F - Ford Motor Company

NYSE - NYSE Delayed price. Currency in USD
9.00
-0.14 (-1.53%)
At close: 4:04PM EST
Stock chart is not supported by your current browser
Previous close9.14
Open9.11
Bid9.00 x 45900
Ask9.01 x 40000
Day's range8.96 - 9.12
52-week range8.16 - 10.56
Volume67,677,681
Avg. volume38,422,433
Market cap35.684B
Beta (5Y monthly)N/A
PE ratio (TTM)22.50
EPS (TTM)N/A
Earnings date03 Feb 2020
Forward dividend & yieldN/A (N/A)
Ex-dividend dateN/A
1y target est10.09
  • Tesla Crosses $100B Ahead of Q4 Earnings: ETFs in Focus
    Zacks

    Tesla Crosses $100B Ahead of Q4 Earnings: ETFs in Focus

    Tesla has become the first publicly listed U.S. automaker to cross $100 billion in market valuation ahead of Q4 earnings.

  • Auto Stock Roundup: Ford's $2.2B Pre-Tax Charge, Fiat-Foxconn JV & More
    Zacks

    Auto Stock Roundup: Ford's $2.2B Pre-Tax Charge, Fiat-Foxconn JV & More

    While Ford's (F) Q4 results are likely to be hit by a pre-tax charge of $2.2 billion, Fiat Chrysler (FCAU) teams up with Foxconn to develop EVs in China.

  • The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Tesla, General Motors, Ford, Volkswagen and BMW AG
    Zacks

    The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Tesla, General Motors, Ford, Volkswagen and BMW AG

    The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Tesla, General Motors, Ford, Volkswagen and BMW AG

  • Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Tesla, Apple, Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler
    Zacks

    Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Tesla, Apple, Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler

    Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Tesla, Apple, Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler

  • Ford (F) to Incur $2.2B Pre-Tax Loss in Q4 Over Pension Plans
    Zacks

    Ford (F) to Incur $2.2B Pre-Tax Loss in Q4 Over Pension Plans

    Ford (F) likely to incur a pre-tax loss of about $2.2 billion in fourth-quarter 2019, which will dent its net income.

  • Ford expects $2.2 billion pre-tax hit related to pension plans in fourth quarter
    Reuters

    Ford expects $2.2 billion pre-tax hit related to pension plans in fourth quarter

    The charge is largely related to a drop in discount rates, the company said, as that leads to an increase in the amount of money to be contributed for future pension benefits. On an after-tax basis, the loss is expected to reduce Ford's net income by about $1.7 billion in the fourth quarter.

