Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?(whichcar.com.au) |
Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?(whichcar.com.au) |
(Memory could be off on time and which publication..)
But yeah, buying a Volvo is what keeps the CCP in power.
> It was founded by former PayPal owner Elon Musk
Hah. Nope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Founding_(2003%E2%...
Granted, he wasn't there to sign the articles of incorporation, but he joined very early.
What qualifies someone as an engineer? Math? What kind of math?
Building stuff? What kind of stuff?
Writing code? What languages count and what languages don’t? Does CSS count?
Or are you talking about some kind of academic certification or standardized exam?
It seems like you are basing someone’s engineering prowess based on their personal, social, political antics.
Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case:
1) he hasn't got anything that comes close to an engineering qualification (no, dropping off a Ph.D. after a a B.Sc. is not enough);
2) his job does not involve anything like an engineer's job, which is to "invent, design, analyze, build and test machines, complex systems, structures, gadgets and materials to fulfill functional objectives and requirements while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety and cost." [1]
He is very good at ordering people around, but there is no evidence that he did any of this at any point (though there is a lot of evidence that he got some underlings to do the boring work for him). Again, dumping a pile of money on someone to do it is not the same thing. I can respect that he did take some risks with his investments.
Even if you have an axe to grind and are frustrated by some people not considering software engineering as "proper engineering" (which is how I read your post, though Musk certainly is not a software engineer either), writing CSS for a living is closer to engineering than what Musk is doing.
Yes, this was a rhetorical question. Those countries that require a certification is not relevant to the discussion, because Elon Musk is operating out of America which does not require a certification to be a software engineer. In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more specifically a job title. That's useless information because then people without a job title or don't care for one aren't engineers, and people who have the job title would automatically be an engineer. So if Elon Musk changes his job title to engineer instead of CEO, is he qualified now? Maybe he should prefix Senior to the title while he's at it.
> 1) he hasn't got anything that comes close to an engineering qualification (no, dropping off a Ph.D. after a a B.Sc. is not enough);
So people who don't have a Ph.D. aren't engineers?
> his job does not involve anything like an engineer's job, which is to "invent, design, analyze, build and test machines, complex systems, structures, gadgets and materials to fulfill functional objectives and requirements while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety and cost."
Yes, he's a CEO. Are the CEOs of Google and Facebook still engineers if they aren't writing code? And what kind of complex system? Are organizations not complex systems?
> there is no evidence that he did any of this at any point
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If you're an engineer, you should understand this.
How do you think someone gets accepted into an engineering PhD, drop out or not, if they've never did any of this at any point in their life?
Yes, a job title he bought, which is just as meaningful as the "Tesla founder" title he bought himself.
> So people who don't have a Ph.D. aren't engineers?
The issue is not the lack of a ph.D. It's the lack of anything beside a B.Sc.
> Are the CEOs of Google and Facebook still engineers if they aren't writing code?
Well, those who did an engineer's job are former engineers. If the status is tied to the job title as you imply, then no, a CEO is not an engineer.
> Are organizations not complex systems?
Not one you invent, design, analyze, build, or test. I mean, yes, you can stretch the meaning to the point that putting a motherboard in a PC case is engineering, but don't expect to be taken seriously. Same if you include all bureaucrats and politicians (and a country is vastly more complex than Tesla so they would have a better claim).
Fun fact: Chevrolet kind of bought GM. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/gm-buys-chevrole...
> "Still the owner of a considerable portion of GM stock, Durant began to purchase more shares in the company as his profits from Chevrolet allowed. In a final move to regain control, Durant offered GM stockholders five shares of Chevrolet stock for every one share of GM stock. Though GM stock prices were exorbitantly high, the market interest in Chevrolet made the five-for-one trade irresistible to GM shareholders. With the sale, concluded on May 2, 1918, Durant regained control of GM"
And then after this the DuPont Family effectively controlled GM for quite a while. They previously had a relationship because GM used DuPont paints.
