Government and unions involvement present their own challenges for the OEMs
As the European car sales continue to struggle, automakers are looking for ways to streamline operations and reduce costs as a result of sales recovering soon. In particular, French automakers Renault and PSA Peugeot Citroën are looking at ways of strictly controlling production costs. As suppliers were forced to in 2008-9, OEMs are now restructuring their businesses.
Though this is an issue for all Europe’s automakers, this may prove particularly painful for the French automakers, as there is a nakedly political dimension to any restructuring decisions they may be forced to take, thanks to French politicians and the industry’s powerful trade unions there.
In France, where one in 10 jobs depends directly or indirectly on the car sector, and unemployment is creeping to 11%, there is pressure on Renault and Peugeot to minimise job losses and show that production in the country still has a viable long-term future.
Though they are united in this problem, both face different challenges. In certain respects it is the international dimensions of Renault that make the difference. Its partnership with Nissan is key to Renault’s financial health at the moment, as are Dacia and AvtoVAZ, Russia’s biggest car manufacturer, in which Renault and Nissan agreed last December to take a controlling stake.
Peugeot has focused instead on its western European base, though it has recently announced a deal with General Motors which will enable Peugeot to share vehicle platforms with GM and boost the purchasing power of both companies for components, raw materials and services. Peugeot sees this alliance as a basis for expanding in Latin America and Russia and for reducing European sales to halve the group’s total by 2015.
It’s these measures that suppliers will need to remain alert to, as they find themselves competing for fewer and fewer contracts. The shrinking number of platforms will also challenge suppliers’ readiness to localise supply into new locations quickly at an OEM's whim as they set up production in China and other high growth regions.
Another contrast lies in the shareholding structures of Renault and Peugeot. Renault is 15% state owned. Paradoxically, the consequence is that, over the past six years, Renault has found it easier than Peugeot to shed jobs and cut costs. Letting the French state feel part of the picture clearly makes all the difference. Renault has not closed any factories, only trimmed staff numbers and frozen pay.
Conversely, when Peugeot stated its intention to close its Aulnay plant near Paris in July, the government reacted by demanding the right to place a nominee on the company’s board during negotiations for EUR7bn in loan guarantees to Peugeot’s financing arm. The political tug-of-war does not help suppliers stabilise their volume planning. Last week Saint Gobain announced its decision to close its windshield production facility in Belgium directly because of Ford’s closure of its plant in Genk.
Copyright © 2025 S&P Global Inc. All rights reserved.
These materials, including any software, data, processing technology, index data, ratings, credit-related analysis, research, model, software or other application or output described herein, or any part thereof (collectively the “Property”) constitute the proprietary and confidential information of S&P Global Inc its affiliates (each and together “S&P Global”) and/or its third party provider licensors. S&P Global on behalf of itself and its third-party licensors reserves all rights in and to the Property. These materials have been prepared solely for information purposes based upon information generally available to the public and from sources believed to be reliable.
Any copying, reproduction, reverse-engineering, modification, distribution, transmission or disclosure of the Property, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited without the prior written consent of S&P Global. The Property shall not be used for any unauthorized or unlawful purposes. S&P Global’s opinions, statements, estimates, projections, quotes and credit-related and other analyses are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security, and there is no obligation on S&P Global to update the foregoing or any other element of the Property. S&P Global may provide index data. Direct investment in an index is not possible. Exposure to an asset class represented by an index is available through investable instruments based on that index. The Property and its composition and content are subject to change without notice.
THE PROPERTY IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS. NEITHER S&P GLOBAL NOR ANY THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS (TOGETHER, “S&P GLOBAL PARTIES”) MAKE ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE PROPERTY’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE PROPERTY WILL OPERATE IN ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION, NOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO ITS ACCURACY, AVAILABILITY, COMPLETENESS OR TIMELINESS, OR TO THE RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE PROPERTY. S&P GLOBAL PARTIES SHALL NOT IN ANY WAY BE LIABLE TO ANY RECIPIENT FOR ANY INACCURACIES, ERRORS OR OMISSIONS REGARDLESS OF THE CAUSE. Without limiting the foregoing, S&P Global Parties shall have no liability whatsoever to any recipient, whether in contract, in tort (including negligence), under warranty, under statute or otherwise, in respect of any loss or damage suffered by any recipient as a result of or in connection with the Property, or any course of action determined, by it or any third party, whether or not based on or relating to the Property. In no event shall S&P Global be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees or losses (including without limitation lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Property even if advised of the possibility of such damages. The Property should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions.
The S&P Global logo is a registered trademark of S&P Global, and the trademarks of S&P Global used within this document or materials are protected by international laws. Any other names may be trademarks of their respective owners.
The inclusion of a link to an external website by S&P Global should not be understood to be an endorsement of that website or the website's owners (or their products/services). S&P Global is not responsible for either the content or output of external websites. S&P Global keeps certain activities of its divisions separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain divisions of S&P Global may have information that is not available to other S&P Global divisions. S&P Global has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process. S&P Global may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P Global reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P Global Ratings’ public ratings and analyses are made available on its sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge) and www.capitaliq.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P Global publications and third party redistributors.