Mazda is not a Ford, Ford does not own Mazda
It seems a few people on this board are under the impression that Ford owns Mazda. Before you go passing along bad information, get your facts straight.
Fact: Ford owns 31% of the stock in Mazda. Ford "borrows" ideas from Mazda. Mazda is owned by Mazda. Ford helped Mazda through a period of financial crisis. My RX8 is not a Ford. Fords are still a POS. Thanks |
you have a lot to learn my young padawan...
|
Originally Posted by architect
(Post 2017185)
Mazda is owned by Mazda.
Mazda is a publicly traded company, and is owned by stockholders. 33% of which are Ford Motor Company |
Oh this is good..
|
I have to agree on one point...Ford's are a POS...that fact has obviously been checked...may be the only one though. As for you ProCharger...I don't want to hear a damn thing from you until your little Rustang gets a block. :P
|
Originally Posted by DeViLbOi
(Post 2017214)
I have to agree on one point...Ford's are a POS...that fact has obviously been checked...may be the only one though. As for you ProCharger...I don't want to hear a damn thing from you until your little Rustang gets a block. :P
And don't make me turn around from my desk and smack you. |
Originally Posted by architect
(Post 2017185)
Ford owns 31% of the stock in Mazda.
Originally Posted by architect
Ford "borrows" ideas from Mazda.
Originally Posted by architect
Mazda is owned by Mazda.
Originally Posted by architect
Ford helped Mazda through a period of financial crisis.
Originally Posted by architect
My RX8 is not a Ford.
Originally Posted by architect
Fords are still a POS.
Originally Posted by ProCharger GT
(Post 2017218)
Try making that rollerskate you call an RX-8 do a burnout w/o dropping it from 9000 RPM's :)
|
Originally Posted by Gambit
(Post 2017194)
Fact:
Mazda is a publicly traded company, and is owned by stockholders. 33% of which are Ford Motor Company |
LOL @ reverse :) Whats the top speed in reverse?
DeViLbOi sits next to me at work, he's just being his normal tool self :) |
Originally Posted by expo1
(Post 2017232)
33.4 % which gives Ford Controlling Interest. So while Ford doesn't "OWN" Mazda, Mazda does what ever Ford wants.
Then Mazda said OK - we'll put in a back seat.. |
Originally Posted by SureShot
(Post 2017240)
Except when Ford said kill the rotary and Mazda said NO F**K'N WAY!
Then Mazda said OK - we'll put in a back seat.. Mazda stopped selling rotary-powered vehicles here a decade before they stopped selling them in Japan. There was never a time over the last 40 years where Mazda wasn't assembling rotary motors. Ultimately, it was Ford executives that ensured that the '8 got built - almost right from the start of development. |
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
(Post 2017245)
Ford never said "kill the rotary" and Mazda never took a stand on it one way or another (from a corporate POV).
Mazda stopped selling rotary-powered vehicles here a decade before they stopped selling them in Japan. There was never a time over the last 40 years where Mazda wasn't assembling rotary motors. Ultimately, it was Ford executives that ensured that the '8 got built - almost right from the start of development. It was more like Ford: "Hey Mazda, we think you can make more money with pistons." Mazda: "Take this car for a drive and you will understand our passion." |
Originally Posted by expo1
(Post 2017232)
33.4 % which gives Ford Controlling Interest. So while Ford doesn't "OWN" Mazda, Mazda does what ever Ford wants.
maybe something about the other 66.6% being split evenly so the 33.4% overrules them....i dunno |
Yep, all about % owned. Ford has the most of any one individual entity.
|
It's the difference between a majority & a plurality.
Many of the others tend to go along with the richest guy says. |
Originally Posted by Gambit
(Post 2017269)
I still dont' understand the logic that says 33.4% is a controlling interest. I thought you had to have over 50% do do whatever you want
maybe something about the other 66.6% being split evenly so the 33.4% overrules them....i dunno
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
I can do one in reverse with only 4000 RPM. Get a grip.
|
Originally Posted by chickenwafer
(Post 2017278)
No, you're right. You have to 51% to rule, and Ford only has 33.X% of the shares. But they are the single largest shareholder, but even then, if Ford votes one way and everyone else votes another, then Ford doesn't get there way. It's just more likely they do since they are the largest shareholder.
|
Considering how diversified the remaining shares are...it would be a small miracle for Ford to lose a vote.
This all assumes there are not some wacky corporate by-laws etc... BTDT, lawyers can do all kinds of crazy stuff. |
Originally Posted by Gambit
(Post 2017269)
I still dont' understand the logic that says 33.4% is a controlling interest. I thought you had to have over 50% do do whatever you want
maybe something about the other 66.6% being split evenly so the 33.4% overrules them....i dunno I didn't understand it either until it was explained to me Japanese laws on all this are different from our own. What's weird is that a big comany like Ford could become weaker than Mazda in terms of finances but Ford would still control Mazda. There are real examples of this in Japan with other companies. It would be like a local produce guy reduced to selling watermelons out the back of his truck on the highway controlling Chiquita brands International. |
From wikipedia:
In addition, a company that requires a 2/3 super-majority of shares to vote in favor of a motion, can grant, in effect, veto power to a minority shareholder or block of shareholders that own essentially 1/3 of the shares. Thus in some cases, a single entity can essentially maintain control, with only 33.4% of the outstanding shares. Ford Motor Company's ownership of 33.4% of Mazda is an example of a controlling interest with minority shareholding. |
We all know how accurate wikipedia is...12.3L Renesis anyone?
|
Originally Posted by laythor
(Post 2017298)
From wikipedia:
PS this has nothing to do with japanese laws... these are pretty universal provided the company has a 2/3rd rule. |
Originally Posted by alnielsen
(Post 2017316)
That only means that they can block something from changing in the company. Ford can round up enough like minded share holders and acquire their proxy votes to get their people on the Mazda B.O.D. Then they can steer the company.
Objection; Sustained. Continue with known facts. |
Originally Posted by DeViLbOi
(Post 2017214)
I have to agree on one point...Ford's are a POS...that fact has obviously been checked...may be the only one though. As for you ProCharger...I don't want to hear a damn thing from you until your little Rustang gets a block. :P
It all depends on what you are looking for in a car.... |
oh... and to the OP, there are no secrets in the automotive industry anymore...
You will be surpriced at how automotive companies share resourses and components.... Have you ever wondered how the Ford Ranger looks like the Mazda B-Series trucks? Or how the new Escape is almost identical to the Tribute? Both interior and exterior... |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands