 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Jaguar Cars / February 2005More Ford cash for Jaguar
>From London Times; Ailing Jaguar wins £534m Ford support By Times Online Jaguar has won a £534 million injection of capital from Ford, its US owner, after the weakness of the luxury car market left the marque in a "serious" position. The prestige car company, which received a £260 million injection from Ford last year, said that it was in negotiations over the accounting treatment of the latest recapitalisation. Jaguar's plea follows continued losses, which reached £601.1 million in 2003 and are believed to have remained in nine figures last year. A company spokesman said that the size of the latest recapitalisation reflected the "serious needs" of the business. "Jaguar is struggling at the moment," he told Times Online. While Jaguar has made significant progress in Ford hands, plans to raise sales to 200,000 cars a year, from 125,000, were abandoned last year amid tough competition in the premium market and a drift among wealthier motorists towards SUVs. Jaguar in September announced the closure of manufacturing at the Coventry plant where it was founded, and the loss of more than 1,000 jobs, to match better manufacturing capabilities with production needs. "We have faced and tackled the fundamental reality that Jaguar simply cannot support three assembly plants," Mark Fields, the executive president of Ford Europe, said at the time. In the US, Jaguar has struggled to maintain share of a market heavily reliant on buyer incentives, and at a time of dollar weakness. The £534 million charge is believed to cover a write-down of Jaguar's investments and is independent of the cost of job losses. >From London Times; Ailing Jaguar wins ?534m Ford support By Times Online Jaguar has won a ?534 million injection of capital from Ford, its US owner, after the weakness of the luxury car market left the marque in a "serious" position. The prestige car company, which received a ?260 million injection from Ford last year, said that it was in negotiations over the accounting treatment of the latest recapitalisation. Jaguar's plea follows continued losses, which reached ?601.1 million in 2003 and are believed to have remained in nine figures last year. A company spokesman said that the size of the latest recapitalisation reflected the "serious needs" of the business. "Jaguar is struggling at the moment," he told Times Online. While Jaguar has made significant progress in Ford hands, plans to raise sales to 200,000 cars a year, from 125,000, were abandoned last year amid tough competition in the premium market and a drift among wealthier motorists towards SUVs. Jaguar in September announced the closure of manufacturing at the Coventry plant where it was founded, and the loss of more than 1,000 jobs, to match better manufacturing capabilities with production needs. "We have faced and tackled the fundamental reality that Jaguar simply cannot support three assembly plants," Mark Fields, the executive president of Ford Europe, said at the time. In the US, Jaguar has struggled to maintain share of a market heavily reliant on buyer incentives, and at a time of dollar weakness. The ?534 million charge is believed to cover a write-down of Jaguar's investments and is independent of the cost of job losses. When one knows what this really means, it is appaling: Another billion $ just to keep "Ford's Mess Knbown As Jaguar" afloat for another year, covering Ford's mess as they go. Mr. Fields, you are right, Jaguar does not need 3 assembly plants. A simple solution: close Halewood and end the X-Type fiasco NOW! Since the disaster called Jac Nasser first laid a hand on Jaguar, Ford has done more to destroy this proud & historic marque than all the efforts of Mercedes, BMW and Lexus combined. Even the gross incompetence of British Leyland pales in comparison to Ford's mis-management of Jaguar. Jaguar can no longer design great cars, race to win (or, race at all), or even sell the cars it builds. All it can do now is look foolish and lose money. FORD: FIX IT OR SELL IT, NOW! Im not surprised Jag are in financial trouble - Read the entry 3 up ref the S type misfire because the owner once drove through a puddle !!! Stu >>From London Times; > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > FORD: FIX IT OR SELL IT, NOW! Im not surprised Jag are in financial trouble - Read the entry 3 up ref the S type misfire because the owner once drove through a puddle !!! Stu >>From London Times; > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > FORD: FIX IT OR SELL IT, NOW! > Im not surprised Jag are in financial trouble - Read the entry 3 up > ref the S type misfire because the owner once drove through a puddle > !!! I have been in quite a bit of rain with my S-Type without issue. That's like saying Chevy is in trouble because my 03 Avalanche went back to the dealer 3 times for an A/C problem. Jaguar has problems - but doesn't every company right now? I read that none of the US automakers are running at a profit since 9-11. I think my Jaguar S-Type has great fit/finish; performs well; and I have only brought it back to the shop once. Every new car finds it's way to the shop in the first 6 months. It's par for the course these days - these cars