The newly created Do-Over and Do-Again (or Do-Do) Award was recently bestowed on the Ford Motor Company's (NYSE: F) Taurus sedan and Taurus X wagon. Christopher Jensen, who reviews cars for The New York Times, invented the not-quite-complimentary award just for the Taurus, in recognition of Ford's effort to recover from the missteps the company made introducing the Ford 500 in 2005. According to Jensen, "The Do-Do recognizes the automaker who tries the hardest to compensate for not having taken full advantage of the opportunity when originally introducing a vehicle."
Jensen has some nice things to say about the new Taurus, which is really a revised 500. It's roomy, comfortable, handles nicely and has lots of storage space. The problem is that Ford did not offer the current version of the car right off the bat. Jensen argues that if the 2008 Taurus had been the 2005 500, it might have been a great and popular car. But Ford blew it, rushing an inferior version to market, then paying the price with lackluster sales and now this confusing new/old name. In the meantime, competitors including Toyota Motor Corporation (NYSE: TM), Honda Motor Ltd. (NYSE: HMC) and General Motors Corporation (NYSE: GM) have produced new generation sedans that are at least as good if not better.
As Michael Fowlkes noted earlier this week, Ford saw a 21% decline in U.S. sales in September. The Taurus did even worse, selling 30% fewer cars than the 500 did a year ago. This is a shame, since by all reports the new Taurus is a solid car. The engineers did a good job designing it, and the auto workers do good work building it. The problem, I suspect, lies in poor planning at the corporate level. Years of neglecting cars in favor of SUVs is still hurting the American automakers, and perhaps Ford worst of all.
Advanced Micro Devices rallies after settling Intel tiff
United Technologies fires up a deal with GE
Cramer on BloggingStocks: Not much time left for downside 
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-05-2007 @ 1:40PM
Ryan said...
They really need to bring back the Taurus SHO with a manual tranny and AWD + the 3.7 V6 or Twin-Force engine in it and put some good Ad dollars behind it...make it stand out somehow.
10-05-2007 @ 2:19PM
Michael Manicone said...
The Taurus fiasco helps explain why the shares of Ford which I purchased at$50.00+ per share are selling at$8.25 per share. I don't think I will ever get back my losses. What a group of automotive geniuses can do to successful cars is evident with Ford. Do you really need an Expedition to pick up your kids after soccer practice? The Taurus was the right size for family use, but Ford wants to sell you a bus, excuse me, a bloated SUV that luckily can get out of the gas station due to low gas mileage. Is it too late for Ford?
10-05-2007 @ 2:59PM
Byron Spain said...
Same song, thousandth verse. Ford has been doing this type of stupid thing for many years. Rushed into smog prevention in 1974 and totally ruined the Bronco. Put a crappy tranny in their 1980 series F150 and ruined an otherwise fine vehicle. Seems that it is too hard to copy Toyota and just build a fine vehicle with no defects.
10-08-2007 @ 8:36AM
jpdr1100 said...
I doubt real customers know or care about the history of the new Taurus. It was once called the Five Hundred? So what?
The buyers for this car are not the type to be influenced by what is hot or current.
That said, its sales do suck.
10-12-2007 @ 2:21PM
Tom Arcy said...
At first I was very excited that Ford was re-introducing the Tarus, but after I looked at the gas mileage I was very dissapointed. I formerly owned 3 Tarus's and loved each of them to the tune of almost 100,000 miles each. The all got great mileage. The New Tarus is a poor performer on gas. I guess it is because Ford spent 500 million on a new engine plant and is forceing people to buy big gas hogs and not investing in Hybrids or giving buyers choices between big engine's or gas saving smaller engines. My current Fusion gives me GREAT mileage, 34-37 hwy and I love it. I have driven it almost 40,000 miles in 16 months why can't they do it with the Tarus?
tom
12-14-2007 @ 12:36PM
jpdr1100 said...
Perhaps they can't do it because the Taurus is a significantly larger, heavier car than the Fusion. If you are actually getting mileage in the upper 30s from your Fusion, why would you even be looking at another car?