I'm a Ford guy as well. It was 1 billion dollars in the late 70s that Chrysler got, not just millions( unless you want to call it 1000 millions (-
. Personally I was against that as well as the current one. The history of autos is strewn with companies that couldn't financially make it, for whatever reasons. I was( still am) a big fan of Studebaker....no one offered them a bail out, nor AMC( not such a fan) which was purchased by Chrysler. I support the bankruptcy procedure. If Fiat buys them, I don't care, as long as they are obligated to function separate from govt. intervention.
I have felt for many decades that there are only so many cars that can be sold every year, and we have exceeded that many times. I refused to purchase any of my children cars when they turned 16, like many parents do. Not a popular stand with the kids, but I don't feel that MOST kids are mature enough to operate a vehicle without some parental controls. Owning their own is just one way to sacrifice your parental responsibilty. I would hope that this current economic environment will put a BIG reduction in that action. That will of course mean that we are purchasing less new cars.
If Chrysler can't cut it, let them go...I don't care. I think the biggest failure of most car companies occurs when they are no longer a family enterprise, so there is no incentive to protect their assets. Ford, while a company that sells stock, is still predominantly owned by Ford family members and with all their assets they will likely mortgage anything neccesary to keep what they have. GM and Chrysler don't have that impetus. Not that Ford is infallible, I think like all car companies they make crap, I haven't purchased a new car since mandatory airbags and won't again. O.K., I purchased some Cobras and a couple Deuces of different flavors, but calling them "new" is probably a stretch even though they were.
I worked in the bike industry for about 30 years starting in the 60s and saw a similar pattern. Of course, bikes became a consumer commodity and people that weren't motorcyclists started buying large numbers of new bikes in the late 70s and into the 80s. That set up a production system that couldn't be sustained as the "next" consumer desire went in another direction. I see that as what the issue in the car industry is now. It seems that every company has to have a vehicle in every market and can't find their "niche" to focus on.
Ford would be better off if they weren't so consumed with that. If they just made trucks and really good ones, who cares if GM/Toyota/ Nissan had a part of the SUV market. The same with Mustangs, think how much better/less costly a Mustang might be if they didn't have to spend engineering/production moneys on every possible market that some other manufacturer might create. I recall when one of the Fords spoke at the Hot Rod Trade show a few years ago, his solution to their waning sales was that they were going to change the name of the 500 back to Taurus. Not that they were going to make it better/more desirable...they were changing the name. Pretty much sums up my feelings about the Auto industry as a whole.
Threaded Mode
