Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Adam in NYC USA
That is nothing but a "public" announcement. If they printed that pigs are flying, you would believe it, would you? They publish that so 1. its something on a page and 2. it can be surrounded by advertisements. You read the page, how many adverts did you notice on the way out?
If you want the info, get it from the source, not from a rag called "scoop".
|
I suggest YOU do some research. That was just a quick link I grabbed.
Vehicle sales get reported to the government. Do you truly think they would get away with lying to Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Morgan & Company, yadayada, let alone shareholders?
http://media.ford.com/newsroom/relea...?release=25187
A 3.5% increase in U.S. sales alone in 2006. Land Rover sold 47,774 new vehicles in the U.S.
For perspective, in 2001 20,536 new Land Rovers were sold in the U.S.
Not sure why you want to argue facts - where are yours? You’ve got all these recommendations laid out nicely but what basis of proof do you provide that your ideas will really benefit Ford? There is no market research, analysis, facts in your letter to back up what you are saying. All I gather is you don't personally like the direction it's going so this is how you would like them to go. I'm not saying it's not a good letter, but if you truly want to have them take you seriously you'd be best to have some good data to back up what you say.
You may not like the direction that Land Rover has gone for your personal interests but targeting a market broader than only the specialized off-road segment seems like a smart move financially.
Should I mention all the awards they have won? Surely the award committees got paid off as well…no wonder Ford's losing money lol.
Like I said before, a more off-road capable utility would be great in addition to the new models, so as not to alienate the 4x4 community, but really I doubt this would be more than a drop in the bucket in helping Fords problems. And to replace them altogether would in no way 'save' Ford.
