Ford CEO Farley Does More To Wreck The Company
Jim Farley steered Ford into a Chinese partnership he once warned would destroy the company, and now a Cabinet secretary is calling him out in writing. The fallout reveals a pattern of strategic miscalculations that keep mounting at one of…
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.
Ford (NYSE: F | F Price Prediction) was on a roll, briefly. It dropped out of the expensive EV race after pledging $30 billion in investment. Ford Energy, a battery storage business, was a solution for energy needs for installations like AI data centers.
Even Jim Cramer liked it. He gushed, “We know that demand for these big backup batteries is growing like crazy because all the new data centers really can’t afford to go offline.”
Not long ago, Ford CEO Jim Farley said that if Chinese EVs were in the US market, it could ruin Ford. Recently, it has formed an alliance with some Chinese companies, which some people believe will hurt the US labor market.
A reprimand from U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy hit Farley like a truck. The reaction to Ford’s deals with Chinese battery maker CATL and Chinese automaker Geely was one of “profound concern.” Duffy’s letter to Farley was even harsher. Duffy wrote, “When a company intentionally chooses to deepen operational dependencies on strategic competitors, it fails to act as the reliable partner the American public and this DOT require.”
Among the other things Ford missed was that both Republicans and Democrats have stated Chinese technology is a threat to US security. And, just as bad, many Chinese EV and battery companies exist only because their government has underwritten their founding and ongoing financing. Farley should have considered that his own fear of Chinese EVs is fundamentally what the Administration is using against him.
Farley is widely known for strategic blunders. EVs are at the top of that list. Years of product recalls are also something he did not fix quickly and which has continued to dog Ford.
Farley’s response to Duffy was that Duffy’s letter was based on a “misunderstanding,” Farley told the WSJ. He commented to the paper, “These are basic misunderstandings, mistruths, whatever words you want to use, that could be cleared up in a simple five-minute call.” It is just short of an insult to Duffy. And that call should have been made much earlier.
Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.







