In any event, speculation is running wild, and analysts are throwing their two cents into the argument.
Some pundits say what's best for the shareholders should be the dominant call in deciding to sell or not to sell. Others call for an analysis of the needs of the consumers who buy the cars.
Jerry Marks submits to SeekingAlpha a different view, that of the consumer. He identify these issues: the need for a clear product offering; value; proposition; and safety.
First, the need for a clear product offering. These pundits argue that the best way to offer product is through a good, better, and best method. Moreover, say these pundits, the differentiation can be identified by brand name. Some would break Ford up like this: Mercury as the value line; Ford as the 'better' line and Lincoln could be the 'best' line. Jaguar, Volvo, and Lincoln, say pundits, bring confusion to the 'best' line.
A clear value proposition ask how the consumer should be looking at the brand. In the case of Volvo, for example, safety is the value proposition.
In short, what these pundits are saying is that each division of Ford should have its own identity. No overlapping. If there is, jettison one division to avoid confusion.
Our take? Perhaps this philosophy should be considered. Really, though, it's not really no. Personally we'd add all elements of an automobile manufacturer's business should be considered when there are thoughts of selling or not selling a division.