Ford Motor (NYSE: F) recently indicated that it doesn't anticipate needing federal bailout money. The automaker is in the same heap of trouble as its competitors, but has handled costs and other infrastructure items better with CEO Alan Mulally at the wheel in recent years.

But everything may come to a pass later this year, according to Barclays' analyst Brian Johnson. Johnson indicated that even Ford will need to tap the federal spigot at some point. That is, unless a miraculous revival in new auto sales happens...starting yesterday. Johnson even cut his price on Ford shares to $1 from the previous $4 mark. That's bed sentiment I think -- right?

Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) runs a pretty interesting shop. Unlike most manufacturers, almost all of its products are web-based, so it doesn't need to have roads to get its product to customers. It can release products in beta testing to ensure they don't break in the real world.

Customers are involved in the making of the products, from the point of design until final release. But could automakers design, test and release products like that, or are there more variable to consider?

Now that the big three CEOs are sealing up their second week on Capitol Hill trying to convince U.S. lawmakers that their companies collectively need tens of billions to survive, what do they plan on doing internally? As in, what changes could be made to the product lines of all three automakers to fit a changed marketplace and a consumer and business populace that has hit the reset switch on what they want out of an automobile? How about jettisoning some brands that aren't core assets? That's the ticket -- or at least a big part of it.

Just which brands are at serious risk of going away? Brands from all three domestic automakers have been bandied about this week, and with 112 models offered from 15 brands just from the three domestic automakers, the industry clearly needs some fat trimmed. The three U.S. automakers now have only a 47% market share in the U.S., down from 62% just five years ago. Just imagine the design, engineering and support a complex product portfolio like that requires in terms of investment. Is that sustainable? Apparently not, and the big three are fighting for their lives in part because of it.

Right off the bat is General Motors Corp.'s (NYSE: GM) Hummer brand. The king of masculine brands has shriveled into virtual nothingness over the past year as consumers stayed away due to higher gas prices, which have now fallen heavily back down. Still, the damage to Hummer is most likely irreversible, and it will be one of GM's first brands to go away. Ford Motor Corp.'s (NYSE: F) luxury Volvo brand is also a prime contender. Volvo sales have fallen 28% this year as customers flock to lower-priced vehicles while tightening those wallets and purse strings.

Tom Libby with J.D. Power and Associates indicated Monday that November automobile sales in the U.S. will probably fall sharply due to the sagging economy and the state of all three U.S. automakers (possible bankruptcies or other maladies). In fact, the CEOs of the big three are on Capitol Hill today to try again for a $25 billion aid package lest they fail and fall hard.

But the November sales hit won't just be affecting the three U.S.-based automakers. The Japanese automakers are also set to see a sales shortfall due to tighter credit standards and lower consumer confidence in the economy. Libby indicated that sales at all the major automakers would fall at least 10% in November. During December and the end of the model year, expect to see the best bargains yet if you're planning an auto purchase.

Bloomberg News' survey of 26 analysts and economists also indicated that a seasonally adjusted sales rate of just 11 million automobiles were sold in November, down a full 32% from the same month in November when gas prices were much higher but the perception of the U.S. economy was not in the toilet yet. Have you bought a car -- any car -- recently? What kind of deal or incentive did the exasperated dealer give you to move anything out of inventory? Let me know in comments below.

When the CEOs of General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F) and Chrysler again take the steps up to the U.S Congress tomorrow, they will again try to convince U.S. lawmakers that a $25 billion injection into all three companies will somehow stave off their collective death along with over a million U.S. jobs that would be lost if the three automakers cease to exist.

GM's Rick Wagoner, Ford's Alan Mulally and Chrysler's Bob Nardelli -- all of whom flew to the last meeting with Congress on expensive private jets -- will be back in action tomorrow to try for the second time to siphon $25 billion from the federal government. Oops, I mean, the U.S. taxpayer. A few weeks ago, the trio were labeled as unprepared and failed to convince the majority of Congress that $25 billion would allow all three companies to somehow retool their complete efforts pretty fast.

