Ford Bronco Explorer True Un-cut Survivor on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford family keeps special voting rights

Ford Motor Company has a dual-class stock structure of Class A and Class B shares. The roughly three billion Class A shares are for the general public like you and me, while the roughly 71 million Class B shares are all owned by the Ford family. Each Class A share gets the shareholder one vote, each Class B share is worth 16 votes, the result being that Common Stock holders control about 60 percent of the company while the Ford family controls 40 percent even though it holds far fewer shares. The only way that could ever change would be if the Fords sell their Class B shares, but even so, Class B shares revert to Class A when sold outside the family, so they'd have to sell a whole bunch of them.
A contingent of Class A shareholders think the dual-class system is unfair, and for the past few years a vote's been held during the annual shareholders meeting to end it. It has failed every time, as it just did again during the meeting held this week. A smidge over 33 percent voted to end the dual system, outvoted by the 67 percent who are happy with the way Ford is going - unsurprising in view of a corporate turnaround that will be part of business-class curricula for years to come.
On the sidelines, Ford elected Ellen R. Marram to the post of independent director, the first woman to hold the job. The former Tropicana CEO and 20-year Ford board member replaces retiring board member Irvine Hockaday who helped bring Alan Mulally to the CEO position.

2016: The year of the autonomous-car promise

About half of the news we covered this year related in some way to The Great Autonomous Future, or at least it seemed that way. If you listen to automakers, by 2020 everyone will be driving (riding?) around in self-driving cars. But what will they look like, how will we make the transition from driven to driverless, and how will laws and infrastructure adapt? We got very few answers to those questions, and instead were handed big promises, vague timelines, and a dose of misdirection by automakers. There has been a lot of talk, but we still don't know that much about these proposed vehicles, which are at least three years off. That's half a development cycle in this industry. We generally only start to get an idea of what a company will build about two years before it goes on sale. So instead of concrete information about autonomous cars, 2016 has brought us a lot of promises, many in the form of concept cars. They have popped up from just about every automaker accompanied by the CEO's pledge to deliver a Level 4 autonomous, all-electric model (usually a crossover) in a few years. It's very easy to say that a static design study sitting on a stage will be able to drive itself while projecting a movie on the windshield, but it's another thing entirely to make good on that promise. With a few exceptions, 2016 has been stuck in the promising stage. It's a strange thing, really; automakers are famous for responding with "we don't discuss future product" whenever we ask about models or variants known to be in the pipeline, yet when it comes to self-driving electric wondermobiles, companies have been falling all over themselves to let us know that theirs is coming soon, it'll be oh so great, and, hey, that makes them a mobility company now, not just an automaker. A lot of this is posturing and marketing, showing the public, shareholders, and the rest of the industry that "we're making one, too, we swear!" It has set off a domino effect – once a few companies make the guarantee, the rest feel forced to throw out a grandiose yet vague plan for an unknown future. And indeed there are usually scant details to go along with such announcements – an imprecise mileage estimate here, or a far-off, percentage-based goal there. Instead of useful discussion of future product, we get demonstrations of test mules, announcements of big R&D budgets and new test centers they'll fund, those futuristic concept cars, and, yeah, more promises.

GM, Ford, Honda winners in 'Car Wars' study as industry growth continues

General Motors' plans to aggressively refresh its product lineup will pay off in the next four years with strong market share and sales, according to an influential report released Tuesday. Ford, Honda, and FCA are all poised to show similar gains as the auto industry is expected to remain healthy through the rest of the decade. The Bank of America Merrill Lynch study, called Car Wars, analyzes automakers' future product plans for the next four model years. By 2020, 88 percent of GM's sales will come from newly launched products, which puts it slightly ahead of Ford's 86-percent estimate. Honda (85 percent) and FCA (84 percent) follow. The industry average is 81 percent. Toyota checks in just below the industry average at 79 percent, with Nissan trailing at 76 percent. Car Wars' premise is: automakers that continually launch new products are in a better position to grow sales and market share, while companies that roll out lightly updated models are vulnerable to shifting consumer tastes. Though Detroit and Honda grade out well in the study, many major automakers are clumped together, which means large market-share swings are less likely in the coming years. Bank of America Merrill Lynch predicts the industry will top out with 20 million sales in 2018 and then taper off, perhaps as much as 30 percent by 2026. Not surprisingly, trucks, sport utility vehicles and crossovers will be the key battlefield in the next few years, Car Wars says. FCA will launch a critical salvo in 2018 with a new Ram 1500, followed by new generations of the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra in 2019, and then Ford's F-150 for 2020, according to the study. Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst John Murphy said the GM trucks could be pulled ahead even earlier to 2018, prompting Ford to respond. "This focus on crossovers and trucks is a great thing for the industry," Murphy said. Cars Wars looks at Korean (76 percent replacement rate) and European companies more vaguely (70 percent), but argues their slower product cadence and lineups with fewer trucks puts them in weaker positions than their competitors through 2020. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Featured Gallery 2016 Chevrolet Silverado View 11 Photos Image Credit: Chevrolet Earnings/Financials Chrysler Fiat Ford GM Honda Nissan Toyota study FCA