Opel: "State Aid? We Don't Need No Stinking State Aid"

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt

If you go back for what seems to be years , TTAC never gave Opel big odds for getting state aid. Ever since GM reneged on the Magna deal, their chances were pretty much nil. Since then, the German government had been subjecting Opel to water torture. A few days ago, Berlin made it obvious. They had to, because GM was like a psychiatric patient that was slowly going through all stages of the Kübler-Ross model: Denial (“They said they would help us”), anger (“Maybe this will make your chancellor happy”), bargaining, depression, now finally, acceptance. Today, GM and Opel officially threw in the towel. Opel officially gave up on state aid. They will turn to the entity that supposedly wasn’t allowed to help them: The GM mother-ship. In other words: You and me will pay to save Opel.

Of course, GM didn’t just cry uncle.

Opel said that whole state aid business is just too slow and cumbersome. “Our application was put in more than six months ago, and we followed the process that the governments laid out and asked us to follow. We had no idea it would take this long,” Opel CEQ kvetched in a conference call.

GM and Opel withdraws all applications for state aid, writes Der Spiegel. All of them. Opel and GM had bombarded just about anybody in Europe that had anything to do with Opel with demands for urgent help. Disregard. Cancel. We didn’t mean it. Opel doesn’t want any loan guarantees from the U.K., from Spain, from Poland, from Germany. Smart move: With the German loan guarantees denied, nobody was willing to make a useless contribution anyway.

Amazing: Opel is not changing their restructuring plan. Opel maintains that they need about €3.3b (approx $4b). They also maintain that no other plants than Antwerp will be closed and that no more than 8.300 of the 48.000 jobs in Europe will be lost. “We have no intention to change that plan” said Reilly. Time will tell. But its grist for the mills of Germany’s Economics Minister Brüderle and a host of others who had said that GM can and should do it alone.

No wonder that Brüderle is pleased: “This confirms my initial assessment: GM has the funds to restructure Opel,” said the Minister to Focus. They will need more than the €3.3b. To bring the model portfolio up to speed, €11b ($13.5b) are needed.

There are already the first doubts. Roland Koch, Premier of Hesse, where Opel has its HQ, and his Economics Minister Dieter Posch are already worried: They said the consequences of the decision are not foreseeable. That’s German for “The excrement will hit the fan.”


Bertel Schmitt
Bertel Schmitt

Bertel Schmitt comes back to journalism after taking a 35 year break in advertising and marketing. He ran and owned advertising agencies in Duesseldorf, Germany, and New York City. Volkswagen A.G. was Bertel's most important corporate account. Schmitt's advertising and marketing career touched many corners of the industry with a special focus on automotive products and services. Since 2004, he lives in Japan and China with his wife <a href="http://www.tomokoandbertel.com"> Tomoko </a>. Bertel Schmitt is a founding board member of the <a href="http://www.offshoresuperseries.com"> Offshore Super Series </a>, an American offshore powerboat racing organization. He is co-owner of the racing team Typhoon.

More by Bertel Schmitt

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 9 comments
  • Alex Hannan Alex Hannan on Jun 17, 2010

    GM should have either spun off this Opel mess or shuttered it. GM's failure to have done either of the above is yet another embarrassing legacy of the bailout era.

    • Charly Charly on Jun 17, 2010

      Opel makes money (at least the cars that GM sells in China make money and they are mostly Opels) so spinning it off wouldn't be wise. But there is a part of GM that doesn't make money, can't be used in the Chinese market and should be spun off (read closed). Sadly with government ownership it isn't likely that that part will be ejected.

  • Blowfish Blowfish on Jun 17, 2010

    Solly to say is becoming a dead Albatross on the neck of Government Motors. One servant cannot serve 2 Masters anyways. Doubt Uncle Sam will go bail out the Euro GM division. Perhaps put more eggs in the Middle Kingdom, or let someone from Middle Kingdom take over them, as they needed to get in EU badly to sell/build cars.

  • Brandon I would vote for my 23 Escape ST-Line with the 2.0L turbo and a normal 8 speed transmission instead of CVT. 250 HP, I average 28 MPG and get much higher on trips and get a nice 13" sync4 touchscreen. It leaves these 2 in my dust literally
  • JLGOLDEN When this and Hornet were revealed, I expected BOTH to quickly become best-sellers for their brands. They look great, and seem like interesting and fun alternatives in a crowded market. Alas, ambitious pricing is a bridge too far...
  • Zerofoo Modifications are funny things. I like the smoked side marker look - however having seen too many cars with butchered wire harnesses, I don't buy cars with ANY modifications. Pro-tip - put the car back to stock before you try and sell it.
  • JLGOLDEN I disagree with the author's comment on the current Murano's "annoying CVT". Murano's CVT does not fake shifts like some CVTs attempt, therefore does not cause shift shock or driveline harshness while fumbling between set ratios. Murano's CVT feels genuinely smooth and lets the (great-sounding V6) engine sing and zing along pleasantly.
  • JLGOLDEN Our family bought a 2012 Murano AWD new, and enjoyed it for 280K before we sold it last month. CVT began slipping at 230K but it was worth fixing a clean, well-cared for car. As soon as we sold the 2012, I grabbed a new 2024 Murano before the body style and powertrain changes for 2025, and (as rumored) goes to 4-cyl turbo. Sure, the current Murano feels old-school, with interior switchgear and finishes akin to a 2010 Infiniti. That's not a bad thing! Feels solid, V6 sounds awesome, and the whole platform has been around long enough that future parts & service wont be an issue.
Next