Industry says death of Holden ‘plain wrong’

By Matt Brogan | March 18th, 2009

Australia’s car industry lobby has slammed a think tank for suggesting taxpayer subsidies could fail to save Holden from collapse.

The Centre for Independent Studies says Holden would be liquidated if its troubled parent company General Motors filed for insolvency and sold off its global brands.

It also said government funding to build green cars were a form of “old-fashioned protectionism hiding behind a green smokescreen”.

FCAI (Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries) chief executive Andrew McKellar dismissed the think tank’s arguments as “cynical” and “plain wrong”.

McKellar said GM saw Holden as a “viable operation”, citing a restructuring plan given to the US Treasury last month.

GM is relying on US government finance to avoid bankruptcy.

“It sees a long-term, viable future for Holden,” McKellar said. “That’s an important vote of confidence.”

The research paper argued the local car industry faced collapse even as the government gave it $6.2 billion during the next decade to upgrade factories and equipment.

“The plan did not make sense when it was launched and makes even less sense now,” researcher Oliver Hartwich said. “It should have been obvious that the Australian car industry was facing existential difficulties.”

Scrapping import duties and abolishing the luxury car tax would do more to encourage consumers to buy fuel-efficient cars.

But McKellar said a four-cylinder Holden and a hybrid Toyota Camry would not have been built locally, from 2010, without help from the government’s $1.3 billion green car fund.

“It’s not a subsidy taken out of Australia and squirrelled away,” he said. “It attracts innovation into Australia and facilitates innovation in new technologies.”

Source: AAP

Geni

I’m sorry but how does Holden manufacturing rebadged Daewoo’s (Holden Cruze) attract “innovation into Australia and facilitates innovation in new technologies.”. And as has been pointed out in the past, it was very likely that Toyota planned to produce the Camry Hybrid in Australia without the $35million freeby from the government.

As for Holdens viability, as a company I think they’ll survive, the brand is too powerful in AU to drop, and their engineering capability is very good. They might just end up another GM Daewoo manufacturing plant, but Holden itself will still exist

What the FCAI don’t mention is that GM actually said ‘GM‘s local subsidiary (Holden) and the Australian government have developed a plan to bring to market a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle, with project funding provided by the Australian Government in the form of permanent grants. With this support, Holden is projected to be a viable operation, making a positive NPV contribution.’

In other words without the money from the government to help Holden make the Daewoo Cruze, it would not have been viable. The green fund is being used as a smoke screen for protectionism. Is it worth it? Well it does save a lot of jobs, so probably, even if it does make Holden little more than a badge, but I think the FCAI are being a little bit over-critical of the report.
matt

The CIS are a think-tank that espouses libertarian economic and socially conservative policies. They do not believe that the state has a positive role to play in society but believe that free markets and deregulated financial systems are the way to go. Looking at the current state of economies around the world, I’d say that they are kind of irrelevant at the moment.
lazybones

My gut feeling here is not so much if Holden will collapse. But if they will remain to produce cars locally or just become an importer. To me that was the message behind Mr Reuss saying he couldn’t sleep at night.

Not sure anyone could be considered too powerful to drop in this current climate, Geni. But as you correctly pointed out, Holden is only viable with Government assistance. Where GM Has had assistance and still isn’t viable. I think GM bankruptcy is extreamly likely.
jp

mmmm caradvice i think it is in your best interest if Holden stay afloat! I mean your comments tally would have to take a fair hit should the ford v holden v toyota v the rest bickering stop
Bret

Lazy, by your reckoning, then Toyota Aus is only viable with govt assistance as well.
Maybe they both are, or aren’t, but it comes down to do with have any industry in Australia or not – and I’m not talking auto, I mean ANY industry, from primary industries to manufacturing to electronics to research, they all recieve levels af govt assisstance.
Wheelnut

Geni says: I’m sorry but how does Holden manufacturing rebadged Daewoo’s (Holden Cruze) attract “innovation into Australia and facilitates innovation in new technologies.”. .

I agree Geni that was part of my arguement that it would be much more logical not to mention econolically viable For Holden to Build a local RWD version of the Opel Insignia. [building on Holdens RWD expertise]
Because the Cruze is alrey being built in other countries such as Korea which given the fact that they continue to import Daewoos menas it s cheper. Whereas the Insignia is only being built in Europe where ATM its more expensice to import cars from – a point highlighted in a recent issue of Wheels.