have more sh.t in them than a space shuttle! Neil Randle wrote: I stand with Stuart Adair. My 2004 S type R is a fantastic car to own and drive. I traded in a 98 Cad ETC and the Jag is quicker and faster and TIGHTER that any Cad I've owned. In the shop once and that was for an initial front end alignment. Has beautiful finish and fit. Love it. > > Im not surprised Jag are in financial trouble - Read the entry 3 up > > ref the S type misfire because the owner once drove through a puddle [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > new car finds it's way to the shop in the first 6 months. It's par for the > course these days - these cars have more sh.t in them than a space shuttle! You see, my point is this. Jaguar is not a Peugeot or a Renault - Its a quality expensive car. I would expect a mass produced Renault to have some quality issues but I would not in a million years expect a new Jag to have any sort of issues. You pay good money and have the right to expect a superior product. Watch this newsgroup and you will frequently see people with new Jags report the sort of problems that I would expect from Renault. NEVER EVER should any S type have a problem in the wet - Its not acceptable to say its a one off fault - Jags are too expensive to have one off faults. Jag has suffered from poor build quality since day one, I have said this before and I say it again - Its the British attitude to quality thats the problem. Let the Japanese build Jaguars and the quality will be spot on !!! Stuart > Neil Randle wrote: > I stand with Stuart Adair. My 2004 S type R is a fantastic car to own and [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> course these days - these cars have more sh.t in them than a space > shuttle! > You see, my point is this. Jaguar is not a Peugeot or a Renault - Its > a quality expensive car. Agreed. > I would expect a mass produced Renault to > have some quality issues but I would not in a million years expect a > new Jag to have any sort of issues. You pay good money and have the > right to expect a superior product. I have an 05 S-Type 4.2. It had an issue with a paint flaw, needed a new front windshield due to some sort of flaw in the actual glass, and had something or another fixed in the engine (a ticking sound). Now the serpentine belt is squeeling. IMHO, all vehicles have problems (I typically buy a new car once per year); and I think it is more important to get good service than to expect not to need a car serviced under warranty. I recently sold my 03 Chevy Z06 Corvette; and I bet that was in the shop 8 or so times over a 3,500 mile period. I used my 03 Avalanche as the trade-in for the 05 Jaguar; and that Avalanche was ALWAYS in the shop. In fact, the dealer and I had been talking about giving that car back using the Lemon Law as the tool for getting out from under that vehicle. The A/C never worked right; and that was replaced (all mechanical and electronic parts) 5 or so times. There were also some recalls, and engine problem, transmission problem, suspension problem, and even a chassis problem. And that car only made it (barely) to about 20K miles. > Watch this newsgroup and you will frequently see people with new Jags > report the sort of problems that I would expect from Renault. NEVER > EVER should any S type have a problem in the wet - Its not acceptable > to say its a one off fault - Jags are too expensive to have one off > faults. I agree that a car should not start to have an electrical failure due to inclement weather. But whoever started the thread has not reported back what the dealer found wrong with the car. OTOH; I have an S-Type and have driving it in the rain, through massive puddles, and have never had any H2O related issues. > Jag has suffered from poor build quality since day one, I have said > this before and I say it again - Its the British attitude to quality > thats the problem. Let the Japanese build Jaguars and the quality > will be spot on !!! I read a JD Powers Report recently on Jaguar; and Jas is one of the top 3 manufacturers for customer satisfaction and quality. The results of the test were published in USA Today on 4/29/04; and the only vehicles with less problems (per 100 vehicles; first 90 days of ownership) were Lexus and Caddilac. And of those two; they were within 9 cars per 100 of Jaguar. http://www.jdpower.com/special/powerreport/jaguar/ I had the good fortune to visit the Browns Lane Plant in Coventy 1999. The impression I got about quality was that it was not to be compromised. 1. There was a part that went across under the dash in an XJ6, that would never be seen, with a small chip broken off a corner. The report sheet attached indicated that one of the assemblers had broken it and a new part was fitted. 2. A second item was a tab on the bottom of a door pocket that was not aligned properly. The attached sheet indicated a supplier defect and a new part was fitted. 