The fact that Ford didn't need the bailouts that GM and Chrysler got (though I'm aware they still had the line line of credit available) suggests that their leadership is at least strong within the American car making industry, for whatever that's worth. On the side of whether they're developing/integrating tech effectively: on the one hand, that Microsoft system they farmed out for info/music is abysmal and everyone knows it; on the other hand, the Focus RS they've just released shows some impressive work put into even a lower-end car (particularly I'm thinking of the way they handle power delivery to the rear wheels in tight corners.)

At least in what I've seen, Ford is one of the few mass-production car makers doing some pretty interesting stuff.

A credit line of up to $9 billion (which no bank would have ever gave them), additional legislation (Ford was the second most profiteure of the cash-for-clunkers program) and 5$ billion from the DOE loan program does sound like a kind of bailout for me.

Yeah, from the perspective of them getting easy access to the taxes I've paid, I definitely agree that they got a bailout. Maybe I should have said that they were 1st place in the field of losers that was the American auto industry. And while that isn't particularly inspiring, it may lend support to the notion that I was trying to propose, which is that they have at least some ability to handle potential crises that were evidently easy to fall into (at least for GM and Chrysler, who comprised the American car industry, aside from Ford.)

In hindsight on the whole comment, though, I'm probably just pleased with Ford right now because I'm quite impressed with the Focus RS, but that certainly doesn't prove that their leadership is strong.

>Focus RS they've just released shows some impressive work put into even a lower-end car (particularly I'm thinking of the way they handle power delivery to the rear wheels in tight corners.)

That sort of system, while important, is not particularly complicated or advanced though. The tech been employed in various forms for over a decade, I don't see the software implementation as evidence of competency within ford.

That has nothing to with the ability to transform an organizational culture into one that values validated experiments over plans, resiliency over zero defects, collaboration over turf.

I wonder if its a fad so much as recognizing the threat from 200k+ people reserving a car before they've ever seen it with their own eyeballs. I know if I ran a car company I would be deathly afraid of becoming another nokia in an iPhone world. They are extremely far behind on these fronts.

1. The Tesla is a status symbol for people.

2. It's a 1k deposit. I just purchased a car last year, otherwise I probably would have put down 1k on the chance I do decide to buy a Tesla.

Point #2 - exactly. If the car was available now - in production - I think a lot more people would of put the 1k down. I myself, my lease runs out March 2017 - I can't not have a car waiting on the Model 3 to come out. I'll have to wait for the next round.

You can't extend your lease?

Ford makes status-symbol cars, so that's irrelevant. The important question is, could Ford produce a car, status symbol or not, that 200k people would put down even a refundable $1k deposit on, sight unseen?

Going back to the F-150 again, it's a status symbol for some people. I could probably go down to a dealer today and grab one with with most/all of what I want, or wait a little bit and get what I want.

A deposit isn't needed. It's a silly comparison anyway as the Tesla is an entirely new thing, vs already established.

A better comparison would be if 5 years from Tesla announced a new major revision of the model 3 (similar to what ford did with the F-150 this last year) and got 200k orders immediately.

now all this being said, if Ford announced a brand new electric vehicle tomorrow with similar specs/price as the Tesla I really doubt they could get preorders like this.

I'm not sure #1 is meant to be a counter argument but so is/was the iPhone.

The deposit is also 100% refundable.

> I know if I ran a car company I would be deathly afraid of becoming another Nokia

It's far worse than that. The top phone manufacturers before Apple were Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, and Blackberry.

These transitions are wrecking entire fields of players. It's not enough to avoid becoming the next Nokia, you have to sprint like hell and pray to Jesus, Allah, and Vishnu that you can become the next Samsung.

And unless you have a major government behind you, odds are you're not the next Samsung.

By definition most everyone inside a buracracy is focused inward, on their own performance signaling. I doubt many people noticed without providing some sort of defensive rationalization like "PC guys aren't going to just come in and..."

Unlike phones, cars' price prohibits most people from paying grossly more for a slighly better car (it's say $40k extra for a car vs $400 for a phone). Plus, there are already "iPhones" on the market (Mercedes, BMW etc.).

