Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

whichcar.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 171 posts

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#121

Post by matsemann »

muxator wrote: post #119
matsemann wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impractical? Isn't it already being done? At least here in Norway, I can look up an organization and see all owners of that company last year. And press a button and it calculates the "true"/indirect owners up the chain as well. I can also go the other way. Select a person, and see what they own through multiple layers of companies.

Interesting. Is this a public service? Could you please give an url to know more about it? Thanks

All companies have to provide a list of owners each year to our tax agency Skatteetaten ("IRS"). The data isn't exactly publicly available AFAIK, but anyone can ask for access.

This is a company doing extra stuff with the data, and providing some of it directly online. Here's a lookup of the company I work for: https://proff.no/aksjon%C3%A6rer/bedrift/oda-group-holding-a...

It lists owners, but as you can see it's mostly "Holding Companies". However, pressing "Indirekte eierskap og eiere" ("Indirect ownerships") one can see the true companies or persons behind those.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#122

Post by dchest »

mc32 wrote: post #97

Stellantis is like the new Step parent to a bunch of step children that were given up for adoption by their biological parents. Some premier brands but also a lot of second tier brands and smaller brands overall. I wonder if they can keep so many brands afloat. Over the last 20 years or so the larger MFGs have shed brands and consolidated.

They mostly keep releasing the same car under different brands, so the cost for brand differentiation with respect to actual car production is pretty much the same as if it was a single brand. They even add non-Stellantis brands to it, e.g. Toyota (for example, see their European range of small, medium and large vans).

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#123

Post by jacquesm »

FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #53
Green_man wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know anta sports (Chinese) owns Arc'teryx and Salomon (and other brands as well), which are both big deals in very niche parts of outdoors companies (mountaineering/climbing and trail running/skiing respectively) but I don't think there's any single Chinese company that owns all the outdoor brands, unless anta is owned by some other company. Luxottica, the eyeglass company gp referred to is also Italian, not French…

Luxottica merged with Essilor in 2018. It's now a French-Italian company. They own: Ray-Ban, Oakley, Michael Kors, Varilux, Crizal, Transitions, LensCrafters, Clearly, EyeBuyDirect, FramesDirect.com, OPSM, Pearle Vision, Sears Optical, Sunglass Hut, Target Optical, Vision Direct, Vision Source, et al. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EssilorLuxottica

Hm, that looks like a good case for an anti-trust action.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#124

Post by linksnapzz »

CSMastermind wrote: post #107

I know that Ford takes a lot of flak (deservingly in many cases) but I've always been very impressed by how consistently the company has seemingly been run. If I remember correctly, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't, they are the only one of the 'Big 3' American auto manufacturers to not need a bailout.

One of the things that Ford has, which GM and Chrysler did not, is the continued heavy involvement of the founding family. There are two classes of Ford stock, one for family and one for everyone else. The holders of the family shares have a way-outsized voting influence on the board, and can bring a great deal personal interest and scrutiny into how the company is run. Always remember whose name is on the side of the building.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#125

Post by neogodless »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #115
CSMastermind wrote: post #107

I know that Ford takes a lot of flak (deservingly in many cases) but I've always been very impressed by how consistently the company has seemingly been run. If I remember correctly, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't, they are the only one of the 'Big 3' American auto manufacturers to not need a bailout.

Watch Ford vs Ferrari to get an idea of what Ford is like. Also be aware that you are not their customer. Their dealers are their customers. This is why a Shelby with an MSRP of $60k goes for $90k, while a faster $72k MSRP Camaro goes for <$70k. Ford makes limited runs so dealers can put insane markups, while GM makes cars for people to buy. (Bonus, when GT350s' rear differentials overheated on the track, Ford said "…

I assume you mean the Ford GT costing $300k. What car from GM sells for $190k? Is it a rare special edition of the Corvette? The base car is $60k, and even the Z06 starts around $90k.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#126

Post by [deleted] »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #115
CSMastermind wrote: post #107

I know that Ford takes a lot of flak (deservingly in many cases) but I've always been very impressed by how consistently the company has seemingly been run. If I remember correctly, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't, they are the only one of the 'Big 3' American auto manufacturers to not need a bailout.

