Ford recorded a pre-tax profit of $10.8 billion for 2015.

[FordCosworth]

" Spurred by strong numbers in North America, Ford recorded a pre-tax profit of $10.8 billion for 2015. That number is up a full $3.5 billion from the previous year.

 

Revenue ended up at $149.6 billion by the end of 2015, Ford also reported. The company posted a full-year net income of $7.4 billion, an increase of $6.1 billion from the previous year. This figure comes out to $1.84 per share, up $1.53 from a year ago.

 

Pre-tax profit remained strongest in North America, where the automaker garnered $9.3 billion. In the U.S., Ford achieved its strongest sales numbers since 2005. The company also returned to profitability in Europe after several difficult years. In this region, the automaker managed to move 10 percent more volume, earning a profit of $259 million. The automaker also credits its success in Europe to favorable market conditions and its ability to lower costs during the fourth quarter of the year.

 

Along with the booming Asia Pacific region, which earned $765 million in profit last year, North America and Europe helped make up for heavy losses in South America. Ford’s new Middle East and Africa business unit scored a modest profit of $31 million.

 

For 2016, Ford expects its pre-tax results in North America to remain about the same as the previous year, while it forecasts higher results in Europe. Losses in South America are expected to be even greater this year. "

 

 

http://www.motortrend.com/news/ford-posts-2015-pre-tax-profit-of-10-8-billion-makes-gains-in-europe/

[G. David Felt]

Wonder how much they have paid down on their huge 50+ billion dollar loan? Anyone know?

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Not bad at all, considering the lost market share in the first half of the year due to so much product down time, especially their cash machine better known as F150.

 

This year should be far better, with high volume products like new Fusion Sport/Platinum, Escape, and Focus RS, Continental, MKZ Sport, Super Duty....did I miss anything.

Wonder how much they have paid down on their huge 50+ billion dollar loan? Anyone know?

 

 

Really?

[G. David Felt]

Not bad at all, considering the lost market share in the first half of the year due to so much product down time, especially their cash machine better known as F150.

 

This year should be far better, with high volume products like new Fusion Sport/Platinum, Escape, and Focus RS, Continental, MKZ Sport, Super Duty....did I miss anything.

Wonder how much they have paid down on their huge 50+ billion dollar loan? Anyone know?

 

 

Really?

Yes Really, We are seeing a global slow down and there are plenty of indicators that the US could move towards slow growth. If so then this could really hurt FORD especially with the South American market supposedly increasing in losses.

 

So a good year is excellent, but how does it compare to the debt load they are carrying? 

 

We'll some good news and some bad news.

 

Ford is currently rated #3 in its category so it is handling debt ok better than allot but could still improve.

https://www.macroaxis.com/invest/ratioCompare/F--Debt_to_Equity--Current_Ratio

 

Debt to Equity stands at 4.58 times earnings, so again good, hopefully with their big cash earned they pay some debt down.

https://www.macroaxis.com/invest/ratioCompare/F--Debt-to-Equity--Cash-and-Equivalents

 

Total Debt = Bonds + Notes = $126.42 billion owed to creditors.

https://www.macroaxis.com/invest/ratioCompare/F--Debt-to-Equity--Total-Debt

 

Alternative source of comparing their debt to equity ratio in the industry.

https://ycharts.com/companies/F/debt_equity_ratio

 

Ford Debt to Equity is 4.58 times earnings.

GM Debt to Equity is 1.657 times earnings.

FCA Debt to Equity is 2.196 times earnings.

Tesla Debt to Equity is 2.017 times earnings.

 

Intersting Analysis of Ford compared to Toyota, Honda, GM, TATA, Based on this I am surprised to see Toyota with such high Debt, Higher than FORD. Toyota Debt is 165.89 billion.

 

https://www.macroaxis.com/invest/compare/F

 

Pretty interesting numbers to compare. I hope the world market does not dump too hard with Europe and Asia in a down turn.

[Drew Dowdell]

The Debt issue at Ford is a valid concern.. .and yes, they should use their profits now to pay it down.  

[Suaviloquent]

Debt to equity needs to be put into context.

 

It uses the book value of equity, not its market value....

 

And two a company that is leveraged gets much better return on equity.

 

Also, part of the interest is tax deductible.

