● Esperti USA: attenzione, se GM non viene salvata dal fallimento, con una reazione a catena l’industria americana dell’auto rischia di essere acquisita da gruppi tedeschi,
o rafforzando considerevolmente la loro influenza sull’economia americana, dato che la crisi investe anche l’industria auto tedesca e giapponese, ma in modo meno violento dei tre big USA.
o Con l’assorbimento di gran parte del settore auto USA, i gruppi tedeschi e giapponesi verrebbero a controllare l’industria USA, in quanto grandi acquirenti di acciaio, alluminio, plastica, vetro, macchine utensili, chip per computer e gomma.
§ andrebbero perse anche capacità chiave: in USA sono dedicati a ricerca e sviluppo nell’auto $18,5 MD/anno à rimarrebbe negli USA solo una industria auto simile a quella del Messico.
o Data la debolezza di Chrysler i nuovi big dell’auto diverrebbero Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Vw (che non ha ancora aperto un suo impianto negli USA), Ford, Mercedes-Benz, BMW e Hyundai-Kia (NYT) (questi ultimi due hanno entrambi uno stabilimento negli USA) [come è accaduto per la banca di investimento Lehman Brothers, le cui spoglie e profitti sono stati assorbiti da una grande banca britannica e da una giapponese].
– Primo incontro della cancelliera Merkel con GM ed Opel, vari scenari discussi:
● se Washington sostiene GM con decine di MD, tutto resta sostanzialmente immutato;
o Opel riceverebbe garanzie statali solo per le attività in Germania;
● Se Washington lascia fallire GM, senza Opel la fornitura di auto non crollerebbe in Germania, e perciò non occorrerebbe sostenere Opel, le sue spoglie verrebbero assorbite da concorrenti tedeschi (ad es. VW).
● Altra ipotesi il distacco di Opel da GM e la sua nazionalizzazione, con successiva vendita ai privati, il che rappresenterebbe un ulteriore colpo a GM, le cui perdite sono state finanziate in misura significativa da Opel (2 MD nel 2008).
● Questo riporterebbe in mani tedesche il settore auto tedesco, finito durante la crisi del 1929 sotto controllo USA.
● Chrysler, la più piccola dei tre big, è stata per breve tempo acquisita dalla tedesca Daimler, e dopo la sua ristrutturazione è stata riconsegnata in mani americane.
o Prima misura del governo tedesco una garanzia da €1MD per Opel, a spese dei contribuenti.
● In ogni caso i costi verranno sostenuti dai lavoratori, con la perdita di decine di migliaia di posti di lavoro in caso di fallimento di Opel;
● se Opel viene sostenuta, i contribuenti devono pagare con le tasse
– GM era al primo posto mondiale per vendite ad inizio 2008, ora è passata dietro Toyota, e rischia il fallimento, a causa del calo delle vendite negli USA.
– Contro i circa 15 mn. di auto prodotte anni fa’ negli USA, nel 2007 erano solo 10,7 mn., con tendenza ad ulteriore calo per crisi. Nessuna delle tre big americane può fare profitti con 10 mn. di auto vendute.
– Se fallisse GM sarebbero trascinate al fallimento numerosi produttori di componentistica, con conseguenze anche per i gruppi auto rimasti che da questi dipendono; gli esperti prevedono che sarebbe necessaria una completa ristrutturazione del sistema componentistica e della stessa produzione auto.
● Cosa rappresenta per l’economia americana il settore auto?
o Nonostante il forte calo nel 2008, i gruppi auto e componentistica USA rappresentano il 20% della produzione industriale USA;
i Tre Big americani occupano 240 000 persone; i gruppi della componentistica altri 2,3 mn., quasi il 2% della popolazione attiva.
———————————-
Se Detroit crolla, i produttori esteri potrebbero fare da tampone
● Il fallimento di uno o più dei tre Big dell’auto di Detroit intaccherebbe enormemente il manifatturiero americano, ma poi i gruppi esteri, qui ben impiantati, ne approfitterebbero per aumentare la loro produzione negli USA, e assumere velocemente il controllo sia dell’auto che dell’indotto.
o Negli USA si avrebbe un’industria dell’auto simile a quella di Canada e Messico, a proprietà estera, con un periodo di transizione doloroso (240mila i salariati diretti + altri 2,3 mn. nella componentistica, pari a quasi il 2% della forza lavoro americana).
o Nel 2008 auto e componentistica contano ancora per il 2,3% del PIL americano, contro il 3,1% del 2006 e il 5% del decennio 1990; il 20% del manifatturiero è ancora legato all’auto. (dati governo USA).