If Wagoner, Mulally and Nardelli can't make their vision compelling with facts, future plans, some kind of competitive strategy and a five-year layout on changes they will make, along with being held accountable to each of them, then the end of the American auto manufacturing triumvirate as we all know it may be the end.

Of course, like many pundits, I sincerely believe that this is all for show and that a structured bankruptcy is the "way out" for at least Ford and GM at this point.

Speaking of leaders, Ford's Mulally -- who has shown some excellent chops at trying to rescue Ford in his two plus years there -- may be the only CEO that needs to stay. Wagoner needs to go (actually, years ago), and why on earth Chrysler nabbed Home Depot shenanigan master Nardelli is beyond comprehension.

Ford Motor Corporation (NYSE: F) will see its Volvo Car division shed 3,300 jobs as the American automaker continues dealing with a huge slowdown in sales in the U.S. as well as other global markets. The auto industry is not in a death spiral at the moment (although it's been described that way), but expect the largest restructuring of one of the largest industries ever in the last 50 years. Ford will help lead the way, unfortunately.

Volvo announced that 2,700 of the positions will be eliminated in its home country of Sweden while 700 additional positions will be cut globally. The company said in a statement this week that "to meet the rapidly deteriorating market situation in the global car industry, the management team at Volvo Car Corporation has decided to initiate further structural changes in all parts of the business." That is light language for "the sky is falling."

The Swedish company will also get rid of contracts with 700 consultants. As it makes these cuts, they can't be the last, I'd expect more announcements in 2009 from Volvo as well. Consumers continue flocking to vehicles with smaller prices, smaller engines and larger MPG figures. Volvo, which makes great cars, just doesn't have the product mix to fit that description. That is the price for inflexibility not only in the U.S. market, but for all global consumer markets that are under extreme duress at the moment. Everyone hopes it gets better soon, but your guess is as good as mine.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), which is reconfiguring plants from producing unpopular trucks and SUVs to fuel-efficient passenger cars, will now be trimming its nationwide automobile dealerships as sales continue to lose steam. High fuel prices and shifting consumer sentiment towards smaller cars are only some of the reasons for the sales decline.

Ford executives believe that more Ford dealerships (along with Ford brands Mercury and Lincoln) will have to consolidate to survive. Ford is right -- there is no way a huge, overwhelming national network of dealers can exist when sales don't. Expect dealers to start amalgamating as Ford's Way Forward plan continues taking longer than expected.

2007 stats tell the tale: Four thousand Ford, Lincoln and Mercury dealers sold an average of 590 vehicles in 2007. Toyota Motor Co.'s (NYSE: TM) 1,400 dealers in the U.S. sold 1,766 vehicles in 2007. Quite the contrast. Ford has managed to make about 400 weaker dealers combine with stronger ones since initiating a program to do just that in 2005. Looks like incentives to speed up profitable dealer concentrations will have to become much sweeter as sales continue to flop as badly as a corner lemonade stand in winter.

Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) will refit an existing truck plant in Michigan to manufacture smaller cars. Cost: $75 million. This comes on the heels of one of the worst years ever for large American automakers, which still can't cope with rapidly changing consumer desires for fuel-efficient transportation instead of gas guzzling SUVs and large trucks.

As Georges indicated recently, Ford will need massive plant retooling to get its bottom line back in shape as it produces the product mix consumers are looking for. This is a good step for Ford, even though it will be costly. The $75 million price is minor considering the cost of doing nothing.

Ford says the production of newer, fuel-efficient cars at the Michigan plant will begin in a few months, with completion sometime in 2010. It's also moving 1,000 of the employees from that plant to another one in Wayne, Michigan to increase production of the 4-cylinder Ford Focus sedan. Since Ford spent $300 million just three years ago to build the plant to be flexible, this should speed the conversion, according to the automaker.

