TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The automotive industry’s value-destroying addiction to capital (2015) [pdf]

50 点作者 mxschumacher大约 5 年前

11 条评论

csours大约 5 年前
Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. These are my opinions only and do not reflect my employer etc.. I don&#x27;t work in corporate planning, but I have some familiarity with vehicle platforms and programs.<p>I see a lot of people commenting on specific OEMs and getting caught up on details. That&#x27;s not what this is about.<p>This is about the fact that GM has a ~1.5 liter turbo 4 cylinder and so does Ford and so does FCA and so does Volkswagen and so does ... ... ...<p>The specific 4 banger in a vehicle will never be a differentiator for a customer (except in VERY specific cases), so anything you spend on R+D for that engine will not help you get ahead, only to keep up.<p>It&#x27;s about the fact that developing a engine that no one will ever get excited about still costs a great deal of money, and pretty much every OEM is spending that money.<p>That cost is dragging the whole industry down, and that&#x27;s why EBIT and Return on Invested Capital is low across the industry (but it may be lower for some OEMs).<p>It&#x27;s about the fact that ~50% of components may be like that engine that the customer will never get excited about.<p>---<p>It also talks about how companies are trying to mitigate that by platform sharing, with pictures of a couple from Volkswagen and Toyota. Shared platforms are great for a lot of products, but they don&#x27;t work so well for specialized products like sports cars or luxury cars.<p>Here&#x27;s a great video covering GM&#x27;s plans for their electric car platform (shameless plug): <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=-25fGfjHP5Y" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=-25fGfjHP5Y</a><p>---<p>It also talks about how hard this is to do. I know of several instances where this has been done or been tried and it&#x27;s always been harder and lower payoff than expected. For example, Ford and GM cooperated on the development of a 9 speed (Ford) and a 10 speed (GM). Each company developed their own transmission and then at the end they shared them.
throwaway8291大约 5 年前
Spot on. As a consumer of a newer generation: I do not care about 90% of the stuff that&#x27;s in a modern car. I could not care less about the manufacturer. If it drives and is relatively safe and clean, cool. Best case: I do not even need to own a car.<p>The best counterexample for the R&amp;D spree of western automotive can be found in Russia. The Lada Niva is car that is extremely useful and mostly unchanged in structure since inception. People can repair them with their own hands. I wish we had robust clean cars like the Niva in the west as well.
lowdose大约 5 年前
The presentation is lacking the words electric and battery. Seems like Fiat Chrysler Automobiles did not see Tesla as competition in 2015. Another headline today report automotive industry is still in shock of Tesla&#x27;s success(2020).<p>The innovators dilemma is real and confirmed.
评论 #22550400 未加载
评论 #22551732 未加载
advisedwang大约 5 年前
The detail and comparisons are incredible here.<p>However couldn&#x27;t you basically apply this to any industry with substantial fixed costs? In this situation you can always save by consolidating so that fixed cost is amortized over more units.<p>What is the &quot;right&quot; level of R&amp;D spend for auto-industry? This analysis assumes it&#x27;s unreasonably high, but the flip side of this is just that he&#x27;s pointing a path to higher profit.<p>Although this deck says it&#x27;s not about &quot;Putting FCA up for sale&quot;, this reads to me like it&#x27;s trying justify consolidation without just saying that it will make more money, so that it can avoid competition-regulation scrutiny.
评论 #22552007 未加载
avalys大约 5 年前
Yawn. The financier CEO of the automaker in one of the worst financial positions, with the lowest R&amp;D spending, oldest product line, and nonexistent EV strategy complains that auto R&amp;D is too expensive and argues the solution is that someone should buy his company. Not impressed.
评论 #22551141 未加载
评论 #22553482 未加载
评论 #22551739 未加载
karpodiem大约 5 年前
Sergio was way ahead of his time, I miss him.<p>Huge FCA fan, really looking forward to all of their upcoming product.