  • Carmakers Must Do Better Just to Keep Up in China
    Bloomberg

    Carmakers Must Do Better Just to Keep Up in China

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- The world’s largest car market is cratering and there are few signs of a recovery. It was never supposed to get this bad —  and even if it got close, a helping hand from Beijing would steer things out of any prolonged trouble. Or so people thought...  Instead, passenger car sales in China fell 9.5% last year, more steeply than the 4.3% in 2018, which was the first annual sales decline in over a decade. The drop has dragged down the global automobile industry and its deep supply chain. That leaves automakers in limbo. After years of relying on the Chinese market for its double-digit volume growth, they don't seem too sure about whom to build cars for, or what kind. Beijing’s lackluster stimulus last year included a grab-bag of measures: removal of car-purchase limits, support for buying electric cars and incentives to build infrastructure like rural gas stations. They haven't done much to revive demand. Consumers were waiting for more, which simply led to a steeper slide in sales. With no new sweeteners and the distortions of past stimuli fading, a real picture of demand is emerging. It’s nuanced. There are fewer first-time buyers, and more who are purchasing replacement vehicles. They’re increasingly looking to upgrade, and also buying more used cars. In a word, consumers are being more discriminating.Luxury carmakers account for around 15% of the market and are doing better than the rest. Porsche Automobil Holding SE, for instance, delivered 86,752 vehicles to customers in China last year, up 8% from 2018. In December, BMW Brilliance Automotive Ltd.’s average daily vehicles sales rose 21% on the year, up from 5% in November. Down the food chain, buyers of family-friendly cars are upgrading. Demand for sports utility vehicles and sedans remains depressed but is shifting toward higher-end, in-between cars, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Buyers of these so-called multi-purpose vehicles, or MPVs, have long bought the same few basic models, priced between 40,000 yuan ($5,800) to less than 100,000 yuan. As the market was flooded with SUVs, aspirational buyers stayed away. Now, manufacturers are improving design and comfort, and raising prices.A slew of MPV models will be released this year. Going by low discounts compared to the rest of the market, demand remains sturdy. Goldman’s analysts estimate that in every 1% of demand that moves to the higher-end MPVs lies an annual revenue opportunity of almost 50 billion yuan ($7.25 billion). Here’s the hard reality: The double-digit growth days of selling nearly 25 million cars a year are vanishing in the rearview mirror. So are outsize profits from China. Much like the U.S. market, the type of demand will evolve and how people get around will change. Younger Chinese are more inclined to use ride-hailing services. The older people get, the less likely they’ll obtain driving licenses. China’s population is aging rapidly. This is a structural slowdown.In theory, China has plenty of room to sell more cars. Penetration rates are low and so is the national percentage of licensed drivers. The carmakers are banking on semi-urban China, ostensibly the most upwardly mobile consumers. But sales are unlikely to top 20-some million a year, even with the push toward electric vehicles (only 5% of cars sold now) and regulations that will eventually force buyers to go green. For now, higher technology only raises the cost of car ownership out of reach.The market is oversupplied, no doubt. The good news is that inventories are coming down as automakers try to stay in the black. Toyota Motor Corp. has increased the types of models it sells in China and gained market share. As weaker players drop out and the industry consolidates, the likes of Honda Motor Co. and Volkswagen AG are taking a bigger piece. Failure to rigorously manage output will mean a pile of clunkers. Changan Ford Automobile Co. is sitting on some of the highest levels of inventory, as is SAIC General Motors Corp.’s Baojun. GM continues to lose market share. Ford Motor Co. said last week that its sales in China dropped 26% in 2019. European carmakers have also struggled.  Making money by churning the assembly lines won’t cut it anymore. The China Road to success is a lot narrower. Only the companies that drive it smarter will survive.  To contact the author of this story: Anjani Trivedi at atrivedi39@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Patrick McDowell at pmcdowell10@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Anjani Trivedi is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering industrial companies in Asia. She previously worked for the Wall Street Journal. For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

  • What's the Right Valuation Multiple for Tesla?
    Zacks

    What's the Right Valuation Multiple for Tesla?

    What's the Right Valuation Multiple for Tesla?

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Closing snapshot: Change of heart

    * European shares little changed * DAX flat after hitting new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Italian banks fall on fresh political uncertainty * S&P 500, Nasdaq aim for record on IBM earnings Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni.

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Autos decoupling from DAX: a trade war put option?

    * European shares little changed * DAX flat after hitting new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Italian banks fall on fresh political uncertainty * S&P 500, Nasdaq aim for record on IBM earnings Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni. Barclays anticipates better days ahead for earnings in 2020 rather than the actual Q4 numbers and overall, it says you shouldn't expect much of a boost in share prices from the results as the U-shaped recovery has been largely priced in.

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Ponzi Market?

    * European shares little changed * DAX flat after hitting new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Italian banks fall on fresh political uncertainty * S&P 500, Nasdaq aim for record on IBM earnings Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni. Reach him on Messenger to share your thoughts on market moves: danilo.masoni.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net PONZI MARKET? In a note titled, "Global Central Banks Fuelling a Ponzi Market a Ponzi Market", Guggenheim Investments CIO Scott Minerd says the only reason investors keep adding to risk is the fear that prices will be higher tomorrow.

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Trade truce: much ado about nothing

    * European shares little changed after higher open higher * DAX flat after hitting new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Italian banks fall on fresh political uncertainty * S&P 500, Nasdaq aim for record on IBM earnings Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni. Reach him on Messenger to share your thoughts on market moves: danilo.masoni.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net TRADE TRUCE: MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING (1429 GMT) How would you react if you were told that the trade truce between U.S. and China would at best boost global trade for this year by just $20 billion (that's much lesser than how much Apple grew its revenue last year)?

  • 2020 to be a Crucial Year for EVs: Models to Watch Out for
    Zacks

    2020 to be a Crucial Year for EVs: Models to Watch Out for

    The EV momentum is expected to reach a new level in 2020 with various attractive, long-range and affordable vehicles coming up this year.

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Italy risks are back but don't worry too much

    * European shares open higher; DAX hits new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Italian banks fall on fresh political uncertainty * S&P 500, Nasdaq futures also touch new record high * Asian shares up, investors welcome China virus response Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni. Risks of an early election handing power to right-wing leader Matteo Salvini look small and some investors see the drop in Italian assets as a possible buying opportunity.

  • Reuters - UK Focus

    LIVE MARKETS-Tesla vrooms past VW to become no. 2

    * European shares open higher; DAX hits new record peak * Worries over spreading Coronavirus ease * Asian shares up, investors welcome China virus response Welcome to the home for real-time coverage of European equity markets brought to you by Reuters stocks reporters and anchored today by Danilo Masoni. 2 (1038 GMT) One hundred billion dollars (purposely spelled out) -- that's what Tesla is expected to be worth when U.S. markets open later today, dethroning car behemoth Volkswagen to become the world's second-biggest automaker by market cap. "The rise in the value of Tesla tells us little about the health of the car market (modest in the U.S., weaker in Germany and China), but a lot about investor behaviour and the state of banking," says Mike O'Sullivan, author and ex-CIO at Credit Suisse IWM.

  • Bugatti, Aston Martin, and other historic cars to sell at auction that could generate $60 million
    Yahoo Finance

    Bugatti, Aston Martin, and other historic cars to sell at auction that could generate $60 million

    The collector car world is racing to London this April for the chance to buy rare and historic Buggati and Aston Martin automobiles that promise to outperform recent sputtering sales.

  • Tesla (TSLA): Does This Rally Still Have Legs?
    Zacks

    Tesla (TSLA): Does This Rally Still Have Legs?

    Does the most valuable US automaker have legs to continue its run after doubling in value in the past 3 months?

  • Rare '48 Tucker is just one of the million-dollar-plus cars up for auction this weekend
    Yahoo Finance

    Rare '48 Tucker is just one of the million-dollar-plus cars up for auction this weekend

    A rare 1948 Tucker is just one of the thousands of cars up for sale at the several Auctions underway this weekend in Scottsdale Arizona.

