[dZired]

Nissan has officially completed the process of taking over a controlling stake in Mitsubishi, which has adversely been hit by the infamous fuel economy scandal. With Mitsubishi joining the Renault-Nissan alliance, the resultant group is now the third largest automotive manufacturer in the world, behind Toyota and Volkswagen.

The deal, valued at $2.3 billion, formally gives a 34% controlling stake in Mitsubishi to Nissan. The new alliance is expected to help both automakers in using each other's technologies. Moreover, Mitsubishi will hope to regain customer confidence, which was lost earlier this year after the company admitted that it had been claiming false fuel economy figures of its small cars, especially in the US markets.

Mitsubishi had reported a profit in 2015, but is now expecting an annual fiscal loss of around $2 billion at the end of this year. This would be the company's first annual loss in eight years. With the new partnership, the company will hope to survive this setback.

Nissan-Renault's current CEO, Carlos Ghosn will be taking over as Chairman of Mitsubishi. In order to give more of his attention towards repairing Mitsubishi's condition, Ghosn has appointed Hiroto Saikawa as the co-CEO of Nissan and Renault. Saikawa is also the Chief Competitive Officer of the Renault-Nissan Alliance.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Link to Team-BHP News

[GTO]

Crazy, I can't understand why Nissan would pay such a big amount to control Mitsubishi. In any developed market, Mitsubishi is seen as a bargain basement brand, which customers only buy if they can't afford anything else or don't get a loan for other cars. Mitsubishi Motors has fallen back on product development big time and has nothing going for it.

If anything, this is going to be an unnecessary distraction for the management. Is Ghosn biting off more than he can chew? Or was this perhaps on the nudge of the Japanese government to help out a weakling (like Toyota has agreed to assist Suzuki).

When Carlos took over Nissan, things were different. For one, Nissan still had a good brand. Second, the automotive landscape was vastly different then.

[desdemona]

The idea seems to be to use Mitsubishi's good name in SUV-s and especialy hybrid versions thereof to drive synergies with Nissan, especially in SE Asia, Australia, and Europe?

Renault-Nissan is already piling on the emphasis on cuv-s and suv-s right from the Dacia Duster upwards, so perhaps there are indeed large synergies available here for Nissan/Ghosn.

Also, Mitsubishi's cost-effective hybrid powetrain for cuv-s would be attractive, given the new emissions and CAFE strictures coming-soon or already-in-place in China, Europe and the USA too?

[mukul32]

Originally Posted by GTO

Crazy, I can't understand why Nissan would pay such a big amount to control Mitsubishi.

We may not know of it, but there must surely be something substantial that 'The Cost Killer' saw in this deal.
One (typically obvious) argument can be that Mitsubishi have a strong utility vehicle pedigree, which is very rare to be found today. Other such brands like Jeep and Land Rover are firmly in the grip of their parent companies, and don't look like they'll be up for grabs anytime soon. Even the mighty VW group, without such a UV specialist brand, has had to work extra hard with their Teramont, Taigun, Kodiaq, etc to try and get the formula right.

Also, Mitsubishi, though fallen today, seem to be quite active about the hybrid/EV future, which Ghosn himself seems to be excited about.
Then there is also the Japan connection.

Yes, it would add to the load on the management, as well as add yet another brand to their extra long lineup (along with Infinity, Datsun, etc) but then they must've had their plans well in place before making the acquisition.

Another small factor is that Mitsubishi have motorsport pedigree, in the Dakar, WRC, etc which again is rare to find.
Of course, all these small pieces can become redundant if the deal itself is a money pit, but when the man making the deal is Carlos Ghosn it is gonna be interesting.

PS: With a new parent group and better financial state and reach, can we enthusiasts now hope for a reborn Evo?

[dark.knight]

Originally Posted by GTO

Crazy, I can't understand why Nissan would pay such a big amount to control Mitsubishi.

May I also add that I'm not the biggest fan of one parent organisation controlling multiple companies of the same genre, it never works out well for the consumers.

I do understand the financial aspect of things, cost sharing, quicker R&D, more real-estate (assets), and of course a way to sell the same sibling multiple times, that's where the trouble begins. I don't think we need a Terrano, the Duster was fine on its own and the Micra sells less by itself, the Pulse even lesser.

