GM wants money from Nissan, Renault
The latest round of reports coming out of the Nissan-Renault-GM talks are quite sensational. Although there have been hints that Ford is on Carlos Ghosn's speed dial should things go sour with GM, according to the latest newsletter from the American International Automobile Dealers Association (AIADA) General Motors is going to tell Nissan and Renault today that their proposed deal looks good. As long as they can cough up a few billion dollars to secure the three-way alliance.GM feels it would need the money as compensation because it would be bringing much more to the table in any partnership between the three, reports The Wall Street Journal. This doesn't sound like a simple request to get the i's dotted and t's crossed. Whereas Renault-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn wishes to have an alliance involving taking big stakes in GM, such a deal is unlikely.
GM Chief Rick Wagoner will go before his board of directors on Oct. 3, to outline his analysis of the proposed alliance, showing how it would favor Nissan-Renault more than GM. A final decision is expected by October 15.
[Source: The Auto Channel]
Related posts:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Glenn 12:57PM (9/28/2006)
In other words, to quote a line from a (semi) funny British comedy movie,
"go away before I taunt you again"
Reply
Jeff 1:05PM (9/28/2006)
Good for GM and good for the American auto industry. No reason GM should go with their hats in their hands begging for Renault and Nissan. Gm's the stronger of the three. Ford, on the other hand, needs the help much more.
Reply
William Wallace 1:25PM (9/28/2006)
Ya, GM brings SOOO much to the table
Liek what? Lessons learned that all the incentives in the world won't make enough people buy POS cars? That just because you have a Halo car (corvette) deosn't mean you don't have to make decent cars?
>No reason GM should go with their hats in their hands begging for Renault and Nissan
You're right, it's much better for them to go begging to the government and let all of us bail them out.
I think American cars have some decent design that is often ruined by bean counters and managers. How many amaerican cars would be great if they a) made the same HP per liter as their foreign competition, or b) had quality that lived up to their looks (p.s. Nissan, pay attention, cause your quality is slipping already; join GM and keep it up and you'll be inthe same trouble in 10 years), or c) had dealer networks that didn't reinfornce the sleezy car salesmen reputation (not that Nissan is much better on this front).
That's all I got. Discuss.
Reply
Howard Kerr 1:31PM (9/28/2006)
to quote a previous poster...
"....Gm (should be GM ?) is the stronger of the three".
I'm not quite sure how this person came to that conclusion. Yes, GM is bigger, but at the rates it is losing market share...except, for the moment, in China, is it really STRONGER than Nissan/Renault? Did GM go to Nissan/Renault with the idea of a tie-up or did Nissan/Renault go knocking on GM's door?
Could it be that after having to give Fiat Group THREE BILLION DOLLARS for pretty much nothing.....GM decided it would turn the tables on it's next "partners" and demand they pony up the cash in advance of any tie-ups?
Reply
Tim UF 1:47PM (9/28/2006)
kerkorian is also in the process of buying another 12million shares of GM... to go along with his current 56million... hes the biggest pusher on the renault/nissan thing
Reply
Lithous 1:54PM (9/28/2006)
"Ya, GM brings SOOO much to the table
Liek what?"
Do you live in a cave? Seriously? Toyota wanted to work with GM in hydrogen fuel vehicle development (you know, Toyota, the company that is advanced in hybrids, put most of their eggs in the hybrid basket and is reaping the rewards ONLY because of the federal gov't giving tax breaks and states allowing HOV lane usage for hybrids. Read the polls, those incentives sealed that deal.) Now Toyota has a fighting chance in fuel sales more than otherwise because GM has been researching hydrogen vehicles for decades (started in the 1960's). Ford and Nissan use hybrid technology basically from Toyota and GM developed their own and shared the cost to develop further with BMW and DCX which used GM's technology as a basis.
GM has some of the highest ranking of quality by a company which actually targets real owners of vehicles (i.e. you get a survey specifically for a car you, on record purchased, instead of accepting anything you report because you paid a few bucks for a magazine.
GM has tried things others would not (except Mazda using the Quade Coupe idea for their RX-8). Plastic body panels; how many people live in a climate which promotes rust?
" How many amaerican cars would be great if they a) made the same HP per liter as their foreign competition,"
First, the Asian companies were literally slapped on the wrist for giving bad HP numbers. Second, GM does have engines like the 3.6L in the Aura produces 252HP and the 3.5L (Honda) in the VUE produces 250. Sure they both can be upped to produce more but they are comparable more than you think. The same is for GM's VVT ecotec smaller engines as well.
