Thread: The end of the Australian Ford

Originally Posted by juddo

You may be right with what you say, but "sick of thirsty cars" is a perception that is in my opinion not a reality. example.

The other week I had to take a road trip down the Shepparton to do some work. It is 770km between filling and filling the tank and I used 65L of E10 fuel. That is in a Ford G6 4L straight 6 petrol engine. That equates to 8.4L/100km. I would not call that thirsty for a large car with a big powerful engine. Given, the day to day economy is not that good. It is between 10-11L/100km, and being a company car I do not drive it softly.

I have no idea what real figures the ecotech engine gets, but I imagine it would be quite a bit better.

As comparison, my Discovery 3 TDV6 used to get as good as about 7-8L/100km cruising on highways, but now with the new tyres it is more like 8-9L/100km.

Anyway, perception is everything, and trying to sell a product that customers do not want to purchase for whatever reason is folly.

My two tdi work cars (both 4wd, but cars) will do ~6 litres/100km on road. On a flat warm cruise at 100km the one with a digital readout can be below 5 litres/100km.
Ford have a diesel Mondeo that with a manual gearbox will do similar figures. So why buy the falcon?

IMO if they had placed the falcon as the "muscle diesel" it would be outselling everything. How difficult is it to put the 2.7tdv6 into a falcon? It's in the falcon based territory already so drivetrain etc is already done, Jag ran it successfully in their cars too so clearance can't be a big problem.

It seems to me that someone in FORD global HQ simply gave FORD Au enough rope to hang themselves. They are selling essentially the same cars they have sold for 20 years. More evolved, but fundamentally the same.

Ford have not sought additional funds from the Government and have publicly announced it will not be seeking new funds.

Also the money provided to Ford was for Ford to produce its new 2014 range which it has committed to do - so Ford has/will meet all its commitments for its obtaining that funding - so I would say the above comments made re taking our money and running would seem way off the mark.

If we look at the experience of Nissan and Mitsubishi this will be the best thing to happen to Ford and employment in the car supply industry. Both the above companies sell more cars, they employ more people and make more money than they ever did as a manufacturer.

However given the "robotisation" of car manufacturer and the substantial reduction of labour I am surprised it costs twice as much to make a car in Aust than in Europe and 4 times as expensive as Asia then this clearly highights there are structural issues that raise costs in Aust. Noting that for the home market the exchange rate is not such an issue, maybe advantageous as parts coming from overseas like some engines etc are cheaper.

Garry

Originally Posted by FeatherWeightDriver

.....It is only a matter of time until Holden does the same...

I think that the bells are already starting to toll there. With the introduction of the Opel range, I think that that is big mummy GM already laying the foundations for a 100% imported range.

The biggest problem in all of this, is there is something like 27,000 people employed directly & indirectly in the car industry in this country.

Should we stop making cars here, then the real problems start.

If even half of them go on unemployment benefits, thats 13,500 people that the government has to support.

So, by giving the car industries a financial boost, they are actually saving money. Now, I am no government supporter, but this makes economic sense.

HOWEVER, as has been said, have the balls to increase the import tariff, on cars priced below a certain threshold, and stop the flood of cheap cars that are only designed to last 5 years.

The playing field certainly is not level.

Originally Posted by Basil135

Should we stop making cars here, then the real problems start.

If even half of them go on unemployment benefits, thats 13,500 people that the government has to support.

HOWEVER, as has been said, have the balls to increase the import tariff, on cars priced below a certain threshold, and stop the flood of cheap cars that are only designed to last 5 years.

The playing field certainly is not level.

That is not the long term experience from Nissan and Mitsubishi stopping local manufacturer. In fact the opposite.

If we are to put tariffs on imported vehicles we will be back in the good old days of crap aussie cars that could not compete on their own - also if we do that we will have counter tariffs on our goods overseas. I do agree though that some action where overseas products are subsidised is fair game but where the playing field is level then leave things as they are.

Our car makers have been subsidised by the government and I am surprised foreign countries have not hit the few cars we do export with counter tariffs - we do not make the the playing field level either.

Garry

Garry

The following article on the closure from today's Crikey by Bernard Keane is worth reading:

Is Ford’s closure of its Australian operations, announced in Melbourne today, a disaster? Are its employees, plus the component manufacturers that depend on Ford, victims of the strong dollar and economic rationalist ideology? Does this demonstrate the decline and fall of Aussie manufacturing?

No, no and no.