 

And, NOPAT looks at earnings better because it adds back interest, because what interest really is, is income that is attributable to lenders, while the rest is to shareholders.

 

Anyways, Ford is fine. They took some risks by being ready for the downturn. Wouldn't we like more companies to do that?

 

Their trade receivables are immense as well.

[ccap41]

Why do they have so much debt?

[Robert Hall]

Why do they have so much debt?

Developing all-new platforms and models isn't cheap...at least 3 new plaforms in the last couple years (F-series, Transit, Mustang)...

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

It's been quite a few years since I took business or accounting course, so I had to look it up to be better versed, but my one take away from back in the day was that operating margins, also known as return on shares, is the MOST critical thing to analyze for a company like Ford. 

 

Operating margin = operating income / net sales

 

 

From the link below:

"Analyzing a company's operating results is often the most important aspect of equity analysis. How well a company generates operating cash flow dictates how well it can satisfy the claims of creditors and create value for common shareholders. In order to assess this value creation, investors do well by analyzing a company's operating income, operating cash flow and operating margins."

 

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/operating-margins.asp

 

 

So Ford had an operating margin of 6.8% in 2015, which is 2.2 points higher than previous year.  So things are looking excellent, especially compared to their cross town rivals.

 

And I don't recall if this was discussed adnauseum here, as it has in other sites, but Ford's debt has not been an issue for years.  But I do recall many times, having to debate this fact, even at this site.  So either everyone here is in denial, trolling, or are just dense.....when they repeatedly bring it up.

 

Here are some remarks from an article that is exactly 3 years old on the matter, suggesting how Ford was (then) carefully paying down their debt, as they also and more importantly, use it to their advantage.....as any smart business should.  And Ford has certainly continued to improve and balance their amount of debt they carry since then.

 

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/04/do-you-understand-fords-debt-because-youd-better.aspx

 

so to dfelt's little snipe about debt, in this excellent Ford news thread, I suggest he take the time to learn the facts, so we don't have to go through this all again, whenever someone feels the need to bring up Ford debt again.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Debt to equity needs to be put into context.

 

It uses the book value of equity, not its market value....

 

And two a company that is leveraged gets much better return on equity.

 

Also, part of the interest is tax deductible.

 

And, NOPAT looks at earnings better because it adds back interest, because what interest really is, is income that is attributable to lenders, while the rest is to shareholders.

 

Anyways, Ford is fine. They took some risks by being ready for the downturn. Wouldn't we like more companies to do that?

 

Their trade receivables are immense as well.

 

 

The other problem with debt to equity, is that there is so many ways to calculate it.  It's just a lousy metric to gauge what matters most to a business.

[Suaviloquent]

Does no one know why exactly Ford has debt? Well, paying down the 2006 loan was the priority, and only in the last few years has Ford been able to get back at looking at its liabilities aside from automotive debt.

 

People look at debt as though it's bane of existence.

 

But actually there's a few advantages. First - if your credit risk is very low, then leverage can help increase return to shareholders.

 

Two. Interest expense is tax deductible.

 

Which leads to increased profits which can be used to pay off the debt.

 

Ford could have whisked those problems away - if they had wanted to. But I can reconcile not shifting the burden over to someone else. Anyways, the old GM company inherited none of the liabilities of the new Gm company.

 

Which would be $173 billion dollars in 2008 money. Probably more than $180 billion in 2016 dollars.

 

Anyways, look, the deals been done, and I am glad that the competition is alive to this day. But if it's been company that really has had to struggle to remain profitable - $h! Ford divested so many brands, lost a lot of potential premium brands - I'd still surprised at the turnaround that they are profitable and continually delivering above average returns.

 

Now why is the Ford and GM stock trading lower these days? It's because the analysts and investors desperately want both companies to be bullish, but in honesty, the companies are producing sales and profits. For it to plateau for a few years is hardly a bad sign. We're due to have a market correction by now anyways. 

 

And also interest expense is incurred whether or not you actually pay down the debt.  So the profits you see are the real deal. No gimmicks and no tom foolery.

[Suaviloquent]

 

Debt to equity needs to be put into context.

 

It uses the book value of equity, not its market value....

 

And two a company that is leveraged gets much better return on equity.

 

Also, part of the interest is tax deductible.

