Could Kevin Rudd/Kim Carr pursuade Ford to reverse shut down decision?

[BroadyFord]

Just a thought...

Kevin Rudd (and Kim Carr (a Rudd backer)) was the man who developed the New Car Plan which has effectively kept car manufacturing alive.

Rudd has repeatedly said he "doesn't want to be PM of a country that doesn't make things" and lambasted Gillard for dropping the Green Car Fund (which I reckon would have saved Ford had it still been around).

So, assuming Kim Carr is rewarded (again) with the industry portfolio, does anyone think he could meet with Ford to try and get them to change track? It's not too late IMO, so long as something is done relatively quickly - i.e. before the election and before the end of the year when any prospect of developing a new model (lead times etc.) evaporates.

[menil]

Not a chance in hell but if they can I may even vote for them for the first time in 45 years

[Joe5619]

It is a nice thought & I wish it happens. But realistically what changes can Rudd do in 2 months? About anything, not just auto industry!!

[GQ_Smooth]

I can't see it happening. He doesn't have the numbers to change government policy of import tariffs.

Handouts won't change Fords minds, as they have previously stated.

I'm probably going to get shot down, but he's been the only current politician I've seen that has put forward long term policies to the detriment of the popular vote.

You can say the same about Howard with work choices (weather you agree with the policy or not), was extremely unpopular but he believed it was best for the economy. Probably getting too political now for a car forum.

[XP6]

All he can do is make promises they cant keep... way too late even an injection of a few billion will do diddly squat for us except prolong the inevitable :(

[chevypower]

More tax-payer handouts? All that does is keep the life support machine on a little longer. Revamp the whole tax system to incentivize investment? Then take notice.

[vztrt]

Dont see it happening. Ford US want out of Australia. Didn't matter who is running the country. Ford were offered money to continue and said no.

Asia is cheaper and not only in labour costs.

[b0son]

After all of this idiocy, do you think ANY Labor pollie has any influence, anywhere?

[atec77]

Originally Posted by BroadyFord

Just a thought...

Kevin Rudd (and Kim Carr (a Rudd backer)) was the man who developed the New Car Plan which has effectively kept car manufacturing alive.

Rudd has repeatedly said he "doesn't want to be PM of a country that doesn't make things" and lambasted Gillard for dropping the Green Car Fund (which I reckon would have saved Ford had it still been around).

So, assuming Kim Carr is rewarded (again) with the industry portfolio, does anyone think he could meet with Ford to try and get them to change track? It's not too late IMO, so long as something is done relatively quickly - i.e. before the election and before the end of the year when any prospect of developing a new model (lead times etc.) evaporates.

Not a damned chance , and in a month or so when in oppostition Kevin will be even more emasculated and worthless

[Brazen]

He did say last night he wants to be the PM of a country that makes things. I could see Ford staying if enough money was put on the table and maybe the removal/reduction in Carbon Tax. There has been a 10% drop in the AUD since the Ford announcement as well.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Dont see it happening. Ford US want out of Australia. Didn't matter who is running the country. Ford were offered money to continue and said no.

Asia is cheaper and not only in labour costs.

This basically.

In order for there to be a reversal of the decision (like with the engine plant several years ago for example) the parties need to be on the same page and be thinking the same things and have the right mindset to save the factory.

This does not exist with one party, Ford, who don't want to save the plant. Plus there are internal corporate planning issues in play (such as what the hell kind of car they can make that will return a profit) which would go against any moves by Kim Carr to resurrect it.

[dallasv8]

considering Rudd has already canned the proposal to tighten laws for 457 visa workers...i highly doubt australian manufacturing will be on his help list.

[WPR1]

I doubt it Rudd, Gillard and the whole Labor lot are a laughing stock I would be surprised if any Company would take them seriously. With their track record who knows how long Rudd will be around for.

[hodge_williams]

Originally Posted by BroadyFord

Rudd has repeatedly said he "doesn't want to be PM of a country that doesn't make things"

mate he aint going to be the PM for long.

[Maka]

Could Kevin Rudd/Kim Carr pursuade Ford to reverse shut down decision?

Not unless they build a time machine

cheers, Maka

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by BroadyFord

Rudd has repeatedly said he "doesn't want to be PM of a country that doesn't make things" .

And he won't, all he's doing is keeping the seat warm......

As to the question in the OP.....not a chance in hell, Ford wrote of Aus Govco ages ago.....