And given the hype and rave reviews that surrounds the Insignia it appears as though its going to be quite a popular car – which could add to Holdens export earnings

Not only that but the Epsillon platform on which the Insignia is built is very flexible as cars using the Epsillon platform can be bult in RWD FWD and AWD configurations which raises the possibility of an AWD Commodore particularly if they use the Haldex AWD system under the new Saab.

As for The Gummint giving Holden money to “develop” the new small car The industry minister and KRudd have said they’re happy to see the local manufacturers moving towards more environmentally alternatives
http://pirelli itsme

I would be a bit worried about buying any gm products at the moment.If thay go under who honnours all the warranties and recall work .mmmmmmm
max

“Australia’s car industry lobby has slammed a think tank for suggesting taxpayer subsidies could fail to save Holden from collapse.”

I had to laugh at this, the guys that get paid by the auto industry, slamming an independent negative view. GM’s “Give us more money” report, clearly indicated that Holden were only viable WITH taxpayer assistance. To be clear, taxpayer assistance mean’s – they take money out of our pocket and give it to Holden AND the other Auto makers in OZ.

Lets not leave Toyota out of this either, they have their hand in the jar as well.

Brett, I do agree with you, but that level of support does vary, some more, some less. Its also does not make it right. 40 years on we are still having our pockets fleeced by the Auto industry. Enough is enough.

Wheelnut, know you love ya Holden’s and I hope they make it through this, Holden’s biggest problem is GM unfortunately, good luck yo em though.
lazybones

“Lazy, by your reckoning, then Toyota Aus is only viable with govt assistance as well.”

No, its reference to GM Claiming Holden is completely viable. How can they be, they haven’t turned a profit for nearly 5 years. Their last good year was 2004 (+$216M).

They lauched the cruze project with government backing, and yes Toyota got a good handout at the same time for their hybrid Camry. But for the same period Toyota Australia have always made a good profit every year, where Holden have been down nearly $300M since 2004.

Maybe its just a play on words Bret, GM might be saying viable as in, they have the greatest potential to survive the downturn. Where for me “Viable” means they make good money.
Wheelnut

lazybones the term viable doesn’t necessarily always relate to money or finaces

Viable can also mean that its worthy of consideration

When making a decision between 2 options one may be a more viable alternative than the other however; there mighn’t be any [substantial] cost/monetary value involved etc.. It’s merely a matter of assessing the pros and cons of each and working out which is more suitable to your needs/requiremnts.

For Example: You need to get somewhere do you walk or do you ride your bike? neither of them will cost you anything $ yet riding your bike will get you there faster…. and if there is no real difference then it doesn’t really matter which option you go for.

So in terms of Holden being “viable”; GM obviously believe that Holden are viable in so much as that they fit in with GMs restructuring plans or that Holden have a lot of Potential and are therefore worthy of consideration when deciding which companies to hold on to and which to axe like Saab
Wheelnut

Max – I agree Holdens biggest problem is GM as it is for Opel and Vauxhall – the reason for that is Rick Wagoner

When most companies takeover other companies they do it not only in an attempt to increase market share etc but to also take advantage of what those companies have to offer.

Yet despite having owned Holden and Opel for at least 50 years GM have never really taken advantage of what Holden have to offer particularly in terms of RWD cars nor what Opel has to offer in tersm of FWD cars.

No.. Rick appears to have the idea that no-one builds better cars than the Americans – be it RWD or FWD. I believe Rick should have retired from GM and Bob Lutz taken over as Lutzy is much more open minded – at least he realises that they make cars in other countries as well
Dan

Wheelnut – “Viable can also mean that its worthy of consideration”

Oh dear… is the business viable? Then it’s worthy of consideration. Will it make money? Or is there a possibility that it can make money? Then it’s viable. You’ve never done any actual due dilligence work have you?
Sean

Geni and Wheelnut

Can we all become part of a movement that looks at the road ahead in addressing the current direction and position of Holden in the global car industry, rather than staying rooted looking in our rear view mirrors?

Daewoo is a significant and highly integrated component of General Motors, hence it’s full name of GM-DAT. It is now as much a GM company as Chevrolet, Holden or Opel.

The Cruze is NOT a rebadged Daewoo. It is a vehicle sold in world markets, built on an integrated GM platform, the one we all know as “Delta”.

