Ford stumbles as GM and Chrysler gain
Ford shares slump on disappointing results.
Net income at the Dearborn, Michigan-based company reported net income of $13.6 billion, or $3.40 per share, versus $190 million, or 5 cents per share the year before. Excluding one-time items, profit was $1.1 billion, or 20 cents per share, 5 cents below Wall Street consensus forecasts. Revenue rose to $34.6 billion.
Ford's strength in the U.S. was offset by weakness in other parts of the world. Ford's loss in Europe almost quadrupled to $190 million, while its operations in Asia Pacific and Africa swung to an $83 million loss as the floods in Thailand hurt its bottom line. The company's South American business reported a profit from continuing operations of $108 million, but that was a decline from $281 million a year earlier as competition intensified.
Meanwhile, General Motors (GM) and Chrysler Group, which needed government help to avoid collapse, are on a roll. GM recently regained the crown as the world's largest automaker after reporting 2011 global sales of 9.026 million, a 7.6% increase from 2010. Chrysler's results were even better. It sold 1.37 million units in 2011, a gain of 26% from 2010 -- the largest gain of any full-line manufacturer. Chrysler reported its biggest monthly sales gain in December in four years.
As competition rises, Ford may have to offer additional incentives to bolster sales. CEO Alan Mullaly foresaw the financial crisis before most people. Let's hope his crystal ball has not become too dusty.
Jonathan Berr is a freelance business writer. He does not own shares of the listed companies.
Odd, You compared units sold at GM and Chrysler Group to net income at Ford, without even mentioning Ford's sales numbers. For all you know, until they report earnings, GM and Chrysler Group lost money in 2011.
Then you say that Chrysler's results of 1.37 million units sold was better than GM's sales of 9.026 million units. I can only assume, because you seem to consider a high percentage sales gain as the defining factor of how well a company is doing, that you are trying to say: Because Ford's sales didn't fall as far as GM's and Chrysler's did, Ford can't possibly being doing better then they are.
Jonathan Berr does not seem qualified to write this artical. All 3 have picked up market share from the year before. GM still owes BILLIONS. And Ford is doing so poorly that they are expanding. This artical is misleading and should be deleted!
Some of you are spot in your criticism of the above article. Biased to the extreme. Ford took no Fed money. Sold even its Blue Oval logo to generate cash, dumped all other product lines and leveraged itself to the walls to get itself righted for the impending economic storm, but now this article literally says their either stupid or in fraught for doom. OK. As per the commentor below, I guess giving bonuses to your employees, sharing the wealth is not good business.
How come he didn't mention what the Volt cost was......$2 Billion. That translates to $250,000 per car for the 8,000 cars built, of which 1,000 sit unsold. Me, I'll stake my claim with Mullaly!!!
cmc111376 - Not sure why you are yelling, but to point a fact the creditors of GM got screwed just like creditors of personal bankruptcy folks do. In addition, the stock holders whoa re also creditors, got screwed out of billions when GM's old stock went to ZERO! They should have been allowed to fail. Also, look up the actual numbers, your 59 billion is off by 21 billion. the actual amount to include "stock ownership" was 80 billion! The government has no business owning corporate stocks such as this. it's nothing more than a loan. Did you know that the GM unions are voting in KC this week on whether to strike or not because of a seniority issue? How ridiculous is that. These people should have been shut down several years ago, but instead they were bailed out along with GM and now they want even more. i am sick and tired of paying for these problems. Like most of the folks here, and around the country, i work and pay a huge amount in taxes. It should be used for more socially conscious efforts. Defense, immigration reform, Homeland Security....
BOTTOM LINE - FORD TOOK NO GOV'T (means OUR) MONEY - and, as other's note already why relate 'units sold' to Ford's dollar volumes? Also fails to specifically mention, much less give Ford kudos for paying off over $3-billion in debt??
Government Motors should, from now on, be rated/compared only to include the big, fat MINUS for what 'we' gave them (and what they stole from bondholders) - and Chrysler shouldn't even count as "big 3".
Don Quix the UAW hasnt laid off workers over the last 20 years? Really? Thats why the jobs bank was such a huge issue in the chapter 11 proceedings huh?
You know what the jobs bank is right? LAID OFF WORKERS YOU IDIOT!
Thanks for your interest in Ford. We can understand why you and your readers are following the automakers – manufacturing is so important for so many people. It is an important part of the US economy and it is great to be contributing with a strong company and additional jobs.
I'd like to take the time to clarify a few items from your post to both yourself and your readers. From our standpoint, it is premature to compare our 2011 results with GM’s and Chrysler’s – especially since the other two companies have yet to release their numbers. We had a solid 2011 across our business. Despite all the challenges out there, we delivered our 10th consecutive quarter of pre-tax operating profit and our best annual pre-tax operating profits since 1999.
We’re excited about the future and being part of a strong US and global economy.
Ford Motor Company
Don Quix unions are for smart people that realize without someone to stand up for their rights you get WalMart or Apple. A CEO making $300+ million a year with workers making minimum wage.
You know why we are in such debt? The workers, the people that spend money have no money to buy things. Thats cutting off taxes to states, and as their pay goes down the taxes the government gets goes down. Social security is only taxed on the first $108,500 so as workers make less and CEOs make more less goes into social security. But a smart guy like you must understand this right?
If you think the economy is bad now how do you people think the economy would be with 2 million workers out of work because GM went out of business?
And dont pull this oh it wouldnt have been that many people. Not only would all the direct GM employees be out of work, but all the dealership employees would be out of work and that number is huge, then add in the advertiding companies that only do work for GM they would have to cut staff, the independant contractors that work for GM would no longer be needed, the suppliers would have to cut workers because GM sold 9 Million cars in the world last year. Thats a lot of parts no longer being made and when you arent making those parts you dont need all those employees.
MORE ON MSN MONEY
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
John Stumpf acknowledges that growth has been slow, but he says he's still optimistic.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.
Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.
Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.