Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

[dieselgeek]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

The inference is, that name calling is by definition, the act of a troll. Then you go on to call someone a name, seemingly the act of a troll. Seems logical to me.

But I don't understand what that has to do with Ford sales being up? if the guy just called me a troll, inferred or not, then guess what? he's a troll too. And given that he posted it totally irrelevant from the topic, what does that mean?

Party on. Meanwhile, how bout that blue oval??

[BluLightning]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

The stock is rising. That's a good sign.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=F

[88pony]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Yeah, GO FORD. They're making me money. 11.37 today, can't argue that. HOW 'BOUT THAT BLUE OVAL. And is now #2 in brand perception. And grew 1% market share... Just like it says in my signature.....Ford....DRIVE ONE.

[38P]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

No but your the first to bash them when they do good. A profit is a profit and they're still the only American company that didn't suck off the government teet. Way to go Ford.

I don't think you get it. That's not a profit. Not even close. To imply that Ford has "turned everything around" and is home free, as Nutzzter implies, is about as far from reality as possible.

That's not what I "implied." I merely rebutted your unsupported claim that "Ford is still losing money on every car they sell" with information directly from FORD. If you have relevant information which puts Ford's press release about Q3 profit in dispute, please post it.

I'm not bashing Ford, I like PLENTY of their current and past products. I simply cannot stand when someone cites misleading (or bogus) sources or information as they write a 3 million word essay that sounds like a cross between a dejected laid-off marketing dept. staffer and the guy on late night TV trying to sell me a Sham Wow.

By the way, that ShamWow is a BITCHIN PRODUCT! Holds TWELVE TIMES its weight in liquid! http://www.shamwow.com (Note: ShamWow is not effective for mopping up unsupported BS posted at Bangshift.com)

If you have proof that Ford is publishing "misleading (or bogus) . . . information" to its shareholders or potential shareholders, you ought to call the Securites and Exchange Commission. Otherwise you're making a baseless charge "bashing Ford."

Yay for Ford, they're still here, but they're not out of the woods. That's all that needs said about their current state. see how simple that was?

When did anyone say "Ford was out of the woods" in this thread?

The whole issue on whether or not Ford's 30% increase in sales was a good thing or not wouldn't have come up at all if you hadn't wrote "since Ford is still losing money on every car they sell, isn't it actually bad news to be selling more cars then?" The factual assumption of your question -- based on the most recent data publically available from the company itself -- is simply wrong. Thus your implied premise (e.g. more sales = bigger losses) is wrong.

Why all the juvenile name-calling? How does that make your argument more persuasive to anyone?

[dieselgeek]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Speedzter, do you know what EBITDA is, and why it exists?

[kenworth jon]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Go ford go may the company who DIDNT take TARP money win and survive.

[38P]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Speedzter, do you know what EBITDA is, and why it exists?

EBITDA: Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization. It's a non-GAAP method of accounting for earnings that the Gordon Gekko LBO types invented to evaluate ability to service mountains of debt. Because it's non-GAAP, you can't really compare one company's EBTIDA formula to another's (kind of like when cam companies used to cite advertised duration specs without any reference to lift).

Companies now often use EBITDA to advertise short-term profitability. Critics and other mugwumps gripe that it leaves out the cost of cash necessary to fund future ops and replace aging fixtures and equipment.

How'd I do?

BTW, eliminating the "pre-tax" aspect (which takes it out of EBITDA) . . . .

On an after-tax basis, excluding special items, Ford posted an operating profit of $873 million in the third quarter, or 26 cents per share, compared with a loss of $3 billion, or $1.32 per share, a year ago.

http://www.ford.com/about-ford/news-...2009-net-31244

[dieselgeek]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Speedzter, do you know what EBITDA is, and why it exists?

EBITDA: Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization. It's a non-GAAP method of accounting for earnings that the Gordon Gekko LBO types invented to evaluate ability to service mountains of debt. Because it's non-GAAP, you can't really compare one company's EBTIDA formula to another's (kind of like when cam companies used to cite advertised duration specs without any reference to lift).