----
As to the manufacturer family tree: things get significantly more complicated when you add joint ventures. Ford famously partnered with Mazda, Chrysler partnered with Mitsubishi, and GM partnered with Isuzu and Suzuki and even Toyota for a while (NUMMI). Nowadays GM and Honda have a few codevelopment projects; even the concept of what a joint venture means has significantly changed. My list is this comment is far from authoritative or exhaustive.
The epic "Diamondstar Motors" as I recall. Responsible for generations of kickass cars under different names. Conquest/Starion, Laser/Talon/Eclipse, Stealth/3000GT.
Yes, and even more complicated because some of those joint ventures where country-specific. For example, in the 80s (and early 90s) due to the economic crisis in Brazil and Argentina, Ford and Volkswagen created the joint venture Autolatina to join forces during the crisis. So both brands shared engines and released sight variations of the same cars.
TEL had been identified chemically in the mid-19th century, but General Motors had discovered its effectiveness as an antiknock agent in 1921, after spending several years attempting to find an additive that was both highly effective and inexpensive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead
Video treatment:
My favorite are outdoor clothing companies which almost all tie-in to the same Chinese investment fund. Or how glasses companies all belong to that one French conglomerate.
Geely recently bought the mobile phone manufacturer Meizu.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/tesla-valuation-more-than-ni...
When VW stocks went through the roof due to a short squeeze a few years ago, a very conservative German billionaire named Adolf Merckle saw that VW's stock value was ridicilously overpriced, so he decided to bet agains the stock. But the stock price went further up and stayed there long enough to make him lose all of his money. He then committed suicide.
Amusingly, the import restrictions were "voluntary," as much as geopolitics can be voluntary.
No employee in the Ferrari factory has a non-Stellantis car (Alfa Romeo or Maserati preferably)
So I think it should be clarified that Ferrari and Stellantis (specifically Fiat) are related
These networks sprawl out pretty quickly, I imagine. Modern cars rely on microcontrollers and microprocessors, and without chip fabs that comes to a halt. They also require varying amounts of steel, aluminum, carbon fiber, other plastics and metals, and natural rubber.
Then there's the physical locations and the international ownership / leasing / agreement structures. For example, Rust Belt manufacturing of vehicles in the USA for the US market has mostly relocated to Mexico:
https://napsintl.com/mexico-manufacturing-news/mexicos-auto-...
> "According to Forbes, about 80 percent of the cars manufactured in Mexico are exported globally, with about two-thirds of those exports going to the United States. In 2014, the industry comprised about $19 billion in investments. Production for that year was estimated to reach 3.2 million cars, double what it had been five years prior."
A network map of everything that went into a Mexican-made vehicle that was purchased in the USA would be highly complex, and if you then asked for an ownership map of all the shell companies, holding compenies, investors, primary owners etc. involved, the complexity would likely increase by a factor of ten.
Just tracking the global production and ownership of raw lithium and electric car battery manufacturing, for example, would be a fairly massive undertaking.
IKEA’s organizational structure might sound a bit confusing at first, but I looked into it to see how its business model works so that you could gain clarity on that.
Put it shortly, IKEA as a brand comprises two separate owners. INGKA Holding B.V. owns the IKEA Group, the holding the group.
At the same time that is held by the Stichting INGKA Foundation, which is the owner of the whole Group. IKEA Group is not the owner of the brand, which is managed by Inter IKEA Systems B.V., part of Inter IKEA B.V. that is the real owner of the IKEA Concept.
Thus, IKEA Group is a franchisee that pays 3% of royalties to Inter IKEA Systems.
But technically Audi owns the whole group. VW doesn't plan and design the engines, gearboxes and cars, Audi does. VW is more a logistics and SW company now, just with a big brand name, with the cheaper "Audis" labelled as VW.
Porsche cars are made by Porsche AG which is a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG - Porsche SE then holding a controlling stake in Volkswagen AG.
Also was aware that Nissan and Renault cooperate, but didn't know there is also Mitshubishi with them. Btw. Adobe Acrobat logo would like to have a word.
Hyundai, kia and Genesis for instance, share the same ev platform.
Volvo and polestar too,with their EVs.
Audi, Vw, Porsche too have all launched EVs with surprisingly similar specs ( especially in terms of miles/kwh).
