1967 Volkswagen Beetle on 2040-cars

Auto blog

VW exec calls US ops a 'disaster'

Today in the Tell Us How You Really Feel file we have Bernd Osterloh, head of Volkswagen AG's Group Works Councils and member of the company's supervisory board, labeling the company's US operations "a disaster." Why? Because Osterloh believes VW of America doesn't have the models it needs to be competitive here, hasn't been decisive enough about its plans and German higher-ups still don't understand the US market.
In truth, the top labor rep at the German conglomerate is echoing sentiments we've heard from VWoA executives for years, and there's been the same commentary from dealers: Germany doesn't pay enough attention to what the US market really wants. Even ex-VWoA CEO Stefan Jacoby, who preceded the recently departed Jonathan Browning, said early in his tenure that one of his tasks was to get his German bosses to start delivering what the US market demanded. New CEO Michael Horn is saying much the same thing seven years later, telling Sky News that it has to increase "the speed at which we bring new models to the market and innovation to the market."
Osterloh wants to get "more models" here, including a pickup truck, but we'd wonder if the economics have changed from when Jacoby said they'd need to sell 100,000 per year to make money. Osterloh also wants a decision on where the CrossBlue will be built. Although it looked as if the Chatanooga, TN plant would get the call, the Puebla, Mexico plant is still in the running because of lower operating costs. No matter what happens right now, Osterloh thinks the situation won't get better for another two years when revamped models arrive, but at least the company can start taking the steps for a better US future.

Suzuki and VW finalize their divorce

The rocky divorce between Suzuki and Volkswagen is finally over after working its way through the International Court of Arbitration since 2011, according to the Japan Times. In the final settlement to end the companies' disputes, Suzuki agreed to pay VW an undisclosed amount for not living up to the agreement to use the German automaker's diesel engines. While they won't disclose the exact sum, Suzuki said in a statement that the money "will not have any significant impact" on its 2015 fiscal year results, which will end in March. The arbitration court took the biggest step to end this transcontinental partnership in August 2015 when the body ruled VW needed sell its 19.9-percent stake in Suzuki. However, the Japanese company wasn't entirely off the hook because VW was still allowed to sue for damages over the diesel engine issue. This latest decision finally clears up that dispute. Like most marriages, the union between VW and Suzuki began with stars in both parties' eyes. The Germans paid $2.8 billion to buy 19.9 percent of the Japanese company in December 2009. VW was supposed to get greater access to the auto market in India, and Suzuki hoped to capitalize on access to its partner's advanced technology. By 2011, rumors started percolating that things were contentious behind closed doors. VW allegedly tried to assert control over Suzuki's operations, and the Japanese company reportedly wasn't happy with its access to the German tech. Suzuki even bought diesel engines from Fiat, rather than VW. Later that year, company CEO Osamu Suzuki announced he would end the alliance, and they started working through arbitration. Notification Concerning Resolution of Arbitration by Settlement As Suzuki has reached a settlement regarding the arbitration that Suzuki filed with the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce on 24 November 2011, Suzuki informs you of the following: 1. History from the Request for Arbitration to the Settlement As announced in the "Notification Concerning Arbitration Award" dated 30 August 2015, the Tribunal indicated that it would address the issue of alleged damages arising from Suzuki's breach of the agreement claimed by Volkswagen AG ("VW") in a further stage of the arbitration proceedings. Suzuki reached a settlement with VW in regard to such arbitration proceedings on 10 February 2016. Accordingly, the arbitration proceedings have been concluded. 2.

VW budget sub-brand stuck in limbo over VW standards, costs

Reports in October 2012 claimed Volkswagen had begun investigating the creation of its own budget brand. This came after having failed to purchase Malaysian car company Proton or produce a meaningful partnership with Suzuki, and after watching Renault-Nissan make piles of euro on Dacia and plot the return of Datsun. For VW, more important than the question of what to call it was how to build it profitably and in a way that didn't damage the VW brand. According to a report in Autocar, a satisfactory answer still hasn't been found. The hurdle is how to hit "'necessary' quality and safety levels" at the price points needed to make the venture worthwhile. At the time of the 2012 report, German outlet Der Spiegel said VW was trying to get prices down to 6,000 to 8,000 euro ($7,784 to $10,379 US), about two thousand to four thousand euro under the price of the VW Up and in line with the cost of a 6,790-euro Dacia Sandero in Germany. In March 2013, VW announced, "We want to bring a true budget car to the market in China in the foreseeable future," the most concrete move in that direction after years of planning to make a decision. Working with local Chinese maker FAW, it was predicted that the vehicle in question would appear around 2016, but as of November last year a final vote on it needed to wait until this year because "We are still working on the cost side" and profit possibilities for a car that "has to be durable, it has to be precise, it has to be safe." Even Fiat, another automaker long considering a budget brand beneath its Fiat line-up, wasn't sure how to squeeze any extra money from lower-cost products but was sure that it couldn't be done by manufacturing in Europe. If VW hasn't yet made the math work with a joint venture in China, it will be interesting to see how it might build a European go-it-alone business case.