o La produzione è scesa dal massimo di 17 mn. di veicoli (15 mn di auto e camion, per la maggior parte dello scorso decennio) ai 10 mn. attuali;
o I produttori auto americani hanno aumentato la quota di componentistica acquistata all’estero, ma l’85% rimane prodotta in Nord America contro il 60% dei produttori di auto di proprietà estera.
o Il presidente del sindacato dell’auto cerca di coinvolgere i gruppi esteri nel salvataggio dei tre Big, dato che il loro fallimento trascinerebbe quello dei gruppi di componentistica, da cui anche i produttori esteri dipendono; quest’ultimi non si sono finora espressi.
o I produttori giapponesi sono entrati nel mercato americano negli anni 1970, importando auto di alta qualità e a basso consumo; negli anni ’80 hanno impiantato fabbriche negli USA, perché limitati dalle quote di import imposte. I tre Big non hanno ancora sviluppato auto a basso consumo, come base della loro produzione.
– Il fallimento di GM comporterebbe l’eliminazione di oltre 100mila addetti del manifatturiero, pari circa ai posti persi quest’anno nell’auto e industria dei componenti, 1 posto di lavoro su 10, per la maggior parte nei tre Big, che occupano il 75% dei 333 mila addetti totali dell’auto negli USA, gruppi esteri compresi.
– Ulteriori tagli occupazionali sarebbero devastanti per Michigan, Ohio e Indiana; le delocalizzazioni dei gruppi esteri negli USA potrebbero occupare 78 000 addetti, ma a salari inferiori, meno indennità e in fabbriche non sindacalizzate in altre aree.
– GM, ormai senza denaro contante, chiede il sostegno del governo per mantenere la produzione e terminare la ristrutturazione per una maggiore flessibilità.
– Il Congresso americano discute questa settimana se intervenire o meno.
Il capo della confederazione sindacale dell’auto, Gettelfinger: siamo in una crisi che potrebbe avere un enorme effetto sul paese.
(Eigener Bericht) – US-Experten warnen vor einer Übernahme der amerikanischen Automobilindustrie durch deutsche und japanische Konzerne. Sollte es nicht gelingen, General Motors (GM) vor dem Bankrott zu retten, dann drohten Kettenreaktionen, die den gesamten Kraftfahrzeugsektor in den Ruin treiben könnten, erklären Branchenbeobachter in den Vereinigten Staaten.
– US-Traditionsunternehmen wie GM oder Chrysler würden danach durch Firmen wie Volkswagen, BMW oder Toyota ersetzt, die erheblichen Einfluss auf die amerikanische Wirtschaft gewännen.
– Die Herauslösung der GM-Tochtergesellschaft Opel aus dem Mutterkonzern und ihre Unterstellung unter deutsche Kontrolle ist zur Zeit Gegenstand von Gesprächen zwischen Konzernrepräsentanten und der Bundesregierung. Sie wäre ein weiterer Schlag für GM, da sich das US-Unternehmen zuletzt beträchtlich über Opel finanziert hat. Zudem stärkte sie die deutsche Position in der globalen Wirtschaftskonkurrenz mit den Vereinigten Staaten. Die Bundeskanzlerin will in einem ersten Schritt eine Milliardenbürgschaft für den Autoproduzenten prüfen – auf Kosten der Steuerzahler.
US-Experten warnen vor unabsehbaren Folgen eines Zusammenbruchs von General Motors (GM). Der Konzern, der bis zu Jahresbeginn nach Verkaufszahlen weltweit Branchenführer war, schwächelt seit geraumer Zeit und ist inzwischen hinter Toyota auf Platz zwei zurückgefallen. Mittlerweile droht sogar der Bankrott. Ursache ist vor allem der dramatische Absatzrückgang in den Vereinigten Staaten.
– Erreichte die Zahl in den USA hergestellter Autos (Pkws und leichte Lkws zusammengenommen) einst rund 15 Millionen Stück pro Jahr, so waren es 2007 gerade noch 10,75 Millionen [1] – mit weiterhin fallender Tendenz. Verschärfend kommen nun die Auswirkungen der beginnenden Weltwirtschaftskrise hinzu. "Keiner der Big Three (die drei US-Automobilriesen GM, Ford, Chrysler, d. Red.) kann bei 10 Millionen verkaufter Autos Geld verdienen", urteilt ein Branchenkenner.[2]
– Dabei weisen Beobachter darauf hin, dass ein GM-Zusammenbruch weitreichende Folgen hätte. So stünden im Falle eines GM-Bankrotts auch zahlreiche Automobilzulieferer vor dem Aus. Dies wiederum hätte sofortige Konsequenzen für die verbliebenen Konzerne, die auf die Zulieferer angewiesen sind. US-Experten rechnen für den Fall eines GM-Zusammenbruchs mit einer kompletten Neuorganisation des Zuliefersystems, aber auch der Automobilproduktion.
