Porsche-VW merger could take on new investors
Volkswagen's second-largest shareholder, the German state of Lower Saxony, has the final say on the proposed Porsche-Volkswagen merger, and according to a spokesperson for the state's prime minister, Christian Wulff, the new company birthed from the union should be open to outside investors.
Currently, Porsche maintains 51% of VW's voting rights, with Lower Saxony coming in at 20% and miscellaneous investors comprising the final 29%. According to the state's spokesperson, "At the end of the day it could look like this: Porsche owns 50%, Lower Saxony 20% and free float investors 30%." Obviously, Lower Saxony's stake would remain the same – exactly as the local government leaders prefer. As previously reported, talks between the two automakers stalled over the weekend, and no new schedule has been set for the negotiations to continue.
[Source: Automotive News – Sub. Req.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Richard 12:15AM (5/20/2009)
"with Lower Saxony coming in at 20%".... in fact this will most likely not look like this at all. The VW deal with Lower Saxony is in direct defiance of EU regulations, and yet another example of how Germany gets away with murder in the EU. Sooner or later they're going to have to end the illegality. The other option would be for Germany to leave the EU. GIven the German influence on EU car-emissions policy, this would perhaps be a very good thing indeed.
Reply
Markus 7:57AM (5/20/2009)
True, but I wouldn't count on this changing very soon. When you are the largest member state, have the biggest economy, are by far the biggest net payer to the Union and the third-biggest payer per capita, you expect some special deals, since you are the one who actually pays the bills ;).
Andrew 3:00PM (5/20/2009)
Germany leave? The UK is probably the one that ends up getting kicked out (and willingly so).
Like the other poster said, Germany is the largest economy in Europe, and pays the most to the EU. They paid more than the 19 lowest-paying member states combined!
You should check out the BBC's coverage today on exactly this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8036097.stm
The VW-law is disputed in the EU courts, it is not a clear case of either black or white like you seem to think it is. No law is ever like that! Speaking as a jurist.
If anyone is getting away with murder it's the UK with your EU rebate! Two thirds of your contributions are returned to the UK because of some old pre-CAP regulations.
Richard 9:20AM (5/20/2009)
On the contrary, as recently as the 15th of APril the EU has said it is considering stepping up legal action:
http://www.reuters.com/article/mergersNews/idUSBRU00737420090415
Germany has the largest population and GDP, but that doesn't justify cheating. "special deals" is a little vague. sure, you can expect a return which is proportional to what you put in, but that's about it. cheating isn't part of it all. furthermore the European Union is just that, a "union". in order to be part of a union, you have to know how to work others (without cheating, but that should be obvious, right?)
There are countries which have a very good track record in cooperation with others, and there are a very few for which this is impossible, and have no JVs with anyone. The Germans have a JV with France in terms of EADS, and that's pretty much it. But this is an example, unfortunately, of continuous infighting and catastrophic project delays. The A380, for which final assembly takes place in Toulouse, suffered horrible delays because of harness issues which were a German responsibility.
Currently the A400M may be completely cancelled (it has now accrued delays of over 4 years) and the problem has been pinpointed on the FEDAC software, an MTU (Germany) responsibility. Europe's most strategic project, Galileo, has seen outrageous delays and cost overruns becuase of German mismanagement (Astrium Germany component of Galileo Industries) and because the on-board computer of the test spacecraft Giove-B, blew up three times in the final stages of integration. This on-baord computer was German, and was selected purely for political reasons ("a special deal") when European spacecraft normally have on-board compters from SES (Sweden) or Laben (Italy). The Daimler-Chrysler story had as much to do with technology as it did with a certain kind of mindset.
EADS may be the only real JV in which Germany has a say in, but what about other countries? JVs between France and Italy, for example, include STMIcro (EUs largest chip manufactuer), ATR (largest turboprop manufacturer), DCN-Fincantieri (Europe's largest naval co-operation), Irisbus (buses), Alstom-Ansaldo(trains), Thales Alenia Space (EU largest space industry)
Puitting "special deals" aside for a moment, what happens when Germany has zero participation in EU projects? If you look at NEURON (the European UAV), Vega (the new European launcher), FREMM-Horizon (EU largest naval programme ever), Pleiades-Cosmo (the EUs largest satellite earth observation program) the answer is quite clear: they are enormous successes (and the opposite of Galileo, A380 or A400M)
If you look up the meaning of "union" it should be clear that while Germany is a member state, the EU has no future.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/eu-bows-to-car-lobby-on-pollution-limits-435331.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/sep/26/automotive.greenpolitics
www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2333665,00.html
Reply
Andrew 3:05PM (5/20/2009)
Don't worry, Richard, we want to keep Germany in the EU. The EU certainly has a future, but perhaps it does not include the UK?
I would gladly see you outside, at least that way we could get the project moving towards a federal state! And no more pesky Turkey business like your American masters thinks we ought to.
On the other hand you do have the Eurovision contest, isn't that enough Europe for you?
Richard 5:35PM (5/20/2009)
"They paid more than the 19 lowest-paying member states combined!"
This logic is flawed. You are assuming that a Euro put in by Germany has the same value as a Euro put in by any other country. European countries have learned that this is clearly not the case. Experiences such as Galileo, the A380 and A400M (which are no trivial examples) prove this not to be so. Governments have realized that the strings attached to German participation in fact boil down to suicide. There has been plenty of feet-dragging by the UK in terms of the level of EU integration, but plenty of people involved in EU programs have come to realize that the real problem is Germany, not the UK. The UK is also involved in Galileo, A380 and A400M, but has not meant the death of these projects as Germany has.
Put simply if we can pool 20 euros together on some large strategic project without Germany, with the knowledge the progrm will work (Neuron, Vega, FREMM-Horizon, Orfeo), or put together 25 euros together if Germany is included (Galileo, A400M, A380), but knowing full well that this will mean suicide for the project, what do you think is the obvious choice?
You can pull the wool over people's eyes for only so long.
Reply