標致雪鐵龍集團（PSA Peugeot Citroën）對美國通用汽車集團歐洲子公司（GME: 歐寶與沃克斯豪爾）的收購正在緊鑼密鼓地進行之中。今年7月5日，歐盟反托拉斯機構(gòu)正式批準了這樁價值23億美元的收購項目，也預(yù)示著這一交易的完成已進入倒計時。然而，不少復(fù)雜的細節(jié)問題卻依舊有待解決，包括將通用的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)從歐寶中拆分出來，工程技術(shù)、整體設(shè)計、信息技術(shù)和共用平臺的權(quán)益分離問題，以及通用和GME(歐寶與沃克斯豪爾)車型共享的相關(guān)問題（最具代表的當屬歐寶英速亞（Insignia）和其美國的“同胞兄弟”別克君威）。此外，工廠和員工隊伍的也亟待重新整編。
那么，當收購案塵埃落定之后，這些問題將如何解決？對此，SAE歐洲區(qū)的編輯Stuart Birch造訪了位于英國卡迪夫大學(xué)的汽車工業(yè)研究中心（the Center for Automotive Industry Research），見到了該中心的聯(lián)合總監(jiān)Paul Nieuwenhuis博士，就該案的一些關(guān)鍵問題和之后可能產(chǎn)生的影響對他進行了采訪。
SAE：知識產(chǎn)權(quán)問題多半都是收購案討論的核心議題。這一問題要如何解決？
Paul：這的確是一個復(fù)雜而又敏感的問題，其中有很多東西是供應(yīng)商尤為關(guān)注的。對于標致雪鐵龍的入主，其實供應(yīng)商能左右的改變并不多，而在某些情況下，整車廠（OEM）可能會比較強勢。但我覺得，還是應(yīng)該具體問題具體分析，比如在通用和薩博（Saab）分道揚鑣時，就在知識產(chǎn)權(quán)問題上做出過很大妥協(xié)。不過，這次和標致雪鐵龍的談判，結(jié)局應(yīng)該是皆大歡喜的。我認為談判不會因為供應(yīng)商、標致或者通用其中某一方的利益問題而停滯不前。
毫無疑問，當前的第一要務(wù)是要盡可能穩(wěn)住供應(yīng)商，才能將這一收購的成本降到最低。然而，要讓歐寶重回盈利的軌道，就要求歐寶至少在最初階段能夠獨立經(jīng)營?；乜催^往的類似案例，我并不認為知識產(chǎn)權(quán)是一個大問題。這一收購案有點像英國脫歐：大家都希望這么做，所以最終一定會完成。
SAE：在標致雪鐵龍看來，GME(歐寶與沃克斯豪爾)最突出的優(yōu)勢是什么？是汽車設(shè)計、研發(fā)技術(shù)，還是制造能力？對于沃克斯豪爾（即歐寶旗下的英國汽車品牌）來說，是否除了其英國的制造工廠易主之外，其品牌戰(zhàn)略是否也將會有所變化？
Paul：（歐寶）最突出的優(yōu)勢應(yīng)該是生產(chǎn)能力和市場推廣，這些是標致一直以來都有待提高的地方，畢竟這是德國的民族特性所決定的。我們還不知道標致對這個品牌長期的規(guī)劃如何。理論上來看，歐寶的未來可能會和大眾集團（VW Group）旗下的西班牙品牌西雅特（SEAT）或捷克品牌斯柯達（Skoda）一樣，既保留其自身特色，同時也共享大眾旗下品牌的共同特點。
表面上看，標致集團和GME(歐寶與沃克斯豪爾)存在競爭關(guān)系，交集也不少，這可能會帶來一些挑戰(zhàn)，但考慮到標致集團過往對標致和雪鐵龍有很精準的差異化定位，可以說在同級別車型中，這兩款車之間的區(qū)別還是很明顯的。此外，同一級別車型中的三個不同品牌并駕齊驅(qū)，也意味著集團可以在平臺及部件共享方面有更大的作為。
對于法國人而言，沃克斯豪爾這個品牌的知名度幾乎為零。直到前幾年，沃克斯豪爾還是一輛特點鮮明的英國車，然而，之后的車型多少都在向歐寶靠攏，只不過車標不同。
SAE：在您看來，車輛平臺和動力系統(tǒng)的共享會成為兩家公司未來發(fā)展的基礎(chǔ)嗎？
Paul：不錯。所以，兩家公司首先要做的就是弄清哪些部件的供應(yīng)商可以共享，以及在哪些部件上可以通過規(guī)模效益節(jié)省開支。在這一階段，雙方應(yīng)該互不干涉，在各個的產(chǎn)品團隊分別開展工作。當然，如果大家有一天看到歐寶搭載在標致雪鐵龍的底盤上（或是雪鐵龍使用了歐寶的平臺），也沒什么好驚訝的。不過，我們還不知道歐寶到底會帶來些什么，但歐寶的一些車輛平臺（比如專供別克使用的底盤）未來幾年應(yīng)該還會繼續(xù)生產(chǎn)使用。
標致雪鐵龍也會關(guān)注歐寶的專業(yè)優(yōu)勢，尤其是在技術(shù)研發(fā)或商業(yè)運營方面的實力。在車輛電氣化方面，法國應(yīng)該是目前走在歐洲前列的，而歐寶的電動汽車產(chǎn)品則主要仰仗美國通用研發(fā)團隊（GM R&D）的研究成果。
SAE：您是否認為各個品牌的特色都會得以保留，并且也都會繼續(xù)展現(xiàn)兩國不同的汽車文化呢？
Paul：我確信雙方會朝這個目標努力，盡管沃克斯豪爾可能不包括在其中。標致雪鐵龍應(yīng)該會希望保留歐寶這一品牌，并且可能希望通過歐寶繼續(xù)提供對通用汽車在澳大利亞的子公司霍頓（Holden）的支持。和美國的別克一樣，霍頓很快也會停止自主研發(fā)。
SAE：新公司的生產(chǎn)能力將不可同日而語，這也意味著很多工廠將會關(guān)閉。對此，您有什么看法？會產(chǎn)生那些相應(yīng)的風(fēng)險？
Paul：從英國脫歐的角度來說，脫歐前，英國境內(nèi)的工廠確實危在旦夕，但是脫歐以后，這些歐盟區(qū)以外的工廠就很有價值了，比如說，要從英國把車運往澳大利亞或是美國就會方便不少。
因此，脫歐對新公司而言可能還是利大于弊。不過，我們還要考慮從歐盟國家進口零部件的問題，比如從法國和德國進口就會遇到關(guān)稅較高的問題。此外，卡車貨運也可能因邊境管制而造成延誤，那么需要及時交貨的業(yè)務(wù)就會受到影響。這就意味著需要留足更多的庫存，還要建專項專用的倉庫來存放這些物資。而零部件的貨源也會更多來自英國當?shù)兀呐聰?shù)量很小。
歐寶、標致和雪鐵龍在西班牙都有工廠，其中，標致的工廠建在馬德里附近，雪鐵龍在維戈（Vigo），歐寶則是在薩拉戈薩（Zaragoza）。而當?shù)妆P實現(xiàn)共用后，集團應(yīng)該會希望讓工廠都建在一起。
SAE：從戰(zhàn)略角度而言，您個人對這次的收購是怎么看的？
Paul：我想，從公司規(guī)模的角度看，效果是顯而易見的。之前，標致集團在規(guī)模上很難與其競爭對手抗衡，而如今，則可以和那些大公司“扳一扳手腕”了。從總體規(guī)模上看，世界主要汽車公司每年的新車產(chǎn)量至少應(yīng)在500萬到1000萬輛。有了歐寶的加入，標致集團如今可以剛好達到這一數(shù)字了。所以，倘若把整體規(guī)模的提升作為一個重要的參考因素，標致集團對歐寶的這次收購，可謂是明智之舉。不過，并非所有人都這樣認為，畢竟這還取決于收購之后的運營是否成功。至于最終的答案，我們只有拭目以待了。
(SAE中國辦公室注：本文撰稿于8月1日之前，法國標致雪鐵龍集團8月1日發(fā)表聲明表示，公司已經(jīng)完成對通用汽車旗下歐寶和沃克斯霍爾品牌的收購，成為僅次于德國大眾的歐洲第二大汽車廠商。)
The $2.3 billion purchase of General Motors Europe (GME: Opel and Vauxhall) by PSA Peugeot Citroën is moving rapidly to its completion. On 5 July 2017, EU antitrust authorities approved the proposed acquisition. But complex issues remain in unraveling GM from Opel on intellectual property rights, and who gets what regarding engineering and design, IT and shared platforms. There's also the issue of GME shared models, notably the Opel/Vauxhall Insignia sold as the Buick Regal in the U.S., as well as plant and workforce rationalization.
What to expect when the smoke clears? SAE's European Editor Stuart Birch asked Dr. Paul Nieuwenhuis, co-director of the Center for Automotive Industry Research at Cardiff University, about the key aspects of the deal and their possible outcomes.
Q: Intellectual property rights (IPR) will presumably form a very significant element of the take-over discussions; how will this be achieved?
