Ford the idea seems to be to sell off successes, or car lines on the edge of success.

[Lincolnls02black]

Thought i would share this artitle...
Ford should just sell off jag, i'd like to see someone else put history back into the brand. But i'd have to say they did a great job on the jag XF which i cant wait to see in 09.

anyways heres the story..
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Commentary/Flint_Sell_Jaguar_No_Not_Now.S192.A12480.html


Most of us think the idea in business is to keep the winners and sell off the dogs.

At Ford the idea seems to be to sell off successes, or car lines on the edge of success. Spend wildly on them during the failure years, then get rid of them when they turn the corner. That's just what happened with Aston Martin and it appears to be what Ford aims for Jaguar and Land Rover.

We hear words coming from Ford like "concentrate on core brands" and "avoid distractions."

Let me explain something that other car companies understand: There's big money to be made going upscale.

Volkswagen spent 20 years building up Audi to where it now approaching sales of a million Audis a year. How's that for a distraction? It's bought Bentley, Lamborghini, and Bugatti and created the Phaeton, too, all to go upscale.

AtToyota the "core brands" were cheap cars. So they created Lexus.

Hyundai has created a luxury car with a V-8 coming here next year. Fiat pushes to grow Alfa, Lancia, and Maserati.



They all know that the sweetest fruit hangs high on the money tree.

Ford has no global luxury brand other than Jaguar. Lincoln isn't sold outside North America and if Ford of Europe has a luxury line, I've never heard of it.



Jaguar is a widely known luxury brand. True, Ford has fumbled it. Jaguar sales were 50,000 a year when Ford bought it. Sales doubled but Ford had aimed to push up to 250,000 a year. Ford lost billions of dollars in the effort.



Finally Ford seems to have given up.



What went wrong?

 

[psungee]

Hey, L02B... you're in my home town. Took a peek at your video (fun trying to figure out where you are) I lived not too far from you (amongst other places, on Prud 'Homme in NDG and Westminster in CSL). Did HS at Hillcrest (still called that?). As a "mozie anglais", we're in ON now. Still come back to see family and get bagels though

Welcome to the forum - you'll find some interesting people here

If you remember, the sell-off of Air Canada came when they were declaring a profit. The Mulroney government sold off what ever was profitable on the basis, as I understood it, that you get the real bucks for the profitable stuff.

While I kinda agree/understand what you're saying, there are a number of reasons a company may sell off their best.

In no particular order:
1) They may not actually believe in the underlying value of the asset so they're dumping before the weakness in the asset becomes apparent to others (keeping in mind that they recently picked it up from VW)
2) They need the money and it's the asset that will, most easily, raise the most money most quickly (well, you get the idea - rumour has it they're currently the weakest, financially, of the big three)
3) While it's a good quality asset it detracts for their ability to focus on their core (which is what they are claiming at this time)
4) Having purchased a dog at a discount, once the asset realizes growth, you sell it and turn your profit ASAP (which, in this case, I personally doubt).

Lot's of possibilities. I think we never REALLY know what's in their minds - we can only surmise at the truth.