雙語閱讀｜生存還是毀滅？站在十字路口的汽車廠商

CARS are getting bigger. Motorists worldwide have for years been abandoning four-door saloons in favour of bulkier SUVs. Carmakers have become bigger, too. Four car firms now make around 10m vehicles a year in order to reap economies of scale, particularly in the mass-market bit of the business where profit margins can be painfully thin.

現在的汽車變得越來越大。近年來，全球汽車製造商逐漸減少四門轎車的生產，轉向大型SUV。同樣越變越大的還有這些汽車製造商。為獲取規模效益，有四家車廠年產量達到千萬輛，尤其是在現今的大眾汽車市場，極低的利潤率讓各廠商苦不堪言。

Many executives also believe that size is the only protection against the technological upheaval sweeping the industry. But bulking up fast is easier said than done. Lots of different constituents have to be won over. And most car bosses are still reticent about taking the plunge on mergers because many have been catastrophes. Daimler』s acquisition of Chrysler in 1998, for example, was a notable disaster. The list of past crashes is lengthy. Indeed, one recent deal—General Motors』 sale of Opel, its European arm, to France』s PSA Group for €1.3bn ($1.4bn)—seems to go directly against the imperative to bulk up.

眾多汽車廠商高管認為，面對科技對汽車產業的衝擊，唯有求大才能自保。可是，迅速擴張規模不是一天兩天就能辦到的，要贏得太多不同的利益相關體的同意才行。同時，大多車廠有諸多前車之鑒，對於合併持保留態度。比如，1998年戴姆勒收購克萊斯勒就是典型的得不償失。類似的失敗案例數不勝數。最近通用汽車將其歐洲子公司歐寶以14億美元出售給法國的標緻雪鐵龍集團（以下稱PSA），似乎是要逆當前趨勢而為之。

In fact, that deal has had the effect of spurring more talk of consolidation. Speculation centred at first on a possible megamerger between GM and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA), itself the result of a deal in 2014 (FCA』s chairman, John Elkann, sits on the board of The Economist』s parent company). The Italian-owned firm, which makes just under 5m vehicles a year, is run by Sergio Marchionne, who has been eyeing a merger with GM for years. With the American firm now discarding a loss-making European business, the theory goes, it could replace it with a profitable one— Fiat—and crunch together the two firms』 successful operations in America.

事實上，這筆交易讓合併傳聞愈演愈烈。外界的猜測起初是圍繞通用與菲亞特克萊斯勒（以下稱FCA）這兩大巨頭的合併，而菲亞特接手克萊斯勒也是2014年的知名合併案。這家義大利巨頭車廠每年生產汽車近500萬輛，現任首席執行官是塞爾焦•馬爾喬內（Sergio Marchionne），近年來一直尋求與通用汽車的合併。最近通用賣掉持續虧損的歐寶后，理論上會選擇一個更賺錢的品牌來補位。菲亞特很有可能是這個選擇。如此一來，兩家公司就可以整合在美國的市場優勢。

Mary Barra, GM』s boss, has repeatedly rejected Mr. Marchionne』s overtures; selling Opel is unlikely to have changed her mind. Some observers unkindly suggest that GM is in any case unable to handle three tasks at once, and that its aim in ridding itself of Opel was to concentrate on improving its operations in America and in China. Moreover, a lot of the synergies from a deal depended on combining Fiat and Opel in Europe.

通用的CEO瑪麗•博拉（Mary Barra）多次拒絕了FCA的合併提議，賣掉了歐寶也不會對她有所動搖。一些觀察人士腹黑稱，通用無法做到同時協調三個市場，因此，出售歐寶只是為了更加專註於美國與兩個市場。另外，合併交易所產生的合力效應依賴於菲亞特與歐寶在歐洲市場的整合。

The rumour mill has since moved to Volkswagen. The German firm has long cast a covetous eye over bits of FCA. At an annual industry shindig in Geneva in March that coincided with the final sale of Opel, Mr. Marchionne said he had 「no doubt that at the relevant time Volkswagen may show up and have a chat」. He also suggested that PSA Group』s acquisition of the GM unit, which puts the French firm in second place in Europe, adds to the pressure on VW, the market leader, to bulk up further. VW』s campaign to conquer America, where its diesel-emissions scandal has undermined its weak position, would be strengthened with FCA in tow. FCA』s Ram trucks are hugely profitable in America and the Jeep brand is resurgent worldwide. The unrealised potential of Maserati and Alfa Romeo, alluring bywords for Italian style, is also attractive.