Check out a 2016 Honda Accord Touring that anybody can pick up for 31k. (or the civic for even cheaper with lane assist and all that) Honda seems to recognize there is a pretty major threat out there... but even they are behind.

All I'm saying is there seems to be a pretty big difference in whats easily and cheaply possible and what the status quo auto industry execs have been doing. A good example is every single car at this point should come with a touch screen head unit and a not-invented-here operating system on it. Traditionally all these execs believe that such a thing should cost thousands of dollars in upgrades either by model class or just the configuration itself. Few seem to realize they can easily generate 10x the revenue with software features and upgrades than they can with the hardware feature upgrade itself. The cost difference is pretty negligible... but the status quo gives them far less potential.

Financing makes that grossly higher price more palatable though.

> Capital One wanted to become a software company just like Ford says, the difference, Capital One already had great leaders. Is Ford full of great leaders?

Chrysler and GM both went bankrupt during the financial crisis. Ford didn't. It's by far the best run car company in North America.

People underestimate the importance of culture change. I hate this word, but there has to be a company-wide re-education if any company is serious about becoming more high-tech. Often, measures like opening a new R&D lab or pumping more money here or there gets wasted since it rarely has a wider effect. When the effect isn't wider, there is a lack of critical mass for high-impact high-tech projects to get out of the door. The internal friction is generally high in big old companies, and most people causing the friction tend to be old-school "company-persons" who have fixed mindsets about where the company should be. Many of these people aren't necessarily tech savvy and some even pride themselves on not understanding computers as though the ignorance burnishes their skills in science/mechanics/biochem or whatever is the core of their company.

Agree. How about they open source their ECUs and infotainment systems so we can actually own and service our vehicles?

> "We want to become a tech company" is the new management fad

I'd say that it's the new necessity for any large-scale operation. Software (and tech overall) is integrated into everything, and relegating it to an expense column is increasingly a mistake in any enterprise.

It is most certainly the new necessity. That said: 1. This fact is not widely recognized by CEOs 2. The culture change required is immensely difficult

I do this for a living (teach Fortune 500 to make software like SV). The culture change is immensely hard and most organizations flat out cannot make the change. They will see more nimble competitors emerge, margins will shrink, then they'll consolidate, and continue to seek regulatory protection via lobbyists.

It is an extremely difficult shift to make, particularly in tightly regulated areas.

It may be a fad, or a realization of 'software is eating the world'. Each year more industries are moving from software enabled, to software being key component and differentiation.

Unfortunately software is also fastest moving and most labor intensive of all components, it is also permeated across business. So you have to build a culture for it. So a company moving earlier will have key advantage over a company trying to acquire software and its culture at last moment.

We have seen it happen earlier in industries, and it will keep on happening. Will Ford be able to pull it up a question, but there is no other road to take.

Ford has a deployment advantage. They can make stuff in volume at low cost. Tesla has to learn to do that, and fast. (It's nice having an order backlog, but now you have to produce at a cost where those orders are profitable.) Apple outsources their manufacturing. Google has very little manufacturing capability.

Case in point, even Ford was having trouble meeting demand for their new F-150 last year.

Something else to consider. Tesla sold about 50k model S last year. Ford sold that many F-150s, in a month.

I told my mom it's time for you to look for a new vechicle. I've always worked on her vechicles.

I mentioned maybe a Subaru? A few weeks went by, and through an email she said she wanted a new F-150. She, is I belive in her 70's. She always lied about her age, so I don't know her exact age.

I just thought it was a strange pick. Ford is doing someting right with that truck. I asked her why, and she said she liked the aluminum body. I think it has more to do with just the ride height? She's small in stature.

I've always liked the f-150, but went away from Ford when I realized I can put 250,000 on a Toyota.

my brother works for a startup that was acquired by Ford, for what it's worth, Ford is letting them work as they were with little intervention

Ford hasn't had great CEOs for a while. I think they're all just connected military and intelligence goons now. "National Security" and all.