Skip to navigationSkip to content
Zack Rosebrugh

Good afternoon.

ETFs are eating the market

Mining for silver

Ford goes electric

What makes a car a Mustang? Ford's new all-electric Mustang Mach-E is a crossover SUV that the company hopes is as fun to drive as a muscle car. It's an existential crisis on wheels.

Ford is mortgaging its future on the value of its past

Since this is actually my area, let me try something.

The short: This vehicle ain't for you.

The long:

It doesn't matter that Mustang enthusiasts don't want to buy it. It really doesn't.

Take the Jeep Renegade or Compass or Patriot. No Jeep enthusiast who has ever owned a Wrangler or a Cherokee wants

Since this is actually my area, let me try something.

The short: This vehicle ain't for you.

The long:

It doesn't matter that Mustang enthusiasts don't want to buy it. It really doesn't.

Take the Jeep Renegade or Compass or Patriot. No Jeep enthusiast who has ever owned a Wrangler or a Cherokee wants one of those smaller vehicles. You want a real Jeep. The Renegade is made in Italy, for Pete's sake. These smaller vehicles are for brand newbies that want a name but have less money to spend. Funky colors that look good on Instagram. It doesn't damage the Jeep brand, it just makes it more available. I hate those cars, so do real Jeep people. Have people stopped buying Jeeps?

...No.

Ford isn't selling these to Mustang owners. Fact: The yearly volume of the current 2020 Mustang is 65,000+ vehicles, 25% or more are sold overseas. So your "Mustang Enthusiast" opinion is irrelevant. You might just have to accept that.

This vehicle is for Tech folks who like the IDEA of a Mustang but don't want to pay for gas. They live on the coasts, they are eco friendly, need a reason to buy a domestic brand, and have way more money to spend on a car than you. I know this because I saw the press briefings before all of you. I was there when they brought in focus groups. I've seen it assembled at NMPDC when it was still Body-in-White. Ford knows what they're doing, get over yourself.

Very little about this car makes sense to me. I'm not sure why Ford felt compelled to muddy the Mustang brand with a crossover vehicle that looks very little like a Mustang. But then again, Porsche and Lamborghini make SUVs now, so I guess anything goes. I'm not sure if there's enough here to sway anyone

Very little about this car makes sense to me. I'm not sure why Ford felt compelled to muddy the Mustang brand with a crossover vehicle that looks very little like a Mustang. But then again, Porsche and Lamborghini make SUVs now, so I guess anything goes. I'm not sure if there's enough here to sway anyone from a Tesla, nor from a gas-powered muscle car. Maybe some men in the throes of a mid-life crisis men who also want to save on gas, though.

Putting the name “mustang” on this car is a bad joke. When you hear “mustang Mach e” it calls to mind, obviously, an electric mustang. This car is decidedly NOT an electric mustang, it’s a completely separate EV inexplicably called a mustang. It’s a four-door crossover, not a two-door muscle car, and

Putting the name “mustang” on this car is a bad joke. When you hear “mustang Mach e” it calls to mind, obviously, an electric mustang. This car is decidedly NOT an electric mustang, it’s a completely separate EV inexplicably called a mustang. It’s a four-door crossover, not a two-door muscle car, and has nothing in common aesthetically with a mustang anywhere.

None of this is to say that there’s anything actually wrong with the car— but it’s an absolute travesty of branding. Ford should’ve just come up with a new name for it. Mustang buyers wouldn’t even want this thing, and the name’s cachet does nothing for its target audience. All this does for Ford is irk their loyal mustang customers, confuse people who’d actually be interested in this car, and dilute their most recognizable brand.

Edit: to more specifically address Michael’s points, the problem isn’t that the name offends the Mustang’s greatness or anything— it’s that the car is so totally different from a Mustang that the name is just ridiculous. Porsche makes SUVs, but they don’t call them Carreras. Jeep makes that weird El Camino thing (gladiator, I think?) but they don’t call it a Wrangler.

If they’re not selling the car to “Mustang people” (and they obviously aren’t) why on Earth did they call it a Mustang?

The Mustang branding makes me want the car less. I’m not sure the typical Mustang demographic would care for a tech heavy SUV, and vice versa.