– "Angesichts der Schwäche von Chrysler wären die neuen Könige der Autoindustrie vermutlich Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, BMW und Hyundai-Kia", urteilt die New York Times [3]; sie würden sich die Konkursmasse der "Big Three" unter den Nagel reißen. Dieses Szenario ähnelt der Entwicklung nach dem Zusammenbruch der Investmentbank Lehman Brothers; deren Trümmer wurden, soweit sie Profit verhießen, von einer britischen und einer japanischen Großbank gekauft.
Das Szenario entspricht darüber hinaus Vorhersagen eines Analysten einer bekannten deutschen Privatbank aus Frankfurt am Main. Der Mann hatte bereits im Oktober erklärt: "Deutsche und Japaner werden gestärkt aus der (Automobil-, d. Red.) Krise hervorgehen".[4] Seine Analyse trägt dem Umstand Rechnung, dass die Krise zwar die deutsche und die japanische Autoindustrie ebenfalls trifft, aber nicht so stark wie die stürzenden Giganten in den USA – weshalb die deutschen Konzerne ihre Stellung gegenüber der Konkurrenz aus Amerika verbessern können.
– Die Bedeutung der Autobranche für die Wirtschaft der Vereinigten Staaten zeigt, was bei den aktuellen Bemühungen um die Rettung von GM auf dem Spiel steht. Trotz des dramatischen Rückgangs in diesem Jahr sorgen die Automobil- und die Zulieferfirmen für rund 20 Prozent der US-Industrieproduktion. Die "Big Three" beschäftigen 240.000 Personen, die Zulieferbetriebe zusätzlich 2,3 Millionen, das sind beinahe zwei Prozent der erwerbstätigen Bevölkerung.
– Sollten tatsächlich japanische und deutsche Konzerne die US-Automobil-Konkursmasse in weiten Teilen übernehmen, dann könnten sie Branchenexperten zufolge als "Großkunden für Stahl, Aluminium, Kunststoffe, Glas, Werkzeugmaschinen, Computerchips und Gummi" die "Industrie in den Vereinigten Staaten dominieren".[5]
– Zudem gingen Schlüsselkapazitäten verloren. "Zur Zeit geben wir 18,5 Milliarden US-Dollar jährlich für Automobilforschung und -entwicklung aus", sagt ein Branchenexperte; die neuen Firmenzentralen dürften den strategisch wichtigen technologischen Fortschritt überwiegend an ihren Heimatstandorten entwickeln. "Man hätte eine Autoindustrie in den USA ungefähr wie in Mexiko", heißt es beim "Center for Automotive Research" in Ann Arbor.
– Der Kampf um General Motors wird mittlerweile auch in Deutschland geführt. Hintergrund ist, dass Berlin im Falle eines GM-Bankrotts über die Zukunft der GM-Tochter Opel entscheiden will.
– Opel hat zuletzt mit bis zu zwei Milliarden Euro die Verluste des amerikanischen Mutterhauses finanziert und verlangt nun, staatliche Stellen sollten die vorgesehenen Investitionen ermöglichen – anstelle von GM und mit einer Bürgschaft aus Steuermitteln. Bundeskanzlerin Merkel hat am gestrigen Montag erste Gespräche mit GM und Opel geführt.
– Mehrere Varianten werden diskutiert. Sollte Washington die amerikanische Konzernzentrale mit zweistelligen Milliardensummen stützen, kann im Grundsatz alles beim Alten bleiben; die staatliche Bürgschaft erhielte Opel allerdings ausschließlich für Aktivitäten in Deutschland.
– Lässt Washington GM fallen wie kürzlich Lehman Brothers, hat Berlin mehrere Optionen zur Verfügung. "Ohne Opel" breche "in Deutschland nicht die Versorgung mit Autos zusammen", erklärt ein Experte und rät, die GM-Tochter nicht zu stützen. Die nach dem Kollaps frei werdenden Marktanteile könnten dann von konkurrierenden deutschen Autokonzernen, etwa Volkswagen, übernommen werden.[6]
– Andere befürworten stattdessen den Kauf von Opel durch den deutschen Staat, mit anschließendem Verkauf an deutsche Investoren.[7]
– Auf diese Weise geriete das deutsche Traditionsunternehmen, das während der letzten Weltwirtschaftskrise 1929 unter US-Kontrolle gekommen war, wieder in deutschen Besitz.[8] "Wir müssen endlich General Motors loswerden", heißt es bei der Unternehmenszentrale in Rüsselsheim.[9] Der Verkauf von Opel würde GM, sollte der Konzern fortbestehen, deutlich schwächen, die deutsche Industrie jedoch stärken und ihr weitere Vorteile in der globalen Konkurrenz verschaffen.