These ownership trees help explain why, clearly.
https://www.businessinsider.com/10-companies-control-the-foo...
https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the-6-companies-that-own...
But the thing that's super stark is how many marquees Stellantis have; I can't help but think that some consolidation and focusing of resources would be beneficial (and I'm well aware that plenty is shared already).
Sometimes as I'm out and about I'll see old Ford-era Jaguars and I'm pleased that the company has independence to make its own vehicles.
edit: "after it will have brought" I guess
Tata is a huge conglomerate with businesses that apparently have nothing to do with each other.
Steel, Salt, coffee/tea, hotel chains, multiple airlines, IT, car companies, watches, financial companies, phone companies (?), jewellery, air conditioners, the list goes on.
(Whether any of their products are good is a different matter; it may or may not be — I don't really know.)
Tata motors in India has been pretty good over the last few years. They now make very desirable products designed for the Indian market — ie., spacious, efficient, practical cars with good enough performance, reliability, high scores in GNCAP crash tests, at a price which a lot of Indians can afford.
Tata cars probably won't win any races, but they have finally figured out the pulse of the Indian market.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-toyota-mazda-idUSKBN1AK0R...
https://www.automotiveworld.com/news-releases/mazda-continue...
"These 10 Companies Own Almost All of the Brands You Use" https://thehomestead.guru/10-companies-own-brands/
https://gizmodo.com/fascinating-graphic-shows-who-owns-all-t...
https://www.dividend.com/how-to-invest/9-companies-that-own-...
https://capitaloneshopping.com/blog/11-companies-that-own-ev...
https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the-6-companies-that-own...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brendancoffey/2011/10/26/the-fo...
My mental model of brands was as a quality stamp, as in people would recognize a product from advertising but if they disliked the product then it wouldn’t help. But, I think there is a second effect in play. If you start with something of high quality that people consume regularly you can very slowly lower the quality without people noticing. Continue long enough and old brands are going to end up as lower quality.
So it is with markets. There are indistinct conditions that may exist for some time, and decay, and financial privacy, etc. So even given "perfect" observation of events, it is not fully transparent.
Nor would you want it, I argue. Once you as an individual are involved with markets and partners and committed relationships, some faceless bureacracy is tracking your parking spending? or more to the point, your ownership stakes? So we must re-invent public markets. Too much to change at once, and imperfect cooperation, so.. set a direction. "messy"
I guess you get good news every day!
The "three most connected companies" through interconnecting directors are "3M (7 connections), Boeing (6 connections) and Amgen (6 connections)" ... "Other highly-connected companies include Walt Disney, Apple, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, IBM, and Procter & Gamble – each has five board members that also serve for other top 50 corporations." [2]
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/923c92/80_...
[2] https://www.visualcapitalist.com/50-largest-u-s-companies-bo...
Personally, I lean to independent brands. I don't want my Milwaukee tools having all the same parts as the Ryobi line - makes me assume I'm being suckered into an identical tool that's way more expensive. Even if the Milwaukee is usually superior, I'm guessing some things just are exact copies with red paint. I'm the same way with say Patagonia over North Face - I'll always avoid VF Corp brands for something that's still building legacy, rather than profiting on historical credibility.
I guess the same is true with previous generation stuff. Abercrombie & Fitch, and Eddie Bauer used to be premier outdoor equipment companies with great down jackets and sleeping bags, fishing equipment, even shotguns. Now they're both brands representing clothes I don't want. Both brands sold and were aggregated with other companies in the late 1980s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Bauer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abercrombie_%26_Fitch
Ford did not participate in the explicit bailout for the auto industry, but their financial arm did receive loans from the federal government. (GM and co. also received this type of assistance in addition to the bailout.)
I was very surprised to see they were listed as stand alone in that list.
> Ford makes limited runs so dealers can put insane markups, while GM makes cars for people to buy.
