn about economies of scale - and that's your starter course.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Sir Duke's comments wreak of the typical trailer trash American who hasn't a clue how the real world operates. The EU has operated perfectly well for the past forty years; some of its legislative demands can be hard to swallow but the benefits still outweigh the cons. The spanner in the works however is the unified currency, which results in the less wealthy states being at the complete mercy of economic forces when one of the reliefs from recession - printing cash and inciting both inflation and growth - is removed. As for Vauxhall and Opel - remove these from Europe and GM is dead in the water. Of course, unlike "Sir Duke", GM is more than aware of the importance of these companies in Europe. Chevrolet is regarded as a budget brand in Europe - with the exception of the US-sourced Camaro and Corvette - and is in no danger of eroding Vauxhall's 11% market share in the UK, for example.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          "aatbloke, GM would be better off without Opel. They are dysfuntional on many levels and have lost over $1 billion a year on average for the last 13 years straight. LONG before the EU ran into trouble. They were losers then and still are today. GM would NOT be dead in the water if Opel were gone. They would be more profitable and things would run a lot smoother internally." Opel has lost an awful lot of money in recent years, but it still commands a significant market share in a good number of European countries. Cost control isn't merely an issue with Opel - it's a consistent pressure with the vast majority of companies. GME has attempted to ease these issues with cutting factories and streamlining its European corporate structure twice in the past ten years. But the overall European slowdown has hindered the benefits from those changes. If you think that killing off Opel would mean Europeans suddenly switching to Chevrolet, you're living in cloud cuckooland - an unfortunate trait of many Americans. Those customers will simply simply switch to Ford, PSA, VW, and the German Q triumvirate instead. GM would certainly be dead in the water, sales from Chevrolets wouldn't be enough to warrant maintaining any presence in Europe, and the German Q-marques would gain an even firmer stronghold.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Vauxhall sold 116,000 cars and 13,000 commercial vehicles in the UK in the first six months of the year, representing 11% and 9% of both markets respectively. These market shares are down on last year - a direct result of the curtailment of capital investment in a tighter economy and double-dip recession. Chevrolet, which is marketed and known as a budget manufacturer, saw a slight market increase to 0.8% and sold 9,000 cars during the same period. Chevrolet does particular well in the poorer climes of eastern European countries, but in western Europe, Vauxhall/Opel dominates and competes head on with Ford, PSA, VW and Fiat - the traditional European strongholds. Vauxhall and Opel are the same product these days and have been since the late 70's, and the products themselves are not the dictat of Opel but of GME. The development is performed at Opel for the most part. Markets do indeed evolve and change, nobody can argue with that. But if GM pulled the plug on Opel and Vauxhall, those buyers (a good chunk of whom are cmpanies) would simply divert their attentions to the other European mainstreams or the German Q marques, which represent good value to lease given their higher residuals. Be careful what you wish for, because GM would likely be seriously burned as a consequence on European soil.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          "Okay, now that we have gotten past your lack of english comprehension, I'l try to articulate my point about the EU at a grade level that even you can understand." My higher education must be deluding me, since both "reek" and "wreak" are both acceptable verbiage in this particular euphemism. But you'ev probably learned something in your project work today, and that can only be beneficial for you. "Let's take the United Nations for example, its a brilliant concept, only problem is, it repeatedly fails at exactly what it was designed to do. It fails, because of political agendas. The EU is no different." Absolute codswallop. The United Nations and EU exist for completely different reasons. The EU's benefits as a trading bloc are numerous for at both corporate and personal level in Europe. There are downsides too - notably VAT and the restrictions placed on member states with variations of rates on various goods and services - however high levels of indirect taxation are a boon for EU governments and without it, services such as Europe's comprehensive public transportation networks and beautifully maintained transport infrastructure wouldn't exist. The EU is not universally popular in concept - especially in right-wing circles because it hinders conservative agendas to destroy the middle classes - however it has functioned exceedingly well since its inception in the late 1950's and especially since its expansion in 1973.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          I will also reiterate that the current crises faced by the likes of Greece are not the fault of the EU, but a result of the unified currency. The Euro certainly needs to be abolished without full economic integration.
          Sir Duke
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Forgive the typos. About Opel and Vauxhall, Chevrolet already outsells both of them in Europe. http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Jul/0718_chevy_sales.html Chevrolet Europe sold 61,865 vehicles for the second quarter in Western and Central Europe, a 13.6 percent increase in an industry that continues to struggle and is down 6.9 percent. The brand achieved its best-ever volume in Western and Central Europe in the first half of 2012 with more than 117,500 vehicles sold – led by Aveo sales of more than 34,000, a 10.9 percent increase over same period last year. Please show me where either Opel or Vauxhall sold 117K units in the first half this year. As newer/better Chevrolets hit the market, Vauxhall which in reality just rebadges Holdens and Opels will be placed under increasing pressure. Markets evolve, there was a time when both BMW and AUDI were regarded as mere oddities from Germany, Mercedes Benz ruled the roost. People keep saying what Chevrolet can and cannot do, and Chevrolet keeps proving them wrong. BTW: my family's first car was a 1961 Vauxhall Cresta PA.