The current Barina, Viva and Epica are by deifinition pre-GM-DAT cars and therefore can wear that “rebadged Daewoo” comfortably, in a revisionist economic sense. But lets look forward and accept that Holden will draw on GM designed components and product from local, US, European and Asian factories for local consumers. The next generation of Barina and Epica will be built on platforms integrated across the GM world.

By rights, our revisionist thinking could well be applied to Zeta cars sold in the US, South American, UK, Middle East and Asian markets. The Chevrolet and Vauxhall versions of the Commodore/Statesman can be viewed as just rebadged Holdens.

Zeta is an integrated GM platform. Not one bought from another manufacturer, a joint investment or inherited from a company take-over. It’s significance however has been curtailed due to the GFC and CAFE regulations.

The badge engineering approach to product in Holden catalogues – where automotive clones are sold (Nissan, Toyota, Suzuki)- is not a sustainable business model. We will see Holden product emerging in the next 10 years on current or future versions of GM platforms, including Gamma (Barina), Delta (Cruze/Astra), Epsilon (Epica/Insignia) Zeta (Commodore/Statesman) and Theta (Captiva).

Holden’s short term future in manufacturing complete vehicles lies with Delta and Zeta platforms. There will not be a third so Wheelnut, don’t go looking for a local version of Epsilon just yet. Long term, however, we may see flexibility in what is built on top of them – Delta will be built here as a sedan, hatch and possibly hybrid or medium SUV. Zeta could be a casualty of a redeveloped global automotive landscape.

The bottom line is that we have to change our perception – it’s a different world, ladies and gentlemen. Cruze is NOT a rebadged Daewoo nor is it a rebadged Chevrolet. It is in fact an integrated GM product sold in Australia as a Holden, sourced from GM-DAT in South Korea.
Geni

Sean, I have no issue with the idea that soon GM Daewoo will be build cars that are competitive with more than their Korean rivals. However, just because a car is sourced from a GM subsiduary, doesn’t mean its not just a rebadged car. The Saturn Astra, is simply a rebadged Opel, because the cars are identical in all but a few token interior pieces. Look at photo’s of the Chevrolet Cruze which will go on sale in Europe soon, its exactly the same as the Holden Cruze. I will agree that using a platform is not badge engineering (ie Fiesta and Mazda 2), but in the case of the Cruze, its not just the platform, its the entire car. And Holden is simply bolting it together. And that saddens me because unless GM decides that Holdens RWD platform is useful again, the delta platform is all Holden will be tooled to use, which will most likely mean just becoming a GM Daewoo manufacturing plant, subsidised by the Australian government.
Wheelnut

I have actually had a number of contract positions that required to use “due dilligence” – I could go into detail about what I did and what was involved etc but that would be off topic.

Remember this is Caradvice.com.au not Careeradvice.com.au
Dan

Exactly mate. At the end of the day, a business is viable if it makes money, or will make money. As that’s the end result you want to know that it will achieve. You seem to imply that a business doesn’t need to make any money to be viable. Well, in communism, maybe so. But this is capitalism. If something doesn’t make money, whether directly or indirectly, it’s not worth doing. You can be restructuring this and restructuring that, as much as you want. If it won’t make money, it’s not viable. Period.
Devil666

“How can they be, they haven’t turned a profit for nearly 5 years. Their last good year was 2004 (+$216M).”
“But for the same period Toyota Australia have always made a good profit every year, where Holden have been down nearly $300M since 2004.”
“Where for me “Viable” means they make good money.”

Lazy, its clear to see what you’re getting at but in a financial world things are never black and white and viability doesn’t necessarily mean “makes stonking profits YoY”. When you take into account the excessive manufacturing costs associated with GLOBAL architecture development, coupled with the fact GM is cutting it’s requirement for said ZETA platform and sales of all large cars have dropped, Holden is slowly working its way back from big losses in 2005 2006 which saw a loss of $145 and $146 respectively, to a mere $6 million 2007 loss!

That, Lazy, is viability, where a company can bounce back from hard times and has the ability to react to a changing market and financial conditions. Don’t confuse it with profitability.
Ryan

I’m pretty sure more than a quarter of holden’s cars are actually rebadged Daewoo’s….so much for “innovation”.
Wheelnut

Dan Says – You seem to imply that a business doesn’t need to make any money to be viable

No Dan I was merely pointing out that the use of the term “Viable” isn’t limited to the business commercial or financial world.