– Die Kosten trägt in jedem Fall die Bevölkerung. Wird Opel fallengelassen, werden Zehntausende arbeitslos – Einbrüche in der Zulieferindustrie nicht eingerechnet. Wird Opel gestützt, stehen die Steuerzahler für die Milliardenbürgschaft ein. Eine Entscheidung darüber soll, wie es gestern nach einem Krisentreffen im Kanzleramt hieß, in wenigen Wochen gefällt werden – noch vor Weihnachten.
[1] Branche kompakt. USA. Kfz-Industrie und Kfz-Teile; Bundesagentur für Außenwirtschaft, Februar 2008
[2], [3] If Detroit Falls, Foreign Makers Could Be Buffer; The New York Times 16.11.2008
[4] Autoindustrie: Warum deutsche Hersteller von der Krise profitieren werden; Spiegel online 25.10.2008
[5] If Detroit Falls, Foreign Makers Could Be Buffer; The New York Times 16.11.2008
[6], [7] Merkel knüpft Opel-Bürgschaft an Bedingung; Rheinische Post 17.11.2008
[8] In einer Selbstdarstellung des Unternehmens heißt es: "Die kreditfinanzierte Konjunktur brach Ende der 1920er Jahre mit der Weltwirtschaftskrise zusammen – und auch die Automobilindustrie litt darunter. Durch einen klugen Schachzug der Opel Brüder entkam Opel dem Krisenszenario: Nach vielen Verhandlungen übernahm die General Motors Corporation, die wegen hoher Einfuhrzölle seit längerem ein Produktionswerk in Deutschland suchte, die Aktienmehrheit der Adam Opel GmbH."
[9] "Wir müssen endlich General Motors loswerden"; Spiegel Online 17.11.2008
– The failure of one or more of Detroit’s Big Three automakers would put a huge initial dent in American manufacturing, but in time foreign car companies would pick up the slack by stepping up production in their plants here, many industry experts and economists say.
Whether Washington should let that play out — risking hundreds of thousands of jobs — is a central question Congress will weigh this week as it hears testimony from Detroit leaders who are pushing for immediate federal intervention, before the next administration takes over in January.
– “Barack Obama has made it clear he understands the importance of the industry. The question is, do we get that far?” Ron Gettelfinger, head of the United Auto Workers, said in an interview Friday, raising the prospect of a General Motors bankruptcy. “At this juncture, we are in a crisis that could have a major negative impact on this country.”
– But many industry experts say the big foreign makers are established enough to take control of the industry and its vast supplier network more quickly than is widely understood.
– “You would have an auto industry in the United States more like that of Mexico and Canada: foreign-owned,” said Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., which describes itself as a nonprofit organization that has “strong relationships with industry, government agencies, universities, research institutes, labor organizations” and other groups with an interest in the auto business.
● The transition to that new equilibrium would surely be painful. The big American companies employ about 240,000 workers, and their suppliers an additional 2.3 million, amounting to nearly 2 percent of the nation’s work force.
– The outright failure of General Motors would eliminate the biggest auto employer and more than 100,000 manufacturing jobs. That is roughly the number of jobs already lost this year at the nation’s automakers and their suppliers.
– G.M. is rapidly running out of cash and appealing to Washington for a multibillion-dollar bailout to keep operating and continue the costly conversion to a leaner company producing efficient vehicles that people will buy.
– G.M.’s collapse would probably bring down some of its suppliers as well. Since many of them ship parts and subassemblies to the other auto makers — domestic and foreign — auto production could be crippled until the supply system was reorganized around the newly dominant foreign car makers.
“The transplants, deprived of enough suppliers, would have to rely on imported vehicles while they scramble to reorganize the supply system,” Mr. McAlinden said, speaking of the foreign companies with manufacturing plants in the United States. “That would take them about a year.”
● Given Chrysler’s weakness, the new kings of the auto industry would presumably be Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Hyundai-Kia. (Volkswagen has not yet opened a plant in the United States, and BMW and Hyundai each have one plant.)
– Like the Big Three, they would together dominate manufacturing in the United States, becoming big customers for steel, aluminum, plastics, glass, machine tools, computer chips and rubber.