Watch Ford vs Ferrari to get an idea of what Ford is like. Also be aware that you are not their customer. Their dealers are their customers. This is why a Shelby with an MSRP of $60k goes for $90k, while a faster $72k MSRP Camaro goes for <$70k. Ford makes limited runs so dealers can put insane markups, while GM makes cars for people to buy. (Bonus, when GT350s' rear differentials overheated on the track, Ford said "…

[deleted]

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#127

Post by muxator »

matsemann wrote: post #121
muxator wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Is this a public service? Could you please give an url to know more about it? Thanks

All companies have to provide a list of owners each year to our tax agency Skatteetaten ("IRS"). The data isn't exactly publicly available AFAIK, but anyone can ask for access. This is a company doing extra stuff with the data, and providing some of it directly online. Here's a lookup of the company I work for: https://proff.no/aksjon%C3%A6rer/bedrift/oda-group-holding-a... It lists owners, but as you can see it's mo…

Very insightful, thank you!

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#128

Post by tmh88j »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #115
CSMastermind wrote: post #107

I know that Ford takes a lot of flak (deservingly in many cases) but I've always been very impressed by how consistently the company has seemingly been run. If I remember correctly, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I don't, they are the only one of the 'Big 3' American auto manufacturers to not need a bailout.

Watch Ford vs Ferrari to get an idea of what Ford is like. Also be aware that you are not their customer. Their dealers are their customers. This is why a Shelby with an MSRP of $60k goes for $90k, while a faster $72k MSRP Camaro goes for <$70k. Ford makes limited runs so dealers can put insane markups, while GM makes cars for people to buy. (Bonus, when GT350s' rear differentials overheated on the track, Ford said "…

>Also be aware that you are not their customer. Their dealers are their customers.

> Ford makes limited runs so dealers can put insane markups, while GM makes cars for people to buy.

Didn't they just announce fixed price direct to consumer sales for EV's?[1] Regardless, I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Dealers reap the markups, not Ford, and they're hardly moving any of those trims compared to the F-150 and other "normal" vehicles. If anything it's hurt them. The Focus RS was arguably axed because of dealer greed[2]. Of course Shelby has more fanboys, Chevy doesn't have an equivalent. Ford has made non-Shelby Mustang Cobras in the past and currently have the Mach 1 to replace the Shelby GT350. Having shopped for both I can say with confidence that regular Camaros trims in general tend to be higher marked up than Mustangs because their production volume is much lower, especially with the 1LE package. Ford churns out performance pack Mustangs like they're base models.

[1] https://www.kbb.com/car-news/ford-ceo-wants-future-of-online...

[2] https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2017/07/barks-bites-focus-...

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#129

Post by mulmen »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #120

And a few months ago Tesla was valued more than all the brands on the list, combined. If that isn’t a sign of a stock market bubble I don’t know what is. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/tesla-valuation-more-than-ni...

Why would that be a sign of a bubble and not simply an overvalued stock?

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#130

Post by jmrm »

sofixa wrote: post #71
lotsofpulp wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stellantis is where all the brands with slipping or already low quality go, so having a lot of different brands at various price points is their thing.

That's unfair. Maybe that was somewhat true to an extent for the American part of FCA, but isn't for PSA and Opel. The latter were in not great shape under GM for decades, but were turned around by PSA in a few years. Peugeot, Citroen, DS, Opel have good reputation.

I don't know in the last 5 years, but Opel had a lot of different faults due to cost cutting measures, and depending of the model and the year of the different Peugeot and Citroën, it has or not lot of problems.

One one hand, we have the examples of those models that had the infamous FAP HDi 110 hp engine that gives a lot of problems, and Citroën's "Hydractive" (hydropneumatic) suspension was discarded due to the many problems they gave. We had a 1st gen Citroën C5, that had those two, and it needed to visit the garage every every 2 year to have some pretty costly repairs. Also, some of their newer cars with AdBlue have factory design problems in this system, and repairing that module is knowing that is gonna be relatively expensive and it's gone to fail in the future.

On the other hand, we had models like the Xsara, the 206, the 406, the C15, the Partner/Berlingo combo, and many others that were very reliable cars that rarely had problems.

Post reply on HN