It is a complex and delicate area and much of it concerns suppliers. There’s not a lot they can do about PSA coming on the scene and in some situations OEMs can be quite heavy handed. But I feel in this instance it will be worked out on a case-by-case basis. There were some IPR issues when GM parted with Saab that required considerable negotiation. But I think with PSA there will be a happy ending. It is not in the interest of a supplier nor of PSA and GM for it not to work out.
There has been confirmation that the first priority is consolidating suppliers as much as possible to make savings from joint purchasing of higher volumes. However, there is also a requirement for Opel to return to profitability, which suggests it is going to be run as a separate division, at least initially. From similar cases, I don’t regard IPR it as having been a big issue. This take-over is a bit like Brexit: Everyone wants it to work so you make sure it does.
Q: What will PSA regard as the salient strengths of GME – design, technology, manufacturing capability? And apart from its U.K. plants, would Vauxhall just be regarded as an exercise in badge engineering?
Salient points will be production capacity and access to markets where PSA products are traditionally not in a strong position–like Germany! We don’t yet know how distinct PSA will keep the brands in the long term. Mechanically, products may be shared much as they are within the VW Group, which has with distinctive styling identities for some brands including SEAT in Spain and Skoda in the Czech Republic.
On the face of it, PSA and GME have competing ranges, so a lot of overlap. Much is made of this by some, but noting how PSA has been able to differentiate Peugeot and Citroën, I think if anyone can differentiate within similar segments, it is them. In addition, running three main brands in similar segments provides much greater scope for platform and component sharing.
Looked at from a French perspective the awareness of the Vauxhall brand is probably very close to zero. Until more recent years, Vauxhalls were a distinctive, U.K. product, but later models became more or less Opels with a different badge.
Q: Presumably platform and powertrain sharing will be one of the foundations on which the future will be built for both companies?
Yes. So the first thing would be to see where they can share suppliers and get some economies of scale on components. They’ll get through this phase by working with individual product groups. There is no reason to think we will not see an Opel with a PSA platform and vice versa. But we don’t yet know what Opel input there will be. Also, some Opel platforms (such as those for Buicks) will continue to be manufactured for some years.
PSA will also look at Opel expertise among its workforce: where their technology or business strengths are. As for electrification, France is now regarded as probably being ahead of any other country in Europe; Opel’s presence in that sector has mainly come from GM R&D in the U.S.
Q: Do you feel the individual brand signatures of each marque will be maintained and that each will continue to present its national identity?
I am sure that’s what they will try to do although Vauxhall may be an exception. PSA will want to maintain the Opel brand and may continue to use it to supply GM’s Holden in Australia, which soon will no longer build its own cars, as well as Buicks for the US...
Q: Production capacity of the new company will be considerable, which almost certainly means plant closures; what is your view on this and which are likely to be at particular risk?
Pre-Brexit, it looked possible that plants in the U.K. would be at risk, but post-Brexit it might be thought useful to have plants outside the European Union, for example it could make sending cars to Australia and to the U.S., easier.
So Brexit might work in the new company’s favor. But then we have to consider the situation regarding components supplies from countries such as France and Germany possibly being subjected to import tariffs. Also, delivery trucks might face border control delays, so just-in-time delivery may be affected and that would mean the need to hold more stock and to create facilities—possibly purpose-built—to store it. It could also mean sourcing more locally in the U.K., although volumes may be too small.
In Spain, there are Opel, Peugeot and Citroën plants; when shared platforms are introduced, PSA may wish to bring things together: Peugeot has a plant near Madrid, Citroën in Vigo and Opel in Zaragoza.
Q: What is your personal strategic view of the PSA take-over?
I think it a good idea from a scale aspect; PSA was struggling regarding scale and couldn’t keep up with its rivals. Now they will move ahead to play with the “big boys. To qualify that means a capacity of between at least 5 to 10 million units per annum. With Opel, PSA will now be up there—albeit only just. So the future for the PSA takeover of GM E looks good if that achievement of increased scale is regarded as important. But not everyone may be convinced that it is; it depends what is done with it! For that answer we will have to wait and watch.
Author: Stuart Birch
Source: SAE Automotive Engineering Magazine
在標致雪鐵龍集團正式完成收購前，包括歐寶Ampera-e在內(nèi)，通用汽車歐洲子公司不少先進技術(shù)的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)拆分問題仍需得到解決。（圖片來源：通用汽車）
在談到知識產(chǎn)權(quán)問題時，Paul Nieuwenhuis博士說，“這是一個復(fù)雜而又敏感的問題。”（圖片來源：卡迪夫大學(xué)）