cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/67657166

Volkswagen is trying to implement a comprehensive cost-cutting programme with up to 100,000 job losses, double the amount previously planned, by 2030 and the potential contraction or closure of several plants.

all 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 9 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Hahaha

You've been making overpriced junk for decades and getting away with it because consumers don't know better and EU regulations drive people to replace their cars frequently.

Now China is producing the same level of "quality" for much less and you're freaking out.

Hahaha

And here I am driving a 20 year old Honda that should run for another 10 years with few issues.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Kinda ironic that competition is often referred to as "the driving engine of capitalism". It's almost a guarantee that the "bold decision" that Germany will make is to pressure the EU into banning vehicle imports from China.

    It's been funny to see how quickly liberal democracies retreat from their professed love of the free market as soon as it threatens to challenge their market share. It's almost like the free market hasn't ever existed and is only used to justify the monopolization of industry by people who already have a head start.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    It’s been funny to see how quickly liberal democracies retreat from their professed love of the free market as soon as it threatens to challenge their market share.

    It's worker protection, something I thought most people here on Lemmy agreed with. No western nation can compete with China on price without completely gutting 7 decades of worker, social, economic, and environmental protection laws.

    It’s been funny to see how quickly liberal democracies retreat from their professed love of the free market as soon as it threatens to challenge their market share.

    As opposed to illiberal democracies like China who do it by not allowing anyone free access to their market in the first place?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • It's worker protection, something I thought most people here on Lemmy agreed with.

    If the main concern was ever workers protection the economic system wouldn't rely on capitalizing the excess production value of said workers. They don't really care about workers, they care about the profit those workers produce. Otherwise the workers would be the ones running the company and benefitting from their own labor instead of shareholders.

    No western nation can compete with China on price without completely gutting 7 decades of worker, social, economic, and environmental protection laws.

    No western country is willing to invest in the infrastructure and supply lines necessary to to even think about competing with the China's prices, even with a large tarrif.

    Worker, and environmental laws are not the main source of price difference, and I'm not sure what you really mean by social and economic laws. The biggest advantage they have is that their country invested billions of dollars into their infrastructure for production capacity while most of the west were busy giving billion dollar companies and the wealthy tax breaks.

    As opposed to illiberal democracies like China who do it by not allowing anyone free access to their market in the first place?

    Liberal* as in John Locke's theory of merging limited government and a free market. Illiberal democracy is not a economic and political theory. China is not being hypocritical because China never claimed to participate in free market economics......

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    I'm in Germany and i wouldn't buy any of their overpriced garbage, fucking BMW with their "special" logo screws, VW with electronics that can barely go a year without short-circuiting, Mercedes=Bauer Porsche, fuck Porsche in general, Audi... fuck off.

    I bought a 2012 Dacia Sandero in 2019 and it's been great, just general maintenance every 2 years and it's still going.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Oh get bent.

    German car industry rose on cheap reliable cars from the 60s. From 2000, they just started making expensive douchevaggons that only got more expensive and less reliable.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    This still won’t be enough for them to survive without a pickup in sales, which are only set to decline further as any EU action on Chinese imports will be immediately retaliated by measures against EU OEM’s. The EU car industry is about to be completely massacred.

    I don’t like the German car execs, but the economical and political ramifications of not saving the European car industry will be enormous, so it makes a lot of sense to try to save it.

  • source
  • 52 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 45 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    But this is capitalism. If German manufacturers can’t compete, they should shut down. Survival of the fittest and free-markets etc etc. there will be job losses but the German people should ask their leaders why that happened

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Exactly. They insisted China become capitalist then complain when they do capitalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Article doesn't really point to Chinese vehicles being the primary reason though- it's that demand is down for cars in Europe.

    That said, it's not really free market capitalist anyway for China to heavily subsidize EV production.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Chinese car makers aren't really more subsidized than Europeans and US. Actually we're only seeing the brands that survived the internal competition of the Chinese car market, where a ton of brands failed and died.

    What we're seeing are the brands that survived that competition through extreme optimization, at a level no other car manufacturer had to reach before. And they did that in a growing market of 1.5 billion people.

    Why should they struggle when competing with an aging industry with aging production modes that only address ~600m people? Especially when those companies offer objectively worse products at worse prices?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    "Objectively"

    And just because China had companies go under doesn't mean they aren't still subsidized to the hilt.

    I do enjoy though people that are normally pro Union, pro worker, etc. essentially arguing that these people's jobs don't matter and we'll take subsidized foreign cars just because they're cheaper.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    A fair argument can be made that the Chinese government considers EV an imperative and interferes and subsidizes, so it's not fully free market. Thus any country with industry competing with China needs to decide if they care and if they care, how to respond to advantage conferred by China government policies. Whether that's similar incentives for their domestic industry and/or tariffs to try to level the playing field.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    That's only a "fair" argument to make if one assumes that orthodox neoliberal policies such as the EU's ban on state aid are somehow the universal ethical norm. Will, they aren't.