 

And, NOPAT looks at earnings better because it adds back interest, because what interest really is, is income that is attributable to lenders, while the rest is to shareholders.

 

Anyways, Ford is fine. They took some risks by being ready for the downturn. Wouldn't we like more companies to do that?

 

Their trade receivables are immense as well.

 

 

The other problem with debt to equity, is that there is so many ways to calculate it.  It's just a lousy metric to gauge what matters most to a business.

 

 

Exactly. I coudn't have said it better myself.

 

For an activity-based company with mostly sequential manufacturing processes - look to asset turnover and liquidity in the competitive set. Which I believe Ford is exceptional.

 

I would judge NOPAT as also very significant, and corporate bond ratings...

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Does no one know why exactly Ford has debt? Well, paying down the 2006 loan was the priority, and only in the last few years has Ford been able to get back at looking at its liabilities aside from automotive debt.

 

People look at debt as though it's bane of existence.

 

But actually there's a few advantages. First - if your credit risk is very low, then leverage can help increase return to shareholders.

 

Two. Interest expense is tax deductible.

 

Which leads to increased profits which can be used to pay off the debt.

 

Ford could have whisked those problems away - if they had wanted to. But I can reconcile not shifting the burden over to someone else. Anyways, the old GM company inherited none of the liabilities of the new Gm company.

 

Which would be $173 billion dollars in 2008 money. Probably more than $180 billion in 2016 dollars.

 

Anyways, look, the deals been done, and I am glad that the competition is alive to this day. But if it's been company that really has had to struggle to remain profitable - $h! Ford divested so many brands, lost a lot of potential premium brands - I'd still surprised at the turnaround that they are profitable and continually delivering above average returns.

 

Now why is the Ford and GM stock trading lower these days? It's because the analysts and investors desperately want both companies to be bullish, but in honesty, the companies are producing sales and profits. For it to plateau for a few years is hardly a bad sign. We're due to have a market correction by now anyways. 

 

And also interest expense is incurred whether or not you actually pay down the debt.  So the profits you see are the real deal. No gimmicks and no tom foolery.

 

 

Yeah, GM inherited none of those responsibilities after they filed for BK, by screwing over many hard working families and shareholders......and then once again with massive tax breaks allowed them due to the BK.  That is nothing to be proud of.

 

 

And please stop deleting my posts.

[G. David Felt]

It's been quite a few years since I took business or accounting course, so I had to look it up to be better versed, but my one take away from back in the day was that operating margins, also known as return on shares, is the MOST critical thing to analyze for a company like Ford. 

 

Operating margin = operating income / net sales

 

 

From the link below:

"Analyzing a company's operating results is often the most important aspect of equity analysis. How well a company generates operating cash flow dictates how well it can satisfy the claims of creditors and create value for common shareholders. In order to assess this value creation, investors do well by analyzing a company's operating income, operating cash flow and operating margins."

 

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/operating-margins.asp

 

 

So Ford had an operating margin of 6.8% in 2015, which is 2.2 points higher than previous year.  So things are looking excellent, especially compared to their cross town rivals.

 

And I don't recall if this was discussed adnauseum here, as it has in other sites, but Ford's debt has not been an issue for years.  But I do recall many times, having to debate this fact, even at this site.  So either everyone here is in denial, trolling, or are just dense.....when they repeatedly bring it up.

 

Here are some remarks from an article that is exactly 3 years old on the matter, suggesting how Ford was (then) carefully paying down their debt, as they also and more importantly, use it to their advantage.....as any smart business should.  And Ford has certainly continued to improve and balance their amount of debt they carry since then.

 

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/04/do-you-understand-fords-debt-because-youd-better.aspx

 

so to dfelt's little snipe about debt, in this excellent Ford news thread, I suggest he take the time to learn the facts, so we don't have to go through this all again, whenever someone feels the need to bring up Ford debt again.

Wings thanks for posting some good info.

 

In regards to me possibly trolling or snipping about debt, it is just a valid concern of real life. I do not like companies that use bankruptcy, but then it does happen. I am more pissed off with Idiots like Trump that dump not once, twice but three times both business and personal over a 7 year span to increase his wealth and dump the debt on the little guy or in this case guys AKA the hard working american.