  • Foxconn May Be About to Prove Elon Musk Wrong
    Bloomberg

    Foxconn May Be About to Prove Elon Musk Wrong

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- Five years ago, in a routine display of trash talking, Tesla Inc.’s Elon Musk made a now infamous quip about how hard it is to manufacture automobiles.“Cars are very complex compared to phones or smartwatches,’’ he told German newspaper Handelsblatt. “You can’t just go to a supplier like Foxconn and say: Build me a car.”He may be proven wrong. Foxconn Technology Group, through its Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. unit, will establish a joint venture with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV, the Taiwanese company said in an exchange filing Thursday. While not yet signed, they expect their 50-50 enterprise will “develop and manufacture electric vehicles and engage in IOV (internet of vehicles) business,” referencing a growing ecosystem of connected cars that share location, weather, traffic and vehicle information.Hon Hai would be responsible for design, components and supply chain management, Chairman Young Liu told Debby Wu of Bloomberg News. Foxconn might not actually do final assembly, he said.If you’ve ever visited Foxconn’s global headquarters on the outskirts of Taipei, you’d know that the prospect of the company designing cars is disconcerting. It truly is one of the ugliest office buildings in the world. So let’s hope Fiat Chrysler takes the driver’s seat on that.However, components, supply chain management, and manufacturing are right up Foxconn’s alley. The company makes most of Apple Inc.’s iPhones and iPads, as well as a lot of the electronics that go into cars, including Teslas.Tesla’s then-head of vehicle engineering, Doug Field, whose resume includes Apple and Ford Motor Co., in February 2018 subtly dissed the Foxconn-Apple relationship. “The model at Foxconn was very different” from Tesla, because the Taiwanese company uses manual labor to achieve economies of scale quickly. The iPad is a product “whose simplicity is orders of magnitude below ours.” Field returned to Apple later that year.Let’s agree, cars are indeed more complicated than tablets or smartphones. But I’ll say that there’s no way Elon Musk could churn out half a million handsets per day, consistently, with quality and on time.By contrast, Foxconn, because of the reasons Field outlined, could be well placed to leverage its 40 years of experience in manufacturing, scale and manual processes to get Fiat Chrysler to mass production of electric vehicles quicker than almost anyone in the world. After all, Foxconn’s giant workforce and scale mean it’s the only company that can churn out 5 million iPhones a week at launch every year for the past decade.With scale comes not just cost advantages but supply-chain leverage, an important element when you’re hunting down parts that may be in short stock. Batteries, for example, have been a bottleneck for Tesla deliveries in the past. But when your client list includes Apple, Dell Inc., HP Inc. and a dozen other companies that need batteries by the container, suppliers are likely to put you higher on the priority list. Given that they’re the largest cost of an electric vehicle, solving both the supply problem and then using scale to force costs down could give Foxconn and Fiat Chrysler an edge.Having electric vehicles more readily available and delivered on time might even take the gloss off the cult of Tesla, which is driven in part by the difficulty of getting your hands on one. Yet Fiat Chrysler needs to ensure that Foxconn doesn’t mess it up. It’s known to be domineering in partnerships, with an obsession toward efficiency and cutting costs, rather than value-added branding. Its venture with HMD Global Oyj to revive the Nokia name looked promising until Foxconn executives started pulling rank, overruling those who truly knew how to design and market phones. Many of the talented members of the consortium left and the brand is unlikely to see the revival that many had expected.Sure, Fiat Chrysler is taking a risk by betting on Foxconn. But the U.S.-Italian car company doesn’t have much to lose, and knows that it has little time to waste. Chief Executive Officer Mike Manley is hoping to merge with France’s PSA Group, and told investors in October that electrification could happen on a grand scale after that.It’s also likely to join a self-driving car venture being set up by BMW AG and Daimler AG, Bloomberg reported this month. Such plans necessitate the kind of electric vehicle technologies it doesn’t currently have. Foxconn doesn’t, either, but between them there’s every chance the two companies can develop or acquire what’s needed.If Foxconn really wants to make it in electric vehicles, it will need to learn from Fiat Chrysler the importance of good design, marketing savvy, and brand mystique. In other words, a little bit of Elon Musk.Just not too much.To contact the author of this story: Tim Culpan at tculpan1@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Patrick McDowell at pmcdowell10@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Tim Culpan is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. He previously covered technology for Bloomberg News.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