In business what determines if something is viable is whether or not you believe it will make money.
However when buying a car – what makes a car viable may be whether or not it has 8 airbags.

You study your options and what each of them have to offer and if they meet your requirements then they’re worth considering and therefore are a viable option/solution.
Wheelnut

According to dictionary.com

vi⋅a⋅ble /ˈvaɪəbəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [vahy-uh-buhl] –adjective

1. capable of living.
2. Physiology. a. physically fitted to live.
b. (of a fetus) having reached such a stage of development as to be capable of living, under normal conditions, outside the uterus.

3. Botany. able to live and grow.
4. vivid; real; stimulating, as to the intellect, imagination, or senses.
5. PRACTCABLE; WORKABLE – A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE.
6. having the ability to grow, expand, develop, etc.: a new and viable country.

Synonyms:
5. practical, feasible, usable, adaptable
Dan

Wheelnut, what on earth are you talking about?? This article relates to BUSINESS. Not some “ride a bike or walk” pipe dream. Holden is a business. Assessing a viability of a business is not like assessing “whether a car has 8 airbags”, or “whether you should ride a bike or walk”. It always comes down to money. Crikey! You got no idea!
Dan

Wheelnut, this is not EnglishAdvice, this is CarAdvice. The article specifically relating to a business. Therefore the context is a financial context. Regardless, for a business to “live” it needs to make money. You’re going on some ridiculous off topic tangent to attempt to save your ego, when you do not want to admit that you are wrong when talking about “bikes and walking”.
Devil666

Is that the same “money” that Toyota is no longer making, Dan?

Because by that logic “Oh no, Toyota posted a loss. It’s not viable anymore. Time for liquidation”.
Devil666

By the way, business most certainly doesn’t have to make money. I have a “business” set up to run at a loss, an excellent tax deduction. It’s not as black and white as you might think Dan. Talk to an accountant, business is a complex thing.
Dan

No. This is the first time they made a loss. Holden’s been making losses all the time. Difference between toyota and holden is that holden has difficulty making money during boom times. Blind freddy should be able to make money during a boom LOL!
Dan

Devil, I know what a ‘loss leader’ is mate. Been dealing with a few businesses like that myself. The point of a loss leader is to make you money somewhere else. In simple terms, if you were to have a negatively geared property for example, making you losees, with tax benefits of course, it would seem you are not making money here on the face of it. However the house value is going up on the capital account, so when you come to sell it, the whole deal should hopefully make you money.

We had a similar concept a while ago when we built a famous luxury resort down south of Perth right on the beach. We own a lot of land down there, but there’s absolutely nothing there, just wilderness, so wasn’t worth much. We built a luxury resort, and made no money from it at all. Broke even. The value of our land all around has gone up 10 times as a result of a 5 star resort being there. The resort was simply a loss leader. Land being pre-CGT, the profits we’ll make on the sale of the land will be tax free too.

Going back to Holden, on their own they are making losses, no doubt about it. For them to be still viable, you’d better hope they are a loss leader, and are making GM money somewhere else as a result.

Mate, I am an accountant, and I deal with this stuff for a living, so please don’t try to educate me
lazybones

Dan, Wheelnut, Devil666….

Boys I think we can agree the term Viable is a flexable word which GM have carefully used to make Holdens situation look a little less grim.

I asked my Business partner for his view on the Business term “viable”. And he commented that it probably means the company in question hasn’t made any money but possibly could. He didn’t know I was talking about Holden BTW.

So in short, next time you apply for a homeloan. Use the word Viable when expressing your personal financial situation
http://integra axel

I believe stans spoofing , and he has no pedigree for spoofing .
Limited Slip

The more they deny going broke the more certain we can be that GM will go arse up. The Gov handouts arent even keeping up with the massive quarterly losses that GM are racking up, how much more can they give them before it becomes ridiculous? I think that GM can not continue with all their off-shoots, including Holden and will soon go arse up. They will declare bankruptcy and re-emerge as a small car company building cars only in America. Holden will cease to exist if this happens because the umbilical cord will be cut. If GM dont go for bankruptcy they will cease to exist completely.
Limited Slip

To be even talking about Holden dying is not good for Holden and not good for consumer confidence. As soon as talk like this starts in the business world the quicker things go down hill.
Shak