 

I am very happy for Ford having felt the need to get cash via loans and prep for the down turn. The interesting issue I have with Ford Debt is when you REVIEW the last 5 years you see they had debt paid down to 27 Billion by 2011 and now they are over 100 Billion. You are saying it cost them 73 billion to build 3 new platforms? This is my concern with Toyota also who leads all Auto companies with 165 Billion in Debt. Sales, Profits, etc seem to be a bit out of line compared to the debt.

 

I just do not want people to loose jobs during the next down turn due to CEOs and the boards not properly paying down debt and paying key executives crazy multi million pay packages.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

It's been quite a few years since I took business or accounting course, so I had to look it up to be better versed, but my one take away from back in the day was that operating margins, also known as return on shares, is the MOST critical thing to analyze for a company like Ford. 

 

Operating margin = operating income / net sales

 

 

From the link below:

"Analyzing a company's operating results is often the most important aspect of equity analysis. How well a company generates operating cash flow dictates how well it can satisfy the claims of creditors and create value for common shareholders. In order to assess this value creation, investors do well by analyzing a company's operating income, operating cash flow and operating margins."

 

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/08/operating-margins.asp

 

 

So Ford had an operating margin of 6.8% in 2015, which is 2.2 points higher than previous year.  So things are looking excellent, especially compared to their cross town rivals.

 

And I don't recall if this was discussed adnauseum here, as it has in other sites, but Ford's debt has not been an issue for years.  But I do recall many times, having to debate this fact, even at this site.  So either everyone here is in denial, trolling, or are just dense.....when they repeatedly bring it up.

 

Here are some remarks from an article that is exactly 3 years old on the matter, suggesting how Ford was (then) carefully paying down their debt, as they also and more importantly, use it to their advantage.....as any smart business should.  And Ford has certainly continued to improve and balance their amount of debt they carry since then.

 

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/04/do-you-understand-fords-debt-because-youd-better.aspx

 

so to dfelt's little snipe about debt, in this excellent Ford news thread, I suggest he take the time to learn the facts, so we don't have to go through this all again, whenever someone feels the need to bring up Ford debt again.

Wings thanks for posting some good info.

 

In regards to me possibly trolling or snipping about debt, it is just a valid concern of real life. I do not like companies that use bankruptcy, but then it does happen. I am more pissed off with Idiots like Trump that dump not once, twice but three times both business and personal over a 7 year span to increase his wealth and dump the debt on the little guy or in this case guys AKA the hard working american.

 

I am very happy for Ford having felt the need to get cash via loans and prep for the down turn. The interesting issue I have with Ford Debt is when you REVIEW the last 5 years you see they had debt paid down to 27 Billion by 2011 and now they are over 100 Billion. You are saying it cost them 73 billion to build 3 new platforms? This is my concern with Toyota also who leads all Auto companies with 165 Billion in Debt. Sales, Profits, etc seem to be a bit out of line compared to the debt.

 

I just do not want people to loose jobs during the next down turn due to CEOs and the boards not properly paying down debt and paying key executives crazy multi million pay packages.

 

 

 

So you brought up debt in this great financial report, because you care about jobs huh?

 

Sure.  And if someone brought up lawsuits when GM posts a great financial report in the next few days, I am sure they too are concerned about jobs.

[ccap41]

 

Why do they have so much debt?

Developing all-new platforms and models isn't cheap...at least 3 new plaforms in the last couple years (F-series, Transit, Mustang)...

 

Makes sense. Hadn't thought about that, or anything in particular to be honest. I just wasn't sure. 

[El Kabong]

Lost in all the hype and hoopla of the last few posts is that while Ford didn't declare bankruptcy, they took several billion dollars from the Department of Energy for research.

We have discussed this many, many times before. Some companies found good PR ways around the events of '08, some didn't. Some made good use of the second chance, some less so.

[Drew Dowdell]

The reason that Ford has so much debt (aside from the new platforms, which is just a cost of doing business), is that Ford was heading for trouble pre-Crash AND because some financial wizard at Ford saw the writing on the wall on the overall economy before it happened.  A number of people out there saw the crash coming (including me, I have posts in the now defunct politics section warning about it) and it was good on Ford to take note.