It's just too bad that Ford can't unveil more small car production in November instead of just starting to convert a plant for a few years down the road.

More bad news for Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F). After announcing a mammoth $8.6 billion loss just three weeks ago, the company is laying off 300 workers in the Detroit area. The workers at the Romeo Engine Plant are being let go due to a steep drop in demand for vehicles which use a V8 engine that goes into a majority of Ford's trucks and SUVs. As gas prices have climbed, large truck and SUV sales have plummeted.

The layoffs start Monday, according to a Ford spokesperson. The 300 being let go are a good chunk of the 1,075 people employed at the Romeo plant. Perhaps Michael Moore should show up and film another movie.

After Ford saw an 18% drop in truck and SUV sales during the first seven months of 2008, its Way Forward plan needs to be pushed into high gear. Ford needs to make the product mix as flexible as possible to meet the changing demand arising from changing tastes and gas prices fluctuations.

This situation reminds me of Clayton Christensen's Innovator's Dilemma a bit. Instead of innovating in the supply chain and manufacturing flexibility arenas, automakers that aren't adept at near-instantaneous changes in consumer buying habits are finding out just how painful the status quo can really be.

In this series, we take a look at the 25 stocks on the S&P 500 Index (SPX) that have turned in the worst performance during the past decade -- what went wrong, and what happens next.

Though it's possible that sentimentality may have influenced the vote, an expert panel assembled by the Global Automotive Elections Foundation named Ford Motor Company's (NYSE: F) Model T as "Car of the Century" in 1999.

Viewed from a glass-half-full perspective, this was an honor. From a less rosy viewpoint, the award also spoke to the relative lack of success enjoyed by Ford's automobile offerings in the hundred years that have passed since the Model T's introduction.

What went wrong? At No. 8 on our list of SPX underperformers, F lost 85% of its value during the 10-year period that concluded on June 30, 2008. In April 1999, Ford seemed ready to retake its 1994 peak at $40. However, the shares climbed only as high as $38.72 before embarking on a long-term descent.

Although Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) has fallen on hard times -- like much of the auto industry -- the company will eventually come back around. Its success, like that of competitor General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM), will be on its ability to be flexible enough to build the vehicles customers want as needs change.

That's a large order, though. Ford CEO Alan Mulally recently stated that his Way Forward plan was behind schedule, and the automaker wasn't expected to post an annual profit until 2010. Ford knows it needs to be more globally flexible or it won't even make that extended target. Profit centers like SUVs are so 1999.

On top of all that, a Volkswagen (OTC: VLKAY) executive recently said that the German automaker intends to surpass Ford to become the third-largest seller of vehicles in the world. That's quite a bold prediction and it puts Ford under even more pressure to get automobiles delivered to customers with increasing manufacturing and selling flexibility. As of last year, Volkswagen sold 6.19 million vehicles to Ford's 8.55 million. Is one year enough of a background to declare VW a future winner over Ford? Possibly.

Then again, Japanese automakers Honda Motor Corp. (NYSE: HMC) and Nissan Motor Co. (NASDAQ: NSANY) are not going anywhere and will continue to put up a great fight. Toyota Motor Co. (NYSE: TM) is currently the king of the Japanese automakers, right behind GM globally. If Volkswagen really believes it can charge into the third spot, it better have the global vehicle finesse to know what its regions' customers want before they want it -- and then, make those sales.

Giving some thought to what in the world Mr. Gramm was thinking about (or not), it seems to me that his angst last week about Americans being a bunch of whiners was quite self referential. He obviously has lost his sense of balance and is spending too much time with the country club crowd to realize that some folks are feeling true pain.

Unless he is getting free gas or his limousine driver is not speaking with him then how could he have missed the fact that everyone in our country has seen a rapid and significant rise in prices. Ask anyone driving a truck for a living, just as a sampling. I would not consider their plight frivolous.

