Nissan: Sales, Marketing, and Financial News - Page 5 - AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community

Go Back  AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community > Automotive Discussion > Automotive News
Reload this Page >

Nissan: Sales, Marketing, and Financial News

Notices
Automotive News
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Nissan: Sales, Marketing, and Financial News

Old 06-28-2006, 09:22 PM
  #161  
I'm the Firestarter
 
Belzebutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 11,297
Thanked 335 Times in 205 Posts
Originally Posted by M TYPE X
Nissan: cost-cut interiors, unrefined engines, lower resale value

Not bad overall, definitely not Mitsubishi ... but not exactly like Honda either.
Being Mitsubishi is supposed to be a good thing? I rented a Galant last year and it was very "meh". Definitely not much of a driver's car and the interior felt like pretty cheap plastic despite the weird shapes and the attempt at variation in materials. I really can't see how an Altima or Maxima can be any worse.
Belzebutt is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:55 PM
  #162  
Moderator Alumnus
 
Silver™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 37,312
Thanked 333 Times in 242 Posts
Originally Posted by Belzebutt
Being Mitsubishi is supposed to be a good thing? I rented a Galant last year and it was very "meh". Definitely not much of a driver's car and the interior felt like pretty cheap plastic despite the weird shapes and the attempt at variation in materials. I really can't see how an Altima or Maxima can be any worse.


He is saying that at the crappy end of the scale is mitsubishi and that honda is at the upper end of the scale. And that Nissan is in between the two.

I think I should start to charge for deciphering M TYPE X's posts. Would be a full time job.
Silver™ is offline  
Old 06-29-2006, 12:35 AM
  #163  
Pinky all stinky
 
phile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 20,499
Thanked 118 Times in 71 Posts
Nah that's just Belzebutt. I understood what MTX was saying.
phile is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 10:16 AM
  #164  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 50
Posts: 16,400
Thanked 455 Times in 304 Posts
Renault-Nissan-GM Alliance **Proxy fight looming? (page 5)**

Kerkorian calls on GM to look into joining the alliance between Nissan and Renault. The latest inflation gauge indicates a tame rise in prices.

General Motors (GM, news, msgs) jumped more the 12% and pushed the Dow and the broader market higher in early trading after the automaker's largest shareholder publicly called for the company to consider joining an alliance between Nissan and Renault.

Kirk Kerkorian's Tracinda investment vehicle, which owns 9.9% of GM, said in a regulatory filing that GM should establish a committee to explore joining the Nissan/Renault alliance.

Carlos Ghosn, chief executive of both Nissan and Renault, recently had dinner with Kerkorian, at which Ghosn indicated a desire to speak with GM about joining the alliance and about buying a 20% stake in GM, CNBC's David Faber reported, citing people close to the situation. Such a deal would inject $3 billion in much-needed equity into the automaker, Faber said.

The Renault and Nissan partnership began in 1999 and is considered a huge success, with Nissan's profit margin now the highest in the industry.

LINK
Very interesting.
F23A4 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 10:42 AM
  #165  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
WOW. This is good news. First and foremost, they share a common enemy (and archrival); Toyota. You know, "My enemy's enemy is my friend... For both GM and Nissan, the game's all bout halting Toyota's quest for world domination. I think Nissan and GM woul do well working together. More importantly (and telling) is Ghosn's interest in buying a 20% stake. Ghosn's no slouch, so if he's that interested then there's alot of value in GM. Further, it would make Nissan/Renault GM's largest public shareholder, having twice the stake in it that Kerkorian has; with his 9.9% stake Kerkorian was able to put his man on GM's board, and is very influential. It stands to reason Ghosn would easily be able to control one or two board seats. Is this the first step to fixing GM? Though GM's stock has shot back up in the past month (damnit, I knew I should have bought @ $19), it's still a good value. And if this "alliance" goes through, it'll rise much more.
titan is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 10:48 AM
  #166  
Registered Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CGTSX2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beach Cities, CA
Posts: 24,300
Thanked 378 Times in 198 Posts
Whoa...that's would be one hell of a huge corporate alliance...

