• Apr 2, 2010
Daimler is looking for a new kind of Renault Alliance, one that includes Nissan. According to a new report in The Wall Street Journal, there is a deal pending between Renault-Nissan and Daimler to partner on things like engines and platforms, as well as further development on matters that could help increase fuel efficiency. The two companies feel that partnering in those areas would help develop the technology more effectively while keeping the costs more manageable.

Right off the bat, Daimler will get the key to the Renault-Nissan small-car and small-engine toybox. When was the last time you heard of a cheap, frugal Mercedes-Benz... even a Smart? Renault-Nissan would get the opportunity to fiddle around with Daimler's hybrid goodies, as well as possibly the German company's diesels. Any sort of Nissan-Renault alliance with Daimler could fail horribly – after all, these are the raiders that flogged Chrysler badly enough to land it on the heart/lung machine. On the other hand, a vehicle as inexpensive as a Versa that's as solidly screwed together as an E Class has a certain allure. An announcement may come as soon as early next week.

[Source: The Wall Street Journal]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 42 Comments
      • 4 Years Ago
      why blame Daimler for everything going wrong?


      Detroit diesel - Daimler owned since 2000
      Freightliner - Daimler owned since 1981
      Fuso - Daimler owned since 2003
      Western Star -Daimler owned since 2000
      Thomas build Buses - Daimler owned since mid 1990´s
      Setra - Daimler owned since 1995
      Orion - Daimler owned since 2000
      Sterling truck - Daimler owned since 1998

      Did they all went wrong?



      Mistubishi cars was already in a veryvery bad crisis befor Daimler jumped in and pumped huge amount of money into Mitsubishi in 1997. In the late 1990´s the whole asian car industry was in bad shape....

      The only thing Daimler could be blamed for was the handling of the Daimler Chrysler deal...but ... a deal is made of two partners not one..
      • 4 Years Ago
      I agree, Ghosen is a very calculated and shrewed man, there is no way he would let Daimler steamroll Nissan/Renault. If anything, I wouldn't be surprised if it went the other way around.

      I wouldn't mind seeing some AMG engines in Infiniti products.

      Now that would be damn cool.
      • 4 Years Ago
      ... Maybe they can hire Bob Eaton out of retirement to run this new "merger of equals" since he fell for the same Daimler trick in 1998.
      ZingKingX
      • 4 Years Ago
      Another "merger of equals?"
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        "You can attempt to use the business action that Daimler supposedly took, but the reality of what happened is that Chrysler was taken over by the German business. What the stockholders got (or any company re-name) does not change that. Daimler wanted Chrysler for some reason, got the stock holders to agree, then refused to put Daimler parts in the other brands, and basically refused to create updated models for the other brands (quite a 'merger' in those actions). And then ran when they realized what a mess they made - which also proved how little a 'merger' it was, since Daimler went back to its own (intact) company and Chrysler was sold to a venture firm to die."


        You're not listening! I've told you what a merger is. Now, you and others on here can look at it in your working-class layman's terms however you wish, because mergers can often subsequently appear to be acquisitions. But you cannot escape the definition of a merger. Neither Daimler-Benz nor Chrysler existed after the transaction - therefore it was a merger. If you want to say it was a merger which ultimately imaged an acquisition, that's fine. But the transaction was a merger by absolute definition. End of story.

        The term "merger" in itself has nothing to do with product, people, or resources. It is purely how the companies' chares are dealt with. Nothing more.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        @Bloke: Daimler never had a 'merger of equals' with Chrysler. That was their PR term for a takeover. A merger would entail equal sharing of tech, and equal model intros. Daimler put THEIR people in charge, did very little with the Chrysler side (except maybe making their quality worse), and left it dying on the vine.

        Cerberus just came along after and killed the rest of it.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        You can attempt to use the business action that Daimler supposedly took, but the reality of what happened is that Chrysler was taken over by the German business. What the stockholders got (or any company re-name) does not change that. Daimler wanted Chrysler for some reason, got the stock holders to agree, then refused to put Daimler parts in the other brands, and basically refused to create updated models for the other brands (quite a 'merger' in those actions). And then ran when they realized what a mess they made - which also proved how little a 'merger' it was, since Daimler went back to its own (intact) company and Chrysler was sold to a venture firm to die.

        To put this in the simplest term, Daimler used an 'accounting' trick to acquire another company, then sold it at a loss when their execs ran it so poorly.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        "@Bloke: Daimler never had a 'merger of equals' with Chrysler. That was their PR term for a takeover. A merger would entail equal sharing of tech, and equal model intros."

        Evidently you're not an accountant, are you? A merger of equals - by definition - is the bringing together and dissolution of two companies to form one new company. Both former companies shareholders surrender their existing shares (in various ratios) for new issued shares in the new merged company. That is all a "merger of equals" is. And that is exactly what happened with Daimler-Benz and Chrysler Corp. Mergers can often appear to be aquisitions, but when both former companies' share capital is dissolved, it's a merger.

        A merger of equals has NOTHING to do with sharing products, technology, or people. Those aspects are simply negotiating points in a merger or aquisition.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        Hey Bloke! Listen (or read) to what the people are saying!!! Anyone can refer to a business dictionary and find out what a merger is. In this case people are talking about how Daimler-Benz approached Chrysler about combing management, operations and resources (aka 'merger' to use your term so we don't go off-road here).

        The agreement was touted publicly as a merger, but in fact was actually a take over of Chrysler by Daimler. Even then-CEO Jurgen Schrempp admitted as much in the Financial Times! So what people are basically, Bloke, is that Daimler, a foregn company, did in fact hurt a domestic one (Chrysler), because of the tactics it employed to obtain the company, stip it of it's assests, offer little support (something to do with the nonsense of not "diluting the Mercedes brand," and ultimately help run a once good and healthy company into the ground. (Although Cerberus should also take a wee bit of the blame).

        So yes, by your definition it was a merger. But most people will agree it was more of a big business shake down with Chrysler ultimately getting the short end of the stick. So perhaps this will explain some of the cautionary comments readers are conveying with regards to Renault-Nissan's possible tie-up with Daimler.

        So looking at it from that perspective it's really quite simple. And you don't need to be an accountant with 20 years experience to understand it either.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        "Directed at superx1919: Bravo! You hit the nail right on the head! My compliments to you for explaining the situation so well. Unlike Bloke who just wanted to confuse the issue with a whole bunch of legal-type mumble-jumbo and jibber-jabber."

        I'm an accountant whose been qualified for over 20 years, so I'll use my expertise in my field to explain a given situation. I'm not a bricklayer, mechanic, or gardener - so you'd never find me telling people what the deal is with those topics.

        And you'll never find me displaying any childish hatred of a foreign company just because dealing with them happens to hurt a domestic one.
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ZingKingX
        Directed at superx1919: Bravo! You hit the nail right on the head! My compliments to you for explaining the situation so well. Unlike Bloke who just wanted to confuse the issue with a whole bunch of legal-type mumble-jumbo and jibber-jabber.



      • 4 Years Ago
      Maybe we can get an AMG powered Skyline...
      • 4 Years Ago
      Indeed, I think Mercedes has gone a long way toward making it so an E-Class and a Versa are screwed together similarly well.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Nissan/Renault has something Daimler wants, count on it. The question here is ' what has Daimler got that N/R wants, or needs?' Carlos had better watch his wallet closely, especially with Daimler on the hunt for money to feed it's losing Mercedes division, again. Regarding the 'merger of equals', whatever legal niceties used, it was purely a 'strip and flip' by Daimler-Benz, call it what you will. Chrysler was left for dead at the side of the road.
      • 4 Years Ago
      I could see this working.

      The fact that this is NOT a true merger, but rather a technology-sharing alliance is (possibly) a good thing.

      Also Nissan has a very strong and smart leader with Ghosn, so if Mercedes thinks they are just going to steamroll them like they did with Chrysler, I think they better think again.

      I am getting a little worried with all the consolidation within the industry though... while these car companies might not be merging per se, there have been a ton of tech-sharing agreements lately. And many of them deal with Mercedes. They have one already with BMW, and I thought they had another recent announcement with Peugeot (I think). Sometimes tech-agreements turn out very good, but too much of that can stifle competition since everyone is just sharing the same tech and not actually innovating.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Actually, I recently rented a Versa and to my very pleasant surprise, the "screwed-togetherness" of the car was one of the things that impressed me most about it. If their cheapest car is that tight, it speaks well of their other offerings. I expected to hate the Versa, but I actually kind of liked it. It was a completely stripped-down Versa too, yet still it wasn't bad, and it was peppy.

