Letter to the Editor from Jim Jackson
Editor’s note: Following is a Letter to the Editor from Jim Jackson, one of the largest Ford dealers in the nation, on the ongoing debate about the state of the auto industry and the possibility of a congressional bailout of the three largest U.S. automakers.
As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate of our nation’s economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of knowledge is shared with many journalists who are irresponsible when influencing the opinion of millions of viewers.
Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. You and the uninformed journalists and senators who hold onto myths that aren’t relevant in today’s world.
When you say the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2 million in the U.S. GM was the world’s No. 1 automaker, beating Toyota by 3,000 units.
When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power’s independent survey on initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated Ford on par with good Japanese automakers?
Did you realize the Big Three’s gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that beats the Accord. And for ’09, Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion which, at 39 mpg, is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford’s Focus beats the Corolla and Chevy’s Cobalt beats the Civic.
When you ask how many times we are going to bail them out, you must be referring to 1980. The only Big Three to have been bailed out was Chrysler, who paid back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received government aid.
When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely you’ve noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending billions of dollars to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that for 31-straight years Ford’s F-Series has been the best- selling vehicle. Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new ’09 F-150, you’ll agree this won’t change soon.
Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than Nissan or Honda? Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug-in hybrids and hydrogen cars.
It’s 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit is once again the best in the world.
Perhaps, Sen. Shelby isn’t really that blind. Maybe he realizes the quality shift to America. Maybe it’s the fact that his state of Alabama has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes-Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby’s disdain for “government subsidies” is very hypocritical. In the early ’90s, he was the driving force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan the Big Three are requesting will be paid back, Alabama’s $180,000-plus per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch, you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your opinions and decisions.
After 9/11, the Detroit Three and Harley-Davidson gave $40 million-plus in emergency vehicles to the recovery efforts. What did the Asian and European auto manufactures give to the 9/11 relief effort? $0. Nada. Zip!
We live in a world of free trade and we haven’t been able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of other auto-producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government may be ready to force their demise. While our automakers have paid union wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although many United Auto Workers concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think that isn’t enough.
Some place the blame on corporate management. I would like to speak of Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing its workforce by 51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Current and future products are excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team in the business.
The financial collapse caused by the secondary-mortgage fiasco and the greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Treasury Secretary Paulson is saying no to $250 billion in foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So, when the Big Three ask for just 4% of that $700 billion, i.e., $25 billion, to save the country’s largest industry, there is obviously opposition. But does it make sense to unconditionally reward the culprits of the problem with $700 billion and ignore the victims?
As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be touched and isn’t necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any manufacturer would cost retirees their healthcare and retirements. Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan with much less expense. So, who foots the bill if GM or all three go Chapter 11? All that extra healthcare, unemployment, loss of tax base and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of repayment.
So, while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and the economy of our country.
So, I'll end where I began, on the quality of the products of Detroit. Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the U.S. public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam Congressman, vote to end healthcare and retirement benefits for 1 million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation’s jobs, lose the technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic disaster, including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I must ask you this question not in the rhetorical sense, but in a sincere, literal way: Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately?
Jim Jackson
Editor’s note: Following is a Letter to the Editor from Jim Jackson, one of the largest Ford dealers in the nation, on the ongoing debate about the state of the auto industry and the possibility of a congressional bailout of the three largest U.S. automakers.
As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate of our nation’s economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of knowledge is shared with many journalists who are irresponsible when influencing the opinion of millions of viewers.
Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. You and the uninformed journalists and senators who hold onto myths that aren’t relevant in today’s world.
When you say the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2 million in the U.S. GM was the world’s No. 1 automaker, beating Toyota by 3,000 units.
When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power’s independent survey on initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated Ford on par with good Japanese automakers?
Did you realize the Big Three’s gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that beats the Accord. And for ’09, Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion which, at 39 mpg, is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford’s Focus beats the Corolla and Chevy’s Cobalt beats the Civic.
When you ask how many times we are going to bail them out, you must be referring to 1980. The only Big Three to have been bailed out was Chrysler, who paid back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received government aid.
When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely you’ve noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending billions of dollars to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that for 31-straight years Ford’s F-Series has been the best- selling vehicle. Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new ’09 F-150, you’ll agree this won’t change soon.
Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than Nissan or Honda? Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug-in hybrids and hydrogen cars.
It’s 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit is once again the best in the world.
Perhaps, Sen. Shelby isn’t really that blind. Maybe he realizes the quality shift to America. Maybe it’s the fact that his state of Alabama has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes-Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby’s disdain for “government subsidies” is very hypocritical. In the early ’90s, he was the driving force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan the Big Three are requesting will be paid back, Alabama’s $180,000-plus per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch, you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your opinions and decisions.
After 9/11, the Detroit Three and Harley-Davidson gave $40 million-plus in emergency vehicles to the recovery efforts. What did the Asian and European auto manufactures give to the 9/11 relief effort? $0. Nada. Zip!
We live in a world of free trade and we haven’t been able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of other auto-producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government may be ready to force their demise. While our automakers have paid union wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although many United Auto Workers concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think that isn’t enough.
Some place the blame on corporate management. I would like to speak of Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing its workforce by 51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Current and future products are excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team in the business.
The financial collapse caused by the secondary-mortgage fiasco and the greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Treasury Secretary Paulson is saying no to $250 billion in foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So, when the Big Three ask for just 4% of that $700 billion, i.e., $25 billion, to save the country’s largest industry, there is obviously opposition. But does it make sense to unconditionally reward the culprits of the problem with $700 billion and ignore the victims?
As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be touched and isn’t necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any manufacturer would cost retirees their healthcare and retirements. Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan with much less expense. So, who foots the bill if GM or all three go Chapter 11? All that extra healthcare, unemployment, loss of tax base and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of repayment.
So, while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and the economy of our country.
So, I'll end where I began, on the quality of the products of Detroit. Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the U.S. public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam Congressman, vote to end healthcare and retirement benefits for 1 million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation’s jobs, lose the technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic disaster, including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I must ask you this question not in the rhetorical sense, but in a sincere, literal way: Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately?
Jim Jackson