3. Each car that comes of the assembly line is subjected to a '7 minute rainstorm' inside a tunnel - top, sides, front and back. All areas are checked for ingress of water after this and any leakage is rectified. There are many other check performed throughout the assembly process and each stage is signed off. We were told that if a team leader signed a stage off with a fault, it was considered a serious misconduct issue and could result in dismissal for the employee involved. I agree it is frustrating to find faults in any car but faults can slip through. It is negative thinking people that enjoy spreading unfortunate happenings around and espouse how other people should do things better. (I wonder if anything they were ever involved in went wrong). The World Eleven vs The Asian Eleven cricket match at the Melbourne Cricket Ground raised $11M for Tsunami Relief. THAT'S POSITIVE!!! > > [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > > I accept what you are saying, but remember that you saw a clinical impression designed to sell the idea that Jags were perfect. If this is the case why do so many owners make entries on this newsgroup about basic problems with their cars, and indeed, if the car had undergone a 7 minute rainstorm test then 'Sinbad' would not be making entries about how his S type started falling to pieces after he went through a car wash. The proof of the pudding is always in the eating. The really strange thing about all of this is that as I mentioned earlier, I drive Ford Galaxies and have owned 3. I drive 60K pa and keep them 2 years each. I get them serviced at a local dealer and I can absolutely honestly say that my only problems in all that time are were a sunvisor that squeaked when you moved it and a drivers pin-switch broken that operates the internal light. Ford make the Galaxy but most of its put together in Portugal, therefore I have to assume that there is nothing wrong with the process that Ford applies to building new cars - Shame that this has not yet filtered through to the Jaguar plant. Stu I had the good fortune to visit the Browns Lane Plant in Coventy 1999. The impression I got about quality was that it was not to be compromised. 1. There was a part that went across under the dash in an XJ6, that would never be seen, with a small chip broken off a corner. The report sheet attached indicated that one of the assemblers had broken it and a new part was fitted. 2. A second item was a tab on the bottom of a door pocket that was not aligned properly. The attached sheet indicated a supplier defect and a new part was fitted. 3. Each car that comes of the assembly line is subjected to a '7 minute rainstorm' inside a tunnel - top, sides, front and back. All areas are checked for ingress of water after this and any leakage is rectified. There are many other check performed throughout the assembly process and each stage is signed off. We were told that if a team leader signed a stage off with a fault, it was considered a serious misconduct issue and could result in dismissal for the employee involved. I agree it is frustrating to find faults in any car but faults can slip through. It is negative thinking people that enjoy spreading unfortunate happenings around and espouse how other people should do things better. (I wonder if anything they were ever involved in went wrong). The World Eleven vs The Asian Eleven cricket match at the Melbourne Cricket Ground raised $11M for Tsunami Relief. THAT'S POSITIVE!!! The Grim Reaper wrote: Stuart Adair wrote: You see, my point is this. Jaguar is not a Peugeot or a Renault - Its a quality expensive car. Agreed. I would expect a mass produced Renault to have some quality issues but I would not in a million years expect a new Jag to have any sort of issues. You pay good money and have the right to expect a superior product. I have an 05 S-Type 4.2. It had an issue with a paint flaw, needed a new front windshield due to some sort of flaw in the actual glass, and had something or another fixed in the engine (a ticking sound). Now the serpentine belt is squeeling. IMHO, all vehicles have problems (I typically buy a new car once per year); and I think it is more important to get good service than to expect not to need a car serviced under warranty. I recently sold my 03 Chevy Z06 Corvette; and I bet that was in the shop 8 or so times over a 3,500 mile period. I used my 03 Avalanche as the trade-in for the 05 Jaguar; and that Avalanche was ALWAYS in the shop. In fact, the dealer and I had been talking about giving that car back using the Lemon Law as the tool for getting out from under that vehicle. The A/C never worked right; and that was replaced (all mechanical and electronic parts) 5 or so times. There were also some recalls, and engine problem, transmission problem, suspension problem, and even a chassis problem. And that car only made it (barely) to about 20K miles. Watch this newsgroup and you will frequently see people with new Jags report the sort of problems that I would expect from Renault. NEVER EVER should any S type have a problem in the wet - Its not acceptable to say its a one off fault - Jags are too expensive to have one off faults. I agree that a car should not start to have an electrical failure due to inclement weather. But whoever started the thread has not reported back what the dealer found wrong with the car. OTOH; I have an S-Type and have driving it in the rain, through massive puddles, and have never had any H2O related issues. Jag has suffered from poor build quality since day one, I have said this before and I say it again - Its the British attitude to quality thats the problem. Let