Why is the article so myopic? As if the whole world revolves around the US? Ford is a large company with a global presence - take a beat and think about the bigger picture, there are far more competitors in this space than just Tesla in the US. Look further afield and you may find open roads with consumers

Why is the article so myopic? As if the whole world revolves around the US? Ford is a large company with a global presence - take a beat and think about the bigger picture, there are far more competitors in this space than just Tesla in the US. Look further afield and you may find open roads with consumers who are eager to take a drive with a storied American brand - Mustang enthusiast or not.

It's no secret that American cars lag behind with innovation and style - they even keep the same names for decades. The fact that they decided to call the electric SUV a Mustang tells me that they aren't confident about its success and at the very least figure they can get their same customers to go

It's no secret that American cars lag behind with innovation and style - they even keep the same names for decades. The fact that they decided to call the electric SUV a Mustang tells me that they aren't confident about its success and at the very least figure they can get their same customers to go electric even though Ford has always stood for gas guzzlers. It just seems like they want to give Tesla a hard time. Then in an NPR interview, the CEO started talking about Trump policies being beneficial to the company. That this unsolicited dialogue even happened tells me their heart isn't in this car, they know who their customers are, and that new buyers aren't racing to get one.

Take note

The beauty business

Kylie Jenner's $600 million payday. Coty, the century-old beauty company, is shelling out the big bucks for a 51% stake in the youngest Jenner's booming cosmetics business—and access to her 270 million social media followers.

Kylie Jenner’s $600 million deal proves the power of celebrity beauty brands

I definitely think that celebrity plays a MASSIVE factor in the success of a brand; however, it's not a surefire ticket to success. Look at Blake Lively's failed venture - Preserve. She has a huge following and people adore her and yet Preserve never took off and she shut it down. At the end of the day

I definitely think that celebrity plays a MASSIVE factor in the success of a brand; however, it's not a surefire ticket to success. Look at Blake Lively's failed venture - Preserve. She has a huge following and people adore her and yet Preserve never took off and she shut it down. At the end of the day, you still need to have product market fit even if you're a celebrity, but the audience is an enormous boost at launch because instead of having to pay to get millions of eyeballs, you just market to your already engaged followers which builds natural momentum, but without a great product - it doesn't matter how many followers you have, they're not going to buy something they don't want.

Estee Lauder made its first Asian beauty acquisition. The company agreed to buy the two-thirds stake it didn’t already own in Have & Be Co.—parent company of South Korea’s Dr. Jart+ cosmetics—for $1.1 billion.

Estee Lauder to acquire shares of Dr. Jart+ parent it does not already own

If you haven’t been keeping your eyes peeled, K-Beauty is where the money is at. If celebrities loved creating their own perfumes in the early 2000s and YouTube propelled “makeup gurus” in the mid-2000s, K-Beauty skincare is the next phase. Look at Kylie Jenner, Bella Thorne, Miranda Kerr, and soon to

If you haven’t been keeping your eyes peeled, K-Beauty is where the money is at. If celebrities loved creating their own perfumes in the early 2000s and YouTube propelled “makeup gurus” in the mid-2000s, K-Beauty skincare is the next phase. Look at Kylie Jenner, Bella Thorne, Miranda Kerr, and soon to be many other celebrities forging their own skincare lines. If today entails celebrity branded skincare, K-Beauty is the next top tier—and Estée Lauder is very well aware of that.

International education

Indian students are set on pursuing their US dreams. Overall, Indians studying in the US climbed by 3% in 2018-19 but graduate students were down 6%. The American dream is alive and kicking but the path is not as straightforward anymore.

Trump’s visa clampdown hasn’t stopped Indian students from pursuing their US dreams

The fee structure and the lack of work opportunities to actually get a return on investment is a big deterrant for students, unless they opt for specialised STEM courses. That’s only further going to diminish the importance of liberal arts and other professional courses.

The growth, though, is a marginal 3%. The only bright spot being optional practical training.

Global health challenges

India's economic prospects

About that trade war

What will we do?

AI has leveled the playing field for companies. However, Forbes notes how they use the new technology and why will be key differentiators.

What Is The Future Of Enterprise AI?

So true - there is such a great opportunity for AI in the enterprise. "Enterprises are beginning to understand the consequences of the evolving artificial intelligence-driven automation ecosystem far beyond narrow artificial intelligence, crossing economic, commerce, education, governance, and trade supply chains."

From the test kitchen

You're all finished!