Even in this year of plunging car sales, the automakers and their vast supplier network still account for 2.3 percent of the nation’s economic output, down from 3.1 percent in 2006 and as much as 5 percent in the 1990s, according to government data. More significant, economists say, 20 percent of the shrinking manufacturing sector is still tied to the automobile industry.
“I don’t think people appreciate the importance of this backward linkage to the rest of manufacturing,” said Sanford Jacoby, an economic historian at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The automakers play a big role in sustaining other manufacturers.”
– Gradually, the auto industry has already become less American. The smallest of the Big Three, Chrysler, was owned for a while by the German company, Daimler, before it was returned to American ownership in the form of a privately held company in a much slimmer state than its once starring role in Detroit.
– The American automakers, of course, have bought more and more parts from overseas. But 85 percent of their products are made in North America, compared with 60 percent for the foreign-owned automakers, said Dan Luria, research director at the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center.
– Vehicles built entirely abroad drive down the percentage at the foreign-owned automakers. The popular Toyota Prius, for example, is not yet manufactured in the United States. That will come soon, Toyota says. But given worldwide demand for the car, Toyota achieves economies of scale by centering production in Japan rather than using multiple sites.
– Such an inclination on the part of foreign companies to keep their production out of the United States helps to explain the push by the Democrats in Congress to provide aid to keep the American automakers alive. The federal help would probably go first to G.M., which says it will run out of cash by early next year and be forced out of business without federal help.
Rather than collapse outright, a carmaker could file for bankruptcy protection. If it obtained financing, the company could then continue operating and slim down to a more manageable size, with cuts occurring over a period of months or years.
– But some of its operations could be taken over by another automaker or it could even be forced to liquidate.
“If the Big Three go down, a bunch of the suppliers go down, and the transplants share a number of the suppliers,” said Alan Reuther, director of the United Automobile Workers’ Washington office — trying in effect to enlist the foreign-owned makers in the effort to save the Big Three.
So far those manufacturers have stayed on the sidelines, avoiding any suggestion that they would like to see any of the American automakers disappear. “Toyota strongly believes that a strong market with vigorous competition is in everyone’s interest,” said Tina Ewald, a Toyota spokeswoman.
– The Japanese automakers broke into the American market in the 1970s by exporting small, high-quality, fuel-efficient vehicles during an energy crisis. They began putting factories here in the 1980s, when import quotas and anti-Japanese sentiment threatened to restrict their American sales.
Fuel-efficient vehicles are still the strength of the Japanese and other foreign automakers at a time when such vehicles dominate what auto sales there still are in a rapidly sinking economy. The Big Three have not yet developed fuel-efficient cars as the mainstays of their fleets, and some in Congress are insisting they do that in exchange for any bailout.
– But if the current downturn is prolonged, it might be too late. In an industry capable of making 17 million cars a year, sales have dropped to an annual rate of only 10 million vehicles made here.
– “None of the Big Three — and perhaps not the transplants — can make money at 10 million,” Mr. Luria said. “The transplants are O.K. at 12 million and the Big Three at 15 million or so.”
– Annual sales of autos and light trucks have been at least 15 million through most of the last decade.
– The downsizing in response to the slump has been harsh. More than 100,000 jobs have disappeared since January at the automakers and their suppliers, one in every 10 jobs lost in the United States this year.
– The three American-owned companies were responsible for most of the loss. They employ 75 percent of the nation’s 333,000 total auto workers when foreign-owned companies are included.
– The elimination of many more workers, most of them union[e] members and earning upwards of $20 an hour, would be devastating in Michigan, Ohio and Indiana, where the American automakers and many of their suppliers are concentrated. In fact, many of those jobs may disappear even if the companies win government assistance.
– But other employers would take their place over time. As the foreign companies stepped up production to replace what would be lost by an American company’s collapse, the transplants would add to their existing work force of 78,000, replacing many of the lost jobs, although at lower wages, with fewer benefits and at nonunion[e] factories in other parts of the country.
The auto industry’s share of the gross domestic product would probably also revive, if the transplants were to build in the United States the vast majority of the cars they sold here, holding down imports.
– Still, there would be one irreplaceable loss, Mr. McAlinden argued. “Right now, we do $18.5 billion of automotive research and development in a year,” he said, referring to innovative projects like the development of new types of batteries.
– G.M. in particular is involved in the development of lithium ion batteries to power the next generation of cars. If G.M. disappeared, “the foreign companies would develop the batteries, but not here,” Mr. McAlinden predicted. “We would lose all the additional development connected to that technology. It would be a technology opportunity lost.”