22 report 2013 14supply

This preview shows page 10 - 13 out of 40 pages.

22 23 9
Image of page 10
Figure 3, Statista Database that specializes in brake components. 24 This supplier, located in Mexico, works with Ford as well as many of their competitors including General Motors and Toyota. Rassini SAB C.V. has six suppliers of their own exemplifying the complexity of one small part of Ford’s supply chain. Ford uses a third-party to audit current and future suppliers to ensure that they are complying with Ford standards. Since 2003, Ford has conducted over 900 audits of Tier 1 suppliers on issues relating to human rights and working conditions. Ford’s main focus is building strong relationships with their suppliers while supporting human rights and working conditions at their supplier sites. These relationships help to achieve lower costs and improve quality. Additionally, Ford is committed to diversity among their suppliers making an effort to support minority and women-owned businesses. Even throughout their supply chain, Ford stays true to their company values. Competitive Analysis We have identified Ford’s main competitors as General Motors and Toyota. Similar to Ford, General Motors is an American company based in Detroit, Michigan. Toyota is a foreign company based in Japan. Toyota currently dominates the Japanese market with about a 47% share. 25 Ford’s global automotive market share is only about 7.6% as of 2014, while General Motors holds 8.2% of the market and Toyota holds about 11.6% (See Figure 3). In terms of liquidity, Ford is less liquid than GM and Toyota based on both the quick and current ratios of each company. In 2014, GM was the most liquid with a current ratio of 1.27 and a quick ratio of 1.07. Next, Toyota had a 1.07 current ratio and a 0.94 quick ratio. 24 Rassini SAB C.V. FactSet Supply Chain Relationships. 25 MarketLine 10
Image of page 11
Lastly, in the same year Ford had a current ratio of 1.01 and a quick ratio of 0.81. 26 A more extensive discussion of Ford’s liquidity is located in our internal financial analysis. In terms of inventory, Ford is more efficient than their competitors. In 2014, Ford turned over its inventory every 19 days while GM turned over their inventory every 31 days and Toyota turned over their inventory every 26 days. Turning over inventory more frequently is especially important in the automotive industry because vehicles lose value quickly. Lastly, in terms of profitability, Ford is making the least amount of profit. In 2014, Toyota recorded a net income of $17B, GM recorded $4B and Ford recorded $3.2B. Toyota’s success is largely based on their capture of the market in Asia. Due to this and Toyota’s increased expansion efforts, they are a real threat to Ford. GM is a threat to Ford because of the similarities in their businesses. Both companies are America born, have similar shares of the market, and produce similar models of vehicles.
Image of page 12
Image of page 13

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 40 pages?

  • Spring '14
  • Lipton
  • ........., Ford Motor Company

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes