Why Ford is doubling down on electric vehicles
Widen the lens, however, and Ford's big bet is the only natural choice in the face of existential threats to its business.
The big picture: More and more mainstream car buyers can't afford to buy a new Ford, which sells for an average of $56,000.
It's not just Ford, of course. The entire industry is facing an affordability crisis.
At the same time, Chinese carmakers have figured out how to make inexpensive, high-quality, digitally advanced EVs, and they're quickly taking over the world.
It's only a matter of time before those Chinese cars arrive in the U.S.
Failure to invest in the face of that global challenge is akin to waving the white flag.
Yes, but: Building affordable EVs profitably is a lot harder without consumer tax credits and other EV-friendly policies killed by the Trump administration.
Trump's tariff policy has also placed a huge cost burden on American automakers — nearly $10 billion this year alone for General Motors, Ford and Stellantis.
At least his environmental policy has given them more time to push high-margin, U.S.-built trucks and SUVs.
Threat level: U.S. automakers are at a crossroads, with new technology and new competition from all directions, says Ford CEO Jim Farley.
"We saw this coming for years. We knew that the Chinese would be the major player for us globally — companies like BYD, new startups from around the world, Big Tech has their ambition in the auto space. They're all coming for us," he told employees and visitors at Ford's Louisville, Kentucky, assembly plant Monday.
"Legacy automotive companies, we need a radical approach...But we need to do it and be sustainable and make money, and we need to do it with American workers."
Driving the news: Ford's answer is a new electric vehicle platform designed from a clean sheet by mostly outsiders to bring fresh thinking to the problem.
""We took inspiration from the Model T – the universal car that changed the world," said Doug Field, Ford's chief EV, digital and design officer, who previously worked at Tesla and Apple.
"We applied first‑principles engineering, pushing to the limits of physics to make it fun to drive and compete on affordability. Our new zonal electric architecture unlocks capabilities the industry has never seen. This isn't a stripped‑down, old‑school vehicle," Field said.
The first model, coming in 2027, will be a versatile medium-sized pickup truck, with room for five passengers, a storage "frunk" (front trunk) and an open pickup bed.
Ford envisions multiple body styles sharing the same universal EV platform at price points below $40,000, enabling economies of scale to ensure profitability.
The cars will be powered by low-cost, lithium-iron-phosphate batteries produced in Michigan.
Zoom in: The effort includes a complete rethinking of how vehicles are assembled — essentially throwing out the traditional assembly line Henry Ford invented — in order to overcome China's advantages, including low-cost labor and control of battery supply chains.
"We tore up the moving assembly line concept and designed a better one," Farley told reporters. "Henry Ford would be proud."
Instead of a traditional conveyor line, Ford designed an "assembly tree" with three branches for increased efficiency.
Large single-piece aluminum castings replace dozens of smaller parts, enabling the front and rear of the vehicle to be assembled separately on different branches.
Those modules are then united with the structural battery, which serves as the floor of the vehicle, with seats, consoles and carpeting already installed.
The process dramatically improves ergonomics for employees by reducing twisting, reaching and bending, Ford said.
Yes, but: New efficiencies mean fewer jobs. When the revamped Louisville plant reopens in 2027, it will employ 2,200 workers, 600 fewer than today.
Workers no longer needed will be offered buyouts or move to other nearby factories, Ford said.
The bottom line:"There are no guarantees with this project," Farley acknowledged. "We're doing so many new things I can't tell you with 100% certainty that this will all go just right. It is a bet. There is risk."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Court Lets Trump Block Billions of Dollars in Foreign Aid
(Bloomberg) -- The Trump administration can cut billions of dollars in foreign assistance funds approved by Congress for this year, a US appeals court ruled. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' New York Warns of $34 Billion Budget Hole, Biggest Since 2009 Crisis Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets In a 2-1 decision on Wednesday, the appellate panel reversed a Washington federal judge who found that US officials were violating the Constitution's separation of powers principles by failing to authorize the money to be paid in line with what the legislative branch directed. The ruling is a significant win for President Donald Trump's efforts to dissolve the US Agency for International Development and broadly withhold funding from programs that have fallen out of favor with his administration, regardless of how Congress exercised its authority over spending. Trump's critics have assailed what they've described as a far-reaching power grab by the executive branch. The nonprofits and business that sued could ask all of the active judges on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to reconsider the three-member panel's decision. If the panel's decision stands, it wasn't immediately clear how much it would affect other lawsuits contesting a range of Trump administration funding freezes and cuts besides foreign aid. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in the majority opinion that the challengers lacked valid legal grounds to sue over the Trump administration's decision to withhold the funds, also known as impoundment. The US Comptroller General — who leads an accountability arm of Congress — could sue under a specific law related to impoundment decisions, Henderson wrote, but the challengers couldn't bring a 'freestanding' constitutional claim or claim violations of a different law related to agency actions. Henderson, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, was joined by Judge Greg Katsas, a Trump appointee. The court didn't reach the core question of whether the administration's unilateral decision to refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress is constitutional. Judge Florence Pan, nominated by former President Joe Biden, dissented, writing that her colleagues had turned 'a blind eye to the 'serious implications' of this case for the rule of law and the very structure of our government.' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that the appeals court 'has affirmed what we already knew – President Trump has the executive authority to execute his own foreign policy, which includes ensuring that all foreign assistance aligns with the America First agenda.' A lead attorney for the grant recipients did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The two consolidated cases before the appeals court only deal with money that Congress approved for the 2024 fiscal year, which ends on Sept. 30. Grantees are poised to lose access to funds if they haven't yet been approved to be spent by federal officials — a precursor to actual payouts — or unless a court order is in place. The administration lost one of its few battles before the US Supreme Court earlier this year in the foreign aid fight. In March, a majority of justices refused to immediately stop US District Judge Amir Ali's injunction taking effect while the legal fight went forward. Since then, however, the challengers have filed complaints with Ali that the administration is failing to obligate or pay out the funds. They've rebuffed the government's position that the delay is part of a legitimate effort to 'evaluate the appropriate next steps' and accused officials of angling to use a novel tactic to go around Congress in order to cut appropriated money. The Trump administration has dramatically scaled back the US government's humanitarian work overseas, slashing spending and personnel and merging the USAID into the State Department. The challengers say the foreign aid freeze has created a global crisis, and that the money is critical for malaria prevention, to address child malnutrition and provide postnatal care for newborns. The groups argued that the president and agency leaders couldn't defy Congress' spending mandates and didn't have discretion to decide that only some, let alone none, of the money appropriated by lawmakers should be paid. The president can ask Congress to withdraw appropriations but can't do it on his own, the challengers argued. The Justice Department argued Ali's order was an 'improper judicial intrusion into matters left to the political branches' and that the judge wrongly interfered in the 'particularly sensitive area of foreign relations.' The government also said that the Impoundment Control Act, which restricts the president from overruling Congress' spending decisions, wasn't a law that the nonprofits and business could sue to enforce. The challengers countered that Ali's order blocking the funding freeze was rooted in their constitutional separation-of-powers claim, not the impoundment law. The cases are Global Health Council v. Trump, 25-5097, and AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. US Department of State, 25-5098, US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit. (Updated with White House comment.) Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash The Social Media Trend Machine Is Spitting Out Weirder and Weirder Results Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Associated Press
22 minutes ago
- Associated Press
US sanctions Mexican drug cartel associates accused of scamming elderly Americans
MEXICO CITY (AP) — The U.S. Treasury Department imposed sanctions Wednesday on more than a dozen Mexican companies and four people it says worked with a powerful drug trafficking cartel to scam elderly Americans in a multimillion-dollar timeshare fraud. The network of 13 businesses in areas near the seaside tourist destination of Puerto Vallarta were accused of working with the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, a group designated by the U.S. government as a foreign terrorist organization. In a scheme dating back to 2012, four cartel associates are accused of defrauding American citizens of their life savings through elaborate rental and resale schemes, according to a Treasury statement. In the span of six months, officials said they were able to document $23.1 million sent from mostly people in the U.S. to scammers in Mexico. The sanctions imposed by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump would prohibit Americans from doing business with the alleged cartel associates and block any of their assets in the U.S.. 'We will continue our effort to completely eradicate the cartels' ability to generate revenue, including their efforts to prey on elderly Americans through timeshare fraud,' U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement. In past years, the administration of then-President Joe Biden also sanctioned associates and accountants related to such schemes. The Wednesday announcement was made amid an ongoing effort by the Trump administration and the Mexican government to crack down on cartels and their diverse sources of income. The U.S. Treasury Department has slapped sanctions on a variety of people from a Mexican rapper who it accused of laundering cartel money to Mexican banks facilitating money transfers in sales of precursor chemicals used to produce fentanyl. The announcement also came one day after Mexico sent 26 high-ranking cartel figures to the U.S. in the latest major deal with the Trump administration as Mexico tries to avoid threatened tariffs.
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump warns of ‘severe' consequences if Russia doesn't stop Ukraine war after Putin meeting
President Trump on Wednesday warned that there would be 'severe consequences' for Russia if it did not agree to stop its war in Ukraine after his meeting with President Vladimir Putin on Friday. 'There will be consequences. I don't have to say. There will be very severe consequences,' Trump told reporters during an event at the Kennedy Center. The president previously threatened in July to impose sanctions and secondary tariffs on Russia if Putin did not agree to end the war within 50 days, a deadline he later shortened to early August. But Trump has not followed through on those punishments ahead of his planned summit with Putin, with the exception of doubling tariffs on India for its purchase of Russian oil. While Trump has at times complained about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's approach to the conflict, he has in recent weeks expressed increasing frustration with Putin as Moscow continues to fire missiles into Ukraine despite the White House's push for a ceasefire. The president has tempered expectations for what will come of his meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday, saying it is about 'setting the table' for a potential follow-up meeting involving both Putin and Zelensky. 'There's a very good chance that we're going to have a second meeting that will be more productive than the first,' Trump said. 'Because the first is I'm going to find out where we are and what we're doing.'