ChuckMcM大约 5 年前
That is a really amazing look at a part of auto development I&#x27;ve never seen before. I&#x27;m wondering if some private equity firm went with it and rolled up 3 or 4 OEMs into a single more cost productive OEM.
评论 #22550156 未加载
评论 #22550183 未加载
7532yahoogmail大约 5 年前
One thing I question is the assessment that what&#x27;s under the hood is unimportant to the customer ... Now many guys and most wives surely don&#x27;t care unlike a mechanical engineer until it doesn&#x27;t work. In the early 90s Japanese cars cost more but consumers saw quality. JP took 30% of the US market as a result. Wouldn&#x27;t this be better examined in terms of how repair costs factor into customer assessment of car desirability?
purplezooey大约 5 年前
I don&#x27;t get the complaint of &quot;hey we have this overlap and it&#x27;s killing us&quot;. This isn&#x27;t BART. This is an industry. Please do compete, even if it is painful, and lower prices. This is why we have antitrust. You know the industries that were allowed to overconsolidate... do they add joy to your life?:)
nimbius大约 5 年前
wow. Five years ago? the thunder on the horizon was all the way back in 2002 when Japanese automotive manufacturers began ripping apart the luxury market with Lexus&#x2F;etc...<p>Lee Iacocca tried to help and really did in a lot of ways, by consolidating Chryslers various drivetrain and option specifications into tighter platforms...i believe at the time his strategy was likened to Taco Bell&#x27;s toppings. Its exactly what Japanese automakers pioneered for their dive into Luxury. Take an existing platform and powertrain, and &quot;goose&quot; it with a few luxury features. Then, break the bank on marketing (which is all luxury brands really are anyway these days.) switches and buttons for seat options came prewired into the base models, but were built out in the luxury models, so this saved a lot of time and money. regular shocks, coilovers, struts, etc...were swapped for primo, and the seat design was slapped up with leather instead of cloth. you <i>can</i> do this and it <i>does</i> work.<p>Fast forward to 2015 and the auto industry learned bupkis from their crow dinner at congress begging for handouts in 2008. Chrysler basically blocked the memory out entirely, dove hard off the deep end and came out with garbage like the hellcat. Its not even in the top 20 fastest cars, and most importantly its a loss leader with custom engine work, custom drivetrain, custom paint, etc...that is shared by <i>no model.</i> people want reliable cars with good gas mileage and good performance like the Ford Focus and its ST counterpart which were well executed. Ford of course then immediately turned around and wiped out their car divisions entirely under the assumption all americans will drive SUV&#x27;s and trucks forever. maybe so, but the electric mustang crossover is dead on arrival at sixty grand if its still getting its doors blown off by a used model S with a &#x27;baby on board&#x27; sticker.<p>Bureaucrats didnt help this capital addiction either. You could argue this &#x27;ignore the real problems&#x27; stuff started in 2008 when boomers in congress shook their fists and demanded Pontiac die, and Buick get to live, when Pontiac was clearly a stronger company with a better offering for customers than Buick who at the time was living off fumes from the Lucerne and Lacross, two virtually indistinguishable cars which were getting creamed by Cadillacs CTS and V platforms that targeted a younger and hipper trend. Pontiac basically prayed at the altar of Iacocca with the G6, the G8, and the Solstice, and their willingness to damn the consequences and innovate was already on display with the Aztek...whereas Buick was still hucking 80&#x27;s designs around their Lucerne. Look at a 2008 Honda dashboard, then look at a 2008 lucerne dashboard. Buick is alive solely thanks to geriatric politicians.
评论 #22553601 未加载
评论 #22551471 未加载
评论 #22551594 未加载
soniman大约 5 年前
The problem is too many &quot;national champions.&quot; Korea alone has two auto companies (Hyundai and Kia). France (Peugeot, Citroeb, Renault) and Italy (Fiat) have their own car companies, even though neither country is known as manufacturing powerhouse. Until those national champions are shut down or consolidated (politically difficult), there will continue to be overcapacity.
评论 #22551857 未加载