          Sir Duke
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          aatabloke1967 if you are going to call me trailer trash, I take it alluding to my lack of an education, you had better lear to read and write at a basic primary school level. The proper word to use in this context was "reek" not "wreak" wreak/rēk/ Verb: Cause (a large amount of damage or harm): "torrential rainstorms wreaked havoc yesterday". Inflict (vengeance): "he was determined to wreak his revenge on them". reek (rk) v. reeked, reek·ing, reeks v.intr. 1. To smoke, steam, or fume. 2. To be pervaded by something unpleasant: "This document ... reeks of self-pity and self-deception" (Christopher Hitchens). 3. To give off or become permeated with a strong unpleasant odor: "Grandma, who reeks of face powder and lilac water" (Garrison Keillor). v.tr. 1. To emit or exude (smoke, for example). 2. To process or treat by exposing to the action of smoke. n. 1. A strong offensive odor; a stench. See Synonyms at stench. 2. Vapor; steam. Okay, now that we have gotten past your lack of english comprehension, I'l try to articulate my point about the EU at a grade level that even you can understand. Let's take the United Nations for example, its a brilliant concept, only problem is, it repeatedly fails at exactly what it was designed to do. It fails, because of political agendas. The EU is no different. I understand why it was created, and also thought it was a great idea. However, the first true crisis the EU encountered exposed all of its flaws and weaknesses. No, I don't think it should be abolished. Yes, I do believe that some member countries of the EU will be forced to leave if the wealthier countries continue to set an agenda and policy that only benefits them.
          lasertekk
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          There's nothing wrong with the EU's general premise. It's a step forward in creating cooperation for the many. Why does this thought threaten people? Would they rather a world where we constantly are in fierce competition and at each other's throats? Right now the problem is economics, and NO ONE is presently immune from this global issue, irregardless of which ideology they spew from their mouths.
          Justin Campanale
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Sir Duke is compleely wrong. The Chevrolet sales figures are attributed to the Eastern Euro countries. Opel by far is the leader in Western Europe. If Opel were to go away, 50% of GM Europe's sales would go just like that. BAM! And again, this is spread out throughout Europe. In Western Europe, GM sales would be close to nil. Besides, all these awesome new Chevrolets we get in the US? Cruze, Sonic,new Malibu (non eco), Equinox, etc Woo hoo! After so many decades, they're finally competitive, boo yah! In reality, they aren't even Chevrolets, not as we know them here in the US. Opel does almost all the work in engineering the platforms a well as the engines, while Daewoo does most of the designing. Take out Opel from the equation, and Chevy/GM U.S. themselveshas to engineer their own cars. And we all know how well GM U.S. makes their cars when left alone, right? The 1st and 2nd FWD Malibu, Cavalier, FWD sedan Grand Prix, Corsica, Celibrity, Citation, Century, 90's Regal, Aztek, and all those damn rebadges under Pontiac and Oldsmobile being shiniing examples. Even worse, GM will now try to sell those craptastic GM US products in Europe. European buyers are much more demanding of their cars in terms of quality and stuff, and there's no way they would ever accept GM US's products there. Bloke, you are British. In your time spent in England, have you seen a SINGLE "Chevrolet Alero" or "Chevrolet Trans Sport" and yes, they did make those models? GM Europe would essentially we dead without Opel.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          The Chevrolet Alero and Trans Sport were sold in a few select European markets. Both were so cobbled together that the Olds and Pontiac emblems remained on the front of both cars, although later Alero models were fitted with a bow-tie moniker. The Trans Sport was replaced by the Vauxhall/Opel Sintra which achieved a terrible reputation for unreliability and survived for just three years before being replaced by the Astra based Zafira. Sir Duke is just one of many youngsters who eye the European market through rose tinted goggles and draw conclusions which are astronomically different from the real world. Excluding commercial vehicles, Vauxhall Opel sold 470,000 units in Europe in the first half of 2012, 116,000 of those in the UK which is GMEs second largest market. That 470k is a dramatic drop, caused mainly by the economic climate, but enough to make GME reconsider a fundamental change of strategy.
          Jerry
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Let me ask you guys this, does "significant" market share in the EU market matter if you are losing over $1 billion a year on the operations? Who gives a flying !@$% if Opel has 100% of the market share if they continue to lose $1 billion a year. GM would make money by not losing money if they sold or closed Opel!
          Jerry
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          aatbloke, GM would be better off without Opel. They are dysfuntional on many levels and have lost over $1 billion a year on average for the last 13 years straight. LONG before the EU ran into trouble. They were losers then and still are today. GM would NOT be dead in the water if Opel were gone. They would be more profitable and things would run a lot smoother internally.
          Jerry
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          aatbloke, just about every 3rd world country now days offers some basic economics classes in their secondary education programs. Before you start name calling and generalizing while commenting on Opel's generous contributions to the world, take a business 101 class. Any business that loses $1 billion on average every year for 13 years straight is broken and needs to be fixed or left to die. Cutting Opel's loses and selling other brands that do generate a profit, regardless of how small, makes more sense than continuing to feed the giant black hole that is Opel.
          Jerry
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          bloke, it is that simple. GM has been trying to "fix" Opel for two decades with no luck. At some point, you have to start planning to cut your loses.
          aatbloke1967
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          "bloke, it is that simple. GM has been trying to "fix" Opel for two decades with no luck. At some point, you have to start planning to cut your loses." When you grow up, you'll realise that the business world does not operate in the same way as your Lego set.
          Daniel D
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Sir Duke
          Chevrolet might be better known these days, but it most certainly is not a global brand for GM. Badge Holdens Chevs tomorrow and sales in Australia would fall off a cliff.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
    • Load More Comments