If Holden does go belly up well then Australia will have lost an aussie icon. Gm can burn for all anybody cares. They have bogged down companies such as Holden, Saab< and opel for years and these companies have suffered( 4sp auto in the omega). Oh and btw the cruze is not the small car being made. It states in WHEELS 09 feb issue that a totally new car will go on sale but built on the current delta platform. Lets hope (quote PM Rudd) that Holden can survive this financial shitstorm.
luvalambi

Holden just one damn minute ! Lexus all be friends !
Cupid Stunt

Ryan “I’m pretty sure more than a quarter of holden’s cars are actually rebadged Daewoo’s….so much for “innovation”.”

pretty sure eh! Means nothing really.

Just think about it for a minute, a samll company like Holden are not big enough to develope an entire range of cars purely for the Australian market. They must import and rebadge to make it a viable (Ha Ha) business. The problem is they WILL always fail in the eyes of CA commentors whilst they import so-called Deawoos. The problem is cost of importing OPEL goods means they are too expensive for Australians generally, Hence you get Koreans manufacutured cars. Some how Ford seem to do it with importing Fiestas, Mondeos and Focuses.
Holden has got a position in developing RWD cars but again that’s a limited market for Australia & the Americas with a few going to Asia. Nobody in Europe will buy a RWD platform from Ford or GM when theres equally cheap German ones available.
JEKYL & HYDE

LUVALAMBI,

short,sweet,and quote of the month…

so DAN your an accountant,funny i always though you were in the car game.maybe you and ELITIST could be friends.explains it few things..

anyhow back of topic.i was briefly talking to holden yesterday,and yes,they are bleeding.but dead,no way.and although they are in need of some blood,the word out there would suggest that a few other car manufactorers are about to start bleeding big time as well(as the saying goes-the bigger you are,the more discount you have to give on 08 models…)

they also were very coy over cruze.if and when the cruze is made in aussie,it may be a fair bit different to the ones were seeing now,but my guess is that will be propulsion,rather than looks.
AlbertK21

The problem with these “think tanks” is that that don’t give rat’s arse about what happens to the plebs, that’s about 85% of the population. Economic is an extension or should be of the social sciences – that is how to create & maintain a sustainable system that provides for a good standard of living for everyone. Efficiency is only one factor in all this & a crappy one at country level. Man’s will is a much more important factor in getting things done – how else to you reckon the Koreans etc industrialised – by luck? If we don’t support our industry – soon we wont have any at all – how then do these people think we can maintain the living standards for all members of our society??????
eh179driver

So back to the article. All you Ford and Toyota fans had better hope that Holden do survive, which they will. If they fold, the viability of Toyota Oz and Ford Oz becomes pretty clouded. Holden uses some 250 local vendors, most of which are also used by Ford and probablt half are used by Toyota. Without the Holden volumes (local and export) it is doubtfull that many of them would continue. Also remember that most of the Camry and therefore Aurion engineering comes from overseas and if the local suppliers fold the components could easily be imported. The volumes of cars that Ford are currently building hardly justify continuing with building a unique car so we could go down the import route.
I am convinced Holden will survive. If you look at their reports they were on trck to make a handy profit in 2008 until the GFC really bit hard in October. You all talk about survival and profits but what global car company is making money right now? A meassure of success in 2009 might well be making the smallest loss you can.
My last point is that if Holden were to fall, we would be looking at around 50’000 to 60’000 jobs lost plus the future training of engineers and trade apprentices and who wants that?
The Realist

Wheelnut – is your contract with Holden a schedule of rates type agreement where you get paid for every hour you work? I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re making a killing from this blog for all the PR…

AlbertK21 Says:
March 19th, 2009 at 8:26 am
“how else to you reckon the Koreans etc industrialised – by luck?”

No, because they build things quicker, cheaper and with better quality than we can do in Australia. Our high wages once meant that even though we were expensive and slower, we built to a higher quality. Now that’s not the case, with the multi-nationals setting up QA/QC in many Asian countries e.g. Rio Tinto in China for steel fabrication.
Bavarian Missile (.)(.)

Eh179driver ,got to agree with you there said it before myself . Thats coming from one that is barracking for a Ford win at Clipsal this weekend
Richo

Just to clear something up, the Cruze is NOT a GM-DAT (daewoo) design, it is an opel design, it is just being manufactured by Daewoo as they can manufacture cars for cheaper then europe can.

