Interesting Op-Ed in today’s Wall Street Journal (CLOSED DUE TO POLITICS)

[mr mojo risen]

Posted without further comment:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ford-electric-vehicles-subsidies-fossil-fuels-5d13079

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member 14823]

Paywall. Shame, because I'd be interested in reading it.

 

[Chicolini]

Paywall. Shame, because I'd be interested in reading it.

Not me. WSJ has no more credibility than CNN.

 

[Deleted member 14823]

Not me. WSJ has no more credibility than CNN.

While I appreciate the sentiment, I was hoping to learn what Ford's strategy is for dividing their product lines in the future, without listening to any suggestions from the newspaper as to how I'm supposed to feel about it.

 

[commadorebob]

Based on the first two paragraphs: ICE subsidizes EV until EV is profitable because Ford sells ICE like gangbusters.

 

[Dr3wman]

Here ya go.

“ Stocks rallied for the most part on Thursday, but a notable exception was Ford Motor Co., which fell on the news that it will lose $3 billion this year on its electric-vehicle business. This is worth noting even if you’re not a Ford shareholder because U.S. taxpayers could end up paying more if the company can’t turn its green business around.

Ford attributes the losses to the growing pains of what is says is a start-up business in the venerable company. The auto maker said it still expects to earn between $9 billion and $11 billion in operating profit this year, though that’s owing to the sales of its traditional gas-powered vehicles. Its gas-guzzling F-Series pickup trucks are especially popular and profitable. Fossil fuels are essentially underwriting Ford’s green business, much as they do in the electric-power industry.

Ford said it will keep investing in EVs and expects to reach an operating-profit margin of 8% by the end of 2026. That will require dramatic changes in consumer tastes as well as whatever efficiencies Ford can engineer in its production process.
Ford can sustain losses on EVs in part because it is benefiting, directly or indirectly, from subsidies up and down the EV supply, production and service chain: battery production, sales to consumers, charging stations and more. The entire point of last year’s Inflation Reduction Act is to make EV production too big to fail. If consumers don’t want to buy EVs, for whatever reason, the government will keep subsidizing or mandating EVs until they do”

 

[AznMav]

Paywall. Shame, because I'd be interested in reading it.

Archive.ph bypasses paywall enjoy.

https://archive.ph/cE8Rh

 

[Deleted member 14823]

“
Stocks rallied for the most part on Thursday, but a notable exception was Ford Motor Co., which fell on the news that it will lose $3 billion this year on its electric-vehicle business. This is worth noting even if you’re not a Ford shareholder because U.S. taxpayers could end up paying more if the company can’t turn its green business around.

Ford attributes the losses to the growing pains of what is says is a start-up business in the venerable company. The auto maker said it still expects to earn between $9 billion and $11 billion in operating profit this year, though that’s owing to the sales of its traditional gas-powered vehicles. Its gas-guzzling F-Series pickup trucks are especially popular and profitable. Fossil fuels are essentially underwriting Ford’s green business, much as they do in the electric-power industry.

Ford said it will keep investing in EVs and expects to reach an operating-profit margin of 8% by the end of 2026. That will require dramatic changes in consumer tastes as well as whatever efficiencies Ford can engineer in its production process.
Ford can sustain losses on EVs in part because it is benefiting, directly or indirectly, from subsidies up and down the EV supply, production and service chain: battery production, sales to consumers, charging stations and more. The entire point of last year’s Inflation Reduction Act is to make EV production too big to fail. If consumers don’t want to buy EVs, for whatever reason, the government will keep subsidizing or mandating EVs until they do”

Thanks! I was really hoping to find out something about synthetic fuel, since Ford is partnering with Red Bull in Formula 1 and they're going full synthetic fuel by 2026. Oh well. Anyway, thanks for adding the full article.

 

[KimoCarew]

Ford’s shareholders know the ice business is closing in on its sell by date. I hope Mr Farley is successful in the transition… I’ll do my part if I ever get a chance to order the Lightning I have reserved.

