VW to buy Ferrari?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

In October 2008, Porsche announced that it owned 51 percent of the shares of VW, with options for a further 25 percent. The company’s share value—€50 in 2005 and rising to over €200 by October 2008—exploded within a few hours following this announcement, briefly hitting €1,000. The background was the fact that the state of Lower Saxony had a 20 percent shareholding in Volkswagen, and thus only 5 percent of the company’s shares were being freely traded. Several banks were said to have suffered losses running into billions during this period, because they had speculated on falling Volkswagen share values. This was also the case for billionaire Adolf Merckle, who committed suicide a short time afterwards.

Porsche explained at the same time that it was seeking a control and profit removal contract by the end of 2008. The goal was to get hold of Volkswagen’s overflowing coffers of more than €10 billion. In a normal corporation, that would not be a problem with a 75 percent majority shareholding, since decisions can only be blocked with a 25 percent shareholding. In case of VW, however, there is also the “Volkswagen law,” granting this veto right to the state of Lower Saxony for its 20 percent shareholding.

But the appeal by the European Commission never materialised. For Porsche, which faced a mountain of debt of over €14 billion to fund its purchase of Volkswagen shares and options, as later became known, time was beginning to run out. The economic crisis meant Porsche’s sales fell by 25 percent, and the banks were no longer willing to extend their credit. Porsche faced bankruptcy. Its debts far exceeded the value of the company, which in spring 2009 Volkswagen valued at €8 billion.

Also in spring 2009, there followed a series of secret negotiations, at the end of which a solution was presented that simply turned the tables. Volkswagen would acquire Porsche, and Porsche’s owners, the Porsche/Piëch families, would be the largest single shareholders, with 35-40 percent controlling stake in Volkswagen.

So far the only detail that is known is that money from Volkswagen would be used to fund the €12.4 billion for the purchase of the Porsche auto manufacturing business and pay off part of the debts, as well as provide €3.5 billion for the Porsche auto sales company in Salzburg. The remaining debt would be settled by the Emirate of Qatar, which would receive a 20 percent shareholding in VW.

These are the facts, Porsche's only wrongdoing was that it short sold VW stocks to cover its gaping deficit while trying to swallow VW.
Why would Wendelin Wiedeking recieve a 50 million compensation package for fabricating figures?
The accusations you level are criminal offence's in Germany yet he walks free 50 million richer

[tarzoon]

If I remember correctly, Porsche had to buy VW to save the company from hostile takeovers and foreign investment.

Yes, the Italian government could save Ferrari, but according to EU laws it can be considered as unfair competition, so it must be agreed by the Commission:
http://ec.europa.eu/competition/consume ... id_en.html

And if VW is really interested, they won't let go without a fight.

[godlameroso]

It's not as far fetched as you might think. This car manufacturer crisis is still very much with us and things are going to get desperate.

I work in management at a Toyota dealership. Far from things getting "desperate," Toyota, Ford, GM, Honda and others are making HUGE profits. Funnily enough, one of the manufacturers who IS having a problem in the US is . . . VW. High prices and low initial quality have hurt them badly in the US -- one reason they just made drastic price cuts on US-sold models (Jetta, for example).

Of course, anything is possible, but I don't see Fiat selling a national/cultural icon. I think the Italian government might step in with a bailout before that happened.

Hope I sorted out the typoes -- it's only 0715 here!

Those huge profits you mention is just clever book keeping, and bail out money does not count as profit, it's bail out money.

That's like claiming welfare is legitimate income, well I don't know I've never been on welfare, or unemployment, but still, cars aren't being sold like they use to.

The bail outs went to create bubbles in the car market, a lot of that money went to R & D for "green" technology.

[autogyro]

+1 and much of the bale out money and government grants for green technology is being wasted into companies and projects set up solely to hoover up the money.
Tesla comes to mind in America.
I find it difficult to justify such public money going to companies like Ferrari just to prop up energy wasting rich peoples indulgencies.
However, I do believe that Ferrari and others are missing a huge advantage in the market place by not using their obvious technical expertise to gain the lead in EV and hybrid vehicles.
They seem to be locked in obsolete ideology and 19th century engineering.
Most of their hybrid attempts up to now look like a block of flats on wheels, hardly leading edge.
Perhaps the Porsche leed in these technologies is one of the motivators for a take over. Fiat certainly does not look like the way forward, unless you are in to over weight inefficient modern versions of that icon the Fiat 500.

[segedunum]

These are the facts, Porsche's only wrongdoing was that it short sold VW stocks to cover its gaping deficit while trying to swallow VW.

Educate yourself on the short squeeze:

http://radian.org/notebook/porsche

Why would Wendelin Wiedeking recieve a 50 million compensation package for fabricating figures? The accusations you level are criminal offence's in Germany yet he walks free 50 million richer

You have a terrible tendency to do these logical gymnastics JET. If A had happened then B must happen. Since B did not happen then A must be false. If they had done something wrong then they wouldn't have got paid off and would have been in prison, is effectively what you're naively trying to say. Given how many bankers and business people have gone to prison over the past two years we can see that that's just not true.

Back to the point, it just goes to show how little money the car companies actually have versus what the market, as well as public money, can sustain.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

I find it difficult to justify such public money going to companies like Ferrari just to prop up energy wasting rich peoples indulgencies.

Try searching about a 458 emission rate and your SLK before saying the same wrong thing over and over. I would like to see your view on indulgence after you compare the figures, but not here as you are driving the topic off its course and into your annoyance as usual.

Ferrari is a huge national asset of Italy and brings a lot of profit, this being not limited to the cars production. There is a big tourism and clothing industry involving it. But I don't think they need a bailout anyway, as the 458 has been a good seller and the new Maserati line-up is not doing bad. The 458 has a big share of success due to the low emissions and consumption. It emits much less than an equivalent Lotus for instance, embarrassing lots of high-performance hybrids and lots of empty worded people.

Therefore I think this news are wrong, especially if you consider VW has to handle a not very wealthy Lamborghini at the moment. It doesn't seem very logical to buy another brand of sports cars if the one you have is having trouble.

And the current partnership with Fiat is beneficial for both ways. Money-wise and tech-wise, as it can be proved by the brilliant new Alfa-Romeo diesel engines and the new 2-cilinders that emit as much as an 100% electric car (autogyro was wrong? again? what a surprise!) and have the same power as an average mid-sized 4-cilinder. It won the Engine of The Year award out of something, an ideology wouldn't do that and the VW group has nothing similar yet. With all that in mind I find it hard to believe any of them want separation from each other, as those more serious projects of them are done in mutual collaboration.

[autogyro]

Hahaha
Ferrari are fitting what amounts to a miniature power station to its car range, with the sole purpose of being able to turn off the ic engine in Towns to meet the emmissions targets and you say they are efficient vehicles.
You must be on a different planet.
VW might just be thinking of a take over so that it can cut out waste in this segment of the market.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

You must be on a different planet.

The joking topic is the Caption Competition one, not here.

To bring it on topic again, Ferrari for decades have been collaborating on Fiat's flagship line of engines. Most Alfa-Romeo designs since the 90ties are hugely helped by Ferrari and some very common Fiat small engines were actually fully designed by Ferrari. That's something hard to find on Wikipedia, you must get beyond summarized information to get that.

And this miniature power station is what is going to move most of the Fiat line-up in the next years, emitting about the same than that two seat electric car that you guys have in the UK with very weak comfort and safety that I forgot the name. Both in the 50g per KM area. You know that energy generation does have emissions, right? 70% of the worlds emission, as you should know.

That's why maybe Alfa Romeo might be sold, but Ferrari would only be sold if it was a do or die situation I guess. They obviously need and take advantage of this partnership. VW could cut waste doing a similar engine, because so far to produce the same power their engines emit almost twice the new Fiat 2-cylinder.

About the efficiency of the 458, just check the emissions of any hybrid, electrical or regular car with an equivalent performance and it's easy to see. And they don't turn off the engine inside cities yet, only the 599 does that.

[autogyro]

Wrong comparisons.
Electricity is not an energy source it is a far better method of transfering energy from one place to another.
IC or hybrid cars both convert fuel to energy on board the vehicle. Why bother?
The answer is to modernise and expand the world electric distribution network.
This on its own will reduce CO2 by a huge amount simply by doing away with the 19th century liquid fuel infra-structure.
It has nothing to do with so called alternate energy.
Then real major developments can be applied to the resulting centralised energy production plants, whether fossil fed, nuclear or alternative.

Frankly adding gearboxes, batteries and control systems to large ic engined sports and supercars, is a bit like pulling a tractor with an ox.
It certainly will not protect Ferrari from take overs.

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

The comparisons are correct. They might not be completely precise, but they are correct. Energy comes out of something and its infrastructure is worse than the fossil or non-fossil fuel infrastructure at the moment, with the exception of nuclear power generation which is still minority and doomed by public opinion. Its much easier and less pollutant at the moment to extract petrol or ethanol or bio-diesel than creating energy, that's why they should bother. Beyond the whole speech the truth is that for the moment electricity is not that clean overall, otherwise cars wouldn't compose to just 7% of the emissions, and for the present moment and short-term future very efficient IC engines are still very attractive by all means.

When this modernization occurs and energy generation actually becomes low pollutant, then the cars might benefit from going electric and besides all conspiracy theories car makers will love the marketing they provide and will adopt them if they become really good. But who knows were the IC will be in a few years, after all at each 5 years they are having big drops in emissions and it's possible that unless a full swap to nuclear occurs the same situation the 2-cylinder Fiat does today gets repeated at the future.

That's why this is a reason preventing Ferrari from takeovers at the moment. In the future things might change, but now they really need this expertise and collaboration and they have been using it.

[autogyro]

They are using the peoples money to maintain an ancient technology of internal combustion reciprocating engines, at the expense of the 'needed' developments in electric traction. The Hybrid systems at present and the electric vehicles being played with by rich kids are mostly being used to hoover up grants at the expense of progress.
This is exactly the same as steam technology when it had to be replaced, many countries hung on to it with their finger nails until they woke up.
Unless Ferrari and other so called super car manufacturers start making real advances in the new technology, instead of paying lip service, they will be taken over and cut down in size.
Bottom line is that Fiat will not care.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

I wonder how clean electricity is.....

[Agenda_Is_Incorrect]

GM and some used peoples money, not all of them and not Fiat. And they are paying it, on the view of many "green" companies and NGOs that only suck "donations". In Europe at least Fiat just used discounts and the overall incentives to consume to recover from the crisis. As most car makers they are not receiving any kind of hybrid or electric car benefit at the moment and those who do get it on sales and not investments, so it's hard for them to use the benefits as you say, especially when at present only the Prius is a really good seller. Which reinforces the point on topic (on topic, please) that Ferrari is still very useful to Fiat in the current need to do better ICs. Them not caring is a sick wish of yours, they do care a lot.

The electric traction development has been done for decades and it all falls down to JET's phrase at the end, which is what I'm trying to say. To do a complete shift to electricity you first need to change its generation, car manufacturers are far from that problem and so does that topic. Let alone starting mentioning rich kids. I guess someone wanted to be one...

[autogyro]

The civilised world already has efficient electrical distribution and has for over a century.
Charging electric cars was effective and possible in 1899.
By expanding and modernising this infra structure to meet the modern needs of electric vehicles, is the only sensible way forward.
To do this has nothing whatsoever to do with the type of fuel used to generate this electricity.
However by changing to electric traction, it does away with the ancient system of liquid fuel distribution for on vehicle conversion, which is a complex and wasteful method. The result will be a huge improvement in over all efficiency and that means less pollution and CO2. All that before you even start to look at alternative energy sources.
Ferrari produce the most inefficient type of ic vehicle and they are using their hybrid policy to simply stay still in the market place by just meeting the regulations by trickery, much like their F1 ideology of team orders etc.
They risk being left behind in the current EV revolution.
It is amazing just how firmly in place the blinkers are at such companies.

[Formula None]

The civilised world already has efficient electrical distribution and has for over a century.
Charging electric cars was effective and possible in 1899.
By expanding and modernising this infra structure to meet the modern needs of electric vehicles, is the only sensible way forward.
To do this has nothing whatsoever to do with the type of fuel used to generate this electricity.
However by changing to electric traction, it does away with the ancient system of liquid fuel distribution for on vehicle conversion, which is a complex and wasteful method. The result will be a huge improvement in over all efficiency and that means less pollution and CO2. All that before you even start to look at alternative energy sources.
Ferrari produce the most inefficient type of ic vehicle and they are using their hybrid policy to simply stay still in the market place by just meeting the regulations by trickery, much like their F1 ideology of team orders etc.
They risk being left behind in the current EV revolution.
It is amazing just how firmly in place the blinkers are at such companies.

Ferrari can keep the blinders on, it doesn't really matter. Toyota, Honda, Ford, etc, the ones who make millions of vehicles are the ones that matter, in this regard. Ferrari will still be making ICE V12s when gas is $15/gallon. Who cares? Not their clientele. Ferrari and the like will exist as long as we have an upper class.