Forums

Ford eating its own to feed EVs

Started by Flyguy August 22, 2022
Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2
"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently."

Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 11:03:15 AM UTC-7, Flyguy wrote:
> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: > https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 > "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." > > Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
They haven't figure out the logistic for optional (money) charging yet. For example, $10,000 for almost FSD, $500 for remote locking, $1000 for heated seats, $999 for wind shield wipers, $55 to open the window each time. Opportunities are endless.
Flyguy <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: > https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 > "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." > > Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
I want to know who will be designing the new EV stuff. If they have 3000 extra engineers and designers just to essentially make cosmetic changes to a mature product line yearly, how many does it take to make a completely new product?
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy
<soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: >https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 >"He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." > >Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
One pattern I see a lot: The BeanCount Corporation decides that senior engineers cost too much. So force them to retire and pay their pensions. Then discover they can't get anything done without them, so hire them back as consultants.
On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 4:03:15 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: > https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 > "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." > > Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
On the other hand it does show some foresight, which is not a concept that Gnatguy understands. If the currently profitable part of the business is going to go away, it's less valuable than it looks, -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
On 8/22/2022 2:03 PM, Flyguy wrote:
> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: > https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 > "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." > > Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea.
People who like old cars and trucks tend to prefer to buy old cars and trucks. They don't like the new gas Camaro, they don't like the new gas Corvette, they don't like the new F-150, either. The things-were-better-in-the-old-days demographic is a difficult one to please and it might not be spending nearly as much money as a demographic as they believe they do. Ford has those numbers, we don't. Shaking things up once in a while, to the horror of long-time supporters, often tends to be the key to business longevity. Business isn't loyal and like Dylan trading his acoustic for an electric guitar, will give the finger to the fans no problem if it feels its in its best interests to do that.
On 8/22/2022 11:51 PM, bitrex wrote:
> On 8/22/2022 2:03 PM, Flyguy wrote: >> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: >> https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 >> >> "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and >> diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of >> the business must operate more efficiently." >> >> Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high >> development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the >> business is a very bad idea. > > People who like old cars and trucks tend to prefer to buy old cars and > trucks. They don't like the new gas Camaro, they don't like the new gas > Corvette, they don't like the new F-150, either.
Should have mentioned the new gas Mustang too, since we're on the subject of Ford. The base model has a turbo four for goodness sake, scandalous.
On 8/22/2022 8:31 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy > <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: >> https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 >> "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." >> >> Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea. > > One pattern I see a lot: The BeanCount Corporation decides that senior > engineers cost too much. So force them to retire and pay their > pensions. Then discover they can't get anything done without them, so > hire them back as consultants. >
The gas engine could be seen as a victim of its own success. It's a marvel of engineering evolution. And it's approaching an asymptotic limit of what they can do with the tech, for a price the average car buyer can afford. How do you sell the customer on the next big thing when the current thing is already so good? The difference between a 2015 F-150 and 2022 F-150 is what, exactly. Beats me.
On 8/22/2022 11:58 PM, bitrex wrote:
> On 8/22/2022 8:31 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy >> <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV >>> expansion: >>> https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 >>> >>> "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and >>> diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part >>> of the business must operate more efficiently." >>> >>> Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high >>> development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the >>> business is a very bad idea. >> >> One pattern I see a lot: The BeanCount Corporation decides that senior >> engineers cost too much. So force them to retire and pay their >> pensions. Then discover they can't get anything done without them, so >> hire them back as consultants. >> > > The gas engine could be seen as a victim of its own success. It's a > marvel of engineering evolution. And it's approaching an asymptotic > limit of what they can do with the tech, for a price the average car > buyer can afford. > > How do you sell the customer on the next big thing when the current > thing is already so good? The difference between a 2015 F-150 and 2022 > F-150 is what, exactly. Beats me.
I'm sorry one difference in New England is the 2022 probably has less rust. Maybe. Vehicles corrode out pretty fast up here
On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 23:58:55 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 8/22/2022 8:31 PM, John Larkin wrote: >> On Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Flyguy >> <soar2morrow@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> Ford is firing 3000 engineers and designers to help pay for EV expansion: >>> https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-confirms-layoffs-says-it-is-cutting-about-3-000-jobs-primarily-in-u-s-and-canada-11661180161?mod=hp_lead_pos2 >>> "He (CEO Ford) has said profits from its lineup of gas and diesel-engine vehicles will help fund the transition, but that part of the business must operate more efficiently." >>> >>> Obviously EVs are not profitable now do to low sales and very high development costs, but cannibalizing the profitable part of the business is a very bad idea. >> >> One pattern I see a lot: The BeanCount Corporation decides that senior >> engineers cost too much. So force them to retire and pay their >> pensions. Then discover they can't get anything done without them, so >> hire them back as consultants. >> > >The gas engine could be seen as a victim of its own success. It's a >marvel of engineering evolution. And it's approaching an asymptotic >limit of what they can do with the tech, for a price the average car >buyer can afford. >
Spoons and hammers and chairs are at their end of engineering evolution too.
>How do you sell the customer on the next big thing when the current >thing is already so good? The difference between a 2015 F-150 and 2022 >F-150 is what, exactly. Beats me.
The 2022 is a newer truck.