  • How Boeing Lost Its Way
    Bloomberg

    How Boeing Lost Its Way

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- The 2019 column I most wish I could take back was about Boeing. In May, two months after the second deadly 737 Max crash, I compared Boeing’s current troubles to other times when Boeing had stumbled badly, including 2013, when the new 787 — which had come to market four years behind schedule —had a problem with its lithium ion batteries, which burst into flames several times. The Federal Aviation Administration even grounded the plane temporarily.Airplanes are fiendishly complex, and new planes almost always have kinks that need to be worked out (though, admittedly, those kinks don’t usually include fatalities). In any case, my working assumption was that the company had always overcome its problems and would do so again. “Boeing’s history strongly suggests that it will recover from this fiasco and do so quickly,” I wrote. “It will emerge stronger than ever.” Ouch.Within a matter of months, I could see that I was wrong and that Boeing was not the same company I had followed two decades earlier. In October, Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenberg testified before Congress. He was awful. He kept saying that safety was part of Boeing’s DNA, yet the evidence angry legislators confronted him with — internal emails, for the most part — suggested just the opposite: that safety was no longer high on Boeing’s list of priorities. What was ascendant was maximizing shareholder value, with catastrophic consequences.The company cut corners to get the plane on the market quickly. It used the least expensive suppliers regardless of how inexperienced they were. Its manual contained only one sentence about the system that was the root cause of the crashes. Worst of all, it persuaded the F.A.A. — and its airline customers — that pilots didn’t need flight simulator training to fly the 737 Max. The release of a devastating batch of internal Boeing emails late last week — showing engineers rushing to get a plane to market despite knowing it had serious problems — only reinforced the notion that Boeing’s culture had been compromised. A company that had long been run by engineers for engineers was now a company run by corporate bureaucrats whose primary goal was to please Wall Street. That’s the underlying story those emails tell.Which begs the question: How did this happen?In the Atlantic not long ago, business writer Jerry Useem suggests an answer. He marks May 2001 as the beginning of Boeing’s cultural decline; that month, top executives announced that they were moving the company’s headquarters to Chicago. More than 30,000 engineers would remain in Seattle, mind you. But the top 500 executives would move 2,000 miles away.“When the headquarters is located in proximity to a principal business — as ours was in Seattle — the corporate center is inevitably drawn into day-to-day business operations,” CEO Phil Condit said at the time. How he could view removing the top brass from the “day-to-day business operations” as a net positive is beyond comprehension. But he did. Useem wrote: “The present 737 Max disaster can be traced back … to the moment Boeing’s leadership decided to divorce itself from the firm’s own culture.”Condit was ousted in 2003 (in part because he had a series of affairs with female employees) and was succeeded by Harry Stonecipher. Stonecipher, who had been CEO of McDonnell Douglas when it merged with Boeing in 1997, had spent the bulk of his career at General Electric, including seven years under Jack Welch. As I’ve noted before, Welch’s stated goal was to make GE “the world’s most valuable company,” which meant focusing first and foremost on finding ways to increase the company’s share price. As his underlings took over other companies, they brought that mindset with them.Stonecipher was no exception. At Boeing, he gained a reputation as a ruthless cost-cutter and expressed pride in the way he was blowing up the company’s engineering mindset. (“When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm,” he once said.) Wall Street loved it; the stock price rose fourfold.When Stonecipher was fired in 2005 (also for having an affair with a subordinate), the board passed over the obvious internal candidate, Alan Mulally, the head of the commercial airplane division and Boeing’s last great engineering executive, and brought in another Jack Welch protege, James McNerney. So now Boeing had a CEO who knew nothing about how to manufacture an airplane. And this lack of engineering know-how was compounded when McNerney named Scott Carson to succeed Mulally, who left in 2006 to become CEO of Ford Motor Co. True, Carson was a Boeing lifer, but he was a salesman, not an engineer.In 2007, McNerney inaugurated a series of stock buyback plans, which lifted the stock price; it repurchased $6 billion worth of shares in 2014 alone. The CEO and other top executives received tens of millions of dollars’ worth of stock options and stock grants. Dividends were doubled. The stock bottomed out at $30 a share in the aftermath of the financial crisis, but by the time McNerney stepped down, it was approaching $150 a share.Meanwhile, Boeing was putting the screws to its unions, eliminating their pensions and moving some production to a nonunion facility in South Carolina. Richard Aboulafia, the well-known aviation consultant, thinks this was a critical mistake — and another example of how little McNerney understood about the business of building airplanes.“Aviation is not like other industries,” he wrote in Forbes after McNerney announced his retirement. “There are certainly cost pressures, but this is a capital-intensive business with very high barriers to entry. Labor costs just don’t matter as much compared to other industries.”Aboulafia concluded: “An experienced and motivated workforce, therefore, is the most important asset a company has. McNerney failed to recognize this important fact, and the company has suffered as a result.”In that same essay, Aboulafia noted that the incoming CEO, Muilenberg, was an aviation engineer, and though he had spent his career on the defense side of the company, there was hope that he could reverse some of McNerney’s emphasis on the stock price. But it wasn’t to be. Instead, he ratcheted up the company’s stock buybacks, retiring 200 million shares — a quarter of the company’s stock — at cost of $43 billion.How could Boeing afford to do that? As Jonathan Ford pointed out last August in the Financial Times, it was precisely because it was saving so much money on the 737 Max. Instead of starting from scratch and building a new plane, it simply “bolted new fuel-efficient engines onto a tweaked existing airframe.” Ford concluded: “Boeing was able to redirect some of those ‘savings’ to repurchase stock instead.”By the time Boeing decided to cobble together the 737 Max, its engineering culture was completely broken. Here’s how Aboulafia described it to Useem in the Atlantic:It was the ability to comfortably interact with an engineer who in turn feels comfortable telling you their reservations, versus calling a manager [more than] 1,500 miles away who you know has a reputation for wanting to take your pension away. It’s a very different dynamic. As a recipe for disempowering engineers in particular, you couldn’t come up with a better format.You can see that disempowerment — and its consequences — in the recently released emails. Instead of bringing their fears and complaints to superiors, the engineers grouse to themselves about the problems they see with the plane. They are bitter about management’s unwillingness to slow things down, to build the plane properly, to take the care that’s required to prevent tragedy from striking.There is one email in particular(1)  from an unidentified Boeing engineer that I can’t get out of my head. It was written in June 2018, about a year after the company had begun shipping the 737 Max to customers:Everyone has it in their head that meeting schedule is most important because that’s what Leadership pressures and messages. All the messages are about meeting schedule, not delivering quality… .We put ourselves in this position by picking the lowest cost supplier and signing up to impossible schedules. Why did the lowest ranking and most unproven supplier receive the contract? Solely based on bottom dollar…. Supplier management drives all these decisions — yet we can’t even keep one person doing the same job in SM for more than 6 months to a year. They don’t know this business and those that do don’t have the appropriate level of input… .I don’t know how to fix these things … it’s systemic. It’s culture. It’s the fact that we have a senior leadership team that understand very little about the business and yet are driving us to certain objectives. It’s lots of individual groups that aren’t working closely and being accountable …. Sometimes you have to let things fail big so that everyone can identify a problem … maybe that’s what needs to happen instead of continuing to just scrape by.Of course that’s exactly what happened: the 737 Max failed big — at a cost of 346 lives. Shareholder value has caused much harm in the three decades since it became the core value of American capitalism: diabetics who can’t afford insulin; students ripped off by for-profit universities; patients gouged by hospital chains; and so much else. But none worse than this.(Corrects the given name of aviation consultant Richard Aboulafia in the 13th paragraph.)(1) The email in question can be found on page 24 of this document.To contact the author of this story: Joe Nocera at jnocera3@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Daniel Niemi at dniemi1@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Auto Stock Roundup: GM's Electric Hummer Revival, F China Sales Dip & More
    Zacks

