MERCURY should offer as a restart ONLY three cars, as MERCURY shares lot space with LINOCLN already. These would be very different from LINCOLN’s offerings.

Make MERCURY consistently more upscale in terms of perfromance and trim.

COUPE = COUGAR. Based on MUSTANG but with IRS or, if next mustang has IRS, then include more powerful upscale engines. The styling would be rather “retro” (I tend to use the term “reminiscent”), but more opulent than the MUSTANG’s best trim. Think SVT MUSTANG, meets Meets Lincoln. Offer the 6.0L V10 for a road ruling XR-7 or “Eliminator” version.

SEDAN = MARAUDER. The Australian Falcon GT and GT-P only real difference would be LSD and the available engines. Similar engines to Cougar. Base Engine the 3.5L Cyclone V6 (306 hp). Top Engine 5.4L V8 (re-tuned to 400+ hp).

Sports Car = PANTERA (get the rights if they don’t have it). MR V8 sports car to mark the division as a serious hi-pro segment of the company. This would be a long term production car, possibly a perennial, aimed at challenging world class sports cars like the PORSCHE 911 and FERRARI 460. Aim High or go home. The MESSENGER becomes a LINCOLN, The MarK SC.

Just cut out everything and start over. If it means putting the division on hiatus for a few years then do so. Once MERCURY is re-established, then carefully add a few new vehicles over the proceeding years.

The COUGAR and the MARAUDER are both fairly easy to make happen with out too much extra investment. The PANTERA would take some money and time, but wouldn’t have to happen immediately. Just before anything else. LINCOLN could still get it’s development done and launch new product with less concern about stepping on MERCURY. MERCURY gets their unique product and hedged back. I would doubt MERCURY would have a car for everything. just a few focused products that offer a premium of luxury and performance, with a tack that is in another direction from LINCOLN.

It’s a dream. Nah. I don’t think it would happen. It makes too much sense.

I understand the need to share platforms between divisions to reduce development costs and increase profits. What I don’t understand is the lack of differentiation of design, execution, or performance between divisions. I believe GM has finally learned the lesson that everything about a product that the customer sees, feels, and interacts with must be unique and upscale to make a customer truly believe that a product is a premium or luxury vehicle. Ford has not learned this lesson and now has two seriously damaged brands that it must either fix or kill.

I don’t want to see Mercury killed off, but it is painful to watch it deteriorate into the badge engineered nightmare it is today. If Ford can’t give it a unique identity with distinctive, upscale products, then I don’t see much sense in keeping it around. With Ford Corporation’s current financial woes, it might be better to retire a weak, redundant brand and focus development dollars on elevating Lincoln back to true luxury status. Maybe Ford needs to pattern its U.S. brands hierarchy after Honda/Acura, Nissan/Infiniti, or Toyota/Lexus; keep Ford as the affordable, sporty volume brand and reestablish Lincoln as a true upscale luxury brand.

As far as Ford’s other brands, Jaguar and Land Rover need to go and Ford needs to keep Mazda and Volvo. Mazda would continue to be a sporty, alternative Japanese/Asian brand. Volvo would offer Ford an upscale division in Europe as well as give U.S. buyers a taste of European/Scandanavian luxury.

Mercury has been to FORD what “Buick” is to GM. The same cars with better appointments.

And yes I know that the LEXUS ES is a dressed up Camry with noticeably different bodywork and interior. But that is, aside from the LX, about the end of Toyota’s re-badging. Most LEXUS vehicles share the same platform but get completely new styling to the point that is it almost impossible, without already knowing, that it is built on the same frame.

The problem is that LINCOLN looks better, feels better, and is better than MERCURY, with FORD trying to split the difference between FORD and LINCOLN.

The biggest problem is that FORD has not differentiated their divisions strongly enough. Given that there are only three, there should be an enormous difference between them all. Unfortunately, the differences were at best minimal.

If FORD wants to continue this model of business, then they only need FORD and LINCOLN. But if FORD wants to make that “bold move”, then they will turn Mercury around completely and make it a different and utterly separate division.

I think your view about MERCURY in comparison to LEXUS is faulty, showing a disregard for what each subject is with any degree of detail.

