1978 Ford Bronco on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jim Hackett says metal tariffs costing Ford $1 billion in profits

Ford CEO Jim Hackett divulged in an interview with Bloomberg that the Trump administration's tariffs on metals imported from the European Union, Canada and Mexico have affected the automaker's balance sheet, adding that trade disputes need a quick resolution. "From Ford's perspective, the metals tariffs took about $1 billion in profit from us," Hackett told the outlet. "The irony is we source most of that in the U.S. today anyways. We're in a good place right now, but if it goes on longer there will be more damage." Hackett did not specify what period the $1 billion covered, but a Ford spokesman said the CEO was referring to internal forecasts at Ford for higher tariff-related costs in 2018 and 2019. President Trump in March announced his intention to enact 25 percent tariffs on steel imports and 10 percent on imported aluminum from the three trade zones as a way to protect the U.S. steel industry. The move sent U.S. automakers' stock prices plunging at a time when they were coming off weak monthly sales reports. Separately, President Trump has targeted China with two rounds of tariffs targeting a combined $260 billion worth of imports. China has responded by enacting 25-percent tariffs on U.S. goods including vehicle imports. In the interview, Hackett said that has hurt demand for Lincoln, which has found a growing market for its luxury vehicles in China, and made the price of the Lincoln MKC less attractive to Chinese buyers. The MKC is built at the company's Louisville, Ky. assembly plant. "We've had to move people in that factory to other operations because of that trade problem," he said. It's not clear what those moves entail or how many workers were involved. Autoblog sought comment from a Ford spokeswoman and will update this story if we hear back. Ford last month announced it was scrapping plans to import the Focus Active small crossover to the U.S. from China because of the new 25-percent tariffs on Chinese imports. Material from Reuters was used in this report Related Video:

Detroit and Silicon Valley: When cultures collide

Culture is a subject that rarely, if never, gets discussed when traditional auto companies buy — or hugely invest — in Silicon Valley-based companies. The conversation surrounding the investments is usually about how the tech looks appealing and how it's an appropriate step to move the automakers toward autonomy. Culture — the way things are done, the expectations, and the approaches — is something that is overlooked only at one's peril. The potential cultural gap is almost always evident in the obligatory photos of the participants in these deals, with is essentially a photo op of auto execs with their Silicon Valley counterparts. The former — rocking jeans and no ties — look like parochial school kids playing hooky. Don't worry: The regimental outfits will be back in place once they get back in the Eastern time zone. Consider what happened back in 1998 when Daimler bought Chrysler. First of all, there was a denial in Detroit that it happened. It was positioned as a "merger of equals." Which it wasn't. In any corporate situation, when one has more than 50 percent of the business, it owns the whole thing. And the German company was in the proverbial driver's seat. People who were around Auburn Hills back then kept their heads down and their German Made Simple books at hand. Things did not go well. Daimler had had enough by 2007, when it offloaded Chrysler to Cerberus Capital Management — which brought ex-Home Depot CEO Bob Nardelli into the picture, which is a story onto itself. But when you think about the Daimler-Chrysler situation, realize that these were two car companies (at least the Mercedes part of the Daimler organization), so they had that in common, and the language of engineers is something of an Esperanto based on math, so there was that, too. Yet it simply didn't work. It doesn't take too many viewings of HBO's Silicon Valley to know that the business people in that part of the world are far more aggressive than people who ordinarily head and control car companies in Detroit. About 20 years ago, a book came out about the founder of Oracle titled The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison* - and the asterisk on the book jacket leads to: God Doesn't Think He's Larry Ellison. It would be hard to imagine a book about a Detroit executive, even a book that had the decided bias that the tome about Ellison evinces, that would be quite so searing. Sure, there are egos. But they are still perceived to be, overall, "nice" people.

Detroit 3 small cars lay an egg in latest Consumer Reports reliability study

Consumer Reports has released its Annual Auto Reliability Survey and the results are, in a word, interesting. While we already covered the score-damaging effects of infotainment systems, there's another big angle to the data that's getting some attention - the utterly dismal scores of the Detroit Three's small car offerings.
The turbocharged Dodge Dart and Chevrolet Cruze, as well as the Ford Fiesta were their respective brands' lowest-scoring models, a stat that's made worse by the fact that the American automakers finished 25th, 21st and 23rd, respectively.
That's not acceptable for The Detroit Free Press' auto critic, Mark Phelan, who has penned a scathing critique of the D3's small car reliability scores, arguing that GM, Ford and Chrysler are "out of excuses."