<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Why Ford should keep Volvo]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/dai/" rel="tag">Daimler (DAI)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/f/" rel="tag">Ford Motor (F)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gm/" rel="tag">General Motors (GM)</a></p><img alt="" hspace="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/07/volvo_logo.jpg" align="right" border="0" /><a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ford-motor-company/f/nys">Ford Motor Company</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ford-motor-company/f/nys">F</a>) is currently taking bids on parts of its Premier Automotive Group, which includes Jaguar, Land Rover and Volvo. (Another Premier brand, Aston Martin, was sold to investors in March for roughly $900 million.) There has been <a href="http://www.forbes.com/markets/2007/07/24/ford-tata-mahindra-markets-equity-cx_0724markets33.html?partner=aoltix">speculation</a> that the Indian automaker <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/tata-motors-limited/ttm/nys">Tata Motors</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/tata-motors-limited/ttm/nys">TTM</a>) may be interested in the two British luxury brands, but so far Ford has <a href="http://f.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/16/ford-to-sell-volvo/">denied</a> that it is selling Volvo. Ford's denials have been fairly weak, however, and it stands to reason that given Ford's rather desperate need for cash, it would sell the Swedish car maker -- the only profitable part of the Premier Automotive Group -- if the price were right.<br /><br />It's pretty clear that Ford is in trouble, having mortgaged its plants and property -- and even its hallowed name -- to raise cash to support current operations. As Kevin Shult <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/18/ford-a-symbol-of-america-s-failing-auto-industry/">wrote</a> last week, Ford is a symbol of the hard times facing American automakers, which are stuck offering large, heavy, inefficient vehicles to consumers who <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118495061500773150.html">now want something better</a>. There's plenty of blame to go around for the problems in Detroit. While many analysts focus on labor costs, especially retiree health care, I would argue that poor management, weak investment, and mediocre design and engineering are at least as important. And that's where Volvo can play an important role in helping Ford recover.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Why Ford should keep Volvo</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/">Why Ford should keep Volvo</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:45:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/948797/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/07/26/why-ford-should-keep-volvo/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Aston Martin</category><category>AstonMartin</category><category>DCX</category><category>F</category><category>featured</category><category>Ford Motor Company</category><category>FordMotorCompany</category><category>GM</category><category>Jaguar</category><category>Land Rover</category><category>LandRover</category><category>Premier Automotive Group</category><category>PremierAutomotiveGroup</category><category>Tata Motors</category><category>TataMotors</category><category>TTM</category><category>Volvo</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Rainey]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:45:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
