1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/10938/what-the-ford/

What the Ford?

October 29, 2009 by

Ford is busy touting the latest Consumer Reports ratings. It is entirely understandable. Ford (F) managed to achieve an expected reliability rating of “average or better than average” for 90% of its vehicles by 2010. Contrast this with GM’s pitiful 44% of vehicles achieving the same rating and Chrysler’s abysmal 38%. Sure there are claims of some funny business going on with Ford’s ranking but the CR report is the best thing we currently have.

With this information in mind, consider that GM and Chrysler have already taken billions from the federal government and are asking for even more. Also consider that Ford hasn’t taken any government money! It seems rather strange that Ford is not using this in their advertisements. Given the number of people who are upset with the bailouts and the number of people who insist on buying American, it seems that being the only American car company that has yet to receive any money would be a great selling point. Not only are they the only American car company to rank in the top 10 automakers, but they are also the only one not to have robbed the taxpayer. So why have there been no advertisements pointing out this simple fact?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

{ 16 comments }

Jonathan Finegold Catalán October 29, 2009 at 12:50 pm

I’m not sure it’s in Ford’s best interests to attack the government overtly, either. Does Ford have any contracts with the government? If I recall, their contract with several police departments was canceled.

will potter October 29, 2009 at 12:51 pm

In fact Ford did take bailout money in march of 2009 because remember the outrage when all of ford, gm, and chrysler ceos showed up before congress flying in private jets.

Joe October 29, 2009 at 12:58 pm

Yes, Ford did take the department of energy money to “re-tool” for greener cars.

Russ August 5, 2010 at 4:25 pm

No… They did not “take” any money from the federal government to re-tool. They “kept” their earned profits because of a tax credit. BIG difference. Typical liberal mentality…

David C October 29, 2009 at 1:01 pm

Ford didn’t take any money, but GM and Christler help prop up a huge supply distribution chain, which would nail Ford if it collapsed. That’s why Ford was at the bailout hearings even though they received no money, and explains how they benefit indirectly from the bailouts. Sort of like the tribal goat herders who benefit more from keeping the goat alive and drinking off some of it’s blood from time to time, than killing it outright.

l4k October 29, 2009 at 1:14 pm

Ford hasn’t taken bailout money so far. It would be embarrassing to run an ad saying they didn’t take any bailout funds and then have to accept a bailout next year.

Mr Eko October 29, 2009 at 1:33 pm

Ford’s two domestic competitors are (partially) state-owned. It’s best they stay really quiet and behave well, lest the government find a way to kneecap them.

Eric October 29, 2009 at 2:34 pm

As a consumer, why buy from a different car company when you’re already on the hook to support the other two? Does Gresham’s law apply to cars? Isn’t a gov’t warranty, at the expense of the tax payer a safer bet?

Adam October 29, 2009 at 2:49 pm

Ford did not ask for (or receive) a direct bailout, however the did receive loans from the department of energy to assist in retooling factories and devoloping hybrid technology. Nissan and Tesla also received loans from this pool of money. To advertize that they didn’t take bailouts would be percieved by many as true but misleading. I believe that many people would also see it as stabbing their brother in the back (taking sales from other domestic brands) rather than fighting against the foreign brands.

Isaac October 29, 2009 at 6:06 pm

I think because generally people find attack ads to be distasteful. Apple Computers gets away with it because they’re selling a full fledged cult, and because “PC” is not a company they compete with, but merely a grouping of companies using similar technology.

Tracy Saboe October 30, 2009 at 2:14 am

I don’t know.

My guess is, they do have a lot of government contracts.

Bob October 30, 2009 at 9:38 am

I can assure you that Ford is making more money off the government than they would from extra sales by attacking GM and Chrysler.

Greg October 30, 2009 at 2:25 pm

I have seen Ford throw this into their advertising. It wasn’t front and center, but I distinctly remember about a month ago, a Ford add on TV that said something along the line of “and we haven’t taken a single dollar in bailout”. Perhaps it’s just a local advertisement, as I’m in the heart of red state territory (Kansas).

K Ackermann October 30, 2009 at 6:15 pm

Bingo! We have a winner.

I would love to see some of these companies get stigmatized, especially the banks.

Ford should run an ad showing the Statue of Liberty with a GM truck and a Chrysler car.hanging from her teats.

Mike C. October 31, 2009 at 6:28 pm

Ford is making a good quality product right now and you have to hand it to them for that, and they did not take direct funds during the bail out as far as I know. However, if I remember correctly, they did go there to get, and did receive, a guaranteed government backed credit line worth several billion should they need it– so claiming to have not needed the government only to end up needing them down the road as a credit backer or more would be a shot in the foot.

Jansonikk July 7, 2011 at 2:47 am

I admit, I’ve not been on this kind of web page inside a long period?- nonetheless it has been one more pleasure to find out It is this kind of crucial topic as well as disregarded by so quite a few, also specialists. We thank you to assist making people much more aware of feasible concern Outstanding products since typical

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: