SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Share
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Fri Jul 12, 2013 3:28 am

    Now one place ahead of Hyundai and seven above Microsoft.

    8 Toyota Motor
    9 Volkswagen
    22 General Motors
    23 Daimler
    28 Ford Motor
    45 Honda Motor
    47 Nissan Motor
    68 BMW
    103 SAIC Motor
    104 Hyundai Motor
    118 Mitsubishi
    121 Peugeot


    Fortune 500: SAIC leading Chinese auto manufacturers



    The newly released 2013 Fortune Global 500 list shows that Chinese companies on the list reached 95, an increase of 16 over last year. In terms car companies, car companies a total of seven finalists.

    Among them, the Beijing Automotive Group, Guangzhou Automobile Group new entries, were respectively in 336 and 483 places, SAIC $76,233,600,000 in revenue came in 103rd place, an increase over last year by 27 places, continues to lead the Chinese car standings wealth enterprises.

    In addition, the FAW Group overtake Dongfeng Group, ranked 141, an increase over last year of 24, while Dongfeng Motor Group is ranked 146, down four than last year ranked. China South Industries Group Corporation and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group disaggregated 209 and 477.

    "Fortune" (Fortune Magazine) was founded by the Americans in 1930, the main economic problems of research articles published in magazines. Now part of Time Warner's Time Inc.. "Fortune" magazine since 1954 launched the world's top 500 list, has always been economic circles have become the focus of attention.
    Source: http://auto.ynet.com/view_35129_1.html
    avatar
    patpending

    Number of posts : 3005
    Points : 3948
    Reputation : 53
    Registration date : 2009-02-05
    Location : Surrey

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by patpending on Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:23 pm

    "just a little ahead of Peugeot and Mitsubishi by income"?

    I bet by profit SAIC are streets ahead! Wink
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:05 pm

    patpending wrote:"just a little ahead of Peugeot and Mitsubishi by income"?

    I bet by profit SAIC are streets ahead! Wink

    "Fortune released its list of the world's 500 largest corporations on Monday, ranking them by revenue for their respective fiscal years ended on or before March 31, 2013."
    You are right about Peugeot.

    List Rank, Company Name, Revenues ($b), Profits ($mm)
    103 SAIC Motor 76.2 3.3
    121 Peugeot 71.3 -6.4
    118 Mitsubishi 71.9 4.3

    Mitsubishi turns out to be Mitsubishi Corp, not just the auto part, I guess the oil part is very profitable!
    avatar
    patpending

    Number of posts : 3005
    Points : 3948
    Reputation : 53
    Registration date : 2009-02-05
    Location : Surrey

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by patpending on Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:48 pm

    In terms of car companies by absolute profit, last year Mike Rutherford put SAIC 13th ($2.1bn), more than twice Peugeot and perhaps 20 times Mitsubishi(!)

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/columnists/mike-rutherford/9236338/Mr-Money-the-most-profitable-car-companies.html
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:59 pm

    Is the state of Peugeot really as bad as this Chinese article suggests?

    http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&ie=UTF8&langpair=zh-CN%7Cen&rurl=translate.google.com&u=http://www.sinocars.com/qiche/sinonews/money/2013/0712/1508/39850.html
    avatar
    patpending

    Number of posts : 3005
    Points : 3948
    Reputation : 53
    Registration date : 2009-02-05
    Location : Surrey

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by patpending on Sat Jul 13, 2013 3:01 pm

    Windy wrote:Is the state of Peugeot really as bad as this Chinese article suggests?

    I heard they were doing really badly - the French and Southern European markets they depend on are imploding.

    "PSA is actually a bottomless pit" - precisely what MG Rover would have been for NAC or SAIC. BTW do we still have the video of Duke Hale drumming up investors for Oklahoma somewhere?

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/13826030/ns/business-autos/t/chinese-automaker-plans-us-assembly-plant

    Morris Motors

    Number of posts : 446
    Points : 538
    Reputation : 22
    Registration date : 2012-08-10

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Morris Motors on Mon Jul 15, 2013 3:08 am

    Wasn't there a report recently that PSA would be out of finance by the end of this year, that their prospective Chinese investors had backed off and that GM were the only ones in the game? Also GM would be involved only if they could restructure and the French Government won't like that.

    They'll nationalise it.
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Tue Jul 16, 2013 5:20 am

    Morris Motors wrote:They'll nationalise it.
    I don't think they can, apart from EU and WTO rules, France as a country isn't exactly rich at the moment!

    Why are the press not telling everyone not to buy French cars like they did with MG-Rover? Top Gear tested the Peugeot 208 GTi earlier this series and said nothing!
    avatar
    patpending

    Number of posts : 3005
    Points : 3948
    Reputation : 53
    Registration date : 2009-02-05
    Location : Surrey

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by patpending on Tue Jul 16, 2013 7:21 am

    In H1 sales in Germany, Peugeot are down 31% and Citroen are down 25% on H1 2012......neither has a car in the top 50....
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:12 am

    patpending wrote:In H1  sales in Germany, Peugeot are down 31% and Citroen are down 25% on H1 2012......neither has a car in the top 50....
    Maybe the press in other countries have warned their readers?

    Morris Motors

    Number of posts : 446
    Points : 538
    Reputation : 22
    Registration date : 2012-08-10

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Morris Motors on Tue Jul 16, 2013 10:41 am

    Windy wrote:
    Morris Motors wrote:They'll nationalise it.
    I don't think they can, apart from EU and WTO rules, France as a country isn't exactly rich at the moment!

    Why are the press not telling everyone not to buy French cars like they did with MG-Rover?   Top Gear tested the Peugeot 208 GTi earlier this series and said nothing!

    The press had it in for MGR for years. And MGR products did rather attract their fire somewhat, plus the activities of the directors didn't help...

    As for nationalisation - no, they won't be allowed to do it, but that won't necessarily stop them. EU countries often do what they want, then get prosecuted by the European Commission a year or two down the line and promise not to do it again. But of course it's done by then.

    Also the past few years have shown that the EU sets down a great many rules surrounding economic behaviour that they then conveniently set aside later when it suits them. I doubt they'd let PSA fall; France is one of the two main drivers of the EU so it'll get the result it wants. Plus the French people will simply not stand by and watch it fail because of EU competition regulations.
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Tue Jul 16, 2013 1:11 pm

    Morris Motors wrote:
    As for nationalisation - no, they won't be allowed to do it, but that won't necessarily stop them.
    Although they could nationalise it, it would still run out of money!

    Unless it gets to a point where it is profitable before it goes bankrupt then it will be impossible for them to do anything but give a small short term loan (3 years maximum) and even then they can only do so if there is a decent prospect of it being repaid so nationalising it looks fairly pointless. It's not the same situation as our banks which basically simply needed temporary access to a lot of money in order to continue operating profitably.

    All the western press seems to think they will be saved by either GM or the Chinese, neither look likely to me, at least not until the pieces are sold off.


    Morris Motors

    Number of posts : 446
    Points : 538
    Reputation : 22
    Registration date : 2012-08-10

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Morris Motors on Wed Jul 17, 2013 2:04 am

    Any 'saviour' would only step in if they have the freedom to run it as a proper business - i.e. make necessary cuts. The Government has handed them billions already and went apoplectic when PSA then decided to close a factory - in their view the money was to keep things open. They don't seem to realise that it is over capacity which is adding to their woes.

    It'll be like Leyland - a constant drip of cash, constant reorganisation in the hope of a buyer. But any buyer will demand that freedom and not be beholden to the Government to keep open loss-making plants.
    avatar
    patpending

    Number of posts : 3005
    Points : 3948
    Reputation : 53
    Registration date : 2009-02-05
    Location : Surrey

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by patpending on Wed Jul 17, 2013 2:45 am

    Morris Motors wrote:Any 'saviour' would only step in if they have the freedom to run it as a proper business - i.e. make necessary cuts. The Government has handed them billions already and went apoplectic when PSA then decided to close a factory - in their view the money was to keep things open. They don't seem to realise that it is over capacity which is adding to their woes.

    It'll be like Leyland - a constant drip of cash, constant reorganisation in the hope of a buyer. But any buyer will demand that freedom and not be beholden to the Government to keep open loss-making plants.

    How nationalised is Peugeot? I know Renault is a semi-government Reggie with Nissan holdings.

    If the answer is "not very" - going back to the Thatcher years I was reminded of the car crash "Chrysler UK" and how free money kept being doled out to try to keep it going, but chopping and changing operational plans to keep the unions in work (e.g. shifting Hunter production between Ryton(?) and Linwood - the Iran CKDs ended up at Stoke)...

    Opel is far more successful than Peugeot but in loss-making doo doo also - it was clear before the previous elections that Bochum had to close but all the politicians and managers ran away from that hot potato.

    Morris Motors

    Number of posts : 446
    Points : 538
    Reputation : 22
    Registration date : 2012-08-10

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Morris Motors on Wed Jul 17, 2013 3:50 am

    Rootes was punted at BMC at one point in the 60s as the Government didn't want the Americans to take over. But the bad blood between Morris and Rootes from the 20s Pressed Steel debacle scuppered that. Good job too, BMC was wobbling enough on it's own without having Rootes lumped in for good measure. Then add Leyland and you have one enormous disaster that even the Government wouldn't be able to save.

    I don't think PSA is owned by the Government at all, although I may be wrong.

    Nationalisation can only really result in 'managed decline' unless it is effectively a 'bridging loan' scenario. If there is no hope, it's best to get it over with, break it up, sell off what you can and close the rest.
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:02 am

    patpending wrote:How nationalised is Peugeot? I know Renault is a semi-government Reggie with Nissan holdings.
    From what I read last night, it seemed to be part GM and the rest Peugeot family. GM may actually benefit from it's collapse as Opel/Vaxhaul would gain market share in an currently overcrowded market. I guess GM may be putting some money in in return for valuables out (as SAIC did with SsangYong when it became obvious that failure was inevitable)

    Of course SsangYong was recreated without complete loss of jobs, but I don't think the French government as part of the EU can do the same, more likely a Chinese company will buy the bits in the same way as MG-Rover but I wouldn't be too sure that they would choose to keep a French connection, the French are not too popular in China and they don't exactly follow the Thatcherite principles that Chinese business leaders tend to require!

    Morris Motors

    Number of posts : 446
    Points : 538
    Reputation : 22
    Registration date : 2012-08-10

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Morris Motors on Wed Jul 17, 2013 10:49 am

    Are Chinese business leaders particularly Thatcherite?
    avatar
    Windy
    Admin

    Number of posts : 3322
    Points : 4244
    Reputation : 165
    Registration date : 2009-02-02

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Windy on Wed Jul 17, 2013 1:18 pm

    Morris Motors wrote:Are Chinese business leaders particularly Thatcherite?

    Their economy changed rather rapidly from a communist based one to a Thatcherite one based largely on what Thatcher had done in the UK a decade or so earlier and bringing huge changes to their country.  Before Thatcher most Chinese had never seen a motor car and could know nothing of MG, the changes towards international trade and involvement were partly triggered and encouraged by Thatcher herself.


    Thatcher bonded with senior-level officials in 1977 over a shared contempt toward trade unions
    While she didn’t assume the office of the Prime Minister until 1979, the then-head of the Conservative Party was invited to China in April 1977 because the authorities saw her as a likely government leader — one who was staunchly anti-Soviet expansion, to boot — with whom they should preemptively become acquainted. In a country that was still swirling in palace intrigue after Chairman Mao’s death and the demise of the Gang of Four six months earlier, Thatcher broke bread with senior-level officials, including Deputy Prime Minister Li Xiannian and Chairman Hua Guofeng, over the shared belief that allowing trade unions to interfere in national politics was dangerous and to be avoided at all costs. Both, as we know, eventually made good on their promises.

    She was an early advocate against the Great Firewall
    Thatcher pressed the CCP on a free and open Internet as early as 1996. In a speech given to gathered officials in Beijing in November of that year, the former Prime Minister expressed “dismay” at harsh sentences for dissidents, referenced Qin-era book-burning and warned China not to block Internet access, predicting that economic reform was “bound to lead in time to change in the way in which China is governed.”

    She lobbied against serving sea slugs and shark fins to senior-level cadres
    The Iron Lady argued with Foreign Office staffers as to whether sea slugs, jam sandwiches and shark fin should be served at a banquet for Chinese dignitaries in 1982. Why? Just to save a few kuai. We all know how that feast turned out. And to add insult to injury, Good Guy Zhao was the only senior-level official to join the event after the exceedingly-frosty negotiation process. The rest opted to attend the competing diplomatic bash held in the same building — a reception for one Kim Il-sung.

    The Chinese are likely to be familiar with Thatcher as a result of her role as the foreign leader who went head-to-head with political heavyweights Deng Xiaoping and Zhao Ziyang in a last-ditch effort to hold on to Hong Kong, then a British colony, before she capitulated and signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration in December 1984 under which Great Britain agreed to hand over Hong Kong to China in 1997 after 150 years of British colonial rule.


    Chinese reconstruction of the important meeting between Deng Xiaoping and Margaret Thatcher in Beijing on 24 September 1984 with talks about the future of Hong Kong.

    Of the “60 Most-Influential Foreigners Shaping the Last 60 Years of Chinese Development“, the China Global Times decided that Margaret Thatcher was the only woman who made the cut. 70 percent of the finalists were selected by readers, while 30 percent were recommended by “academics”.

    China Remembers Margaret Thatcher


    The Chinese government expressed condolences this week for the death of former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher on Monday. Thatcher, said Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Hong Lei, “was a prominent stateswoman who made great contributions to the development of Sino-British relations, including the peaceful settlement of the Hong Kong issue.” Her part in the return of Hong Kong to China, over which she later expressed regret, has dominated reactions to her death both in Hong Kong and on the mainland. At South China Morning Post, Patrick Boehler surveyed responses on social media:


    Keywords that dominated posts on Chinese blogs included positive words such as “historic”, “wise” and “great, according to data compiled by the social media consultancy Meltwater. More than 130 comments on her passing appeared on Sina Weibo every minute in the first three hours after news of her death broke.

    […] “You don’t have to worry about China, because China will not provide any new ideas to the world – not in the next few decades or century,” Hangzhou-based lawyer Yuan Yulai said quoting Thatcher in a reaction that has since been shared 7,500 times.

    Kai-fu Lee, the former head of Google China and one of the most influential voices on Weibo, shared the historic picture of her and Chinese counterpart Zhao Ziyang signing the Sino-British Joint Declaration in 1984, the bilateral treaty which secured the July 1997 handover of Hong Kong to China.
    “Thatcher and who?” the IT-investor and prominent commentator Charles Xue quipped, when re-sharing the photo. Searches for Zhao Ziyang, who was purged in 1989 for siding with protestors at Tiananmen Square, are still blocked in China.

    At China Real Time Report, Lilian Lin explained the place of the Hong Kong negotiations in Chinese memories


    Many in China know her best for her stumble outside the Great Hall of the People in 1982 during a state visit. That stumble served as a metaphor for Ms. Thatcher’s visit, which marked a rare foreign-policy setback for a leader who took on both Argentina and the former Soviet Union. Bent on pressing for continued British sovereignty for Hong Kong, she met firm resistance from Deng. Records suggest their negotiations were less than pleasant. The Daily Telegraph quoted Deng as muttering to an aide: “I cannot talk to that woman, she is utterly unreasonable.”

    “The Chinese public had a very complicated mentality towards this negotiation and frictions of the two parties, “ said Wang Yizhou, professor of School of International Studies of Peking University. “ But it has been a long time and Hong Kong returned to China smoothly, so people here are more impressed with her statesmanship, which kept Britain in the top rank of the world.”

    In Hong Kong itself, Thatcher’s handling of the handover still has some sharp critics. From Te-Ping Chen, also at China Real Time:


    “That marked a very, very dishonorable chapter in the history of the British Empire,” said Ms. [Emily] Lau, who argues that the former British prime minister “didn’t look after the well-being of Hong Kong people.”

    Still, though, Martin Lee, a former Hong Kong legislator and the city’s best-known crusader for democracy, said that those years were a time of greater optimism about the city’s political future. […]

    […] On the eve of the 1997 handover, Mrs. Thatcher sounded an optimistic note in an interview, saying that she hoped Hong Kong would one day be a model for all of China. “Chinese people will come to Hong Kong, they’ll see and they’ll say why is it different, and what is the difference?” she said. “It is the same people, the same talents, but here there is a rule of law founded on the belief that each and every person matters in personal lives,” she said. Hong Kong, she said, “is a flagship of what the China people can do.”

