Try some of the nearby more rural towns for your car purchase. Even with gas prices as they are I'm sure they still sell a decent number of trucks in the more rural areas of Texas and have less demand for efficient cars.

I think Ford Motors is basically throwing in the towel at this point.

GM at least seems to be trying some bold moves, like thinking of a PHEV.. and doing some aggressive styling for some vehicles.

The marketplace will be better when Ford goes away.. at least the North American unit. Ford's revenue for the last fiscal year was 177 billion. If they go away, the other auto makers will have that amount to play with. Which will mean more economy of scale, more research, and more profitability for them.

aa2,
You can't be real, or you don't live in the USA. Wishing a major US auto maker to go away will create a major shakeup in the US economy and manufacturing jobs outlook, and the ripple effect will affect every middle to lower income class in the USA. The US government was right when it stepped in to save Chrysler from the brink of bankruptcy in the 80's. The US gov. now having so much debt and budget deficit can't hardly afford to do for Ford what it did for Chrysler.

I sincerely wish Ford Motor Company the best of success in its automotive future.

Roger..

I think the wealth of a nation is the cumulutive production of the workers in the nation. If with the same amount of hours workers can produce a better product in a Honda plant, then in a Ford plant(hence a more valuable product).. Then the wealth of the nation is going to be higher.

Chrysler we see ultimatley was taken over by foreigners anyway. With the high end work of engineering moved or moving to Germany. I think no amount of money will save Ford, and possibly GM.. As long as the modern US management ideology exists. Of short term profits, non-technical professions like bean counters and marketing guys in charge of key decisions.

Henry Ford is often credited as being a fine fellow for his statement, (roughly), "I want to pay my workers enough so that they can buy a Ford". His motive was more likely to afford his employees and ultimately most US citizens no choice but to drive a car, of any make, in effect creating a transportation monopoly.

The Plug-in Hybrid goes furthest toward a sensible urban/suburban goal of reducing traffic infestation via the only real means, driving less. A car driven less last longer, reduces accident rates, directs development whereby walking, bicycling and mass transit become viable means of travel. Thus, the Plug-in Hybrid spells upheaval, if not doom for giant, multi-national car manufacturers, financial institutions, oil industries, construction companies and countless car-related interests worldwide, tourism, media, you name it. The 'inevitability' of the global economy is in question when travel and transport are reduced in scale to serve local, regional and state economies. Can't have that, or can we? Should we scale back? There should be no doubt about it. Bill Ford got the word from upper management and given no choice but to pull the plug on Plug-in Hybrids.

Wells:

???? If I had a PHEV I'd be doing more short trips with it , not less. Thats the bounce back effect of having a device that runs on cheaper energy.

Same old excuses from Detroit. They seem to think it's still 1960 -- the only game in town, and in an economy awash in cheap gas.

Meanwhile, Toyota can't build enough Priuses, and should have a PHEV version getting close to 100 MPG by 2008. Not 2010, *2008*.

Way to go, Ford. I thought you "had a better idea." What is it?

Approximately how much do manufacturers make on each hybrid sale?