Wonder how the SEC would feel about it?
CGTSX2004 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:23 AM
  #167  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
Wonder how the SEC would feel about it?
Very good question. I think they'd be okay with it, as long as it's an "alliance" and not a merger. But since GM's markert share is only 25% now, and with Nissan's at no more than 10%, I don't think there would be serious anti-trust concerns.
titan is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:26 AM
  #168  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Tracinda: Renault, Nissan Want GM Stake - - Renault and Nissan Want Stake in GM, According to Investor Kerkorian's Tracinda Corp. - - AP - - SOurce: yahoo.com

NEW YORK (AP) -- Automakers Renault SA and Nissan Motor Co. are interested in purchasing a significant stake in General Motors Corp. and including the struggling Detroit company in their alliance, according to a letter sent Friday to GM from billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian's investment company.


Shares of GM increased $1.20, or 4.4 percent, to $28.64 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange after the news.

The letter from Kerkorian's investment company, Tracinda Corp., said the company believes Renault and Nissan are receptive to the idea of including General Motors in their partnership and purchasing "a significant minority interest" in the Detroit automaker.

Tracinda, a large minority shareholder in GM, said the existing French-Japanese partnership has created "tremendous engineering, manufacturing and marketing synergies, resulting in substantial benefits and cost savings to both Renault and Nissan."

Tracinda urged GM's board to form a committee to "immediately and fully explore this opportunity together with management," as it feels the alliance could help GM "realize substantial synergies and cost savings and thereby greatly benefit the company and enhance shareholder value."

GM, in a statement, said the Tracinda request "will be taken under advisement" by its board of directors. The automaker said it has not received any offers or proposals from Renault/Nissan about an alliance. GM said it would have no further comment.

Tracinda owns 9.9 percent of GM's common stock and is GM's third-largest shareholder. Kerkorian has pressured GM to take aggressive steps to restore profitability and his top aide, Jerome York, was elected to GM's board earlier this year.

The letter also indicates that Tracinda has reached out to Renault Chairman Louis Schweitzer and Nissan Chairman Carlos Ghosn to alert them to its contact with General Motors.

In a separate letter advising Schweitzer and Ghosn of the GM correspondence, Tracinda noted that "as we recently discussed with Mr. Ghosn, Tracinda believes that General Motors, Renault and Nissan should explore a three-company, partnership-based alliance."

Officials with Renault and Nissan declined comment.

Renault owns a 44.4 percent stake in Nissan, which in turn owns a 15 percent stake in Renault. Nissan was on the brink of bankruptcy when Ghosn was dispatched by Renault to lead the Japanese company in 1999. The Brazilian-born Ghosn engineered a cost-cutting and morale-boosting campaign that revived the automaker.


gavriil is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:29 AM
  #169  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
To "explore a three-company, partnership-based alliance" like Mitsu and Eagle for example in the past with Diamond Star Motors and other similar examples is one thing, but any possiblity of having the above three merge, should be out of the question.
gavriil is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:54 AM
  #170  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 50
Posts: 16,400
Thanked 455 Times in 304 Posts
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
Whoa...that's would be one hell of a huge corporate alliance...

Wonder how the SEC would feel about it?
I do not believe there would be any SEC hangups with an alliance between GM and Renault/Nissan.
F23A4 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:58 AM
  #171  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 50
Posts: 16,400
Thanked 455 Times in 304 Posts
off Bloomberg:

June 30 (Bloomberg) -- Kirk Kerkorian's Tracinda Corp. asked General Motors Corp.'s Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner to explore a three-way partnership with Nissan Motor Co. and Renault SA.

Tracinda, which holds 9.9 percent of GM shares, said in a letter to Wagoner today that the partnership would ``strengthen the competitive positions of all three companies.'' GM shares and bonds rose.

Today's disclosure heightens Kerkorian's pressure on GM, the world's largest automaker. The billionaire labeled his initial stake in GM 14 months ago as being ``solely for investment purposes.'' He allowed adviser Jerome York to call in a Jan. 10 speech for a faster restructuring at the automaker. York was named a GM director in February.

``Kerkorian wouldn't have written the letter if Renault and Nissan hadn't spent a fair amount of time thinking about this,'' said John Casesa, an auto analyst at New York-based Casesa Shapiro Group LLC. ``The point of Kerkorian's letter today is that GM's largest individual shareholder is turning up the heat on management to accelerate the improvement in results.''

GM shares rose $1.30, or 4.7 percent, to $28.74 at 10:44 a.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading after gaining 11.4 percent earlier. GM's 8.375 percent bond due July 2033 rose 1.6 cents on the dollar to 78.5 cents on the dollar and its yield fell to 10.85 percent from 11.08 percent, according to Trace, the bond-price reporting service of the NASD.

GM Response

GM, in a statement, said Tracinda's proposal ``will be taken under advisement'' and declined to comment further. GM said it ``has received no offer or proposal'' from Renault and Nissan. Claire Martin, a spokeswoman for Renault, which holds a 44 percent stake in Tokyo-based Nissan, declined to comment. A message left with Nissan spokesman Tim Gallagher wasn't immediately returned.

GM lost $10.6 billion last year and is closing plants, selling assets and buying out workers in an effort to return to profit.

Tracinda included a copy of its letter to Wagoner, dated today, in a U.S. regulatory filing. The letter said it ``is our understanding'' that Renault and Nissan ``are receptive'' to forming an alliance with GM and ``purchasing from General Motors a significant minority interest'' in the Detroit-based automaker.

An alliance could provide GM ``substantial synergies and cost savings and thereby greatly benefit the company and enhance shareholder value,'' the Tracinda letter said. Tracinda urged GM directors to form a committee to ``immediately and fully explore this opportunity together with management.''

Considering Acquisitions

At the French carmaker's annual meeting on May 4, Chief Executive Officer Carlos Ghosn said the company may consider acquisitions under the right circumstances. He was responding to a shareholder's question on whether Renault is interested in buying General Motors Corp.'s Saab car brand.

``The industry is not doing well, and when that is the case, development, partnerships or purchases can be had more cheaply and we will be watching very closely'' for opportunities, Ghosn said.

The Tracinda filing also included a copy of a letter to Renault and Nissan. That letter says Tracinda ``recently discussed'' the idea of an alliance with Ghosn, who is also CEO of Nissan.

``Tracinda believes that General Motors, Renault and Nissan should explore a three-company, partnership-based alliance,'' the second letter said. ``Tracinda believes that such a global alliance has the potential to materially strength the competitive position of all three companies.'' Tracinda holds 56 million GM shares.

``It may not be good for Wagoner, but it would be good for GM,'' said Brian Bruce, who helps manage about $18 billion at PanAGora Asset Management in Boston, including GM shares. ``At this point, they don't appear to have the right answers. Anything that looks like change for the positive would be good.''
Bloomberg
F23A4 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:58 AM
  #172  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 47,711
Thanked 797 Times in 659 Posts
I seriously doubt GM will be at all interested. When was the last time they made a sound business move?
dom is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:04 PM
  #173  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by dom
I seriously doubt GM will be at all interested. When was the last time they made a sound business move?
right on...

I remember reading that the domestic companies (i think GM) made an offer to Ghosn to jump over to GM, which he turned down.

This would be the closest they could get to benefiting from his magic...but of course like dom says, they'll fuck it up somehow. They'll probably end up saying, "Oh, I see Nissan/Renault is interested in taking a strategic position in us...maybe that means that we ROCK!" [everyone high-fives each other and slaps each other's butts]. then they turn it down and play hardball, thinking they are doing a favor to Nissan/Renault just by considering letting them invest in GM.

