2005 Ford F-350 Super Duty King Ranch Crew Cab Pickup 4-door 6.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford bondage ads reportedly trigger firings at Indian ad agency

You will probably remember the ads for the Ford Figo hatchback in India, the ones that showcased the extra large boot of the little hatchback by joking that you can fit three of your enemies in the trunk. One of the ads had Michael Schumacher in the front seat, obviously pleased about having Sebastian Vettel, Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso tied up in the back. But the other two had Paris Hilton and ex-Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi up front and three bound and gagged women in the back - in Hilton's case (shown above), it was the Kardashians.
This did not go over well, and Reuters reports that certain employees at JWT India have been fired over the matter. It is also reported that the images weren't actual advertisements, nor were they part of an actual campaign; JWT said they "were never intended for paid publication, were never requested by our Ford client." A JWT rep said the employees who created the ads did so on their own, Ford commented to Automotive News that the ads were "part of a creative exercise intended to test concepts for an advertising competition."
The problem, if the story is to be believed, is that the employees skipped the regular review protocols and uploaded their work to an ad industry site - they were found on Ads of the World. That page, like the employees, has been removed.

Ford idling Michigan Assembly Plant to trim Focus, C-Max supply

Ford will be putting the brakes on production at its Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, MI, idling production during the weeks of October 28 and December 16. Ford is citing the first drop in US sales in 27 months, a 4.2-percent dip in September, as the impetus for trimming their supplies, according to Automotive News.
Ford's deft management of its supplies has been part of its success over the years, and seeing supplies of Focus and C-Max, the two vehicles built at MAP, rise from 58 and 108 days, respectively, to 71 and 122 days over the span of a month was apparently all that was need to justify the trimming. As AN points out, the rule of thumb for many automakers is to maintain a 60-day supply of vehicles.
"Ford has been focused on keeping their pricing in check. Their operating margin is in double digits. Nobody else is there and they're obviously very proud of that," Alan Baum, an auto analyst with Baum & Associates told AN. Keeping the supply chain operating smoothly and not increasing supplies too much is crucial to that healthy profit margin. After all, a large supply lowers prices ,which, in turn, cuts profit. So while this news might not be great for employees at MAP, who now have an extra two weeks of vacation time, it's far from a sign of problems in Dearborn. Quite the opposite, actually.

180,000 new vehicles are sitting, derailed by lack of transport trains

If you're planning on buying a new car in the next month or so, you might want to pick from what's on the lot, because there could be a long wait for new vehicles from the factory. Locomotives continue to be in short supply in North America, and that's causing major delays for automakers trying to move assembled cars.
According to The Detroit News, there are about 180,000 new vehicles waiting to be transported by rail in North America at the moment. In a normal year, it would be about 69,000. The complications have been industry-wide. Toyota, General Motors, Honda and Ford all reported experiencing some delays, and Chrysler recently had hundreds of minivans sitting on the Detroit waterfront waiting to be shipped out.
The problem is twofold for automakers. First, the fracking boom in the Bakken oil field in the Plains and Canada is monopolizing many locomotives. Second, the long, harsh winter is still causing major delays in freight train travel. The bad weather forced trains to slow down and carry less weight, which caused a backup of goods to transport. The auto companies resorted to moving some vehicles by truck, which was a less efficient but necessary option.