此後，大眾成為傳聞焦點。大眾一直以來都對FCA頗有興趣。今年三月的日內瓦國際車展恰逢歐寶的出售，馬爾喬內在車展上表示，他「確信會在適當的時機大眾會出面商談」。他還表示，如果PSA收購了通用的汽車業務，就會成為歐洲第二大車廠，這勢必會給處於第一的大眾造成不小的壓力，迫使大眾尋求進一步的擴張。大眾在美國市場一向遇挫，而之前爆發的柴油汽車尾氣控制醜聞更是雪上加霜。不過，如果有了FCA的支撐，情況就會好很多。FCA旗下的Ram皮卡車型在美國很受歡迎，另一品牌Jeep在全球的銷量也逐步回升。瑪莎拉蒂與阿爾法羅密歐以獨特的意式風格著稱，也有很大的上升空間，這些都是賣點。

A deal would, however, bring little benefit in Europe, where VW already has a big slice of the market and plenty of small cars on offer. With Seat, a Spanish division, struggling and its own brand said to be loss-making in the region, VW could well do without the trouble of integrating Fiat. FCA is also the only big car company that is lumbered with lots of debt (of just under €5bn), making it a less tempting target.

然而，這筆合購交易對於歐洲市場並不會有什麼幫助。首先，大眾在歐洲佔據第一的位置，眾多小車型都還在低價出售。在西班牙，旗下的西亞特（Seat）品牌經營差強人意，而大眾品牌在西班牙甚至是虧損的。因此，為了避免更多的麻煩，大眾不太可能與菲亞特合併。另外，FCA也是眾多車廠中唯一一家嚴重負債的企業（近50億歐元），這也是一大阻礙。

Matthias Muller, VW』s chief executive, has not ruled out talks with FCA, and has indicated that the German group is more open to a merger than it used to be. But FCA is not the only option. An acquisition of Ford (which just suffered the humiliation of being overtaken in market capitalisation by Tesla, an electric-car firm founded in 2003) might also fit VW』s plans. Still, if VW is intent on leading the next round of industry consolidation, it will need to put 「dieselgate」 behind it. Though the German firm has paid $22bn in fines and compensation, the issue of who knew what and when is still unresolved.

大眾CEO馬蒂亞斯•穆勒（Matthias Muller）並不排斥與FCA進行談判，並曾表示大眾對於合併的態度不如之前那般保守。可是，FCA並不是唯一的選擇對象。最近頗受打擊的福特也是個不錯的收購對象，因為福特的市值竟被2003年才成立的特斯拉超過了。當然，如果大眾的目標是領導下一輪的行業整合，那麼它就要翻過「尾氣門」這一頁。儘管它在該事件中賠付了220億美元的罰款和賠償金，事件背後的具體細節仍然不為人知。

Whatever combination of firms might bring it about, the goal of creating a group that produces nearly 15m vehicles a year makes sense. Mr. Marchionne』s oft-stated view is that the industry』s duplicated investment in kit such as near-identical engines and gear boxes is a waste of resources, and that much of the money would be better returned to shareholders. Other car bosses reckon the money should go on the technologies that will transform the industry: mobility services such as ride-sharing, electrification of the drive-train and autonomous vehicles. Scale would allow car firms to spread the cost over more vehicles.

不管各家汽車廠商合併會有怎麼樣的後果，創建一家年產1500萬輛車的汽車聯盟確實有必要。馬爾喬內一向認為汽車行業將過多的錢投資在汽車組件上，比如近乎相同的發動機和變速箱，實在是一種浪費。這些錢其實可以省下來回饋給股東。其他車廠領導人認為這筆錢可以用於投資科技，為汽車行業轉型之用，比如拼車業務等移動業務、電力動力傳輸系統以及無人駕駛技術等等。規模效益能讓汽車廠商將成本分攤到更多的車輛上。

One argument against full-scale mergers has been that loose alliances, such as that between Renault, a French car manufacturer, and Japan』s Nissan, can do the job by helping to pool development costs. The Renault-Nissan alliance has succeeded. After taking a controlling stake in Mitsubishi, a smaller Japanese carmaker, last year, the firm makes nearly 10m cars a year.

反對大規模合併的的觀點認為，要降低成本並不需要百分百的合併，而是建立一個鬆散的聯盟，就能夠降低研發成本，如法國雷諾與日本尼桑建立的雷日聯盟。這一聯盟無疑是成功的，在去年還控股小廠商三菱汽車之後，該聯盟的年產量達到1000萬輛。

An alliance works well for components and for individual platforms, the basic structure underpinning a car, where the aim is clear and specifications can be agreed on. An engine that might cost $1bn to develop, for example, can be easily split two or more ways. Yet alliances work far less well for broader technologies such as connectivity and autonomous vehicles. It is harder to specify a common goal for a product that could find its way into every vehicle the companies make. And it makes less sense to share futuristic technologies that may prove to be the differentiating factor for buyers of cars in the future.

一個汽車合作聯盟能在汽車組件、車身平台（構成汽車的基礎系統）方面有良好的合作，因為目標明確、規格也能統一。比如，研發一款發動機需要10億美元的話，那麼在聯盟中這款發動機可以很容易變一為二甚至更多，而不需要在每一款上都投資10億。但是，在更多的技術層面，汽車聯盟就沒有這樣的優勢了，比如汽車的數據連接系統以及無人駕駛技術。因為很難為一款產品制定一個統一的目標，並適用於各車廠的所有車型。未來車主在買車時，可能主要看重的就是汽車獨有的技術特點，如此一來，技術共享就沒有意義了。

The arrival of new competitors such as Tesla, and deep-pocketed tech giants intent on disrupting the transport industry such as Google, Apple and Uber, make dealmaking an even more pressing need. 「Everyone agrees on the rationale for big mergers, even if execution of deals has been extremely difficult up to now,」 says an adviser to the industry.

汽車行業來了一波新競爭者，比如特斯拉，以及谷歌、蘋果、Uber等財力雄厚、意圖顛覆傳統汽車行業的科技巨頭。它們使得各汽車廠商的併購迫在眉睫。一位行業顧問說道：「雖然現階段各大廠商要達成合併極為困難，可是，大家都認同併購的必要性。」

If car mega-mergers are to go ahead, however, and stand a better chance of success than past attempts, two conditions apply. First, the big stakeholders—governments, families and unions—will need to be convinced. Many carmakers, such as BMW, Fiat, Ford, Toyota, VW and others, have ties to families, which in some cases have blocking shareholdings. VW』s unions or France』s government, which has stakes in Renault and PSA, would oppose deals that could result in big domestic job losses.

不過，想要實現汽車廠商大併購，兩個條件必不可少。首先，政府、掌門家族以及工會這三大利益相關者一定要點頭。很多車廠，比如寶馬、菲亞特、福特、豐田、大眾等的背後都有家族影子。這些家族掌控著重要的股份，有時能改變企業的決策。而大眾的工會，或者在雷諾以及PSA都有持股的法國政府，未必會同意合併，因為此舉會導致國內的就業減少。

Second, transactions will need to do more than simply chase volume. A welcome new trend in the industry is to put greater emphasis on profitability. One of GM』s reasons for getting rid of Opel was to concentrate on profits rather than solely on how many cars it turns out, a decision that Tim Urquhart of IHS Markit, a research firm, calls 「groundbreaking and brave」.

第二點，合併的目的不僅僅是追求體量的增大。現在汽車行業公認的新趨勢是強調盈利能力。通用賣掉歐寶的一個原因就是為了提高利潤率，而不再是追求年產量。市場研究機構IHS Markit誇讚此舉是「勇敢又不失眼光」。

A mega-merger would take similar courage, and car bosses tend to be conservative and risk-averse. But after over 100 years of selling cars powered by internal-combustion engines, the industry faces the huge wrench of adapting to a future of electrification and self-driving cars. Software and electronics are displacing mechanical parts as the most important components of a car. A business focused on selling objects will have to start offering ever more transport services. If carmakers do not take the plunge, an alternative is that one of the technology giants with big ambitions in mobility could try to buy, say, Ford, Tesla or PSA Group. For cash-rich firms like Apple or Google, the cost of such an acquisition would be pocket change.

大廠商的超級併購需要的就是這樣的勇敢，但各大企業的老總們總是偏於保守、規避風險。在賣了一百多年內燃機汽車之後，現在的汽車行業面臨巨大的轉變，即電力驅動以及無人駕駛汽車。軟體以及電子器件正逐步淘汰原來機械化的汽車部件。汽車行業也將由賣車轉向賣服務。如果各車廠不身先士卒，那麼結果很可能就是，意圖顛覆移動交通領域的科技巨頭買下福特、特斯拉或者PSA等車廠。畢竟對於蘋果、谷歌這些巨頭來說，錢不是問題，收購一家車廠不費吹灰之力。

翻吧