the Japanese build Jaguars and the quality will be spot on !!! I read a JD Powers Report recently on Jaguar; and Jas is one of the top 3 manufacturers for customer satisfaction and quality. The results of the test were published in USA Today on 4/29/04; and the only vehicles with less problems (per 100 vehicles; first 90 days of ownership) were Lexus and Caddilac. And of those two; they were within 9 cars per 100 of Jaguar. http://www.jdpower.com/special/powerreport/jaguar/ > You see, my point is this. Jaguar is not a Peugeot or a > Renault - Its a [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > >> > >> I own a 97 xj6 and love it. I dont think I would want to buy a jag manufactured by ford, today. I have heard many stories on new jags and high maint cost. What is the diff between a ford tempo and todays jag? price! > I own a 97 xj6 and love it. I dont think I would want to buy a jag > manufactured by ford, today. I have heard many stories on new jags and > high maint cost. What is the diff between a ford tempo and todays jag? > price! Maintaining a $55K S-Type should not cost the same as a $14K Taurus. If you have to ask what it costs, you can't afford it. > > You see, my point is this. Jaguar is not a Peugeot or a > > Renault - Its a [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > I own a 97 xj6 and love it. I dont think I would want to buy a jag > manufactured by ford, today. < You have a Jag manufactured by Ford in '97. The ones made today are better, just that no one wants to buy them. > I have heard many stories on new jags and high maint cost.< Actually, current model year Jags have free scheduled maintenace for the term of the warranty. Thus, it's cheaper too maintain a Jag than a Ford. < What is the diff between a ford tempo and todays jag? price! < Not exactly, but that's now the public's perception because Frodinsisted on forcing the "X-Type" Mondeo on Jaguar. With four car lines, last year they only sold 45,000 cars inthe US. In 2000, with three car lines they sold 45,000 cars in the US. In '99 with 2 car lines, they sold 25,000 cars at a PROFIT in the US. Great job, Ford!!!! Hi, > The ones made today are better, How do you come to such a conclusion. Better reliability perhaps, but certainly not better. Better than what? I see a cheapened product aimed at the masses; certainly conflicts with the Jag image. Personally I like it when someone tells me what a pile of sh.t my Jag is. I'll respond "Yes. But I can afford it." <Hehe.> > Actually, current model year Jags have free scheduled maintenace for the > term of the warranty. Thus, it's cheaper too maintain a Jag than a Ford. Perhaps because you already paid for the service. I would certainly feel a little guilty charging so much for a Mondeo/Toreass. ;-) > Not exactly, but that's now the public's perception because Frodinsisted on > forcing the "X-Type" Mondeo on Jaguar. With four car lines, last year they > only sold 45,000 cars inthe US. In 2000, with three car lines they sold > 45,000 cars in the US. In '99 with 2 car lines, they sold 25,000 cars at a > PROFIT in the US. Great job, Ford!!!! Let's face it. Long ago the marketeers realise American's dont "know" what "quality" is anymore. Many companies built very high quality products only to go broke. Take Stereo equipment - Back in the 8late 70's and 80's you could buy great quality and reasonable prices. The comes along the Mosfets and other amazing chips. Then led displays and remote stacked units. This was the end of getting good quality at a reasonable price, now you have to spend BIG dollars to get what used to be standard. Look how Mtv killed the Music industry. You can not be a star unless you are good looking and fit a certain mold. Talent is most certainly not high on the list. People think if its shines, has a nice stereo, and leather, that its "quality". I have a friend who owns a Ford dealership, I used to be a Jag-man in a monkey suit. Yes there have been some improvements, but most certainly a reduction in "quality". But that is my opinion. Ford is going to bail on Jag. The word is out...Jags still have major problems, Jags have no resale <old ones not included>, and that Ford owns them. Ford has more recalls than Chryler and GM combined. My fathers Lincoln cost him about 1k a month in repairs to fix the air suspension, the same kind on the new jags. When I was younger I put three $1k engine computers in my Mustang in three years; always just out of warranty. I wanted a newer Jag...drove them all. I went to the BMW shop and drove the M5, M3...... new cars are BS. I am going to buy a sweet e-type to park next to my Amazing, delicious 1985 BMW 635csi. Enjoy your Fords! DieInterim You've hit the nail on the head Blake - Someone has said to you that you have a pile of sh.t jag. Nobody would ever say that about one of the classic older ones !!! Incidentally I certainly dont regard the new ones as crap, just that Jaguar is trying to produce an exceptional car but cant come up with the quality. I was following a very nice Series 3 XJ12 today around Bristol when a friend who was in the car with me commented that he always used to regard the pecking order as being Rolls Royce, then Jaguar - Shame we cant say the same today. Stu > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > DieInterim > You've hit the nail on the head Blake - Someone has said to you that you > have a pile of sh.t jag. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > regard the pecking order as being Rolls Royce, then Jaguar - Shame we cant > say the same today. Right you are, Stu. Ford KNEW from all the research, all the focus groups and verbally from the old Jaguar Cars management that using their typical badge and parts bin engineering tactics to try and turn Fords into Jaguars would not work, the public would not accept it. (Hell, it's never worked in the US when Ford's tried to turn Fords into Lincolns, for that matter.) Yet, despite it all they did it anyway, and the dismal sales & financial results speak for themselves. Now the US Company has just gone through another reduction-in-force to the tune of 10% and announced ANOTHER reorganization (this makes three in the last two years.) No one purports that the old pre-Ford Jaguars were reliable cars compared to their competition. That's all been documented ad nauseum. However, there's no comparison between the magic of an E-Type, Mark II or Series III XJ6 and any of the Ford era cars, particularly the Ford-platform cloned S & X Types. To put it in another context, imagine Porsche being bought by GM (HORRORS!) and ten years later all Porsches are based upon GM platforms. It's ridiculous on the face of it, but this is exactly what Ford has tried to pull off. In the process of all this madness, thousands of owners have left the marque never to return, and maybe even worse, thousands of dedicated and loyal Jaguar employees have been let go. It's time for Ford to accept that they have no clue what they're doing, other than having a plan for making luxury cars out of recycled aluminum beer cans. It's a shame, it really is. Thanks Stu, I can afford it. ;-) Certainly a POS! I gambled with the XJ40 when I bought it, and I have not soured over the purchase. It has been more reliable than my Toyota Supra TT was for me, and it certainly can sprint well. Hey it could be worse, I could turn into an old gumpy BUICK lover. SoK66, I get the Jaguar magazine and in every issue they go on and on about the great models and they somehow try to make a connection with today's Jaguar. Bah! I just think its funny how Jag marketing pushes the past image, yet they refuse to follow the cast of what made them so special. Still waiting for the Jag Focus... Blake > Thanks Stu, I can afford it. ;-) > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Blake Yes, I wonder what they'll say when history has the final say on the Ford-infected S & X-Types. Some "legends" of automotive history, huh? There's a fascinating interview with Ford Product Development Chief Richard Parry-Jones in this month's Automobile Magazine. Automobile's interviewer went right at the heart of the mess, and Parry-Jones' arrogant responses show you just what a bunch of idiots the Ford management really is. In a nutshell, he claims they have to aggressivly deal with the current Jaguar product, yet in the next breath he says Jaguar "can't compete with the giants", i.e, BMW, Mercedes & Lexus. So, in one breath he admits the products are uncompetitive, in the next he dashes any hope they ever will be. Oh, and he also hinted they're going to do an SUV! (Boy, THAT will save Jaguar!) The final outrage, he tries to claim that Jaguar's all-aluminum XJ (& forthcoming XK) "showcase Jaguar's commitment to technology". (I was there when they forced this on Jaguar, all it is is a means whereby they can use the aluminum company they bought under Jac Nasser. In the process they've developed cars (XJ) with gigantic marketplace resistance and massive owner issues in terms of serviceability. We plead with them not to do this, and could point to the market resistance and dismal sales of the Audi A8 as proof. Yet, on they went with the "beer can recycling" process and the sales tell the tale. In the interview Parry-Jones also blathers on about that infuriating Ford excuse for using their bottom feeder Mondeo platform for the X-Type: "it's got Jaguar DNA". (No, it's got the CRABS is what it's got!) This is just a cover for the real boogeymen, the inept Ford finance thugs and their cost-cutting sickness that forces these "dead-on-arrival" compromises upon Jaguar. I used to work for these idiots at a relatively high level. I'm disgusted with their lack of talent and just downright cowardice. With the current mentality, these Ford gutless wonders have NO BUSINESS owning a marque like Jaguar. The odd, and even sadder thing, is to see what they've done with Aston and even the Ford GT. Here we have two low volume financial sinkholes into which their seems to be no end of money to waste, with no chance of ever making a profit, yet they can't do a proper volume sports sedan or sports car for Jaguar? Makes me want to go punch someone in the nose!!!! > I used to work for these idiots at a relatively high level. I'm > disgusted with their lack of talent and just downright cowardice. With the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > sports sedan or sports car for Jaguar? Makes me want to go punch > someone in the nose!!!! You are certainly entitled to your opinion; but I would like to see some empirical evidence of some of your bold assertions. To whit: 1) Jaguar S-Type is based on an existing Ford chassis (Taurus, Grand Marquis, etc.). 