Companies now often use EBITDA to advertise short-term profitability. Critics and other mugwumps gripe that it leaves out the cost of cash necessary to fund future ops and replace aging fixtures and equipment.

How'd I do?

Not shabby - at least not a cut & paste from a first-page Google search!! :-)

My point was, Ford is using every possible angle they can get to "show" profitability, but I think you'd agree that they're not exactly out of the woods just yet.

I think some other positive points about ford, that should be pointed out, is that their end-user quality ratings have taken a HUGE leap, passing some of the foreign steadfasts in those positions (Honda!) in a few segments. Not shabby.

I don't hate Ford, but my sole point here is that - this is a small victory in a HUGE war. Yay for small wins, but let's be realistic about what lies ahead.

Fair enough?

[38P]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Yeah, okay. But I still don't think you've proven that Ford's losing money on every vehicle they sell.

In today's horrible economy, predicting what's going to happen long-term in the auto business is about like forecasting next month's weather. Gas price shocks, bad publicity, muffed product launches, supplier troubles, interest rate hikes, natural disasters, new regulations, debt refinancing, trade wars, unanticipated shifts in customer taste . . . and scores of other possible "loads" on profitablity can trash forecasts quicker than a drunk rock star can wreck a hotel room.

So I can't foresee a time when I'll announce that Ford is "out of the woods."

[dieselgeek]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Yeah, okay. But I still don't think you've proven that Ford's losing money on every vehicle they sell.

What's there to prove?

Ford's reported losses how many quarters the past decade? almost ALL of them, except where it took special "restructuring" costs and other financial tricks that are used to attempt to bolster investor confidence when the company is, for all practical purposes, LOSING MONEY.

So, even if Ford loses simply ONE DOLLAR in a year, then divide that loss by however many cars they sell. That's a loss per every vehicle sold.

Bottom line, I don't need to prove that Ford loses money on 99.99999999% of the cars they've sold the past 10 years. YOU, and any other fanatics with a habit of wildly overpositive exaggeration, need to prove to the real world that there's NOT a "per vehicle loss" situation happening.

Good luck with that. :

[dieselgeek]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

How much should I spend on a Saturn Sky? I saw 3 on the local lot this morning.

How much can you get a Sky for these days? I'd be tempted - those are nice cars!

[38P]

Re: Shocker: Ford Sales Up 30% in December

Yeah, okay. But I still don't think you've proven that Ford's losing money on every vehicle they sell.

What's there to prove?

Ford's reported losses how many quarters the past decade? almost ALL of them, except where it took special "restructuring" costs and other financial tricks that are used to attempt to bolster investor confidence when the company is, for all practical purposes, LOSING MONEY.

Most all of the restructuring costs accelerated and increased losses. So I can't see how those were "financial tricks" to bolster investor confidence. Nor are they relevant to what happened in the latest reported quarter. Actually when you read Ford's analysis, it's the savings from prior reductions in fixed costs (i.e. restructuring) that has helped get Ford's costs more inline with the industry. That's hardly a "trick." That's increased competitiveness.

So, even if Ford loses simply ONE DOLLAR in a year, then divide that loss by however many cars they sell. That's a loss per every vehicle sold.

I disagree to the extent that increasing sales of units that produce gross profit will subsidize money-losing lines as well as fixed costs. So the premise that selling more Fords is actually bad news only holds if the "opportunity cost" of the extra sales drives up Ford's variable costs more than the net revenue produced.

Bottom line, I don't need to prove that Ford loses money on 99.99999999% of the cars they've sold the past 10 years. YOU, and any other fanatics with a habit of wildly overpositive exaggeration, need to prove to the real world that there's NOT a "per vehicle loss" situation happening.

Good luck with that. :

But the issue is whether Ford's increased December 2009 sales actually cost them more money than if they had sold fewer vehicles in December. That, of course, cannot be completely proven until the Q4 data is released. But the data showing Ford made money generally as well as on its North American Operations in Q3 on increased sales does support the expectation that Ford will post another good quarter.