Packard Forum Index » General

What about Ford Motor Company? How can they compete against the Government backed GM? The US Government has announced they will back GM's warranty on every car they sell. Isn't this unfair business practices? How can Ford compete against this?

Ford is in a much better position, as they had hired their CEO a few years ago who is a former Boeing executive. He restructured Ford 3 or 4 years ago because as a Boeing executive he knows the up and downs of manufacturing slowdowns.

It seems Ford is punished for being prudent, while GM & Chrysler are rewarded for failure. But I guess this is for Par, as Packard had cash when they merged with Studebaker, and they were the ones who ended up with their car line dropped.

HH, I agree with everything you've said, but I think there is another factor and I'm not sure just how to express it. The Japanese, Germans, French and Italians, etc. tend to be nationalistic in their purchasing habits, that is to say they better support their own country's products than we Americans do. As of the last 30 years or so Americans don't seem to have the same sense, call it patriotism or whatever you will, to make even the smallest sacrifice to support our own manufacturing base (or even to support our own econony for that matter - when's the last time Americans in any numbers purchased our country's debt [bonds]? We didn't, and that's why China has 80% of our national debt?) Even in cases of equivalent quality, the "cachet" of a foreign car seems to rule the roost. That to me is one of the largest obstacles to GM or Ford or Chrysler ever becoming significant again in this country. Without a reversal, they'll become the little niche-market makers, and we know where they all ultimately end up.

Plenty of parallels in the past; e.g. while Zenith was US based and making one the finest TVs in the world, what did American's buy - Panasonic, Sony, etc. Another manufacturing base kissed goodbye!

And one needs only to look at the lastest catastrophic problems of Ireland and Iceland to see the vulnerabilities of having a "service-based" economy w/o a significant manufacturing component.

Here's hoping Americans grow up, get smart, learn to support our country again, quit the idea that living 3 levels above your income is a right, and hopefully we get all this done before the government puts us in the equivalent of debtor's prison.

I'm bracing myself for the response.

Owen, I think you said it very well. There's absolutely truth in the statement that other countries support their products better. Maybe some of that is due to the other countries, as a rule, don't have as diverse a population--or maybe didn't until recently. One nationality-one country-one common goal.

I think it has been our mentality that exotic (meaning foreign) was better or if not better, different enough to make you stand out. Particularly after the war when coming out of a depression, lots saw different products & how the rest of world lived. In the 50's, I remember when the first VWs and English cars were coming over. At the time I think they were being exported because the US was the only country left with money & they had to sell them somewhere. Even in the backwater part of Southwest I came from they were considered desirable because they were different and attracted attention. Just because you had to get out and push the VW up the hill or stop and pick up the pieces falling off the English cars didn't detract much and they gained a following. Japanese cars didn't do much until the first oil crisis when people discovered they got 30-50mpg vs our 15 or 20. Never mind you had to be on very very good terms with your seatmate. Remember the first Honda cars--think it was a 600 or maybe 400. 2 up front, shoulders touching and an upholstered package shelf in back you could put kids on?

The first TV I remember was a Zenith bought in 1954, and I had one here until about 6 yrs ago. Great machines but considerably more expensive than the Sony or Panasonic which even though it was a plastic case instead of metal worked as well. When they moved production to Mexico and it stayed so much more expensive is the question. I think that is another of the reasons (until recently) that foreign items took such a large part of our market---price. We were/are living beyond our means, those items were less expensive, and you could have instant gratification. As you said, we're now paying for it.

I have no answers-- if I did, would set up a booth and charge 5? or run for office.

Oh c'mon.... it was sure easy to be patriotic and buy American cars when American cars were those beautiful Bonnevilles, Impalas, Galaxies, Mustangs, Camaros, Rivieras, Continentals, GTOs, Thunderbirds, Toronados, Eldorados, Devilles, 300s, Furys, Polaras, Chevelles, GTXs, 442s, ... back in the 1960s the only foreign car a kid lusted after was maybe an XKE.

Bottom line: Detroit has been turning out crappy products since the mid 1970's or so. Sleek lines gave way to padded vinyl roofs, "opera windows", faux "classic" radiator shells and crushed velour interiors. Everything started to look dorky or like a friggin' pimp-mobile. Suddenly, no one under the age of 60 wanted to be seen driving those things.

Then they started with the down-sizing of once majestic cars: instead of re-engineering them into something smaller but sophisticated they cheapened the brands into compact caricatures of their former selves. Thunderbirds looked like Fairmonts, Eldorados and Rivieras looked like Skylarks. They just trashed every great name there was.

I could go on and on with so many examples... but the big-three drove their car customers away.

Quote:

Remains to be seen what will happen with Ford. As I understand it, they are on the hook for billions in loans and their market share is way off too. Only time will tell if they come asking for money when the loans come due.

As to why Studebaker and not Packard, I think that had a lot to do with Packard selling roughly 26k cars in 56 and Studebaker selling 5 or 6 times as many. Also pickups, heavy trucks and associated. Guess the powers that were in charge thought they had the more viable market. Think I remember reading somewhere that one higher up said it would be easier to make an expensive Stude than a cheap Packard. Of course as history has shown, it ain't necessarily so.

Gerardo, please go back and read again, I think you missed the point entirely. Nowhere did I or HH say that GM/F/C built all wonderful cars deserving of our blind patronage - quite the opposite.

HH56 said:Quote:

I haven't thought about it that way. It sounds about right. This whole meltdown has so many variables, it makes my head hurt.

I have to say, I would buy a Ford just for the fact they didn't take any bailout money.

Well said Gusha.

Owen_Dyneto: I went back and read your post... my point is simply that Americans left Detroit cars because Detroit played them for fools.... so it's kind of understandable why Americans don't support them.

GM really thought Americans would be stupid enough to think they could get away with putting a Cadillac badge on Cavalier and no one would think anything of it. It's just one of hundreds of small examples of how they regarded their customers.

----

Zenith TVs: again a question of design... of style. Sony and Panasonic were making cool looking things while Zenith and the others were still pushing those hideous wood cabinet French Provincial/Early American/ Mediterranean style monstrosities. Even their portables had the usual dose of plastic wood and chrome plated plastic. No thanks.

Sony and Panasonic had modern design and cool advertising.

I don't concede the point, but I give up. Back to topics like nuts and bolts and carbon and grease and gas and oil.

Gerardo: The fact still remains that even with the current trouble that GM is in they still are the second biggest car manufacture in the world.

It seems that in the USA people got tired of the lousy cars that Fiat built and sold in this country. Very few second time buyers because of the poor build quality, mechanical troubles, and most of all the poor bodies of Fiats that would have severe rust problems in only a couple of years.

GM a couple of years ago paid Fiat $3 billion US dollars to get out of any kind of possible partnership with Fiat. Now that really has to say something about Fiat. GM was in bad shape then but was still willing to pay to get out of partnership with Fiat.

Fiat withdrew from the US market for all purposes around 1982. They finally threw in the towel in 1990 because people in the US market weren't willing to buy rebadged X1/9's sold as Bertones from 1984 through 1990.


John F. Shireman