Home » The supply chain pain points of new car manufacturers – FT中文网

The supply chain pain points of new car manufacturers – FT中文网

by admin
The supply chain pain points of new car manufacturers – FT中文网

Reminder from FTChinese.com: If you are interested in the content of FTChinese.com, please search for “FTChinese.com” in the Apple App Store or Huawei App Store, download the official app of FTChinese.com, and pay for subscription. Happy using!

There are tens of thousands of parts and components with different functions inside and outside a car, which can be said to be indispensable. In supply chain planning, these parts are generally classified according to different dimensions. For supply chain management, the two most important dimensions are the degree of standardization and volume – the former determines the degree of commonality of the parts in stock (for example, the parts that have been painted are not as common as the parts that have not yet been painted), and the second The operator determines the space occupied by the inventory (the larger the occupied volume, the higher the requirements for land, etc.).

The first factor affecting the layout of auto parts factories is the degree of standardization of parts. According to this, parts can be divided into three categories: the first parts are highly dependent on the company’s private technology, design and intellectual property (such as the company’s self-designed engine and gearbox), and generally need to be produced by itself; The design of the enterprise, but the manufacturing technology is relatively mature and the versatility is high, so it can be produced by a third-party factory; some components are mature and common in both design and manufacturing technology, so they can be directly purchased from third-party factories.

Therefore, we can see many mature suppliers in the field of standardized parts (known in the industry as Tier 1, Tier 2, etc.). The modes of interaction between them and OEMs are also quite diverse – which part is supplied by which mode generally depends on the OEM’s ability (can or not) and willingness (wanted or not). For parts suppliers, the role of complete vehicle suppliers is quite flexible: there is an independent cooperation model of “only purchasing, no investment”; a shallow binding model of “purchasing and investing, not exclusive”; Purchasing, investing, and exclusivity” deep binding mode.

In this interactive mode, an unavoidable focus is the right to speak. Auto parts manufacturing is a typical capital-intensive industry – parts production lines are expensive and typical fixed assets. Therefore, parts and components companies will inevitably need cash, and the two main financing methods, stock and debt, have produced two typical voices: Obviously, the equity investment of OEMs in component manufacturers has brought OEMs As a shareholder, the capital has the right to speak; the procurement behavior of the OEM either allows the parts factory to obtain advance receipts, or allows the parts factory to obtain financing based on the receivables, which brings the OEM’s right to speak as a customer. .

For a parts factory, the higher the proportion of shipments to a single customer, the greater the right to speak. For example, the world‘s smartphones are highly concentrated in a few brands, so mobile phone brands can rely on a huge demand voice to impose restrictions on component suppliers. However, the brands in the auto industry are much more diverse – major auto manufacturing countries such as Germany, the United States, and Japan have several brands, so on the whole, a single manufacturer does not have a high say in demand.

See also  "The flat tax is unrealistic": Bank of Italy crushes the Northern League dream

Therefore, for individual parts manufacturers, the more mature their development and the more diverse their customers, the less reliance they have on OEMs, and the less power a single OEM has to speak; The source of funds does not require the investment of the OEMs. If the OEMs are not given the right to speak, a relatively independent and flexible cooperative relationship will be formed. The automobile manufacturing industry in Europe and the United States is typical of this model: there are several representative automobile brands in the region, and the manufacturers are highly substitutable; at the same time, these auto parts manufacturers are often multi-industry and have a relatively long history of development. , the capital accumulation is relatively abundant, so a relatively independent many-to-many cooperation has been formed between spare parts suppliers and vehicle manufacturers, maintaining a relatively independent position from each other.

The situation is quite different in East Asian countries where the auto industry is relatively late. In the early stage of development, OEMs in East Asia needed to handle the production of all parts and components, so it naturally formed a model of actively investing in parts manufacturers in exchange for shareholders’ right to speak. This pattern is very obvious in Japan: in addition to the engine factory, each OEM has its own transmission factory, seat factory, interior and exterior trim factory, etc. Although over time, various parts factories have also actively listed themselves independently and introduced social capital to expand their scale, but this production model with OEMs as the core and close capital cooperation between parts factories has still been retained.

It is not difficult for readers to find that in the cooperation model of the automobile industry, the Japanese system has obviously come from behind, and it is more close and planned than the European and American departments. Generally speaking, the greater the voice of an OEM over a parts supplier, the more stable the parts supply it involves to this company. This close and planned highlight is the “Just In Time” production model that Japanese companies are proud of. This high-efficiency and low-stock production model based on a stable supply chain is obvious to all in the industry. of.