2) Aston Martin no longer mades a quality product (lower performace than previous years). 3) Lack of design talent. You can start with the Ford GT, which many people (including myself) think is just as beautiful as the GT40. Once you are done trashing the GT, I would further submit that you show a design failure in the body styles of the Mazda RX8 and Miata, Jaguar XK (and the S-Type 4.2, which I own), Thunderbird (very "retro", IMHO, Volvo C70, Aston DB9 & V12 Vanquish (two of the three most beautiful cars available on this planet, along with the Ferrari Modena). >> I used to work for these idiots at a relatively high level. I'm >> disgusted with their lack of talent and just downright cowardice. With [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 1) Jaguar S-Type is based on an existing Ford chassis (Taurus, Grand > Marquis, etc.). Jaguar S-Type & the Lincoln LS (and the Ford Thuderbird & Mustang) are based upon the Ford DEW98 platform. They are essentially identical under the skin, with displacements & tuning refinement differentiations. The only real difference is styling and interior content. The new Jaguar XJ (and soon the XK) is also based uppon the DEW platform. The DEW platform was designed in the late 80's and was obsolete when the S-Type & DEW were released in 2000. From Ward's auto world back in '00: "T-Bird will be the third vehicle to be built off Ford's DEW98 platform, the underbody currently used for the Jaguar S-Type and the Lincoln LS. But Ford also plans to build an additional, bigger, Lincoln luxury car off the rear-drive platform to take on the Cadillac Seville. And work also has begun on a platform variant known internally as DEW98 Lite. DEW98 Lite ditches the expensive double wishbone front suspension in favor of simple MacPherson struts - reducing costs for a future Mustang and Australian Falcon - desperately in need of a contemporary engineering base." Here's the link. http://waw.wardsauto.com/ar/auto_tbird_dew_models/ > 2) Aston Martin no longer mades a quality product (lower performace than > previous years).> You misread what I wrote, go back & re-read. Ford have pumped billions into dedicated Aston platforms and powertrains in an effort to compete with Ferrari. The results have been stunning, however they'll never make a dime on any of them. Aston sold 400+ cars in the USA last year, a sales record. for it's largest market. None of the money invested in Aston will ever be recovered, it's a plaything for the Ford family. Jaguar, has the potential to be a HUGE money maker, if managed properly. Ford lacks the specific commitment to Jaguar that could ensure the future it deserves. > 3) Lack of design talent. You can start with the Ford GT, which many > people (including myself) think is just as beautiful as the GT40. < You missed my point again, go back and read what I said. The GT is an excellent example of what Frod can do when they have some guts. Unfortunately, where Jaguar is concerned, they have NONE. Precisely to my point: If they have the money and talent to develop a low volume, money losing plaything product like the GT, then where's the same application of resources to make Jaguar a success? < Once you are done trashing the GT, I would further submit that you show a design failure in the body styles of the Mazda RX8 and Miata, > None of the Mazda line have been touched by Ford. Mazda is considered a center of excellence by Ford and is basically left alone (so is Volvo). Ford bean counting thugs are sent there to overlook operations and help with costs. Mazda small car technology leads Ford and, along with Volvo, will provide all future Ford car platforms. In summary, Mazda and Volvco succeed because Ford have NOTHING to do with them. < Jaguar XK > XK was designed by the late Geoff Lawson and his team in the early '90s, before Ford's thugs overran Browns Lane & Whitley. Ford's design sign-off process dictated the bland, GM/Pontiac rear end design on XK. Geoff was furous when they interfered but had no choice other than to accept their meddling. < (and the S-Type 4.2, which I own)> Geoff Lawson privately called the S-Type his most embarrasing design. He simply said: "I did the best I could with the mess I was handed." < Thunderbird (very "retro",> And a total sales dog, heading out of production next year. A total Ford cock-up despite nice styling by retro-maven J. Mays, whom Ford hired away from VW after he'd done the New Beetle. Ford's styling department was, and is continuing to be, a nightmare of timid bean counters who design cars based upon focus groups, not soul or talent. < IMHO, Volvo C70, > Not a single Ford hand had a thing to do with it. C70 was designed by Volvo several years before Ford bought the Company. Volvo continues to succeed because they sell cars & make money and can thus keep Ford's meddling at bay. > Aston DB9 & V12 Vanquish (two of the three most beautiful cars available > on this planet, > Deisgned by ex-BMW exec. Ulrich Bez under the guise of ex-BMW exec Wolfgang Reitzle. Again, Ford had NOTHING to do with these cars. Ford DOES have DIRECT involvement in Jaguar, and is destroying the marque as a result. Look, you can dislike my comments