 

[KimoCarew]

“
Stocks rallied for the most part on Thursday, but a notable exception was Ford Motor Co., which fell on the news that it will lose $3 billion this year on its electric-vehicle business. This is worth noting even if you’re not a Ford shareholder because U.S. taxpayers could end up paying more if the company can’t turn its green business around.

Ford attributes the losses to the growing pains of what is says is a start-up business in the venerable company. The auto maker said it still expects to earn between $9 billion and $11 billion in operating profit this year, though that’s owing to the sales of its traditional gas-powered vehicles. Its gas-guzzling F-Series pickup trucks are especially popular and profitable. Fossil fuels are essentially underwriting Ford’s green business, much as they do in the electric-power industry.

Ford said it will keep investing in EVs and expects to reach an operating-profit margin of 8% by the end of 2026. That will require dramatic changes in consumer tastes as well as whatever efficiencies Ford can engineer in its production process.
Ford can sustain losses on EVs in part because it is benefiting, directly or indirectly, from subsidies up and down the EV supply, production and service chain: battery production, sales to consumers, charging stations and more. The entire point of last year’s Inflation Reduction Act is to make EV production too big to fail. If consumers don’t want to buy EVs, for whatever reason, the government will keep subsidizing or mandating EVs until they do”

I think Ford is selling all of the electric vehicles it can make. Don’t they have years of orders backlogged?

 

[MakinDoForNow]

While I appreciate the sentiment, I was hoping to learn what Ford's strategy is for dividing their product lines in the future, without listening to any suggestions from the newspaper as to how I'm supposed to feel about it.

The product line division is to allow the Bean counters to write off whichever division goes bankrupt against the surviving divisions profits. Also will let dealerships owners which form two dealerships the same flexibilities.

 

[BradnChristine]

I'd worry more about GM being a taxpayer burden than Ford...if history is any example.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

Ford’s shareholders know the ice business is closing in on its sell by date. I hope Mr Farley is successful in the transition… I’ll do my part if I ever get a chance to order the Lightning I have reserved.

Doubt it. Maybe for Ford but there is no way the ICE vehicles are going away anytime soon no matter how much governments want them to. Toyota has the right idea with hydrogen not electricity to move vehicles and is exiting the EV busiess (smart move) We already recognize we don't produce enough energy to support a Country with nothing but EV's. We also have discovered that producing EV's adds more to the carbon footprint than producing an ICE vehicle....Producing batteries is a dirty business. If Toyota can make hydrogen vehicles safe that seems to be the only way to produce clean energy IMHO

 

[Saxapl]

Doubt it. Maybe for Ford but there is no way the ICE vehicles are going away anytime soon no matter how much governments want them to. Toyota has the right idea with hydrogen not electricity to move vehicles and is exiting the EV busiess (smart move) We already recognize we don't produce enough energy to support a Country with nothing but EV's. We also have discovered that producing EV's adds more to the carbon footprint than producing an ICE vehicle....Producing batteries is a dirty business. If Toyota can make hydrogen vehicles safe that seems to be the only way to produce clean energy IMHO

As a guy who got rid of an ev when getting the Tremor, I agree. EV has too many flaws to be the ice replacements in anything like the near future. Evs are fun and interesting, but impractical in a lot of situations. They will improve with time, but the country still does not have the capacity to support a full ev driving population. The infrastructure is already overloaded with the few who are in the space.

 

[APD]

Doubt it. Maybe for Ford but there is no way the ICE vehicles are going away anytime soon no matter how much governments want them to. Toyota has the right idea with hydrogen not electricity to move vehicles and is exiting the EV busiess (smart move) We already recognize we don't produce enough energy to support a Country with nothing but EV's. We also have discovered that producing EV's adds more to the carbon footprint than producing an ICE vehicle....Producing batteries is a dirty business. If Toyota can make hydrogen vehicles safe that seems to be the only way to produce clean energy IMHO

I guess it depends on what you mean by "soon", but every major auto manufacturer disagrees with you

Sponsored