Last edited by mrdeeno; 06-30-2006 at 12:07 PM.
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:26 PM
  #174  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
GM does not need Renault nor Nissan to "get fixed". It can do it on its own. The right people are needed, not alliances with competitors.
gavriil is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 12:43 PM
  #175  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by gavriil
GM does not need Renault nor Nissan to "get fixed". It can do it on its own. The right people are needed, not alliances with competitors.

yeah, but that reminds me of what this redneck dude i used to work with used to say (his granddad was a grand dragon or something for the KKK).

he used to say, "I don't know WHAT reason ANYBODY has for buying foreign cars. ANY foreign car in the world, the DEE-TROIT automakers can make BETTER!".

My response to him, "Yeah, i can't argue with whether or not they CAN make a better car. But what I will argue with is that they DON'T!" To me, CAN and DO are two separate ideas.


GM can fix themselves, sure. They can hire the right people to turn things around....but they don't. Hopefully they will, and tehre have been signs of life over there, but only time will tell.

Last edited by mrdeeno; 06-30-2006 at 12:47 PM.
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 01:06 PM
  #176  
Burn some dust here
 
cob3683's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Atlanta
Age: 35
Posts: 5,709
Thanked 13 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
GM does not need Renault nor Nissan to "get fixed". It can do it on its own. The right people are needed, not alliances with competitors.


GM seems to be on a little run lately with the Escalade, Tahoe/Yukon, Vette, and the upcoming CTS.
cob3683 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 01:21 PM
  #177  
Registered Member
 
biker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 54
Posts: 11,477
Thanked 107 Times in 85 Posts
So, let's see, can I get a CTS with the new VQ engine?
biker is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 01:23 PM
  #178  
dom
Senior Moderator
 
dom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 47,711
Thanked 797 Times in 659 Posts
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
yeah, but that reminds me of what this redneck dude i used to work with used to say (his granddad was a grand dragon or something for the KKK).

he used to say, "I don't know WHAT reason ANYBODY has for buying foreign cars. ANY foreign car in the world, the DEE-TROIT automakers can make BETTER!".

My response to him, "Yeah, i can't argue with whether or not they CAN make a better car. But what I will argue with is that they DON'T!" To me, CAN and DO are two separate ideas.


GM can fix themselves, sure. They can hire the right people to turn things around....but they don't. Hopefully they will, and tehre have been signs of life over there, but only time will tell.

I see you have as much faith in GM as you do in Honda.
dom is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 04:12 PM
  #179  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by dom
I see you have as much faith in GM as you do in Honda.
No I have some faith in Honda. They may not be putting out products that I am interested in, but they at least are making money and are flexible enough that if they do decide to make more EXCITING products, rather than KILLING exciting products (RSX, NSX, Prelude), they could easily do it.

As for GM, i don't have much faith in them. They can have all the balls in the world to develop cars that people like, but they are STILL stuck with union contracts and legacy costs. I do see exciting products coming out of GM, but the vast majority of GM products suck and they are still bleeding money which puts a damper on innovation.

I'd much rather have a conservative car company that makes a lot of money than a car company that makes a couple exciting cars but loses money like the second coming of Enron.
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 04:24 PM
  #180  
Registered Member
iTrader: (1)
 
CGTSX2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beach Cities, CA
Posts: 24,300
Thanked 378 Times in 198 Posts
Originally Posted by F23A4
I do not believe there would be any SEC hangups with an alliance between GM and Renault/Nissan.
Not necessarily concerned about the SEC having any hangups about the alliance, but you gotta think that at least a few at the SEC have to be thinking that the door has just been opened for another US company to be taken over by a foreign company. I'd be curious to hear what SEC analysts have to say about this situation is all.
CGTSX2004 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 04:40 PM
  #181  
Stay Metal
 
Doom878's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Age: 40
Posts: 24,671
Thanked 778 Times in 607 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
So, let's see, can I get a CTS with the new VQ engine?
Or a Maxima with an LS7.
Doom878 is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 05:55 PM
  #182  
The sizzle in the Steak
 
Moog-Type-S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern California
Posts: 71,438
Thanked 1,876 Times in 1,296 Posts
Originally Posted by dom
I seriously doubt GM will be at all interested. When was the last time they made a sound business move?
...but very true.
Moog-Type-S is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 08:05 PM
  #183  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: philly
Posts: 4,426
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
So, let's see, can I get a CTS with the new VQ engine?
We aren't talking about an Acura merger here, GM is plenty capable of delivering engines of any power level on their own. I'm not so sure I see the real benefit as GM is on an upswing. 3 years ago, yes, hurry do it. What are we going to see the Nissan YD next to a Yukon Denali and a Chevy 3.5ze next to a nissan 350z. What is the outcome?
heyitsme is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 10:04 PM
  #184  
Pinky all stinky
 
phile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 20,499
Thanked 118 Times in 71 Posts
GM shouldn't bite. They're on an upswing...the new Buick Enclave is a stunning design, the new CTS looks like it'll have quite an interior, new engines are coming. And most importantly, GM has a loyal (read: "patriotic") customer base. The brand itself would suffer more than it would prosper when these customers see that their home team is now a part of a French company.
phile is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:33 PM
  #185  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by mrdeeno
yeah, but that reminds me of what this redneck dude i used to work with used to say (his granddad was a grand dragon or something for the KKK).

he used to say, "I don't know WHAT reason ANYBODY has for buying foreign cars. ANY foreign car in the world, the DEE-TROIT automakers can make BETTER!".

My response to him, "Yeah, i can't argue with whether or not they CAN make a better car. But what I will argue with is that they DON'T!" To me, CAN and DO are two separate ideas.


GM can fix themselves, sure. They can hire the right people to turn things around....but they don't. Hopefully they will, and tehre have been signs of life over there, but only time will tell.
What are exactly the great offerings from Renault, and even from Nissan that GM "cant touch" so to speak?

It's not like BMW is interested in collaborating with Pontiac
gavriil is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:35 PM
  #186  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by biker
So, let's see, can I get a CTS with the new VQ engine?
I think the next gen. Caddy V6 will be comparable to the VQ.
gavriil is offline  
Old 06-30-2006, 11:37 PM
  #187  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
All of this is stock manipulation IMO
gavriil is offline  
Old 07-01-2006, 08:40 AM
  #188  
Senior Moderator
 
F23A4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Age: 50
Posts: 16,400
Thanked 455 Times in 304 Posts
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
Not necessarily concerned about the SEC having any hangups about the alliance, but you gotta think that at least a few at the SEC have to be thinking that the door has just been opened for another US company to be taken over by a foreign company. I'd be curious to hear what SEC analysts have to say about this situation is all.
It is just another sign of the fact that it is all part of economic globalism.

Japan has a law on the books that does limit foreign ownership of Japanese firms. Thus, Renault's 37% ownership of Nissan...which I believe makes them the largest single Nissan shareholder. But I do not believe the US has such laws. (Correct me if I am wrong here.)

But ; I would keep an eye on the SEC peripherally.

Originally Posted by Doom878
Or a Maxima with an LS7.
....as if the Maxima does not already have excessive torque steer.
F23A4 is offline  
Old 07-01-2006, 07:51 PM
  #189  
Registered Member
 
DownUnder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 2,054
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Doom878
Or a 350Z with an LS7.
Fixed.
DownUnder is offline  
Old 07-02-2006, 08:01 PM
  #190  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by gavriil
What are exactly the great offerings from Renault, and even from Nissan that GM "cant touch" so to speak?

It's not like BMW is interested in collaborating with Pontiac
Who said anything about "can't touch"? I'm talking about "doesn't do".

My product example was just to demonstrate the differences between "can" and "do", and this was to shut down a redneck that said his '01 Chevy Impala has better "Xenon" headlights and "Navigation system" than an Acura CL-S. But my intent is to think about "can" and "do" on a larger operational scale rather than "product vs. product".

But to answer your question, there are A LOT of things that the Nissan/Renault alliance does that benefit them that GM doesn't "do", especially from a business standpoint. They can put out competitive products, but they still continue to produce at or below par products (not quality per se, but "appeal"), very low or NO profitability, and their operations and production costs continue to be a huge problem.

I agree with what you that GM CAN turn themselves around without Nissan/Renault, but until they actually DO, it's all theoretical. But I can think of things that GM CAN'T do without a Nissan/Renault alliance...they probably CAN'T use any turnaround experience that Nissan/Renault went through...and i say "probably", because there's always a chance that even without an alliance, there is always a chance someone with the experience could jump ship and join GM.
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 07-02-2006, 08:06 PM
  #191  
Banned
 
M TYPE X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Champaign, Illinois
Age: 36
Posts: 7,309
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This would be a bad move for GM and for Nissan. Renault might benefit from access to a dealer network in North America.
M TYPE X is offline  
Old 07-02-2006, 08:27 PM
  #192  
Senior Moderator
 
GreenMonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Swansea, MA
Age: 52
Posts: 35,219
Thanked 13 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
All of this is stock manipulation IMO
We should have bought gm stock last week
GreenMonster is offline  
Old 07-02-2006, 11:48 PM
  #193  
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
All of this is stock manipulation IMO
Precisely... though, unfortunately, it hasn't meant a shot in the arm for Nissan's stock like it has for GM's.
titan is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 01:57 AM
  #194  
Senior Moderator
 
West6MT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Toronto
Age: 36
Posts: 8,889
Thanked 106 Times in 80 Posts
I read about this the other day in the paper. Although interesting, I dont really see this happening.
West6MT is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 01:07 PM
  #195  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by mrdeeno

Who said anything about "can't touch"? I'm talking about "doesn't do".
OK let me substitue then. Same thing:

What are the Renault and Nissan offerings that GM cannot do (as well)? What does GM have to be "jelous of" from Nissan and Renault? Which products?


Originally Posted by mrdeeno

But to answer your question, there are A LOT of things that the Nissan/Renault alliance does that benefit them that GM doesn't "do", especially from a business standpoint.
Like?

Originally Posted by mrdeeno

They can put out competitive products, but they still continue to produce at or below par products (not quality per se, but "appeal"),
Compared to Renault and Nissan? Like which products?


Originally Posted by mrdeeno
very low or NO profitability, and their operations and production costs continue to be a huge problem.
I agree about profitability. But the "new GM" so to speak, just bore fruit. It just started. We will know about profitability in about a year or two from now. Nissan's rejuvination has been going on for a few years now. Plus Nissan does not have the benefit-related costs the GM has due to different country laws.

Originally Posted by mrdeeno

I agree with what you that GM CAN turn themselves around without Nissan/Renault, but until they actually DO, it's all theoretical.
They ARE turning around. For GM to turn around it will take longer than any other comapny would, and a TON longer than Nissan due to the size of GM. IT's only natural.

Originally Posted by mrdeeno

But I can think of things that GM CAN'T do without a Nissan/Renault alliance...they probably CAN'T use any turnaround experience that Nissan/Renault went through...and i say "probably", because there's always a chance that even without an alliance, there is always a chance someone with the experience could jump ship and join GM.
Nissan's execs that helped with the turnaround should not be perceived as being able to turn GM around in a theoritical situation. The reason? Different situation. Totally. Just because Gohsn turned a company around in Japan, that does not mean he can do it with a company so many times larger, in the USA. Maybe he can, but not necessarily.

Plus, if anyone think that the benefit of a GM-Nissa/Renault alliance would be Nissan/Renault's mgt's ability to turn things around, you dont have to make an alliance with a company for that, all you have to do is lure a few people away and you have achieved your goal with a lot less "luggage to carry around".
gavriil is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 01:08 PM
  #196  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
We should have bought gm stock last week
I was thinking of buying when it was at 19. NOw I see that, that was the absolute bottom. Which is rarely picked. I should have pulled the trigger.
gavriil is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 01:11 PM
  #197  
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
 
gavriil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 47
Posts: 16,399
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Renault, Nissan boards mull GM partnership - - Street sees three-way deal as positive, not a cure-all - - By Shawn Langlois, MarketWatch - - Source: http://www.marketwatch.com/

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Renault and Nissan convened board meetings Monday to mull the prospects of aligning with General Motors Corp. after billionaire Kirk Kerkorian last week urged the U.S. automaker to consider forging a three-way global partnership.

Shares of Dow Jones Industrial Average component GM (GM : General Motors Corporation

12:50pm 07/03/2006

Shares of Dow Jones Industrial Average component GM (GM29.47, -0.32, -1.1%) gave up some of the prior session's gains, finishing the holiday-shortened session down 1.3% at $29.41.

Carlos Ghosn, Renault-Nissan's chief executive and turnaround specialist, chaired a meeting of the Nissan board to discuss Kerkorian's overtures, which came in the form of a letter from his Tracinda investment group last week. See full story.
'GM's problems in North America are also largely related to revenue and brand issues, which Nissan and Renault can't help.'

— Rod Lache, Deutsche Bank

The board approved that Nissan (NSANY : nissan motors sponsored adr
News , chart, profile, more
Last: 22.19+0.21+0.96%

NSANY22.19, +0.21, +1.0%) should proceed with exploratory discussions concerning a potential alliance with Detroit-based GM, if the world's biggest carmaker supports and endorses the proposal.

The board also gave Ghosn, who is credited for successfully breathing life into both Nissan and tire company Michelin, the necessary powers to conduct any discussions and negotiations relating to a potential linkage.
French carmaker Renault (FR:013190: news, chart, profile) will also hold a board meeting later Monday to discuss the possibility of bringing GM into its Nissan partnership, a spokesperson said.

Meanwhile, Wall Street chimed in with an approving nod. Banc of America Securities upgraded GM to neutral from sell, citing the anticipation of value flowing from a transaction with the Japanese and French automakers.

Analyst Ron Tadross raised his stock price target on GM to $30 from $15. He said he believes an alliance with Renault-Nissan is more likely than not to happen and would equate to a positive management infusion that could yield benefits over the short to medium term.

Not everyone, however, was convinced that a new marriage will fix what's wrong with GM. Deutsche Bank analyst Rod Lache said that, while the deal could have a positive impact on GM's strategic directions, the crux of the company's decline would likely remain.

"GM's problems in North America are also largely related to revenue and brand issues, which Nissan and Renault can't help," he said, reiterating his sell rating. "GM needs more substantial changes to its North American business model."

Shawn Langlois is a reporter for MarketWatch, and the editor of its community message boards.
gavriil is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 02:44 PM
  #198  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by gavriil
OK let me substitue then. Same thing:

What are the Renault and Nissan offerings that GM cannot do (as well)? What does GM have to be "jelous of" from Nissan and Renault? Which products?
I never said anything about GM being "jealous" of any Renault/Nissan product. Nissan has some great products that GM should be jealous about, such as the G and M, which are much more popular than its GM competitors, the CTS and STS. The Altima is much more popular than the myriad of GM competitors (G6? Malibu?, etc) since a lot of the GM products are selling mostly on price appeal rather than popularity.

There are a lot of GM products that Nissan should be jealous about also, such as the V-series, Corvette, Solstice, Sky, and especially the popularity of their full size trucks and SUV's, which Nissan has only started offering which hasn't caught on as well yet.

I can't speak for Renault, but between Nissan and GM, there are different weaknesses between the companies that an alliance would help strengthn.



Compared to Renault and Nissan? Like which products?
GM's competitve products are the corvette, escalade, sky, solstice. But for those FEW competitive products, most of their products still sell based on price appeal. Cobalt, grand prix, g6, impala, malibu, etc. etc...their supposedly VOLUME sellers.



I agree about profitability. But the "new GM" so to speak, just bore fruit. It just started. We will know about profitability in about a year or two from now. Nissan's rejuvination has been going on for a few years now. Plus Nissan does not have the benefit-related costs the GM has due to different country laws.
Yes, but the good "fruit" that was bore that helps the company are low volume sellers, and the profits from these low volumes don't help offset the losses they take from GIVING away their high volume sellers. Nissan/Renault does not have benefit-related costs, but i'm sure there are TONS and TONS of places besides benefits that costs can be cut from. Technology sharing, R&D investments, production methods, and suppliers are just a few of the places where costs can be cut. Why R&D similar technology when they can just share? Nissan isn't developing a hybrid system, they will just pay to use Toyota's proven system...probably much cheaper than R&D AND the risk of it not being successful.

Again, there are DIFFERENT strengths and weaknesses between the companies, and if the companies can share their strengths with each other, that will better the chances of turning around GM.

They ARE turning around. For GM to turn around it will take longer than any other comapny would, and a TON longer than Nissan due to the size of GM. IT's only natural.
Yes, they ARE turning around, but will they make it? It's all speculative at this point. But if Nissan/Renault can offer something that would speed up this turnaround, or even reinforce it so the chances of a successful turnaround are better, why should GM forgo this "help"?


Nissan's execs that helped with the turnaround should not be perceived as being able to turn GM around in a theoritical situation. The reason? Different situation. Totally. Just because Gohsn turned a company around in Japan, that does not mean he can do it with a company so many times larger, in the USA. Maybe he can, but not necessarily.
Sure, whether there's an alliance or not, GM's turnaround would still be speculative. But as a company that has so much to risk, wouldn't they want to improve their chances of a turnaround however they can? Let's say you're taking a studying for a math test...would you rather take advice from someone who already took and passed the test even if it is slightly different, or would you depend only on your own studies, knowing that you have been doing piss-poorly for a while in this class?

Plus, if anyone think that the benefit of a GM-Nissa/Renault alliance would be Nissan/Renault's mgt's ability to turn things around, you dont have to make an alliance with a company for that, all you have to do is lure a few people away and you have achieved your goal with a lot less "luggage to carry around".
Any the chances that GM could lure people away from a more successful company is what? Let's say your company is successful and making decent money and you are making a decent amount. Let's say that there is a piss-poor company turning around, but the chances are still very speculative. They can't offer you too much more than you are already making since that woudl piss off shareholders, not to mention Unions who have already made concessions. Would you jump at the chance to help turnaround the company and make a lot more, but with a greater chance of you just being fired because the company failed to turnaround anyway?

With an alliance, GM wouldn't have any "luggage" to carry around. It's give and take and sharing of ideas and methods that contribute to both companies, not to mention the financial assistance that Renault/GM can offer. How much of Nissan/Renault woudl GM need to "lure" away to achieve the same adantages of an alliance? Plus there would be no financial assistance if they lured people away rather than make an alliance.
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 02:55 PM
  #199  
Registered Member
 
mrdeeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lower Nazzie, Pa
Age: 40
Posts: 5,349
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 1 Post
Nissan's execs that helped with the turnaround should not be perceived as being able to turn GM around in a theoritical situation. The reason? Different situation. Totally. Just because Gohsn turned a company around in Japan, that does not mean he can do it with a company so many times larger, in the USA. Maybe he can, but not necessarily.
Also wanted to add that I disagree...they are very similar.

Nissan suffered because of piss poor product. GM suffered and continues to suffer because of piss poor products. By piss poor, I don't mean "quality" or "reliability", i mean in how appealing or competitive it is in its market segments.

Nissan was saved by product. They had a few stellar products, but mostly decent products and no piss-poor products. GM needs to be saved by product. They need to move all their piss-poor products up to the decent level so nothing is working against them. And the reason for all these piss poor products? R&D, which suffers because they have other "obligations" such as benefits to pay. With an alliance, R&D investment would be shared plus methods and ideas already developed by Nissan can be used.

Sure, they differ because GM's got the benefits factor to add, but if Nissan/Renault can offer help in other areas, such as product and management, why should they forgo the whole thing just because GM's got their own unique problem also?
mrdeeno is offline  
Old 07-03-2006, 03:53 PM
  #200  
Smitty's Moral Police
 
unlemming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 943
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Sentra doesn't count, I guess. Do they even still make that?
unlemming is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Nissan: Sales, Marketing, and Financial News


Contact Us Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.