 

It is very likely that Ford would have been right there along side GM and Chrysler going through bankruptcy and getting (additional) bailouts had they not taken the actions they did.  Before the crash they mortgaged everything... even the name on the building... to free up cash heading into the storm.  This proved crucial and it was for this reason that Ford avoided bailouts while GM didn't.  Once the crash hit, there were no banks large enough and healthy enough to finance the GM Bankruptcy. Credit availability on that scale had completely dried up.  Even healthy companies were affected.... Target, which uses lines of credit to purchase inventory suddenly had a large portion of that credit withdrawn.  That is the primary reason the government had to step in..... even healthy companies were getting hit.

 

 In a way, Ford bailed themselves out ahead of time. Ford avoided it by getting their credit lines in position before all the crap hit the fan.  And while it is great that Ford managed to avoid BK and (most) bailouts, they are still living with a large portion of that debt today.  The sooner they address it, the better.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Lots of misinformation, so allow me to correct with actual facts, that I actually experienced, not read about.

 

 

As Alan was selected to assist Bill Ford Junior, who was the actual architect of the plan, and deliver a flurry of new products over the next decade or so  to market, and which was really phase II of a previous plan, they needed a lot of capital to back their plan, even though they had most of the cash back then to do so.  Covering your bets is a smart play. And the amount they actually requested was half of what they got, but when they realized that borrowing was so cheap to do back then, they doubled down.  Why not, right?

 

And again, the low interest DOE loan was awarded to Ford, Ford did not ask for it.  That's what happens when you demand an industry to comply with radical rules and regulations.....you offer some incentive by way of practically free loans.  Ford won the jackpot, because of their greening efforts.  DOE awards periodically. 

 

Hardly the same as begging for money to keep your lights on because of poor foresight.  

I am so proud of Ford for not taking the Ghetto way out.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Wings4Life

[Drew Dowdell]

Lots of misinformation, so allow me to correct with actual facts, that I actually experienced, not read about.

 

 

As Alan was selected to assist Bill Ford Junior, who was the actual architect of the plan, and deliver a flurry of new products over the next decade or so  to market, and which was really phase II of a previous plan, they needed a lot of capital to back their plan, even though they had most of the cash back then to do so.  Covering your bets is a smart play. And the amount they actually requested was half of what they got, but when they realized that borrowing was so cheap to do back then, they doubled down.  Why not, right?

 

And again, the low interest DOE loan was awarded to Ford, Ford did not ask for it.  That's what happens when you demand an industry to comply with radical rules and regulations.....you offer some incentive by way of practically free loans.  Ford won the jackpot, because of their greening efforts.  DOE awards periodically. 

 

Hardly the same as begging for money to keep your lights on because of poor foresight.  

I am so proud of Ford for not taking the Ghetto way out.

 

Yeah, because taking "Payday Loans" and maxing out a 3rd Mortgage on everything including Ford name is not the ghetto way out? The only thing Ford did differently than GM and Chrysler was get to the payday lender before it closed.... sitting in there with Laquisha waiting for her post-dated check to be processed.

 

Ford got more than just the DOE loans. Just because they didn't take any of the stuff that was bad PR, doesn't mean they didn't get some sweetheart deals from the government. One of the deals they got was that the government "suddenly" needed to replace it's aging fleet of cars.  The Feds suddenly started buying fleets of Focuses and Fusions to replace their aging Crown Vics for non-police/security duty, they bought a smaller number of F-150s and E-150s.... all at nearly list prices.  In 2008, getting anyone to pay near list on a Focus was almost impossible... but Ford got it from the Feds.... it was a huge influx of cash for cars that would have otherwise been rotting on dealer lots until they got marked down many thousands of dollars.   GM and Chrysler got similar deals selling Pontiac G6es and Dodge Avengers respectively, but not nearly at the volume that Ford got.   Laquisha got to sell all of her old out of style weave inventory for nearly full retail price.

 

Ford was also one of the biggest domestic beneficiaries of the Cash-For-Clunkers program being the ONLY domestic auto manufacturer with a model in the top 10 sales.  The Ford Focus was number 4 and the Ford Escape FWD was number 10. Overall, Ford got 14.4% of sales generated from C4C.  Laquisha's weave store now accepts SNAP/EBT cards and will cash tax refund checks.

