Forums

The cheap way to Sustainability: buy a legacy auto maker

The cheap way to Sustainability: buy a legacy auto maker

Tesla did this before, they bought the GM-Toyota NUMMI plant, for 5% of its value.

If they bought a whole brand they could get, as an example, Ford's 86 odd factories,then dealerships, staff, etc. (and rivet supplies):)
GM Europe recently sold to CSA Citroen/Peugeot. So it is not silly.
Maybe more of GM is for sale.
GM Aus would probably be worth zero$.
GM USA would be the big prize as unlike Ford they already have EV experience.
However in line with the challenge to accelerate world sustainability, Ford is the challenge.

And there are plenty of people or businesses could afford to unite all that...Amazon, Apple, Google, Waymo, Disney..Berkshire...VW..BYD, KIA,

Madatgascar | 12 October 2018

They would not get the dealerships, those are independently owned and operated.

Maybe they could buy Chrysler from Fiat. Electric Jeeps would be cool!

Rocky_H | 12 October 2018

That would be the touchy thing. If they buy another auto maker, would that include their franchise agreements with their dealerships?

(1) If so, then it would be a disaster! They would have to stop selling in most of their stores in the country! In most of the states of the U.S., they are only allowed to operate their own stores because they have never had a franchise agreement with any independent dealership. The minute they do that, they become a "franchisor", and dozens of state laws kick in, preventing them from selling directly.

(2) If not, I don't necessarily see what the benefit would be, since they wouldn't be gaining any distribution network.

quinney | 12 October 2018

Buying a legacy automaker would also saddle Tesla with UAW contracts. Better to just try to buy an unused factory, if anything.

Yodrak. | 12 October 2018

"Tesla did this before, they bought the GM-Toyota NUMMI plant"

Buying a shuttered assembly plant is NOT the same thing as buying a car company.

Ross1 | 13 October 2018

yes but the point is that instead of costing 8oo million it cost 50 million.

Al1 | 13 October 2018

It's cheap because its worthless.

Tesla2018 | 13 October 2018

It's cheap because its worthless

Fisker got bought out and now the are selling a similar model for some crazy price.

Nobel (Made racing cars) and Moessler (made racing and supercars) got bought out by Rossion and now they are hardly making any cars at all

TRW got bought by some young Russian billionaire and arent doing anything as fsr as I know.

Pontiac, Saturn, and Plymouth brand names can probably be purchased super cheap.

British Leyland also had MGs, Triumph and other brands that arent there anymore

Uncle Paul | 13 October 2018

Tesla has plans far more advanced than these old plants.

They will be construction efficient Gigafactories where labor costs are low.

No reason to deal with all the legacy costs that the current manufacturers have gathered over the years.

Elon has plans for ultra high speed high precision, factories with cars being assembled close to where the motors and batteries are produced. Will change mass production forever.

Madatgascar | 13 October 2018

Elon makes grandiose announcements about improving manufacturing efficiency by an order of magnitude, then winds up throwing out a lot of “alien dreadnaught” automation and reverting to manufacturing with more people per car than the bigs. Still waiting for proof that they have meaningful non-battery manufacturing innovations worth duplicating elsewhere. Before we claim to be miles ahead of any of the legacy automakers, let’s give them their due - most of them have mastered the basics pretty well. You know, like painting the cars?

Al1 | 15 October 2018

I am giving them their due. They're pretty good at painting. When nobody will want ICE cars they can still do painting for electric cars made by others.

As for Tesla employing more people per car I wouldn't fall for that. With all required training and what not number of people reflects where Tesla plans to be in 6 months. While number of cars they make is typically old data, could easily be 6 months old. When you are doubling production year on year you can easily be mistaken by ratios.

Besides people per car is not a problem. Managers per car is. People do the actual work and adding value to the process or nobody will keep them there. Managers are there to organize people to do the actual work more effectively. How to measure value they add is anybody's guess.

Ross1 | 18 October 2018

Similar to the Sears thread, this.

If Tesla were to buy a legacy auto, without dealerships of course because they are owned separately, then there would be a waiting list thousands of dealers wanting to pay Tesla to be a Store Near You.
All those stores and franchises could come for free. Well, what else are they going to sell?
If Tesla indeed disrupts the major markets, you are looking at serious recessions here there and everywhere.
Be careful what you wish for.

Ross1 | 18 October 2018

Every car sold by Tesla is an ICE not sold by legacy.
Also every tradein follows a different route by not going thru ICE dealers.
Hey the way to Sustainability is to destroy all tradeins.

Suppose Tesla were willing to drop $x000 per Model 3, then to destroy all the tradeins is not so different cost wise and a lot easier. Also it reduces ICEs on the roads, removes them from resale markets forever (how many times does a car get sold?), creates more demand for Teslas , then Tesla can be more profitable and we are back to square 1.

Yodrak. | 15 December 2018

FLAGGED

jordanrichard | 15 December 2018

Flagging seranseran1995’s post.

Ross1 | 16 December 2018

There. And I thought my thread was being resurrected.

It is quite topical though, considering GM closing factories here there and everywhere.

Suppose TSLA bought GM, Mary Barra comes with the deal.

El Mirio | 16 December 2018

Taking over a factory and some equipment is one thing, taking over obligations is another. OEM's have to guarantee spare part supply for 10 years or so. Doubt Tesla would want any piece of that.

jordanrichard | 16 December 2018

Wouldn’t that spare part supply obligation be on GM, not the person/company that buys the building?

El Mirio | 16 December 2018

Yes, obligation would only transfer to TSLA if they bought GM, Ross implied buying the whole brand as far as i can tell.

Not sure if financially it is that lucrative to buy these old buildings, maybe Tesla is better off designing the whole thing from scratch in a modular fashion as they did with Giga 1.