Of course, the close integration of Japanese auto companies also has its own characteristics. Due to the close relationship between Japanese component manufacturers and OEMs, the two often conduct joint research and development. On the one hand, joint R&D makes the form of intellectual property rights of final products highly complex. Without the permission of OEMs, it is difficult for component manufacturers to supply products containing OEM technologies and intellectual property rights to other companies; on the other hand, joint R&D also It makes the final product “Galapagosized” – the parts are often highly coupled with the same brand of vehicles, and it may not be very easy to use when installed on other brands of cars.

See also  Germany remains one of the largest arms exporters

Let’s go back to the situation of the new car-building forces. In the core “three powers” supply chain, the demands of new car manufacturers and traditional car manufacturers are on a par – their shipments and value of goods are generally similar, and the demand for voice is also similar; and because “three powers” all need Rapid expansion (new energy vehicles are a big demand that has never existed), so in terms of capital discourse, new forces and traditional car manufacturers are also standing on the same starting line.

For new forces that have not yet been listed or have just been listed, they need to spend their precious cash on investment in the core three-electricity supply chain and accumulate their core advantages as quickly as possible. Therefore, for the non-three electric parts, they must hope for a model with less fixed investment and more flexible capital expenditure, and the pursuit of the right to speak is not their priority. Therefore, for those non-three-electrical parts that can be reused with traditional cars, the new forces want a more flexible model.

Therefore, compared with those Japanese-style suppliers who are closely integrated and whose shareholders have too much voice, the relatively independent European and American-style suppliers are relatively preferred choices by new forces. Regarding the possible consequences of “their competitors have a very high right to speak to their own parts suppliers”, a state-owned independent brand in South China was arrested for the limited supply of key parts and components for its hot-selling models. The dilemma of forced production cuts has taught new forces a valuable lesson.

However, the new forces do not seek the right to speak to the “non-three electric” parts factories. Although they have the consideration of focusing on the direction of investment, it also brings a fatal problem – long-distance inter-provincial ground transportation.

In the automotive industry, the less common and larger parts are, the shorter the inventory cycle is generally. The body is a very typical example – most car factories arrange the body shop and the assembly shop in the same factory area. The steel plate and aluminum plate are stamped and welded into the body. After leaving the body shop, it will enter the painting and painting shop in a few seconds. ; From the painting and spraying workshop, it will immediately enter the final assembly workshop, without even needing to use a truck. Conversely, the more general and smaller the components are, the more they can tolerate a certain transportation and inventory cycle, and the distance between the parts factory and the final assembly factory can be farther. Automotive electronic chips are a typical example – they are very small and can be programmed to be reused between different car models. As long as the stock is kept for a certain period of time, there is no problem even for international air freight.

See also  Boating boating drives the yacht transport business on container ships

Therefore, the foreign-funded enterprises that entered China in the 1980s systematically planned the supply chain, forming a concentric circle layout with the final assembly plant (the factory that eventually manufactures finished vehicles) as the center and the inventory cycle as the distance between each factory: The factory is the closest, followed by the engine, gearbox, battery, and motor factory, followed by the exterior parts factory, and the interior parts factory again. For example, if the final assembly plant is located in Shanghai, the engine and gearbox plants are often located in Shanghai, and the interior and exterior trim plants are located in Suzhou, Jiaxing, and Ningbo in turn.

It’s not hard to imagine that components produced in factories farther from the OEM are more vulnerable to supply chain crises—especially if the transportation requires traveling on highways or across administrative areas. And the new forces are just facing this problem – out of the consideration of obtaining government financing and land and other policy help, many new car-making forces choose to be in second- and third-tier cities (such as Hefei, Zhaoqing) with relatively weak automobile industry foundations, instead of The foundation of the automobile industry is relatively strong, and factories are established in places with many foreign-funded car factories (such as Shanghai, Guangzhou, Changchun, Wuhan, etc.).

Since the new forces do not invest in “non-three power” component manufacturers, they naturally cannot invite component manufacturers to set up factories near their own factories according to their own needs in the early stage. This has led to the fact that the “non-three electric” parts of the new car-making forces must be transported from the existing manufacturers through long-distance ground transportation, and even the Pearl River Delta depots have to travel long distances to transport parts from the Yangtze River Delta.

It can be said that the supply chain management problems of the new car-making forces have been exposed in this chaos, and a valuable lesson has been taught to the new forces-new energy vehicles are first and foremost automobiles, so the management of their supply chain is first and foremost. Management of the automotive supply chain. On the one hand, the new forces are relatively limited in terms of objective discourse ability and subjective discourse awareness; on the other hand, new forces still have deficiencies in supply chain and logistics management and planning capabilities. If we can make up for this lesson, the ability of the new car-building forces will be improved to a higher level.

(This article only represents the author’s own views, editor in charge: Yan Man [email protected])

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy