Further Renault-Nissan Integration Blocked By French Government In Power Play

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon
further renault nissan integration blocked by french government in power play

An attempt to bring further integration within Renault-Nissan resulted in the French government tightening its hold on Renault against CEO Carlos Ghosn.

The move by the government Thursday to block the integration effort leaves Ghosn with the choice to either negotiate or fight for integration, Reuters reports. The CEO has long desired to give Nissan more status in the alliance to match its sales and profit, while the administration of French president François Hollande wants to increase its influence upon the French companies it owns, including Renault.

Using a rule allowing the government to double its voting rights on its holdings over two years of age — one companies like Renault-Nissan can choose to opt-out to following — Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron announced the government made a purchase of €1.2 billion ($1.34 billion USD) in Renault shares, increasing its stake from 15 percent to 19.7 percent in order to block the opt-out vote. Just 60.5 percent of shareholders supported the opt-out vote, but a two-thirds majority was needed to make it stick.

Though Macron claimed the move wasn’t a power grab, government officials and company insiders state the move occurred due to the French government’s fears Renault would become more like Nissan, which now accounts for two-thirds of combined sales and a bigger share of the profit shared by the alliance.

With the opt-out vote blocked, the CEO may counter the French government by restoring Nissan’s voting rights via buying back Renault’s shares in the Japanese automaker and/or creating new shares with a capital increase.

Before pulling the trigger on restoration, though, Ghosn may try negotiating for integration with Nissan taking the helm. The government may not be so interested, however; Macron stated that he saw no reason for Nissan to restore its voting rights, and would hold the line “to the end.”

[Photo credit: Norsk Elbilforening/ Flickr/ CC BY 2.0]

Join the conversation
3 of 23 comments
  • 56m65711446 Well, I had a suburban auto repair shop in those days.
  • Dukeisduke Yikes - reading the recall info from NHTSA, this sounds like the Hyundai/Kia 2.4l Theta II "engine fire" recall, since it involves an engine block or oil pan "breach", so basically, throwing a rod:"Description of the Safety Risk : Engine oil and/or fuel vapor that accumulates near a sufficiently hot surface, below the combustion initiation flame speed, may ignite resulting in an under hood fire, and increasing the risk of injury. Description of the Cause :Isolated engine manufacturing issues have resulted in 2.5L HEV/PHEV engine failures involving engine block or oil pan breach. In the event of an engine block or oil pan breach, the HEV/PHEV system continues to propel the vehicle allowing the customer to continue to drive the vehicle. As the customer continues to drive after a block breach, oil and/or fuel vapor continues to be expelled and accumulates near ignition sources, primarily expected to be the exhaust system. Identification of Any Warning that can Occur :Engine failure is expected to produce loud noises (example: metal-to-metal clank) audible to the vehicle’s occupants. An engine failure will also result in a reduction in engine torque. In Owner Letters mailed to customers, Ford will advise customers to safely park and shut off the engine as promptly as possible upon hearing unexpected engine noises, after experiencing an unexpected torque reduction, or if smoke is observed emanating from the engine compartment."
  • Dukeisduke In an ideal world, cars would be inspected in the way the MoT in the UK does it, or the TÜV in Germany. But realistically, a lot of people can't afford to keep their cars to such a high standard since they need them for work, and widespread public transit isn't a thing here.I would like the inspections to stick around (I've lived in Texas all my life, and annual inspections have always been a thing), but there's so much cheating going on (and more and more people don't bother to get their cars inspected or registration renewed), so without rigorous enforcement (which is basically a cop noticing your windshield sticker is out of date, or pulling you over for an equipment violation), there's no real point anymore.
  • Zipper69 Arriving in Florida from Europe and finding ZERO inspection procedures I envisioned roads crawling with wrecks held together with baling wire, duct tape and prayer.Such proved NOT to be the case, plenty of 20-30 year old cars and trucks around but clearly "unsafe at any speed" vehicles are few and far between.Could this be because the median age here is 95, so a lot of low mileage vehicles keep entering the market as the owners expire?
  • Zipper69 At the heart of GM’s resistance to improving the safety of its fuel systems was a cost benefit analysis done by Edward Ivey which concluded that it was not cost effective for GM to spend more than $2.20 per vehicle to prevent a fire death. When deposed about his cost benefit analysis, Mr. Ivey was asked whether he could identify a more hazardous location for the fuel tank on a GM pickup than outside the frame. Mr. Ivey responded, “Well yes…You could put in on the front bumper.”