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

This basically.

In order for there to be a reversal of the decision (like with the engine plant several years ago for example) the parties need to be on the same page and be thinking the same things and have the right mindset to save the factory.

This does not exist with one party, Ford, who don't want to save the plant. Plus there are internal corporate planning issues in play (such as what the hell kind of car they can make that will return a profit) which would go against any moves by Kim Carr to resurrect it.

The only possibility I could see (if Ford threw some massive dollars at it) would be Ranger and Ranger SUV to be built here. But the dollar would have to go through the floor (kinda like in 09 when the GFC finally hit here).

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by vztrt

The only possibility I could see (if Ford threw some massive dollars at it) would be Ranger and Ranger SUV to be built here. But the dollar would have to go through the floor (kinda like in 09 when the GFC finally hit here).

Fusion, Edge and another SUV for me. That's the only way you can do it to get enough volume to bring economies of scale into play. Oh, and an export market of course. But as you've said, it is all about the dollar...

[Lotte]

Seems to be a lot of psychics here, anyone got lotto numbers?

As for Rudd saving falcon, I'd hope it could happen, but I won't be holding my breath.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Fusion, Edge and another SUV for me. That's the only way you can do it to get enough volume to bring economies of scale into play. Oh, and an export market of course. But as you've said, it is all about the dollar...

Only reason I say Ranger is the demand is high and should continue to be so. Its a worldwide vehicle that now has big waiting lists (15 months for Wildtrack). Couple it with another good seller in oz (SUV's) you have two vehicles that have good demand and can pull in good profits per unit.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by b0son

After all of this idiocy, do you think ANY Labor pollie has any influence, anywhere?

Gillard & Rudd are both puppets to the Unions and with this happening... not a snowball's chance in hell:

A RIFT has exploded between AWU chief Paul Howes and Bill Shorten with Labor sources calling the turncoat MP a "rat" and a "liar."
The pair was among the "faceless men" who knifed Kevin Rudd and installed Julia Gillard in 2010 but Mr Shorten is now being accused of bowing to "terrorism" after a campaign of destabilisation by Rudd supporters.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226670770639

BTW Paul Howes is on record saying that for every $3 the industry put in, the Govt must put in $1 to have a viable industry.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Only reason I say Ranger is the demand is high and should continue to be so. Its a worldwide vehicle that now has big waiting lists (15 months for Wildtrack). Couple it with another good seller in oz (SUV's) you have two vehicles that have good demand and can pull in good profits per unit.

The problem with choosing the Ranger and the T6 is that Broady is configured for building unibody cars, and that the Ranger is made elsewhere globally. That puts FoA at an instant disadvantage because 1) it would require a big dollar spend on plant upgrades and 2) it would be competing with low-cost plants elsewhere making the same vehicle for less. Hence my view that Fusion and Edge would be better because they aren't made anywhere else but the US at the moment and would put FoA front and centre as the regional production and export hub for those two vehicles. Both of which appear to be in-demand and quite profitable. Plus no large R&D spend up front for FoA because they're global models.

[CyberWasp]

What does everyone think.

a) Is there more votes in going out of you way to save the industry
or
b) More people thinking it is not worth saving and spending more money on.

[GQ_Smooth]

The public don't understand the consequence of losing the industry and don't want their taxes going to prop up such companies.

I also don't believe the majority would cop import tax hikes making their overseas cars more expensive to purchase.

I don't believe there is any votes in keep the industry viable. However when the industry is gone, the public will 100% blame the government for not doing anything about it.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by GQ_Smooth

The public don't understand the consequence of losing the industry and don't want their taxes going to prop up such companies.

What do you believe to be are the consequences (both positive and negative)?

[Lotte]

Originally Posted by GQ_Smooth

I don't believe there is any votes in keep the industry viable. However when the industry is gone, the public will 100% blame the government for not doing anything about it.

They already are to an extent....

[blackf6]

I can see it now the FPV Crudd edition.

[GQ_Smooth]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

What do you believe to be are the consequences (both positive and negative)?

Of the top of my head
Positives:
Less taxes going to prop up overseas run business where the majority of any profits made go off shore.
There will be less need to for Government to purchase locally made vehicles, will likely mean the vehicles purchased would be on average cheaper.
Ford/Holden/Toyota will have more funds to spend on sponsorship both on a national level (AFL/NRL/V8SC/Australian Olympic team etc..) and a local level (supporting scouts, local sports club etc).
We will have greater assess to global RHD cars.
Negatives:
Low skilled workers will need to find other (normally lower payed) employment, both existing workers and any new workers looking for new employment (both directly and indirectly). Some will simply stay on the dole and turn to crime.
Automotive engineering jobs won't be based in Australia (this will happen once manufacturing is gone), we will lose that skill set. Australian's will still be auto engineers but will have to re-locate overseas from day one, not after they have proven themselves as is currently happening, same with designers.
We will slowly lose the skill set to manufacture, as less people will be taking Uni courses as there are less/no jobs in the industry left. We will be solely reliant on imports and can be dictated to by multinational companies and other governments taking sanctions against us if anything untoward happens in the future (while we make cars here, we some some level of control over this).

There are good an bad points, personally I'd rather have the industry, protect it with tariffs imposed on products imported from those countries that have poor working conditions (ie little tariffs from products imported from US/UK/Germany/Japan and higher tariffs on Korea/Thailand/Malaysia/China). I have no idea how this could be negotiated, I suspect it can't, but to me it sounds fair.

[Hulsty]

Originally Posted by GQ_Smooth

Of the top of my head
Positives:
Less taxes going to prop up overseas run business where the majority of any profits made go off shore.
There will be less need to for Government to purchase locally made vehicles, will likely mean the vehicles purchased would be on average cheaper.
Ford/Holden/Toyota will have more funds to spend on sponsorship both on a national level (AFL/NRL/V8SC/Australian Olympic team etc..) and a local level (supporting scouts, local sports club etc).
We will have greater assess to global RHD cars.
Negatives:
Low skilled workers will need to find other (normally lower payed) employment, both existing workers and any new workers looking for new employment (both directly and indirectly). Some will simply stay on the dole and turn to crime.
Automotive engineering jobs won't be based in Australia (this will happen once manufacturing is gone), we will lose that skill set. Australian's will still be auto engineers but will have to re-locate overseas from day one, not after they have proven themselves as is currently happening, same with designers.
We will slowly lose the skill set to manufacture, as less people will be taking Uni courses as there are less/no jobs in the industry left. We will be solely reliant on imports and can be dictated to by multinational companies and other governments taking sanctions against us if anything untoward happens in the future (while we make cars here, we some some level of control over this).

There are good an bad points, personally I'd rather have the industry, protect it with tariffs imposed on products imported from those countries that have poor working conditions (ie little tariffs from products imported from US/UK/Germany/Japan and higher tariffs on Korea/Thailand/Malaysia/China). I have no idea how this could be negotiated, I suspect it can't, but to me it sounds fair.

You forgot the loss in revenue to the government coffers from all the people employed and supported by the manufacturing industry, both directly and indirectly. So overall the budget will have less money in it to spend on other things, ie Health care, education etc etc.

A lot of people think the government just "give the companies million for nothing back" which is narrow minded and incorrect. The government is getting a lot of money back from the money it invests into industry (not just automotive) ie company tax dollars, income tax on employees, GST on what those employees spend their money on etc.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

BTW Paul Howes is on record saying that for every $3 the industry put in, the Govt must put in $1 to have a viable industry.

Actually for every dollar the government put in the car companies must spend $3.

So for $1 billion investment they put in $3 billion. Pretty good return when you think about it.

It creates jobs which keeps unemployment down which in turn brings in foreign investment. Unemployment is no good for the country full stop..even if its cheaper to give workers investment money to stay home. It doesn't provide anything for the economy except resentment and turmoil.

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

The problem with choosing the Ranger and the T6 is that Broady is configured for building unibody cars, and that the Ranger is made elsewhere globally. That puts FoA at an instant disadvantage because 1) it would require a big dollar spend on plant upgrades and 2) it would be competing with low-cost plants elsewhere making the same vehicle for less. Hence my view that Fusion and Edge would be better because they aren't made anywhere else but the US at the moment and would put FoA front and centre as the regional production and export hub for those two vehicles. Both of which appear to be in-demand and quite profitable. Plus no large R&D spend up front for FoA because they're global models.

Well paint shop and post delivery area as well as the section after the engine and transmission is put in (Flatop) wouldn't need to much rejigging. I guess the clam shells would need redesigning to accommodate as well as engine dress up area. Not sure about body....but seeing as they are programmable robots it might not be as much.

But most of this would still need investment for a new car regardless. Its not as easy as dropping it in cause of the chassis.