IN the wake of the largest industrial merger, confirmed yesterday by Germany's Daimler-Benz and Chrysler of the US, and the continuing tussle over Rolls-Royce, the motor industry world-wide is ripe for further rationalisation.
Although the industry, certainly in Europe, is fairly buoyant, there is clearly far too much capacity in the medium to longer term.
This position, which has been caused in part by the series of Japanese ''implants'' into the UK, has heaped pressure on European car manufacturers (including extensive US-owned subsidiaries of Ford and General Motors) which have been forced to strive to compete with these ultra modern greenfield site operations.
Last week General Motors revealed it was to take a stake of between 35% and 50% in the motor business of Korean conglomerate Daewoo, which in turn is to take a 50% stake in British van maker LDV, formerly Leyland Daf.
There have also been hints that a Daewoo car production line might be set up in the UK.
Although Ford has taken over Jaguar and Aston Martin, the big German auto manufacturers have tended to be the main players in the market of late as BMW absorbed Rover while Volkswagen gobbled up Seat of Spain and Skoda of the Czech
Republic.
It was as BMW and
Volkswagen vied for the small but immensely prestigious Rolls-Royce Motors - which now seems to have gone VW's way after initial agreement between owners Vickers and BMW was announced last week - that Daimler-Benz secretly negotiated the much bigger merger with Chrysler.
The shake-out of the motor industry looks set to continue, especially in Europe with
governments and motor manufacturers all anxious to ensure that their car operations and jobs are not sacrificed on the altar of overcapacity.
It seems that they cannot all be successful and that before long there will be more more mergers. Ultimately some heads will roll . . . but whose?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article