Ok lets keep aside the sales, I do think creativity and value takes a nose-dive when such a type of company is formed. VW essentially makes 3 slightly tweaked designs of each platform in the lower rung (across VW, Skoda and Seat), and more than 3 in the higher rung when Audi is involved. The focus is immediate shifted to improvising and unifying the manufacturing processes (via platform sharing) whilst trying to differ in a 1% way. Also, maybe its just me but I also think its wrong to judge the size of a corporation that grew by mergers or acquisitions or just strategic alliances, though valid it may be as they are pumping in the capital and absorbing the risks related to such actions. My opinion is purely from a consumer stand of point.

Now we're down to about 5 companies and it goes as follows :

1) GM - Chevrolet, GMC, Buick, Cadillac, Holden, HSV, Opel, Vauxall, Ravon, Jie Fang, Baojun.

2) Toyota - Toyota, Lexus, Scion, Daihatsu, Hino Motors.

3) VW - VW, Skoda, Audi, Seat, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Bentley, Porsche.

4) Nissan - Nissan-Renault-Mitsubishi-Infiniti-Datsun.

5) Hyundai - Hyundai, KIA, Genesis.

That's a whopping 32 sub-brands under just 5 brands, do note that I'm splitting based on brands i.e different names under the same group and this is not taking into consideration segmentation. Yes luxury brands are all different from their more modest peers within the group, but nevertheless, wouldn't there have been more variance in style, positioning, value or pricing, had they been different entities? Costs may go down but the same cannot be said of pricing, when it comes to strategic alliances.

[benbsb29]

Not taking into account Mitsubishi's performance as a brand in other markets, they seem to be consolidating on their position in the Australian market in the 4x4 segment. The new Triton ute, as well as Pajero Sport seem to be in good demand, and the Pajero Sport in particular seems to be getting good review from the local Australian auto portals.

In fact, the Pajero Sport has been touted to be better than Toyota's hallowed Fortuner as well! In saying this, lets not forget Toyota is hallowed in Australia, as a brand.

Some excerpts from recent media articles:

We said from the outset that this was going to be tight, but in the end the gap was bigger than we’d initially suspected.

The Toyota Fortuner remains a top-notch rugged SUV, one that deserves as many buyers as it is getting. It is, however, overpriced and under-equipped against the Mitsubishi Pajero Sport – like, it’s almost rude how much more equipment you miss out on in the Toyota.

It’s not just equipment though: the ride comfort of the Mitsubishi far betters that of the Fortuner, and while it has a slightly smaller boot, it does have better efficiency, better towing and better off-road modes.

It is, we think, better in almost every way. And as a result, the Mitsubishi Pajero Sport – now with seven seats – wins this test, and wins it well.

Link : http://www.caradvice.com.au/473939/2...ed-comparison/

Another review from a different portal, before the Pajero Sport was equipped with 7 seats in Australia.

The numbers favour the Mitsubishi, which has more safety gear and equipment. It's also the default pick for off-roading. But I'd buy the Toyota for its edge in on-road manners and the versatility of seven seats.

Link : http://www.carsguide.com.au/head-to-...20160212-39596

[GTO]

Originally Posted by desdemona

The idea seems to be to use Mitsubishi's good name in SUVs

Originally Posted by mukul32

One (typically obvious) argument can be that Mitsubishi have a strong utility vehicle pedigree

can we enthusiasts now hope for a reborn Evo?

The only way I see a future for Mitsubishi is specifically targeted segments. A new Pajero / Montero SUV, EVO performance sedan etc. But they can forget about the mass market as the brand is too weak in that space. Building a brand takes millions of dollars; repairing a damaged brand takes more (if at all possible).

At best, Mitsubishi will be a niche manufacturer in most markets, and popular only in a handful.

[cbatrody]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

Now we're down to about 5 companies and it goes as follows :

1) GM - Chevrolet, GMC, Buick, Cadillac, Holden, HSV, Opel, Vauxall, Ravon, Jie Fang, Baojun.

2) Toyota - Toyota, Lexus, Scion, Daihatsu, Hino Motors.

3) VW - VW, Skoda, Audi, Seat, Bugatti, Lamborghini, Bentley, Porsche.

4) Nissan - Nissan-Renault-Mitsubishi-Infiniti-Datsun.

5) Hyundai - Hyundai, KIA, Genesis.

I guess you missed FCA, the 7th largest automaker in the world:

6) FIAT Group: Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, RAM, Ferrari, FIAT, FIAT Professional, Lancia, Maserati

[volkman10]

Mitsubishi's merger with Nissan rules out - Mitsubishi to reform itself!

Merger between two Japanese auto makers Mitsubishi Motors Corp (MMC) and Nissan Motor is not being considered. Full merger is not on the table. We want Mitsubishi to reform itself

Mitsubishi and Nissan to cross-manufacture in areas where it makes sense.

Link