    While former Conservative candidate Richard Harris wrote at the South China Morning Post that Thatcher “always had a soft spot for the ordinary people of Hong Kong“, Australian foreign minister Bob Carr recalled her “unabashedly racist” warnings about Asian immigration. The South China Morning Post’s Tom Holland argued that Thatcher “had thrown away her best trump card” in the handover negotiations for the sake of blocking Hong Kong Chinese immigration to the U.K.:


    In 1981, her government passed the British Nationality Act, introducing a new class of British citizen and denying the right of abode in Britain to those, like the majority of Hong Kong’s population, who were merely British subjects.

    Years later, Monitor asked one senior member of Thatcher’s first cabinet why she had undermined her own negotiating position in this way. He answered that at the time Britain could not possibly have accepted mass immigration from Hong Kong.

    But, protested Monitor, the actual number of migrants would have been small. Guaranteed the right of abode in Britain, Hongkongers would have felt secure at home, and London could have got an even better deal for them in Beijing.

    Yes, admitted the former minister, but that’s not how the British newspapers would have portrayed it. There was no way, he said, we were going to risk headlines in the London press warning that three million Hong Kong Chinese were heading towards British shores. It would have been political suicide.

    Global Times took a somewhat different view from Wang Yizhou’s assessment that Thatcher had “kept Britain in the top rank of the world”. Her rule, it suggested, was one of the final spasms of Britain’s, Europe’s and the West’s global dominance, though she “could well enter history as a distinctive female politician” nonetheless.


    A political legacy is always hard to define, and the love and hatred still felt toward Thatcher are distinct. Joining hands with former US president Ronald Reagan, she played a crucial role in the collapse of the Soviet Union. During and after the Falklands War she impressed the world with her hard-line stance, which no Western politicians could compete with afterward.

    […] Her restoration of the British economy represented one of the last glorious achievements of Great Britain, or even Europe.

    […] The moment makes the man, or in this case, the woman. After Thatcher left office, there haven’t been any “iron men” or “iron ladies,” partly because the decline in European power means they cannot uphold an iron stance. The evolution of Western electoral culture makes politicians weak at solving domestic problems.

    Also at Global Times, Tian Dewen of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences credited Thatcher with pioneering Western engagement with Beijing:


    Thatcher was also [one of] the first Western leaders to propose that the West should press China to engage in international system, instead of excluding it. There were ideological reasons for this. Thatcher hoped “peaceful evolution” in China through the country’s engagement in the international system. However, Thatcher’s proposal also created external conditions for China’s reform and opening-up.

    […] As a right-wing politician, Thatcher was theoretically hostile to communist ideas.

    However, on the other hand, she also realized that China’s development was inevitable and the development of China was of significance to the UK.

    Historically speaking, as long as any politician can recognize these development trends, he or she is a friend to China anyway.

    Actress Melissa Rayworth, who played Thatcher in a state-sponsored TV film, recalled attitudes towards her somewhat differently:


    For weeks, we’d been shooting pivotal scenes that chronicled Thatcher’s meeting with Deng in 1982 to negotiate the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, at that point still 15 years away. This tiny, awkward moment — a re-creation of Thatcher’s brief stumble while walking down these very steps after that meeting with Deng in the Great Hall — seemed more important to them than any of her powerful speeches.

    They needed the villain to be brought low.

    They saw her not as a real person but as a cartoon bad guy – the embodiment of an empire that, in their eyes, had taken a piece of China more than a century before and held the Middle Kingdom hostage when it tried to get the island back.

    In any case, some of Thatcher’s influence still lingers even in the Party itself, according to The Telegraph’s Tom Phillips last year:


    At Shanghai’s China Executive Leadership Academy, one of the country’s most elite Communist Party schools, Thatcher’s philosophy has found its way onto a “crisis management” course that also focuses on the 2011 UK riots.

    […] Professor Li Min, a lecturer at the institution, said when it came to crisis management Britain’s former prime minister was a model of behaviour.

    Baroness Thatcher might seem an unusual choice for the curriculum of an academy grooming the next generation of Chinese leaders. But faculty directors say Shanghai’s Leadership Academy is no ordinary Party school.

    “We have an open attitude towards all civilisations that are useful to us, and [we] learn from them,” explained Professor Jiang Haishan, the anglophile head of its international program.


    Sponsored content

    Re: SAIC climbs the Global Fortune 500

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:30 pm