    If we made neoliberalism our dogma and the Chinese are outcompeting us maybe our dogma is fucking wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    There's a reason I explicitly mentioned state aid as an option. So it's a fair argument because currently they are disadvantaged. Advocating for equivalent state aid wild be on the table

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)

    I reject the framing. It is us Europeans that chose to be "disadvantaged" because we made the political choice to trust in the mumbo jumbo of neoliberal economics, because we thought we were going to be "advantaged" by the invisible hand of the market gods. We made a bad policy choice. Instead of calling it a "disadvantage", our political institutions should do their own self-criticism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Ok, I find this very bizarre. You lament that neoliberal economics is bad but should not be considered disadvantaged?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I guess we are reading the word "disadvantage" slightly differently. You, I suspect, use it purely descriptively. I am interpreting it normatively (disadvantage viz. the proper rules). I am not pushing back on the descriptive bit. I am pushing back on what I consider to be normative baggage smuggled in by the framing. Aka maybe I'm reading too much in a word.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 4 months ago

    Who could have seen this comming...corruption catching up... Who could have seen it coming that bribing politicians to allow them producing their product, that the people dont want anymore, wouldnt result in people wanting their product!!? Truely mind boggeling /s

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    They refused to make the transformation from gasoline to electro vehicles.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Not really. China is trying to wage economical war with the world.

    Chinese EVs are made by workers who live in cages and work 12+ hour days making $500/mo in a country that's only 80% cheaper than the US. IE $500 is like living off $650/mo in the US if your living expenses were paid (and your home was a cage coffin). You're basically an indentured servant because you can leave, but you'll be homeless because you can't save enough to live in the city.

    Second, the CCP subsidize the shit out of EVs. Then sells them across the world.

    These two things are designed to destroy the auto industry across the world. The sad thing is most people are to idiotic to realize it. They just go "I wAnT cHeAp EvS duurrr". Plus, at least domestic Chinese EVs are scary AF, they have an insanely higher rate of thermal runaway. You can have you cheap EV at the cost of helping destroy your domestic economy, just don't park that shit within 590 feet of my house.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    I think you're forgetting about Tesla. Long before China was the competitor Tesla was kicking European carmakers' asses and they were not even interested in responding. They ignored EV for about a decade and then when EU tried to push them by banning ICE cars they fought against it. Yes, is China beating them now but they made it really easy for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    That is not entirely true. VW saw the risk and said that they could beat Tesla in three years' time by producing a better electric vehicle than Tesla ever could due to their superior knowledge of vehicle construction and supply chain. They were too full of themselves.

    We can ignore the early Tesla Roadster which was more a proof of concept and fun halo car than a daily driver for the masses. We can also ignore the EV1 with a far shorter range and a few compliance cars and experiments. Then there's the model S which was available in Europe from 2013 which you could actually buy. There were barely any fast chargers at that point but the early Model S was a functional fast and cleverly packaged car for its time. It took a while for the masses to get convinced. I vividly remember driving that car at that time and the interest and questions people had.

    VW did start development around 2013 it seems and it feels like they were targeting the cheaper Model 3's future market rather than the much more expensive Model S. They saw the importance.

    Where they failed was in building a feature complete car in due time. The ID3 was late and was functionally incomplete. I recall news articles of many produced ID3s waiting in the parking lot for engineers to update them. The ID3 was almost a prototype of what should have been. VW was right in that Tesla would not be able to get the factories up and running correctly, but by ignoring workers' well-being Tesla did manage to produce. Quality control seemed non-existent but the car was for sale. The ID3 not.

    Then there was the charging infrastructure which Tesla had largely set up at that time in a monopolistic way but VW did not have. People need that. One can argue that the Tesla Superchargers still provide a superior experience tot the alternative for other brands.

    I don't think they were blind. Neither was BMW for that matter and probably many others. I think they underestimated the value of the mix Tesla brought and the value of their supply chain. The Tesla was was fast but no one blamed you for it, it was a cultural icon, it was a very strong signal to move away from fossil fuels. A signal VW or any other brand had not dared to play in to. That makes it a tall order where you have to produce a superior offering and they failed at that. Even today Tesla's vehicles have an efficient chassis design and you could only really destroy the company's status by going openly against a human friendly stance (ie: Nazi style) or against an ecological stance which is what they did.

    VW and many other makes because they were full of themselves. Nearly no new car maker succeeded in breaking into the market. Electric cars made that possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    So you're basically saying that they tried to compete but failed because they thought it will be easier and didn't try hard enough. Could be but it's still doesn't excuse them. They were not interested in making the right thing. They knew making EVs is possible but helping with climate change was not their goal. It still isn't. They still do the bare minimum they think they have to do to survive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    China has always been the land of the cheap workforce. What’s the reality today is robot factories, rapid concept to design to delivery pipelines. Essentially Europe, Japan and the USA have lost the race to innovate.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Somewhat true, but the German auto slowdown isn't only due to China flooding the markets. The biggest losses they're making right now is due to the drop of exports.

    The upper classes of the world no longer need or want "premium" European goods, because they've been revealed not to be that great anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    How about the car industry making bold moves into EV production instead? They have fought EVs tooth and nail, and lobbied to retain the fossile fuel market forever.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    The threat is your disinterest in battery, charging and EV technology?

