Don't look for Ford Motor Co. to kill any of its eight brands, especially long-ailing Mercury, after it finalizes its restructuring plan this week.

Former President Bill Clinton is scheduled to accept a new Mercury Mariner Hybrid next week at the Clinton Global Initiative conference, an indication the brand will live on despite a 55% sales decline in the last decade and critics' calls to dump the name.

"Mercury is part of our plans," Jim Cain, a Ford spokesman, confirmed.

Ford, which recorded a half-year loss of $1.4 billion primarily because of a $4-billion loss in North America, is about to embark on its revised Way Forward restructuring plan.

The plan, which is to be publicly announced sometime after the board of directors meeting concludes today, will include accelerated job cuts, a plan to reduce dealerships and new product plans, among other actions.

Ford currently sells Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Jaguar, Land Rover, Volvo and Aston Martin vehicles and also has a partnership with Japanese automaker Mazda Motor Corp. Sales are down this year for all but Land Rover and Mazda.

Experts have said for years that the automaker needs to pare down the number of makes it sells. The 67-year-old Mercury, which peaked in 1985 at 528,033 car and truck sales, has long been at the top of critics' hit list.

Despite that, Ford has remained committed to fixing the Mercury brand, which basically consists of Ford cars and trucks outfitted with finer interior and exterior features, such as high-end fabrics, colors and chrome touches. The brand has had few of its own unique models over the years.

Last year, Mercury got a small 1.25% lift in sales -- breaking a five-year free-fall -- with some female-friendly models, such as the Mercury Mariner, which is an upgraded Ford Escape, and a fresh ad campaign featuring actress Jill Wagner.

But the downward trend for Mercury has continued this year, and sales are off 9.8% through August.

Some critics say the evidence is overwhelming that Ford should retire Mercury, as General Motors Corp. finally did in 2004 with Oldsmobile.

"I really think they need to kill the Mercury brand," said Erich Merkle, director of automotive forecasting at IRN Inc. in Grand Rapids. "Its sales have basically been halved in the last few years."

Merkle criticized Ford for being too emotional in its assessment of Mercury.

If Ford keeps Mercury, he said the company should at least give it a few of its own models.

Getting rid of Mercury, he and others say, would free up money to boost other Ford brands that have the potential for more success if only they had more money for development, marketing and retail outlets.

Mike Jackson, the CEO of AutoNation Inc., the country's largest automotive retailer with 338 franchises, including 50 Ford stores, wouldn't say whether he thinks Ford should kill Mercury or any other brand.

He said Ford must do something dramatic to streamline its dealership network and vehicle lineup. Jackson said he favors throwing all the company's resources behind the mainstream Ford nameplate.

"Ford should get all the development dollars and management attention," he said, noting that the F-Series, Mustang and new vehicles like the Fusion are key to shaping the company's future.

Volvo, he added, should not be far behind, and he said he believes the automaker could rebuild on the strength of Ford and Volvo, a luxury brand that is also more mainstream than its peers. Over the last 10 years, sales of the Swedish Volvo brand have grown 40%.

One of the other long-term arguments against killing Mercury is the expense of phasing out a brand. GM, for example, recorded a $939-million charge in 2001 to pay dealerships to shutter Oldsmobile showrooms and other expenses.

Merkle and others suspect Ford will starve Mercury of new products for several years, pouring more money into Lincoln and other names. Doing so would weed out weak dealerships and devalue the brand, reducing the amount of any future phase-out expense.