Money Pit

Old Nov 20, 2011 | 10:11 AM
  #16  
Raoul's Avatar
Certified Goat Breeder
25 Year Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
Originally Posted by Frank S
Originally Posted by Frank S
Yep. The argument can and should be made the auto bailout precedent was set in 1979.
Autos, airlines, railroads, etc. All the bailouts are bad. If they were never passed, life would still go on and someone better would be managing them.

I'm sure we're on the same page.
Hey, I don't know we could quote ourselves in Third person.
Raoul is outraged.
 
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2011 | 11:44 AM
  #17  
SSCULLY's Avatar
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,511
Likes: 10
From: Under the flightpath of old ORD 22R
Originally Posted by glc
We are in danger of winding up like the British car industry............nothing, all gone overseas.
Don't know if the British ever had a auto manufacture as strong as Ford is now. They still have Aston Martin, but this is a specific segment manufacture, and will never have annual revenues that match Ford's quarterly results. Even in the best of times Rolls Royce did not do that well ( with the US buying engines for planes ). Britain is not known for being a haven of well run innovative companies. They are trying to draw in high tech companies, but the carrot for this is just sad.

The new guy came into Ford and took it to task to make Ford a strong company.
He got the old bonds off the table as soon as they were callable. He leveraged everything he could back in 2006 and the market thought it was Ford's swan song. Jokes on the market for thinking this. I still recall the comparisons to GM and Ford back in 2006, and now where is that shareholder value of GM and Chrysler stock ?

Bill Ford did start the plan to being profitable, but he looked at it in sections rather than a whole. Trying to spot fix things to get Ford back to being profitable by shuttering plants, and laying off people was not going to do it.

The new guy got the expensive money called back in, to reduce interest payments, sold off the lines that were purchased under Bill Ford's reign and had the guts to listen to ( and act upon ) the opinion to ditch Mercury, as it had lost what ever name it had, and just floated around in no man's land.

Bill Ford can't take credit for the turn around, so he trys to take credit for hiring the guy from Boeing. Bet that was the board's decision, just like the board's decision that Bill had to go.
 
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2011 | 07:43 PM
  #18  
1depd's Avatar
Senior Member
20 Year Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 691
Likes: 1
From: Gulf Coast
I thought Ford owned Aston Martin, but sold it recently.
 
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2011 | 11:14 PM
  #19  
SSCULLY's Avatar
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,511
Likes: 10
From: Under the flightpath of old ORD 22R
Originally Posted by 1depd
I thought Ford owned Aston Martin, but sold it recently.
2007 is when Ford sold it off. At the time they kept 10% ownership.

Keep in mind the I am talking about from the time the new head came over from Boeing ( 2006 if I have that right - I remember this by the MY of my truck ).
In the bigger scope of things, anything he acted on is considered recently when you look at him being there only 5 years.

Probably the only way they could get the company off the books was to hold onto a chunk of it.
Cheapen up the sale by $ 100M so the financing could be had without it being a 100% financed deal ( someone other than an investment house had skin in it ).
 
Reply
Old Nov 21, 2011 | 03:18 AM
  #20  
glc's Avatar
glc
Senior Member
15 Year Member
Veteran: Navy
Veteran: Reserves
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,542
Likes: 819
From: Joplin MO
Aston Martin is barely hanging on - most of their production is now outsourced to Austria.
 
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:07 AM.