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    free market advocates become anti free market when china comes into play

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

    German cars have become the same plastic crap with the same spying software, but still at double the price.

    I would happily buy a 2010 level German car if they would still make it.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I drive a 1999 Skoda Octavia, VAG, with the 1.9 TDI, with the mechanical pump. The thing, with proper maintenance, is ultra reliable. Doesn't leak or burn oil. It hasn't had a major repair in 27 years/400.000 km, just consumables, like a clutch, belts, a starter motor, stuff like that.

    Two people I know that have bought VAG cars the last 5 years are constantly bitching about their cars.

    Engineering is not the problem here, it's management making engineering decisions.

    The Chinese make generational planning. Western make quarterly decisions to appeal to speculators, not investors.

    Western car makers, and Japanese/Koreans, definitely have the know how to make good value EVs, and some do (see Renault and Hyundai). If western and free market oriented Asian makers made long term investment and decisions they would compete just fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    It started to become visible mid 00s. My Audi A4 was a great car mechanically - but it had to go for 'repairs' at least two times a year. Not because something was really broke - but because yet another sensor was malfunctioning. Massive costs, not for real repairs, but for mechanics hours figuring out which sensor was the culprit this time. Not one time there was a real mechanical problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    It doesn't even mean anything to drive an Audi or BMW anymore. A Hyundai or Chinese brand can give you the same functionality at an equal or cheaper cost. Their cars don't even stand out anymore due to their SUV focus. It's hard for a luxury brand to recover its image once it loses its lustre.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Could start by making good cars again. Bmw couldn't get any worse at this point

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    No one left to buy them. Since they're expensive locally, they used to export them to the Chinese. But China has its own industry now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    They could make cars that last 30 years again like in the 80s and people would buy them at extreme premium

    The only car worth buying from Germany is porsche and they sell just fine. Because they last and make what people want

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Euro cars are known to be finicky and when something goes wrong it's also always a write off unless it's under warranty.

    Have they tried making cars that don't break after 3-5 years again?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    That would break them. Building cars that last means less demand for the next new car. Planned obsolescence is the only way to make sure the next round of vehicles has a market, regardless of whether its a significant enough improvement to justify the cost.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Doesn't sound quite right to me - isn't Toyota a top brand globally, and doing just fine building cars engineered to last hundreds of thousands of miles? Somehow there's plenty of market for their cars year after year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Different business model. Toyota has the Lexus brand, but they rest most of their business model on the shrinking mass market. It works great... when there's a significant amount of money in the low- to mid-tier markets. Volkswagen group, Mercedes, etc. target upper-mid to luxury/sport markets. Their target market is people with money who want status symbols, not just tools. It has to run flawless, while it runs, but it doesn't have to run forever because it's just as much a fashion accessory as it is for transportation; and fashion trends need regular refreshes.

    If you target that market with a super-reliable product, you get an Instant Pot. The original models were designed to be damn near bullet proof and last forever. People will take those things to the grave with them, but once everyone who would consider them had one?... the bottom fell out of the market and they didn't diversify into other appliances in time to make up for the lost revenue from their primary line of business. Fell into chapter 11 and got snapped up by a bigger fish. The new ones suck so bad... but it keeps people replacing them.

    Line go up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Volkswagen is trying to implement a comprehensive cost-cutting programme with up to 100,000 job losses, double the amount previously planned, by 2030 and the potential contraction or closure of several plants.

    There's no solution to this. Either make cars people want to buy or GTFO. Can't have jobs for an unwanted industry.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Bold decisions... like removing combustion engines!

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    China is not the threat since Germany can always impose tariffs. As the article points out, benefits to workers are too high. Germany must explore other industries besides car manufacturing. This is where it's important for Germany to encourage immigrants with talent to study and work there. The AfD will exploit the warnings of job collapse to gain power. Hitler rose to power when the democratic Weimar Republic couldn't control inflation.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Germany must explore other industries besides car manufacturing.

    This! Our industry is far too dependent on the car market. Car ownership is going down and people don't need to buy new cars all the time. The market is saturated. When I look around, everybody is driving a relatively new car that won't have to be replaced for years. It's just not a growth industry - and by the love of god, it shouldn't be one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Germany could explore other ways of making money such as tourism and film making. Encouraging foreign students to study in Germany would bring tuition money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Tariffs won’t help because while they’re losing across the board, the most important market for VW, and also the one with the most drastic losses, is not Germany but China. They bet a lot on expansion into China and once reached ~20% market share there, but that has since dropped to half. For BEV specifically it’s abysmal, so the outlook is also bad: BEV has rapidly risen to nearly 60% of the Chinese retail market but VW’s share is in the low single digits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    The so called "chinese threat" is the chinese not buying their cars anymore?

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/globalnews@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    Oh no, not the poor car industry! Think of the jobs! Giant corporations need help! /s

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    I love when a cartel labels healthy market competition and more options for consumers as a threat.

  • source