" b) had quality that lived up to their looks (p.s. Nissan, pay attention, cause your quality is slipping already; join GM and keep it up and you'll be inthe same trouble in 10 years),"
Toyota is bland and has recalls rising and rising: http://www.autoblog.com/2006/09/18/toyota-exec-answers-recall-issues. Toyota doesn't *need* to offer longer warranties even if just powertrain so they continue to rely on quality perception from when Toyota made 1/10 and 1/5 of the cars GM does (for American consumption).
"c) had dealer networks that didn't reinfornce the sleezy car salesmen reputation (not that Nissan is much better on this front)."
GM created Saturn to see how that worked. Then you have people that don't get it complain that no one helped them at the Saturn retailer (because they are told not to be in your face). Or those that think they are great hagglers that don't want one price. You can't win with everybody. So GM has a no haggle dealer network that is getting some very good product now (I.E. Saturn) and you have traditional dealerships that have very good product where you can haggle.
Your view of GM is from the 80's or something. Either you are trying to be misleading and make GM look bad for those who don't know the facts or you really don't know what GM has and doesn't have (you meantion Corvette but leave out the Solstice/Sky, G6 Hardtop, CTS, Lucerne, etc.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_d5-K109DQ&mode=related&search=
Reply
UK-KID 2:16PM (9/28/2006)
GM wants some Billions before they agree to an Alliance do they ??
Pray Tell, Who needs this Alliance the Most ?
NISSAN
Just wait a couple more years till GM is Bankrupt then Move in.
Business 101
(Trust me Nissan, it will not be more than a couple more years)
Reply
The other Bob 2:31PM (9/28/2006)
A columnist the other day gave an example that showed why it may be a good deal for GM to link up, but it would be a better deal for Nissan and Renault.
The example went like this:
A small car part costs $1 to buy.
GM gets a 10% reduction for quanity pricing, buying the widget for 90 cents.
Nisan/Renault gets the same part discounted by 5%, paying 95 cents.
A GM/Nissan/Renault alliance gets the part for 85 cents.
Therefore iunder the deal, GM saves 5% more and Renault and Nissan save 10% more. That's why GM is saying they don't get much out of the deal by comparison.
Reply
danny 2:32PM (9/28/2006)
GM isnt going to go bankrupt, and you can quote me on that. Whether its the result of a major turn around or a government bailout GM WILL NOT CAVE. Doesn't anyone remember Chrysler. If, and I stress IF, GM gets to the point of bankruptcy the US government will use the US citizens money and bail GM out. As for the deal, I think GM should get some compensation, they do have the largest distribution capacity in the US and Nissan needs more to become a key player.
Reply
Thomas 2:57PM (9/28/2006)
"Doesn't anyone remember Chrysler. If, and I stress IF, GM gets to the point of bankruptcy the US government will use the US citizens money and bail GM out."
You seem to have confused the current administration with one that gave a shit.
Reply
William Wallace 2:47PM (9/28/2006)
So, Toyota is stupid because they built cars that people wanted that worked with the existing infrastructure, while GM did nothing but research and produced, uh, the EV1. Yeah,t he people that bought them loved them, but the average person would never even consider one.
Which surveys are you referring to? I rarely see GM and Quality int he same sentence. What do I base this off? I have had domestic rentals, and imports. Drive one of each and you tell me which is holding up better. I've also owned both domestics and imports. I bought a brand new Chevy in 2000, cause I thought it was a deal with employee pricing. It had more problems than any vehicle I had ever owned, and even with the employee discount back then (remember, it wasn't available to everyone like it is today) and the money I put down on it, I ended up way upside down on it cause it depreciated way quicker than it accelerated...
Keep your Saturn plastic body pieces; I'll keep my car that doesn't have gaps between the body panels bigger than the grand canyon.
You say Toyota is bland then tout the G6?
Want to talk about the Solstice? 2.4L, 177 hp. Miata, 2.0L, 170 HP. Oh, and don't forget GM found a way to make the Solstice 350 lbs heavier than the Miata. My old Nissan 240 from the 90s had a 2.4L making 155 hp. For not much more than a solstice, you can buy a 240hp s2000 (which is a 2L, and lighter, and a real sports car).