all you want, but it's simply a marketplace fact. Jaguar is losing billions, is selling at a rate HALF what was projected not three years ago, and has no viable, competitive product plan. Meanwhile, BMW, Lexus and Mercedes are setting sales recoirds each year, putting Jaguar farther and farther behind. Ther's one and only ONE reason for this: FORD MANAGEMENT SUCKS!!! The only real hope for Jaguar is thjat Ford will sell it off to a European or Japanese Company. My bet is they'll close it up within five years. > Jaguar S-Type & the Lincoln LS (and the Ford Thuderbird & Mustang) > are based upon the Ford DEW98 platform. They are essentially [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > DEW platform. The DEW platform was designed in the late 80's and was > obsolete when the S-Type & DEW were released in 2000. Thanks for that heads-up. I must admit, I am extremely surprised. I would never have suspected that the same chassis existed in the S-Type and Lincoln LS. I just researched the DEW98 based on your information; and the chassis sounds good. 50/50 weight, extensive use of aluminum, extreme stiffness, etc. I am surprised, but I would not say I am disappointed. The S-Type drives well. I don't dislike DEW98, apparently. > You misread what I wrote, go back & re-read. Ford have pumped > billions into dedicated Aston platforms and powertrains in an effort [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > if managed properly. Ford lacks the specific commitment to Jaguar > that could ensure the future it deserves. I must have misread it. I took it to mean you didn't like the Aston. I love the Aston - it is beautiful to behold. I don't expect it to be a money maker; though I agree with you that Jaguar sells enough units to make a profit. I see that Ford is trimming back the amount of plants, etc. So, they are addressing Jaguar. I think it is an iterative process. Keep in mind that the auto industry in general is really hurting. > You missed my point again, go back and read what I said. The GT is an > excellent example of what Frod can do when they have some guts. > Unfortunately, where Jaguar is concerned, they have NONE. Precisely > to my point: If they have the money and talent to develop a low > volume, money losing plaything product like the GT, then where's the > same application of resources to make Jaguar a success? I think they want to sell more Jaguars than Astons and GTs. IMHO, my 05 S-Type is an absolute pleasure to drive. I feel the same way about the Lincoln LS as well - it's an easy car to drive. I love the way my S-Type looks. That retro nose is what sold me on the vehicle. I like the interior, the pep of the 4.2 liter 32 valve V8 (though I want to find a way to remove the max speed limiter), and the only place I think the car is short is on braking. I looked around to see if I could add the Brembo system of the S-Type-R; but came up empty. > Geoff Lawson privately called the S-Type his most embarrasing design. > He simply said: "I did the best I could with the mess I was handed." As disappointed as I am to hear that quote, I love the lines of my S-Type, I feel it drives decently (though nowhere near my 03 Z06), and the interior design is comfortable, reasonably well thought out, and everything including the map system work well. > And a total sales dog, heading out of production next year. A total > Ford cock-up despite nice styling by retro-maven J. Mays, whom Ford > hired away from VW after he'd done the New Beetle. Ford's styling > department was, and is continuing to be, a nightmare of timid bean > counters who design cars based upon focus groups, not soul or talent. It would be a shame to see the end of the Thunderbird. Very retro, and very nice. Some of the colors were a bit too "pastelish"; but overall I think that car is very nice. > Ford DOES have DIRECT involvement in Jaguar, and is destroying the > marque as a result. Look, you can dislike my comments all you want, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and farther behind. Ther's one and only ONE reason for this: FORD > MANAGEMENT SUCKS!!! BMW and Benz builds cars in USA. Building some of the vehicle lines in USA saves a bit of money compared to shipping overseas. As such, overall costs for those companies may be inexpensive compared to Jaguar; who does not make any of it's cars in USA. That might affect sales (just guessing). With regard to Jaguar bleeding money - weren't they bleeding money before Ford took them over? When I looked at buying the S-Type, I also looked at the MB E320, Lincoln LS, Lexus GS430. The Lexus and Lincoln were not that attractive to me, so I narrowed it to the Mercedes and the Jaguar. After driving both, I picked the Jaguar; which I thought was more comfortable for me and I liked the looks and layout of the interior a bit more. > The only real hope for Jaguar is thjat Ford will sell it off to a > European or Japanese Company. My bet is they'll close it up within > five years. I think Jaguar will be here forever. I hope they don't sell to a Japanese company. If they do, I won't buy another one. >> Jaguar S-Type & the Lincoln LS (and the Ford Thuderbird & Mustang) >> are based upon the Ford DEW98 platform. They are essentially [quoted text clipped - 90 lines] > I think Jaguar will be here