Most buyers anticipate Ford to be bankrupt by 2009.

jkt

redcar, 1115: the differences between H-Hondas and A-Hondas is smaller than the difference between say a tempo and a topaz

Blakkar: Mercury is FORD’s L—s. The same cars with a different name. Although a mercury costa a little bit more that a ford, while adding an “L” to a camry will cost about $5,600

1115: A—a should die, or get some dedicated models. Toyota, it seems, has the best hybrid technology. Everyone should use it

I agree with a lot of what’s been said, but my vote would be to kill Mercury, bring over the Euro-cars and work them into Ford/Lincoln lines. I think part of the Mercury sales decline is that brand loyalty or brand recognition is deteriorating. BlueIndependent’s got some good stuff to say about that. And, say what you will about Honda/Acura, but for good or bad, there is certainly enough engineering and design to distinguish the two.

I disagree that Mercury could live as a hybrid-only line. I hear that Toyota is considering doing that with Prius–basically “Scionizing” the brand. I think Toyota can get away with that for Prius, because the name is synonymous with hybrid technology. Not so with Mercury. It would take a lot more expensive marketing effort to change people’s perceptions about Mercury from the negative to the positive (in the first place), and then from re-badged Fords to hybrids (in the second place).

Although the Ford hybrid system is very similar to Toyota’s, Toyota is not directly supplying any components to Ford. Toyota and Ford have entered into a licensing agreement allowing Ford to use technology that had been patented by Toyota. Toyota welcomes the introduction of the Escape hybrid and Ford’s effort to demonstrate and gain acceptance of this important environmental technology.

http://www.toyota.com/about/environment/technology/2004/hybrid.html

The Euro/Aussie play won’t work. Not only are global platforms informing the Ford lineup, but FoMoCo management doesn’t have the guts to bring those cars to the US without dumbing them down. Look at the new-gen Focus and how it’s being suppressed from the US market. It’s shameful that in this day and age Ford has no competitive small car for the US.

The goal is to bolster the Lincoln line-up before Mercury shuts its doors. So far so good as MKX and MKZ have driven up Lincoln’s retail sales a lot this year. With an MKZ revamp, the MKS, and the Lincoln Flex in the next 15 months and an upgraded Navigator and MKX within 12 months of that and a smaller CUV and a RWD flagship by the time Mercury is dead, the dealers will not be happy that Mercury is leaving, but at least they’ll have sales replacing it.

The problem with bringing Euro Fords over is that they are going to be in the Ford line-up by 2012 from Fiesta (or whatever they call it) through Taurus, from B-CUV through Edge. So then what will Mercury have? About the only thing for Ford to do is to create a Prius-like line where Mercury is specifically designed as an urban, eco car? I know, I know, you want the Euro Fords here now, but the new Fusion that launches in a couple months will be really good, and the only car wanting will be the Focus, which is scheduled to be replaced in 2010.

It’s a dead-brand walking. I think Ford is doing the right thing by killing off an extra brand as opposed to trying to keep a brand that is rebadged Fords – or worse trying to sink more money into it to make it “upscale” and threaten Lincoln’s territory. The only option is hybrid/diesel-ize it or cut it. I would prefer the former, but I’ve come to expect very little innovative or creative thinking out of Ford. So, cut it is!

But with no news as to what is happening at MERCURY, a clear sign that nothing is happening given that there is so much news for FORD and LINCOLN, I will not be surprised when and if Mercury is dropped.

I have said it before, Mercury needs a mission of its own. FORD does not have the problem that GM does with Seven divisions to work with. Three divisons… technically four on paper. That’s it. It should be so easy.

FORD = Mainstream affordable cars. with the occasional supercar (needs their own division. SVT FORD maybe?)
FORD TRUCKS = Like GMC, nothing but trucks and SUVs
LINCOLN = Premium luxury. Could be FORD’s Lexus.
MERCURY = Named for the messenger of the gods and the acknowledged god of speed, so make it the performance divison with a twist of luxury. Could be FORD’s Infinti.

I will say though it might be too late. But then again, With many of FORD Europe’s cars getting turned over in the coming next few years, now would be a good time to get those cars engineered into “global” cars, that is cars that will pass US safety standards and, if nothing else, re-badge them as MERCURYs. Like anyone ins the US is going to complain. The Unions better not, it could mean the difference between having a job or not.

For the longest time Mercury was FORDs Buick, not quite but just enough to be a luxury division with the occasional muscle car to liven things up. I want a new Cougar, Put the IRS on it, and offer that 6.0L V10, detuned of course. Bring over a straight conversion of the Falcon as the new Marauder. Build the Messenger sports car.

Treat MERCURY like it really is important and this will good away. Otherwise…

I did attend Oldsmobile’s funeral.

If Ford wants to show they can get it done right, they’ll bring those cars here and put them in showrooms up against the Camrys of the world. If Ford doesn’t have the guts to do this, then I say if anyone has any stock in Ford sell it now, and if you’re a Ford employee, start looking for work ASAP.

Ford got in this trouble by playing it safe. They’ll only get out of it by taking risks. Releasing limited-run nostalgia wagons like the Thunderbird, GT and Shelby Mustang, and padding the new car list with nostalgic names (whether any of these cars is good or bad) won’t save them. Don’t get me wrong, the Ford GT kicks a lot of ass. But even AMC put out a decent muscle car (the AMX) to stay competitive, and still crashed and burned.

Ford as a company is at a total crossroads in their history, and they will go away if they make the wrong decision. I’m a GM guy at heart, but would rather not see yet another American giant fade into pathetic obscurity so easily. At least put up a damn fight.

Problem #1: There is no reason at all to pick a Milan over a Fusion, or a Mariner (moronic ad campaign BTW) over an Escape, Montego over Taurus etc., unless you think the Ford versions are too edgy, stylish, and extroverted…or some equally lame excuse.

Problem #2: Mercury’s marketing seems to hinge on its association with the Lincoln name. Bad for Mercury to always be linked to someone else. Bad for Lincoln if they want to be taken even remotely seriously as a luxury player. So Ford is essentially hampering two brands at once (no mean feat I might add) by mentioning the Mercury name in Lincoln commercials, and vice versa in Mercury commercials. Add to that the fact that the Lincoln MKZ is a rebadged Milan/Fusion (that just barely got a newer better engine than the other 2), and hey, in the exact same commercial Ford is competing with itself. GM found this to be a problem in the 80s, so the Blue Oval is 20 years or so behind.

Problem #3: Ford’s cash flow is in about as bad a shape as it could possibly be, and GM just hit its stride. Ford’s top brass should be utter basket cases at this point, now that Chrysler is still misfiring (goodbye Big 3 player #3), and GM, though losing #1 to Toyota, got it’s groove back and is now capable of dominating anything Ford offers. Only Mazdas are attractive as purchases any more.

Problem #4: Ford refuses to bring their Euro/World cars here. I can’t explain this one, because it’s the biggest no-brainer for them, and they still refuse to do it because they apparently think of American customers as soulless appliances that would reject a car that actually drove well and was styled nicely. Again, GM figured all this out before Ford did.

Ford’s problem is apparently R&D, mixed with really bad execution. Pretty soon only GM will be left.

Basically – keep the style, keep the handling, keep the powerplants, keep (or improve) the material quality, build it here but sell it only thru Mercury to give it a clear differentiation. GM is doing this with Saturn and it works.

Plus any US Ford designer who maons about upsetting the “delicate balance of design” they have achieved should be promptly shown the way out, only instead of the door hitting him in the butt it should be Mullaly’s foot assisting the retard outta there. The foreign designs sell and win awards – something the US designers can’t seem to pull off.

http://www.automuseum.org/NAM_collections_jdmerc2.shtml

2. If they want to keep the brand at all costs, bring the European Fords here and rebadge them as Mercury’s.

3. If they want to kill the Mercury brand, they MUST keep Volvo and use it to fill Mercury’s place.

4. I don’t think it’s possible to get people excited too much about a car with a dumb name. Cars named after planets need to go (So Saturn should change its name to Opel fast). This is why you’ll never seen me driving a Mercury or a Chinese car…”what kind of car is that thing??” “oh, its just my Dongfengyong”. No thanks