Due to the Ford closure around 1200 people directly will lose their jobs, plus more in the automotive components sector. It comes after over 400 workers were retrenched last year. Thousands of families will be disrupted and many workers may struggle to find jobs without significant retraining. But unemployment is still relatively low, and there’s more than three years until the final Ford closure. Without downplaying the impact on affected workers, ABS labour mobility data suggests that around 7000 workers change jobs every day in Australia. So, the Ford closure won’t even add the equivalent of one day’s worth of mobility, even though the losses will be confined to a much smaller area.

And while the strong dollar and lower tariffs for imported vehicles since 2010 haven’t helped, the key reason for Ford closing is because Australians, despite buying new cars like never before, don’t like Fords. In 2012, Ford’s best selling model, the Focus, barely scraped into the top 10 selling models despite a big lift in sales. Its second-best selling model, the Ranger, is a ute. Its flagship family sedan, the Falcon, was 21st, suffering a 25% slump in sales. And that came after a 37% slump in sales in 2011 (Ford says it will “retire” the nameplate in 2016; the question is whether it will make it to 2016). In the year to March, Ford suffered a nearly 14% dip in total sales.

These aren’t the numbers of a company suffering increased competition from a stronger currency, but a company that can’t convince consumers to buy its flagship product any more, a company that has lost touch with consumers, as so often happens with protected industries.

Nor is the closure representative of Australian manufacturing. For all the stories about high-profile manufacturers struggling, in the year to February the total manufacturing workforce fell by just 3000, or a third of 1%, to 954,000 in trend terms — the lowest fall in years.

The Prime Minister, who as recently as April claimed the election of Tony Abbott would see the car industry close in Geelong, this morning announced the federal government would contribute $30 million to a $40 million package to “support the economic development and diversification of the Geelong and northern Melbourne regions”. She dismissed suggestions that automotive manufacturing was unviable in Australia and claimed it was a major strategic industry. The federal government will also be pumping an additional $10 million into the Automotive New Markets Program for component manufacturers.

Why the loss of 1200 jobs in one region attracts $40 million in handouts wasn’t explained by the Prime Minister, although the electoral logic of trying to hang on to the highly marginal electorate of Labor-held Corangamite is clear.

In truth, Ford’s closure should have happened well before now. But the Detroit multinational has kept factories operating because it has been paid to do so by a government deluded that making physical products is somehow a more real economic activity than services, or producing intellectual property — and funded by unions with a vested interest in keeping uncompetitive factories open to employ their members. It was a scam perpetuated at the expense of taxpayers, but one that couldn’t survive changes in consumer preference and the removal of the barriers that hindered consumers from choosing what they wanted.

Unfortunately Holden and Toyota will continue to receive taxpayer bribes to maintain uncompetitive operations because they play a minor role in Australian manufacturing.

I have a feeling Ford AU have no control over this decision, it would be the parent company that has made this decision.

Baz.

Originally Posted by sheerluck

I think that the bells are already starting to toll there. With the introduction of the Opel range, I think that that is big mummy GM already laying the foundations for a 100% imported range.

Think they might have a bit of time left yet with the iminent release of the new VF range.

Also interesting to note that the soon to be released "Chevrolet SS" is a LHD Commodore SSV. Was reading an interesting article last night on how they are looking to the future for further applications of this platform - one is an all wheel drive "crossover" wagon, based on the VF Commodore wagon. The photo that they have put up looks like a Commodore wagon with a Colorado type grille - fitted with the 2.8 litre duramax diesel.

I think that at least GM has given Holden a better chance to survive in that they have actively chased export opportunities for some years now - both to the US and elsewhere. I was very surprised at the number of Holden Caprices (re-badged as Buick Park Royal) that I saw on a recent trip to China for example.

The Australian Falcon (and possibly the Territory as well) is a product that would probably sell very well in the US (and elsewhere) given the current lack of large rear wheel drive American sedans - but for reasons best known to themselves, Ford seems to have failed to explore this opportunity. It's a pretty well known fact that the Australian market alone is not big enough to support the design and manufacture of such a vehicle - GM at least seems to have realised this and have been selling to multiple markets for some years now.

I think the saddest part of any auto manufacturing shut-down in Australia is the potential loss of Australian design input - it is also a well known fact that some of the best car designs in the world in recent years have come from Ford and Holden in Australia. Their designs are influencing much of what we see on the roads from a number of countries. Will indeed be a pity if this is lost.