Close
A new study reveals the real reason Obama voters switched to Trump

A new study reveals the real reason Obama voters switched to Trump

Read more on Vox

From Our Members

  • "White voters with racially conservative or anti-immigrant attitudes switched votes to Trump at a higher rate than those with more liberal views on these issues".

    Yet again, these same voters with the same hostilities had voted President Obama. Polls also show that Sanders could have beaten Trump, meaning

    "White voters with racially conservative or anti-immigrant attitudes switched votes to Trump at a higher rate than those with more liberal views on these issues".

    Yet again, these same voters with the same hostilities had voted President Obama. Polls also show that Sanders could have beaten Trump, meaning he could have retained at least some of these voters. Why wasn't her experience and qualifications enough? I doubt it was materially about racism or sexism. President Obama beat McCain (experienced and qualified) then Romney in the middle of a racially charged country. Sanders gave Hillary a run for her money and has subsequently greatly influenced the Democratic party.

  • Unfortunately Hillary had so much baggage and had her character so destroyed (with Bengazi, and The Emails, etc), that people didn't like her, and actually neither candidate was liked much, so voters took a chance on change. Silent sexism allowed her sullied character to seem worse than Trump's. I believe

    Unfortunately Hillary had so much baggage and had her character so destroyed (with Bengazi, and The Emails, etc), that people didn't like her, and actually neither candidate was liked much, so voters took a chance on change. Silent sexism allowed her sullied character to seem worse than Trump's. I believe that voting decisions are too complex to be attributed to discrete buckets like racism and/or xenophobia alone.

  • Not nearly enough time and energy has been focused on the role of sexism and misogyny in the 2016 election. Race certain played a part, and Donald Trump played into that quite well. But Hilary Clinton was often criticized for things that no male candidate had ever been. She was held to a completely different

    Not nearly enough time and energy has been focused on the role of sexism and misogyny in the 2016 election. Race certain played a part, and Donald Trump played into that quite well. But Hilary Clinton was often criticized for things that no male candidate had ever been. She was held to a completely different standard, as evidenced by the fact that this buffoon is who ended up in the White House despite having no experience, ideas, or really knowledge of absolutely anything. Quiet sexism is still far more acceptable in our society than racism is.

  • Reading that article made me realize that elites still do not get why Trump won. Here’s a hint...it has nothing to do with race. The fact that this narrative is still being pushed shows me that the media doesn’t get it. As a conservative, white, male, trump supporter, I can tell you it had nothing to

    Reading that article made me realize that elites still do not get why Trump won. Here’s a hint...it has nothing to do with race. The fact that this narrative is still being pushed shows me that the media doesn’t get it. As a conservative, white, male, trump supporter, I can tell you it had nothing to do with race.

    Illegal immigration (and I still find it amusing that this article refuses to say that) is not about race, it is about the sovereignty of a nation and not allowing people into the country illegally while good people who do so lawfully are stuck in lines. People voted for Trump because he wanted to do something that made sense.

    Since this article is trying to put race in the forefront, let me say what leftists do not want to hear. For conservatives, Obama’s race had nothing to do with anything. His horrible policies had everything to do with why the people you try to shame in this article disliked him. Bad deals, cash to Iran, and the premiums of health insurance skyrocketing are just a few.

    So you think you know why Trump won? You still don’t have a clue. It has to do with the fact that people love our nation and are tired of seeing it ruined because a bunch of politicians kept themselves in a political class where they tell you one thing and leave you worse off than before. Trump supporters wanted change from the status quo. If not, then they would of voted for “low energy” Jeb. Trump also communicated to the people and not at them like most other politicians.

    So while you sit in your ivory towers and look down on Trump voters, remember this. Trump’s popularity is on the rise across the board with people from all racial groups because his policies are working. You are trying to paint a picture that Trump supporters are a bunch of angry white men who want keep their status. Here is the real picture. People were and still are tired of others trying to force them into a box. People were and still are tired of the politically correct nonsense that has starting to get into the realm of insanity. So take another look and learn something. It is not about what you say, but what you do that defines you. You try to flip that around to cover the fact that what you say is sweet, but what you do is poison.

  • What a terrible excuse for an argument. Comparing two issues and choosing between them while ignoring dozens of others is the kind of flawed reasoning that put us in this spot to begin with

  • #walkaway