 

You can try and spin it any way you like, Ford certainly has... but no, Ford's process was no less ghetto than the other two. 

[Robert Hall]

Ford probably had a top-10 car C4C turn in car w/ the Explorer..lots of those got unloaded  (my sister should have C4Ced her old Mercedes before they became undrivable paperweights). 

[Drew Dowdell]

Ford probably had a top-10 car C4C turn in car w/ the Explorer..lots of those got unloaded  (my sister should have C4Ced her old Mercedes before they became undrivable paperweights). 

 

Ford had 5 of the top 10 vehicle turn-ins.  #1 Explorer 4wd, #2 F-150 2wd, #4 Explorer 2wd, #9 F-150 4wd, 10# Windstar

[Drew Dowdell]

Lots of misinformation, so allow me to correct with actual facts, that I actually experienced, not read about.

 

And again, the low interest DOE loan was awarded to Ford, Ford did not ask for it.  That's what happens when you demand an industry to comply with radical rules and regulations.....you offer some incentive by way of practically free loans.  Ford won the jackpot, because of their greening efforts.  DOE awards periodically. 

 

Also, since you seem keen to try and fact-check people... check your own facts.

 

"Ford Chief Executive Officer Alan R. Mulally also asked Congress for a “credit line” of up to $9 billion in case the economy worsened."

 

"the Congressional Research Service noted that Ford “is counting on $5 billion from the DOE loan program to support a $14 billion plan to reorient its lineup toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.” On June 23, 2009, the Department of Energy announced it would provide $5.9 billion to Ford “to transform factories across Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, and Ohio to produce 13 more fuel efficient models.”"

 

"In a business plan submitted to Congress in December 2008, Ford touted its $14 billion plan for fuel-efficient cars as a key part of its effort to turn the company around — noting that a big piece of the funding was coming from the DOE."

 

"The company’s business plan also urged Congress to pass legislation to provide “incentives for consumers to trade in older vehicles and move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.”"

 

"A Department of Transportation report (table 10) said more than 90,000 Fords were purchased under the cash-for-clunkers program — second only to Toyota — as of December 2009."

 

"Ford was for government bailouts before it was against them."

 

The idea that Ford didn't ask for the loan is absurd on its face... the D.O.E. doesn't just sprinkle magical loan fairy dust on a manufacturer.  Companies have to apply for the loans, submit business plans, etc.  The $5.9 billion that Ford got was by far the largest of the DOE loans at the time. The next largest was Nissan at $1.9 billion.

[surreal1272]

 

Lots of misinformation, so allow me to correct with actual facts, that I actually experienced, not read about.

 

And again, the low interest DOE loan was awarded to Ford, Ford did not ask for it.  That's what happens when you demand an industry to comply with radical rules and regulations.....you offer some incentive by way of practically free loans.  Ford won the jackpot, because of their greening efforts.  DOE awards periodically. 

 

Also, since you seem keen to try and fact-check people... check your own facts.

 

"Ford Chief Executive Officer Alan R. Mulally also asked Congress for a “credit line” of up to $9 billion in case the economy worsened."

 

"the Congressional Research Service noted that Ford “is counting on $5 billion from the DOE loan program to support a $14 billion plan to reorient its lineup toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.” On June 23, 2009, the Department of Energy announced it would provide $5.9 billion to Ford “to transform factories across Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, and Ohio to produce 13 more fuel efficient models.”"

 

"In a business plan submitted to Congress in December 2008, Ford touted its $14 billion plan for fuel-efficient cars as a key part of its effort to turn the company around — noting that a big piece of the funding was coming from the DOE."

 

"The company’s business plan also urged Congress to pass legislation to provide “incentives for consumers to trade in older vehicles and move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.”"

 

"A Department of Transportation report (table 10) said more than 90,000 Fords were purchased under the cash-for-clunkers program — second only to Toyota — as of December 2009."

 

"Ford was for government bailouts before it was against them."

 

The idea that Ford didn't ask for the loan is absurd on its face... the D.O.E. doesn't just sprinkle magical loan fairy dust on a manufacturer.  Companies have to apply for the loans, submit business plans, etc.  The $5.9 billion that Ford got was by far the largest of the DOE loans at the time. The next largest was Nissan at $1.9 billion.

