Ford Announcement is Shocking and Painful Blow
Commentary (by way of a modern "parable"):
A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
On the big day, the Japanese team won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action.
Their conclusion was the Japanese team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.
They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the American rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 Steering Supervisors, 3 Area Steering Superintendents and 1 Assistant Superintendent Steering Manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing Quality First Program," with meetings and dinners for management and a free pen for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.
The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.
___________________________________________________________________
As for Buzz Hargrove's comments --------- that old dinosaur ought to take a look at WHY the Asian marketplace doesn't want inferior N/A products. Instead, he'd rather we ban imports and force car buyers to have little choice but to purchase F.O.R.D.'s (Fix Or Repair Daily - Found On Road Dead).. And all for the sake a a few thousand subsidized jobs in southern Ontario. Or is it all for the sake of those union dues........?
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 18, 2006]
Note: Chicago Tribune article
Ford Announcement is Sh...
Stumble It!
---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
"The Weapon" - Rush
---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
"The Weapon" - Rush
It has since come to light that Buzz Hargrove, the president of the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) union, joined with top TWU officials to pressure the bargaining committee to approve the proposed settlement arguing, according to dissident bargaining committee member Lila Hackett, that “the government wasn’t going to help, we’re running out of money, that other unions or federations would not help if we had no money ...”<br />
<p>---<br>"Son, if you wanna get ahead in this world, never work for another man as long as you live."
The reason they gave for keeping the Canadian plants open was because of the large amount of money saved due to our healthcare system.
What a great weapon for American industry to use in court to strip us of our healthcare system eh?
---
Dear Abby, Dear Abby my fountain pen leaks, my wife hollars at me and the kids are all freaks
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
Fickle? Consumers aren't fickle. As an owner of 3 Ford products, I just want a decent car. I love the two I own that were made 11 years apart in the same plant, and there has been a huge drop in quality from that plant.
My 1992, I have 300,000k on it, and it is still solid as a rock, with only regular maintaience.
My 2003, has the crappiest paint since LADA stopped using rollers. It's gone through 1 transmission, and it severely overheats on cylynders 7 & 8. The rear axel seals leak. (and Ford knows it's a common problem). It eats tires, and goes through a set of 4 X $500 each tires every 20,000km that Ford had made special for the vehicle and you can't get just anywhere . . .
Don't get me wrong - I love that car like it's a pet. It directly connects my right foot to my smile. But if the Consumer is paying luxury car prices, high end Fords should at least match the quality of a Toyota that costs 1/2 to 2/3 less. Or a Mercedes that costs 25% more.
What North American cars in showrooms now 'excite' you? Mustang? The '08 Camaro? Charger? Pretty short list, eh.
---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden
---
Dear Abby, Dear Abby my fountain pen leaks, my wife hollers at me and the kids are all freaks
I bought a 1985 Toyota pickup. I still have it and use it regularly. It's a 4X4 with a four cylinder diesel. At the time only four cylinder gas engines and the rare few of the diesels available. Currently you cannot find a four cylinder 4X4 pickup. Apparantly after all these years, even the four cylinder with more horsepower then 1985, is not sufficent. The diesels were such poor sellers that in 1987 they disappeared from the NA market.
I own 2 Fords & 2 GMCs as well. The Toyota is very badly rusted even in the west coast climate. One of the Fords I use for business and the other a farm vehicle. I have no major problems with either. The GMC van, my wife uses and the other a vintage vehicle waiting restoring. The GMC van has no major problems either.
People are demanding "new". It just can't look like last years. It has to have more horsepower because last years horsepower couldn't have been enough. The biggest seller in the world is a Ford E150. Few use it as a truck other then carrying arround "Big Boys Toys. This years model has to be better then last years. NOW fuel misers are in demand. The craving for big diesel engines have gone back to smaller ones. I watched small econo vehicles grow since the last oil crisis. V6s with more horse power then the old V8s have domineered over the four cylinder.
Yes people are fickle. The economy of a car depends on the present day price of fuel. Trying to determine "when" they get use to the costs, is the big game. The "Smart" car isn't out selling any other.People are still demanding 0-60 in less then 5 seconds but giving the same economy as the Smart car. There are many ways to cut down fuel consumption but few are willing to drive that way. Perhaps that's more stupid then fickle.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
If you know of a way, you will be rich very quickly. Hybrids won't even get that. There is a reason why they can't. No one knows how. The old wives tale of some miracle device that will get that kind of MPG, is just that, an old wives tale. If just one manufacture could build such a vehicle, the manfacture would not be able to meet the demand. Why wouldn't anyone want that vehicle? Besides, fuel economy is only relevent to the cost of fuel. At $10 per liter, even 40 MPG will be sneezed at.
---
Expect little from life and get more from it.
If you know of a way, you will be rich very quickly"
Piece of cake: build a 3.2 litre engine so that it provide's torque low in the power band, and keep the curve flat through 4,000 rpm. Then run it through a 6 speed gearbox with a .75 to 1 ratio, and then put it through a 2.73 rear end on 16 inch tires.
Run that puppy @ 2,000 rpm and you're looking at better than 45-50 mpg.
---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
"The Weapon" - Rush
my bad.
---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"
"The Weapon" - Rush