      It's turned me into a burgeoning Nissanophile; whereas, I was distrustful of them before (all that pre-Ghosn crap they made had tainted my impression of them).
      • 4 Years Ago
      I think people are misjudging where this partnership is headed. I've been tracking it for a while, and it looks like Nissan/Renault will develop FWD and Smart platforms for Daimler. Nissan may share EV drivetrains and already has a superior hybrid plarform in the new M (versus the GM-derrived 2-mode), so Nissan may help MB there too.

      However, when they say "big diesel engines," most indications are that they are talking about heavy commercial vehicles (think Freightliner). Daimler has experience in this segment. Renault/Nissan wants to expand their commercial vehicle offerings. This alliance could be a challenge to Navistar.
        • 4 Years Ago
        lne937s, you got it all wrong.
        2 mode hybrid is a power splitting transmission, which is way more flexible than the mild hybrid setup Nissan is running. Speaking of mild hybrid, Mercedes has a similar setup in S400H, it uses ZF electric machine sandwiched between engine and tran. Its battery is world's first serial production passage vehicle Li battery.

        Speaking of heavy truck engine, you do realize both Renault and Nissian's heavy truck division are under Volvo control, which is No. 1 competitor to MB heavy commercial vehicle? As for Navistar, these guys are joke, their HD engine is actually M.A.N. D20/26.
        • 4 Years Ago
        bkc,

        A couple of points of confusion:

        the S400H is the same system as the GM 2-mode, they were co-developed. Mercedes just uses a different supplier for their batteries and electric motors.

        The Nissan system in the M is just as much full hybrid as the 2-mode, it is different than the one in the Altima. It can run on electricity only up to highway speeds and was running on electricity only ~60% of the time in testing.

        And Renault owns Volvo truck, not the other way around.
        • 4 Years Ago
        "How is this better than the GM 2-mode?"

        They are similar in concept (both use motors between the engine and transmission, replacing the torque converter) and the 2-mode isn't a bad system, but there are some differences that make the Nissan system more advanced:

        The first is the elegant simplicity of the Nissan system, with half the electric motors, half the clutches, etc., without sacrificing any performance. This was made possible by Nissan's in-house developed electric motor. This lowers weight significantly.

        Unlike the 2-mode's 4 speed automatic, Nissan uses a 7 speed with a wider range of gearing (especially better for highway mileage).

        The way the system is engineered allows it to run in electric-only mode more of the time.

        In addition, it is coupled to Nissan's more-advanced lithium batteries which have greater charge/discharge capacity.
        • 4 Years Ago
        What's the Nissan M hybrid?
        • 4 Years Ago
        Sounds nice. How is this better than the GM 2-mode?
      • 4 Years Ago
      Maybe we can get a CRD diesel powered Nissan Maxima...:)
      • 4 Years Ago
      "On the other hand, a vehicle as inexpensive as a Versa that's as solidly screwed together as an E Class has a certain allure."

      How about an E-class that's as solidly screwed together as a Versa?
        • 4 Years Ago
        "Bob, I have a sneaking suspicion you've never driven an E Class Benz. Electrical maladies aside, they're amazingly solid. Not that a Versa is bad, mind you, but the E feels like it could hold up a railroad trestle. "

        Dan, your sneaking suspicion is right having only ridden in one. My smart ass comment was only based on the MB not so good reputation for poor reliability and the reverse for many less desirable vehicles of the world.
        • 4 Years Ago
        +1 on that comment. While I don't have any first-hand knowledge, the previous-gen E-Class was widely regarded as a shop queen. MB has nowhere to go but up
        • 4 Years Ago
        Bob, I have a sneaking suspicion you've never driven an E Class Benz. Electrical maladies aside, they're amazingly solid. Not that a Versa is bad, mind you, but the E feels like it could hold up a railroad trestle.
    • Load More Comments