 

 

I wish someone would just give me a loan even though I didn't ask for one.   They could just award it to me.

[Suaviloquent]

Well, yeah, Ford borrows. A lot. Their debt is serviceable though. Actually, when you think about it, the bail-outs were loans at one point in time too.

 

They were really like junk bonds that had the option of being convertible. The benefit of that was one - the debt burden is reduced or gone completely, and two, if the shares appreciated in market value - the government might get something out of it.

 

Except the share repurchase programs started when the stock was below par value - so that's where the government lost out. 

 

Someone should do the math - heck I should. It's all there for everyone to see. It's another research topic. Like the Tesla situation. Yup. Someone do the research. Do the math. get the yield to maturities and stuffs. Calculate the capital losses. Do it!!!

 

Until then, a lot of heated debate...with no resolution because guys have certain affinities that they just can't get rid of. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, yeah, Ford borrows. A lot. Their debt is serviceable though. Actually, when you think about it, the bail-outs were loans at one point in time too.

 

They were really like junk bonds that had the option of being convertible. The benefit of that was one - the debt burden is reduced or gone completely, and two, if the shares appreciated in market value - the government might get something out of it.

 

Except the share repurchase programs started when the stock was below par value - so that's where the government lost out. 

 

Someone should do the math - heck I should. It's all there for everyone to see. It's another research topic. Like the Tesla situation. Yup. Someone do the research. Do the math. get the yield to maturities and stuffs. Calculate the capital losses. Do it!!!

 

Until then, a lot of heated debate...with no resolution because guys have certain affinities that they just can't get rid of. 

 

Yes, Ford's debt is serviceable in this economy.  What happens when China tanks and takes the world economy with it?    

 

All I'm saying is that Ford needs to work on this high level of debt and get it back into industry standard ahead of the next crisis.  They have the profits today to do it. 

[G. David Felt]

I am very excited that Ford is doing so well, but having the SECOND highest debt load of auto companies is not a good thing and I do wonder how the Asian Rim slow down will affect FORD. Ford is already expecting large increase in losses in South America. So debt is a concern. Job loss here will affect us greatly.

[FordCosworth]

Maybe Ford should have declared bankruptcy like GM and Chrysler. Then, like GM and Chrysler, could have inherited none of the responsibilities after they filed for said BK, all while screwing over many hard working families and shareholders. And then Ford too could enjoy massive tax breaks allowed due to the BK?

[surreal1272]

Let's see. Record profits while sitting on a near record mountain of debt, with the writing on the wall for another economic downturn? I'm not saying that is a recipe for disaster but...

[Drew Dowdell]

Maybe Ford should have declared bankruptcy like GM and Chrysler. Then, like GM and Chrysler, could have inherited none of the responsibilities after they filed for said BK, all while screwing over many hard working families and shareholders. And then Ford too could enjoy massive tax breaks allowed due to the BK?

 

What would have been the best decision for the business. 

[Suaviloquent]

Well, anything to send the economy into turbulence is going to affect other automakers as well.

 

And not to point out an automaker as glutton - but FCA is much worse position.

 

The losses in South America - it affects every automaker.

 

The losses in some Asian markets. I think GM sells even less vehicles in Japan than Ford.

 

Indonesia - fine, but hey, you win some, you lose some. Remember the money wasted by GM on Europe and Citroen?

 

I think you guys are now becoming analytical think tanks trying to turn over every stone. Are we supposed to be desensitized about car company bailouts? or any bailout? Well, it's going into the tax payer pokcetbook. I'm neutral on the issue. But I don't like for example how Bombardier needs to be given the teet so often. 

 

Ever look at the revenue to debt of G7 nations? Yeah. I don't like where the house of cards will fall, when it fall or if it even can. But being worried for Ford's profitability is the last thing anyone has been for the better part of the last decade. They paid down their debt before. They'll pay it down again.

 

If the don't - well there's a lot more loser automakers out there, more vulnerable to swings in the economic cycle that'll default first. 

 

For example - no one has even yet to know the full damage of the VW scandal. It'll probably require the flash sale of a couple of group brands to settle the diesel fumes.

[Drew Dowdell]

I agree that FCA has one foot on a very slippery stone.  Their problem right now is their CEO trying to raise brands from the dead rather than trying to keep alive ones alive.