Didn't they just announce fixed price direct to consumer sales for EV's?[1] Regardless, I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Dealers reap the markups, not Ford, and they're hardly moving any of those trims compared to the F-150 and other "normal" vehicles. If anything it's hurt them. The Focus RS was arguably axed because of dealer greed[2]. Of course Shelby has more fanboys, Chevy doesn't have an equivalent. Ford has made non-Shelby Mustang Cobras in the past and currently have the Mach 1 to replace the Shelby GT350. Having shopped for both I can say with confidence that regular Camaros trims in general tend to be higher marked up than Mustangs because their production volume is much lower, especially with the 1LE package. Ford churns out performance pack Mustangs like they're base models.
[1] https://www.kbb.com/car-news/ford-ceo-wants-future-of-online...
[2] https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/07/barks-bites-focus-...
The movie makes it look like scrappy Carroll Shelby and Ken Miles were simply smarter than the clowns at Ford but that's not the whole story.
Then just recently FCA and PSA formed Stellantis.
PSA and Fiat worked together previously, as their van the Fiat Ducato is basically the same as the vans from PSA group and the same as the Iveco Daily. They closely worked also together in other areas.
The small cars by Fiat was also partly joined development with Opel in the mid 1990. That relationship worked loosely for years, even while Opel still was part of GM.
Their hobby is telling other countries that they suck because their economy is bad (partly because of NL being a tax haven).
Maybe someone has more information than me.
Tata Group owns 70% of TCS, which is worth $200B.
Also this: > more than 70% of Tata Sons' dividends were generated by TCS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Group
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Consultancy_Services
TCS is around half the value of Tata.
“Brooks Brothers!”
while taxation in NL is lower than other countries like italy or French, it is not a tax haven, which is a precise definition that involves also border line legal activities.
what you maybe mean is that NL was able to lower taxes on companies because they understand their values, while other nations decided to go for a "tax the sh*t out of everything" and now they are surprised that companies are closing or moving to other nations.
the actual reasons for FCA and Mediaset to move to NL was more about legal : on average in italy you get a decision in 5 years, in NL on average it takes 6 months.
However, I was disappointed that they stopped making the Yeti.
They're unreliable where I'm from.
Otherwise, they make fabulous desirable cars.
My current car is a 1l 3-cylinder DSG Kamiq - which I am pretty happy with. Only complaint being the slow starting touch screen and the move away from physical buttons (e.g. for heated windscreen).
However, these don't tell the whole story. The GT is pretty highly strung whereas the Corvette's have a lot of room to improve with relatively inexpensive upgrades.
Overall the Corvette is the halo car... with a range from $60k up to about $125k. But I haven't actually walked into a dealer and asked them how much they'd want to order me up a ZR1 :)
Because the dealers are Ford's customers, not us. Ford makes the dealers happy.
>Didn't they just announce fixed price direct to consumer sales for EV's?
Because they really have to. EVs will be the end of dealers, as Tesla has demonstrated. Tesla has put Ford in a difficult position. Given how dealer friendly Ford is (see above), it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Might simply be that they simply have separate ICE/EV relationships until ICE goes away.
>Ford has made non-Shelby Mustang Cobras in the past and currently have the Mach 1 to replace the Shelby GT350.
Mach 1 MSRP $56k. My local dealer has one for $79k.
>Having shopped for both I can say with confidence that regular Camaros trims in general tend to be higher marked up than Mustangs because their production volume is much lower, especially with the 1LE package.
LOL. My last mustang was a PP and I had to special order it and wait months to avoid paying an extra $10,000 just for shit I didn't want. Sure, at $35k (2016) it was good value for money. I still got the limp mode on the track because of the rear diff, but at least I didn't pay $90k for that privilege!
Repeating the same thing isn't an explanation and that doesn't make any sense. What incentive does Ford have to do that? They arguably lost the Focus RS because of what you're claiming and I provided a link to it. It doesn't help them sell more vehicles and these are only low volume to begin with. Dealers depend on Ford, not the other way around. As the other article I linked pointed out, Ford is moving to direct consumer sales.
> Mach 1 MSRP $56k. My local dealer has one for $79k.
Yes, we know markups exist. Not all dealers do that and it's trivial to find them. https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/2022-mustang-mach-1...
> LOL. My last mustang was a PP and I had to special order it and wait months to avoid paying an extra $10,000 just for shit I didn't want. Sure, at $35k (2016) it was good value for money. I still got the limp mode on the track because of the rear diff, but at least I didn't pay $90k for that privilege!
Are you bragging that you got ripped off? I bought mine new, under MSRP last year. Performance pack Mustangs are easy to come by sitting on dealer lots at MSRP new and even easier used. I wanted an SS 1LE, but I bought a Mustang instead because I was able to get it new for the same price as 3 year old Camaro.
The production volume doesn't even compare. Ford moves significantly more Mustangs annually[1] than Chevy does the Camaro[2], and for the past 3 years it's been 2x as many. Camaros are much harder to come by and hold their value far better used. Unfortunately for me as a buyer it made me favor the Mustang because it made more sense financially. Still a fun car and better for modding, but I would have preferred an SS 1LE over my GT PP
[1] https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/ford-mustang-sales-figures/
[2] https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/chevrolet-camaro-sales-figures...
While STMicroelectronics corporate headquarters and the headquarters for EMEA region are based in the Canton of Geneva, the holding company, STMicroelectronics N.V. is incorporated in the Netherlands.At least here in Norway, I can look up an organization and see all owners of that company last year. And press a button and it calculates the "true"/indirect owners up the chain as well.
I can also go the other way. Select a person, and see what they own through multiple layers of companies.
Is this a public service? Could you please give an url to know more about it? Thanks
This is a company doing extra stuff with the data, and providing some of it directly online. Here's a lookup of the company I work for: https://proff.no/aksjon%C3%A6rer/bedrift/oda-group-holding-a...
It lists owners, but as you can see it's mostly "Holding Companies". However, pressing "Indirekte eierskap og eiere" ("Indirect ownerships") one can see the true companies or persons behind those.
They own: Ray-Ban, Oakley, Michael Kors, Varilux, Crizal, Transitions, LensCrafters, Clearly, EyeBuyDirect, FramesDirect.com, OPSM, Pearle Vision, Sears Optical, Sunglass Hut, Target Optical, Vision Direct, Vision Source, et al. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EssilorLuxottica
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica#Medical_managed_care
Consider that CostCo does the same thing and members are generally happy about it.
https://www.citroen.it/modelli/berlingo/elettrico.html
https://www.fiat.it/e-doblo/e-doblo
https://www.opel.it/veicoli/gamma-combo/combo-e-life/panoram...
They still have a fair number of unique parts, they still have a fair amount of individual development and certification, they still have their own parts supply chains… these all add costs compared with literally having the same vehicle.
It's not that I see no reason to have multiple marques—after all, there is meaningful differentiation between the different VW ones, for example. But at some point you've got to stop and ask when you have too many.
Chrysler has been taken over by different entities throughout the last 40 years but somehow managed to drag the new owner down every time. A bit like Rover before the Chinese takeover.
One one hand, we have the examples of those models that had the infamous FAP HDi 110 hp engine that gives a lot of problems, and Citroën's "Hydractive" (hydropneumatic) suspension was discarded due to the many problems they gave. We had a 1st gen Citroën C5, that had those two, and it needed to visit the garage every every 2 year to have some pretty costly repairs. Also, some of their newer cars with AdBlue have factory design problems in this system, and repairing that module is knowing that is gonna be relatively expensive and it's gone to fail in the future.
On the other hand, we had models like the Xsara, the 206, the 406, the C15, the Partner/Berlingo combo, and many others that were very reliable cars that rarely had problems.
Over here it's only a matter of time before DSG inevitably fails.
Apparently, it tends to overheat when idling in traffic in D. This is also a problem in VW cars which uses the same gearbox.
It's a really hot climate where I live; I wonder if that's a factor.
The good thing is that Skoda/VW don't hesitate before replacing a failed gearbox (and then that one fails).
It's a lovely gearbox when it works.
I'm in Scotland, so it rarely gets above 20C and it quite often fairly damp - which presumably keeps the gearbox nice and cool :-)
Edit: We also very rarely sit in traffic, which might help as well.
There's a Wikipedia entry for DSG problems: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-shift_gearbox#Problem...