forever. I hope they don't sell to a > Japanese company. If they do, I won't buy another one. Ford has a fundamental problem: They can't build & sell cars pweople wanty to buy, much less at a profit. They are unfortunatel;y infected with a "muddle in the middle" mentality. They are bland, bean-counter driven culture that does everything it can to drive out the risk of inspiration-driven, emotional elements of design that people find in BMWs & Porsches, for example. A few years ago I watched a senior Ford manufacturing exec present profitability stats on every ford car line, and on average they lost over $1,000 on every car they sold. They made it up on trucks. That says a LOT about their management. IMHO, Jaguar's future is hopless as part of Ford. Ford doesn't understand the luxury segment, they think BMW, Lexus and MB are bullshit and the customers fools. They want to make ridiculous profits per car so they bludgeon the designers to drive out cost, at the expense of the most basic table stakes in terms of content. In the end, the press catches on first and condemns the cars, or damns them with faint praise, then the public decides the cars are junk, so Ford management ratchets up the incentives, which destroys resale value, etc., etc. Meanwhile, for the same price one can buy a BMW with no question as to its pedigree, and no risk as far as residuals are concerned. I see no hope at all for Jaguar unless it's sold off. Manufacturing them in the US will only make it worse. > <snip> BTW, thank you for taking the time to respond to me with that lengthy post. I appreciate the links and the information. No sweat. (Unfortunately, after 15 years working at Jaguar I may take this stuff with Ford a bit too personally! :-) >> <snip> > > BTW, thank you for taking the time to respond to me with that lengthy > post. I appreciate the links and the information. > Still waiting for the Jag Focus... > > Blake Focus?? I'm waiting for the Jaguar SUV :-) Ford Exploader with a cute S-Type grill... LOL Ron McGrice > No one purports that the old pre-Ford Jaguars were reliable cars > compared to their competition. That's all been documented ad nauseum. > However, there's no comparison between the magic of an E-Type, Mark > II or Series III XJ6 and any of the Ford era cars, particularly the > Ford-platform cloned S & X Types. Please post something showing that the 2005 S-Type Jaguar is based on one of the Ford bodies. And please do not post from geocities. :-) > > No one purports that the old pre-Ford Jaguars were reliable cars > > compared to their competition. That's all been documented ad nauseum. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Please post something showing that the 2005 S-Type Jaguar is based on one of > the Ford bodies. And please do not post from geocities. :-) LOL! Its a Lincoln LS, and it is no secret. And I think the lincoln looks better too. >> > No one purports that the old pre-Ford Jaguars were reliable cars >> > compared to their competition. That's all been documented ad [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > LOL! Its a Lincoln LS, and it is no secret. And I think the lincoln > looks better too.> Right again, Blake! The LS is a far better car for the money than S-Type. Or as Mike Dale, former President of Jaguar Cars North America quipped in 1998: "S-Type customers will be asked to pay an additional $10,000 for what in reality amounts to nothing but bullshit." >> No one purports that the old pre-Ford Jaguars were reliable cars >> compared to their competition. That's all been documented ad nauseum. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Please post something showing that the 2005 S-Type Jaguar is based on > one of the Ford bodies. And please do not post from geocities. :-) Your kidding? S-Type from Lincoln LS X-Type from Mondeo I'll stick with my XJ6 Series II, 420G and Daimler limousine, thankyou. They all leak oil, have the odd "Lucas" electrical problem and were well know by the bugger who built them, Sir "Willy" :-) Ron McGrice > Nobody would ever say that about one of the classic older ones !!! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > pecking order as being Rolls Royce, then Jaguar - Shame we cant say the same > today. Yes Stu, they used to have a magically aura; no longer. The 6 and 12 created beautiful music and did not need to rev high to scoot. Hell, even Peugeot has thoughts to build a mans car now, but not Jag.... http://www.fast-autos.net/peugeot/peugeot907.html I reckon this has generated one of the most popular streams seen on this newsgroup. Ford take note - We care about Jaguar and want the old prestige back. Thanks to all who have contributed. Stu >> Nobody would ever say that about one of the classic older ones !!! >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > http://www.fast-autos.net/peugeot/peugeot907.html >Jag has suffered from poor build quality since day one, I have said this >before and I say it again - Its the British attitude to quality thats the >problem. Let the Japanese build Jaguars and the quality will be spot on !!! > >Stuart I would disagree with that statement. My 1994 XJ40 has been the most reliable car I have ever owned. Nothing other than routine maintainance. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.