For some reason he has also missed the fact that all three of our major automobile manufacturers Ford Motor (NYSE: F), General Motors (NYSE: GM), and Chrysler (now privately held) are teetering on bankruptcy.

I have been fortunate enough to have traveled to the four corners of the United States, Alaska and Hawaii and I would actually say we tend to be overly optimistic at times in the US. By comparison many of the 25 countries I have had the chance to visit can be some what negative. I would place us somewhere in the middle.

2008 will be the year that both General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) and Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F) went down in recent history as the complete sandbags those companies have really become. Both are losing money hand over fist (save for Ford's most recent profit surprise), and are struggling with trying to provide vehicles customers actually want to buy -- as distinct from vehicles they were projecting to produce.

GM CEO Rick Wagoner said recently that a GM bankruptcy won't be coming, although the automaker then announced it would be laying off even more workers as it digs and scratches its way to some type of profitability. A question then came up in the market again: would a foreign auto company be willing to take a stake in either American icon? How about those up-and-coming Chinese automakers who are cranking out fuel-efficient cars by the boatload and could be seen as very eager to enter the U.S. market?

Not so fast -- according to The New York Times, Chinese automakers are not interested. Not interested in equity stakes or even buying asset pieces from either American automaker. GM's recent sale notice for its struggling Hummer division and Ford's recent sale of Volvo didn't even register on the radars of Chinese auto companies, according to the report.

It's hard to see any company buying Hummer (except a military contractor) with global fuel prices where they are, but Volvo would be a neat catch for a company wanting to expand beyond a single global region. Ford doesn't have a buyer yet, but a deal could be announced any day now. Still, Chinese automakers may be smarter than to partner with or buy into two currently dead weights in the vehicle business. There are plenty of other global auto partners besides GM and Ford.

The weak market conditions have caused many stock prices to fall under $10. Not only smaller -- and perhaps lesser known -- stocks trade under $10 these days, but also some big and famous names such as Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F), Motorola Inc. (NYSE: MOT), Sprint Nextel Corp. (NYSE: S), Washington Mutual Inc. (NYSE: WM) and Del Monte Foods (NYSE: DLM), as well as many airline companies like Northwest Airlines (NYSE: NWA) and JetBlue (NASDAQ: JBLU).

While those names could sound tempting for investors who may think they are cheap, BusinessWeek's Karyn McCormack reminds us that not everything that is cheap is a good bargain, and there are some risks that need to be taken into account.

One common problem for most of these stocks is that they trade under $10 for a reason. That reason is usually hardly any earnings growth, if any at all. And with a weak economy, these companies would have an even harder time to stimulate growth. Add to the mix the fact that institutional investors don't like to touch stocks under $10 and the potential for recovery is not good.

According to BusinessWeek, a senior General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) recently tossed an idea to the troubled automaker: Consider a merger with rival Ford Motor Co. (NYSE: F).

The idea, which the magazine says was shot down at a GM meeting, underscores the problems facing the two American auto icons as consumers pinched by high gas prices dump their SUVs and pick-up trucks in favor of smaller cars. The swiftness of that transition caught just about every auto manufacturer off guard, although Toyota Motor Corp. (NYSE: TM) was better prepared with its lineup of smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles.

A possible deal would be a large distraction into both companies while doubling the amount of problems a combined auto colossus would face. A long-term combination may have indeed proved quite fruitful, but are both companies seriously ready to have their empires combined? Maybe in 2013, okay?

Financially, if the deal makes sense for the long term, look for this rumor to surface again in the near future. Combining the incredibly high overhead and capability to weather fickle customer preferences in vehicles would never be a bad thing. right now, the timing is bad -- but it could be better in reach of five years. Is the U.S. ready for a single, publicly-held American auto manufacturer? I'm not sure, and there would be mountains of convincing to do if a merger ever comes up again. My bet is it will.