Ghosn Says Slow Your Roll on the Renault-Nissan Merger, Then Confirms the Possibility

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

As Renault and Nissan discuss ways to strengthen their bond, Carlos Ghosn is asking everyone to slow their roll on the prospect of a merger. Despite continuously nudging the alliance in that direction, the CEO and chairman is often hesitant to discuss unification as anything more than a hypothetical. So this is par for the course.

“I don’t think you’re going to see it this year or next,” Ghosn said on Wednesday. “Lots of mergers collapse and destroy value — the strength of any company is the ability to motivate people, and how how are you going to do that if some of these people consider themselves second-class citizens.”

The second-class citizens he’s referencing are, presumably, Nissan employees seeking more influence within the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance. A large part of the group’s current strategy is to find ways to give the Japanese automaker more of a say in product development and operations.

As the more profitable automaker, Nissan feels it’s entitled to make decisions. But Renault currently has a 43.4 percent stake in Nissan, while Nissan only holds a 15 percent stake in Renault — effectively giving the French automaker corporate control.

Both Ghosn and Nissan’s CEO Hiroto Saikawa seem bent on creating a lasting relationship between their companies before their retirement, but they also seem keenly aware that the road ahead of them is fraught with peril — leaving both of them cautious when discussing a merger. However, Ghosn said he hoped to have see important decisions made that would strengthen the alliance by the end of this year.

“I don’t think there is a resistance,” Ghosn told Bloomberg in an interview. “Let’s try and find something that will reassure the stakeholders that this will continue, but at the same time maintain identity.”

He also issued a reminder that decisions take time to produce results within the industry, be it product or corporate developments. “You know our cycle, in terms of technology and product, is very long,” Ghosn said. “So what you are doing today is something that’s going to be visible three or four years down the road.”

He went on to stress that electric cars are regulator driven, which makes their future prospects a little easier to track. But automakers have to perpetually work with governments to help them understand the advanced technologies they’re requesting (but might not be particularly familiar with).

Getting back to the alliance, Ghosn noted that Nissan and Renault will experience a conversion, but stopped short of calling it full-blown merger. “We have already decided to have a common engineering, we have decided to have a common manufacturing, we have common purchasing,” he said. “This move toward more integration, toward doing more things in common, but still maintaining different brands [and] different identities you will continue to see.”

However, he’s worried about the sustainability of that model after the automakers’ current leadership retires. The top boss said a merger is one option for solving that problem, but not the only one. Ghosn explained that the ideal solution, for him, involves a drive for synergies to solidify the collaboration while allowing each brand to maintain its unique identity.

“At the end of the day, you need people who are proud of their brand going and fighting in all the markets,” he said. “But, at the same time, you don’t want duplication. You develop one technology, one platform, we buy together. Everything that the consumer doesn’t really care for should be done in common for the sake of efficiency and for the sake of [the price of our cars].”

[Image: Nissan]

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 5 comments
  • Kyree Kyree on May 23, 2018

    Well, it's not the ill-fated DaimlerChrysler Merger of Equals, and the two automakers already have a great relationship, so I bet it'll work out fine. And maybe it'll result in US-bound Renaults. Probably not, but maybe.

  • Inside Looking Out Inside Looking Out on May 23, 2018

    May they take Chrysler also on the board? Apparently Sergio has no clue what to do with American brands, busy with useless vanity projects like AR and Levante.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next