    Auto Stock Roundup: GM's Electric Hummer Revival, F China Sales Dip & More

    While General Motors (GM) plans to revive Hummer brand as an electric pickup, Ford's (F) China sales dip for the third straight year in 2019.

  • Tesla stock could hit $6,000 per share in the next five years, analyst says
    Yahoo Finance

    Tesla stock could hit $6,000 per share in the next five years, analyst says

    The firm that once predicted Tesla shares would cross the $4,000 mark delivered a new, even more bullish price target for the electric-vehicle maker.

  • Here's a Sneak Peek Into Tesla's (TSLA) Offerings for 2020
    Zacks

    Here's a Sneak Peek Into Tesla's (TSLA) Offerings for 2020

    Tesla's (TSLA) smashing 2020 vehicle lineup includes Model Y, Semi Truck, Roadster and Model S Plaid.

  • Business Wire

    Ford Motor Company Announces Details For 2019 Q4 Earnings Conference Call

    Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) and Ford Motor Credit Company will release their 2019 fourth quarter and full year financial results at 4:05 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Feb. 4.

  • Ride on Tesla's Hottest Run With These ETFs
    Zacks

    Ride on Tesla's Hottest Run With These ETFs

    Tesla Motors has been on its hottest streak, surpassing the $500 per share level for the first time in its history.

By using Yahoo, you agree that we and our partners can use cookies for purposes such as customising content and advertising. See our Privacy Policy to learn more