Volvo Announces IPO, Polestar Does SPAC Merger

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Volvo Cars has confirmed months of speculation by announcing that it’s planning to go public on NASDAQ Stockholm. On Monday, the automaker stated that it would be seeking to raise 25 billion Swedish kronor (nearly $2.9 billion USD) via the selling of new shares as a way to fast-track its electrification plans. Those include ensuring half its annual volume being represented by EVs and transitioning the majority of its sales stemming from online orders by 2025.

While the targeted IPO valuation is unknown, prior information coming from Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (Volvo’s Chinese parent company) suggested it was aiming for something in the neighborhood of $20 billion. We’ve also learned that the collaboratively owned Polestar would also be going public, except it will be using the always sketchy special-purpose-acquisition-company merger to help pump the stock.

We’re expecting more concrete details as the week progresses. But Reuters is currently speculating Volvo’s valuation at $20 billion while The Wall Street Journal has it set at $25 billion. The duo also had no idea how much stock Geely would retain, though we’re operating under the assumption that the group would like to remain the largest shareholder moving forward. Volvo has asserted that the money will be reinvested into transitioning toward becoming an electric-only automaker by 2030.

Those prospective valuations are huge when compared to manufacturers similar in size to Volvo Cars. Of course, we’ve also seen Tesla running with a market capitalization that hardly seemed to make sense for years. Volvo’s September sales may be down by 30 percent (year-over-year) but the company is trying to capture the more-fashionable corner of the automotive market and get investors excited about growth potential as it swaps to EVs.

There are similarly high bars being set for the performance-focused Polestar. Launched in 2017, the company only has a couple of vehicles on offer. However, it’s working to expand that lineup while targeting a 2.3-percent share of the global premium market by 2025.

From WSJ:

Last week, Polestar, a Swedish electric-vehicle maker jointly owned by Volvo, Geely and others, announced plans to merge with a special-purpose acquisition company and list in New York in a deal that would value the Swedish EV company at roughly $20 billion.

Volvo said last month that it expected to own close to 50 [percent] of the combined company after the completion of Polestar’s merger with Gores Guggenheim Inc.

The Polestar deal generated a pathway for Volvo to pursue its own offering by assigning a value of about $10 billion to its stake.

“It was important to separate the issue,” Volvo Chief Financial Officer Björn Annwall said, adding that investors now see that Volvo, too, after shedding its internal-combustion-engine-manufacturing business is going electric faster than some rivals.

“Investors see that as a clear sign that we’re not only saying we’re going to become electric, we’re doing it,” Mr. Annwall said.

Both companies have set wildly aggressive targets. Polestar has said it plans on adding three new vehicles to the lineup by the end of 2024. It has also said it would need to more than double the number of global markets in which it currently operates to obtain its desired market share by the following year. Meanwhile, Volvo is vying for annual sales averaging 1.2 million units — requiring a roughly 50-percent in sales over the next three years.

[Images: Volvo Cars; Polestar]

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 13 comments
  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on Oct 05, 2021

    "Both companies have set wildly aggressive targets." Yep, so prepare for disappointment.

  • ThomasKing ThomasKing on Dec 02, 2022

    It's been a long road to IPO and IPO day for Volvo but it looks like they're getting all geared up to hit the market and make their IPO, which will be worth around $500M. This is good news for those of us who care about 'going green' and our planet. I prefer to check this handyman services and get more new helpful ways for construction. What we must do is help Volvo reach its goal by growing our economy, helping out the environment and by supporting new car models that look great on the inside.

  • W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
Next