Actually, Mazda is part owned by GM and they are the only ones that put out bad numbers. The rest just had the testing methods standardized and the numbers readjusted (not like it matters since they're just as far ahead of most domestics performance-wise, and don't forget handling counts too before you mention the mustang or something silly like that).
Buy what you want, but there obviosuly aren't that many people thrilled with GM (as your surveys would point out), or they'd be doing better and telling Nissan and Renault to go shove it. Instead, they're just trying to stay alive.
Reply
The other Bob 2:58PM (9/28/2006)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_d5-K109DQ&mode=related&search=
Lithous: Thanks for posting thast link. It's funny I have to watch a Japanese TV show to get a decent through pro and con about an American Vs. Japanese car. In the end the Pontiac did better.
Neat review, wish Motortrend and C & D wrote like this guy reviewed.
Reply
Milos 3:16PM (9/28/2006)
#10
If I'm not mistaken, Mazda is not partially owned by GM, but by Ford. Mazda 3 and Focus (at least the better one - European) share platforms
Reply
Fabulo 3:19PM (9/28/2006)
"GM isnt going to go bankrupt, and you can quote me on that."
Are you the same person who said: "Delta Airlines isnt going to go bankrupt, and you can quote me on that."
or
"US Airways isnt going to go bankrupt, and you can quote me on that."
or
"United Airlines isnt going to go bankrupt, and you can quote me on that."
Why is GM so different? The big2.5 whiners in charge can't get a simple 1 hour sit down meeting with Bush. He hinted several times that the car industry was on their own. GM does not want to file for chapter 11, but when they run out of money, when creditors will come knocking on the door asking to be paid, they may have no other option.
This is america. The market rules. Your products don't sell? Tough. Make better products. It's not like they don't have decades of experience making cars, it's not like they can't rely on history of their competitors.
Reply
Richard Warren 3:39PM (9/28/2006)
What does GM bring?
Manufacturing capacity
New product
They are still as we speak, the largest vehicle maker on the planet
Profitable operations worlwide with the execption of the NA market
Built in dealer body for Renault if desired
A static NA market share, not falling as in years past
A stock that has doubled VS Nissan/Renaults peak and valley performance since early last year
A bond rating that in less than a year may be removed from junk status, making the stock more attractive
What does Renault/Nissan bring? Carlos (and that's a debatable item, because if Renault/Nissan sales do not improve, what has he actually done) A sagging sales picture in Japan, Europe and NA
What does GM bring? A lot, perhaps more than some think.
Reply
Sam 5:11PM (9/28/2006)
NISSAN
Just wait a couple more years till GM is Bankrupt then Move in.
Business 101
(Trust me Nissan, it will not be more than a couple more years)
Uh... no......
Nissan will collapse first.
Nissan isn't growing in Asia and is losing share in Japan.
Nissan is getting crushed in North America still-not as bad as Mitsubishi, but Nissan and Mitsu should have just given up when Hyndai showed up.
Nissan really has nothing going for it in China.
GM may not be growing in North America, but it's really not an American car company anymore-it's Chinese, Korean, Middle Eastern and finally Europe.
Nissan can try to grow in North America, but it wants a deal with GM so it can grow globally-that's where GM is booming.
Reply
KT 4:45PM (9/28/2006)
Richard is right.
I know many of you would like to think the opposite because it's more fun for you to wish upon GM's (and other domestics) demise. However, if you knew (or even tried to learn) anything about the industry, you could see what GM has to offer.
All this wishful thinking about GM/Ford tanking is actually wishing 100,000's of people losing their jobs and the whole economy tanking. So, keep on tossing your coins into the wishing well. Hopefully someone will come along and toss you into it!
Reply
Finished Law School 4:59PM (9/28/2006)
"GM feels it would need the money as compensation because it would be bringing much more to the table in any partnership between the three"
That is exactly right.
GM is bringing more to the table in terms of bad, ugly, unattractive, dated vehicle design, shit quality vehicles as well as inept and ignorant executives, not to mention the many lazy UAW workers who get paid to play cards and watch TV at the plant.
GM is bringing more indeed...
Reply
Whydrive 5:11PM (9/28/2006)
bad, ugly, unattractive, dated vehicle design, shit quality vehicles - you're talking about Nissan / Renault right?
Reply
Pizza the Hut 5:11PM (9/28/2006)
Finished Law School:
You stink.
Reply