It is built of the platform for the next astra and shares many of its mechanical components with the next Astra.

Please be informed before slagging every GM product off as “a daewoo” just because they own daewoo…
adam (aka mada)

eh179driver,

The same thing was said when Nissan and Mitsubishi became full line importers.

I sometimes think that some here get a little too drama queen like!
lazybones

eh179driver, i’ve heard this before. It could be more of a case that the local industry can’t support 3 local players but could support 2. Yes there will be cut backs for suppliers but I doubt it would cause a complete collapse. I mean 50-60,000 jobs lost is a tad sensationalist.

Holden may well survive just by importing cars, which still keeps dealers/servicing/etc going.

“the Cruze is NOT a GM-DAT (daewoo) design, it is an opel design” Come on Richo, this has been done to death on here mate.
Zorro

For all you dyed in the wool Holden fans that continually call Holden an “aussie icon” and “Australia’s own” (superbly encouraged by General Motors USA) perhaps this article will finally open your eyes to your misplaced sense of patriotism.

Australia’s Holden died over 50 years ago and Detroit loves you guys more than you will ever know…

The weird thing is, all of you know this allready, it’s no secret. So what can we conclude from this? Wow, it’s obvious, brainwashing really does work!
AlbertK21

Thanks “The Realist” – your confirmed my argument – cut the workers down to size – is the core of your myopic, short sighted view. The Koreans industralised because of the application of will – that is they over a long period applied their collective national will to developing industry. Your argument borders on racism – Aussies are inferior when it comes to making quality manufactured products. You are wrong & you and your kind will lead to Australia being the cheap white trash of SE Asia
Richo

Zorro – I don’t think you would find anyone who doesn’t actually know that GM owns Holden, how farking stupid do you think people are?

But lets talk about facts mate, facts are that Holden HAS for the last 50 years manufactured cars in Australia, creating thousands of jobs to Australian workers. Holden has also designed cars specifically for the Australian market for the last 50 years. Holden, more so then any other manufacturer, has supported Australian motorsport for just about as long as Australia has had motorsport and supported it with factory backed teams for most of that time.

It’s for these reasons that many Australian’s feel like Holden is “their car company” in many respects. Everyone knows its owned by GM, people aren’t dumb
Richo

and it has nothing to do with “brainwashing” either, its just simply fact that if you heavily support an industry for 50 years, the ofcourse that company will built up a tremendous amount of goodwill. If anything mate, your the one who is being stupid
Boots

If GM\Holden dies…..who cares? It just means that there will be less Daewoo crap on the road.
Richo

Boots – the hundreds of thousands of people worldwide who directly and indirectly (part suppliers) rely on GM for jobs. I can’t believe how people can have this attitude, the simple worlds that some people must live in, ignorance really must be bliss…
Zorro

Richo

“..ignorance really must be bliss…” You’re absolutely right mate, you’ve hit the nail firmly and squarely on the head. You are a genius, no wait, you are Einstein himself reinCARnated. Just ask anyone thats ever bought a GM product with a Holden badge glued to it and sent their hard earned off to the good ol’ US of A. I suppose you lay awake at night gently humming away to yourself the tune of The Star Spangled Banner… You are a great American, God bless you…
Bret

Shak, perhaps Wheels knows more than GMH themselves:

“Just to put to bed any ideas that anyone had about this being unique to or designed in Australia GM design executive Simcoe says the sedan and hatch versions of Holden’s small car will be near-identical – both inside and out – to the (GM-DAT designed) Chevrolet Cruze versions rather than custom-designed for Australia.”
eh179driver

Well who cares where the cars the Holden manufacture are designed, so long as they are built in Australia. Put in in perspective, Holden directly employ some 5’000 to 6’000 people in Australia. The FAPM say that indirectly there in another 42’000 working at vendors plus add on dealerships etc. So if Holden were to close we could see another 47 to 48’000 unemployed. However the number would be higher becuase you need to factor in diverse suppliers such as freight, mining/steel manufacturing and other industries.
On top of this would be the knock on effect of the loss of the skills training that Holdeb support (designers, styling, engineers, apprentices) in a huge way. There are a lot of skilled people in the workforce that have been through the Holden graduate system. You loose Holden (or Ford) and you loose all of that with them. Imagine adding another 50 (odd) thousand people to the unemployment list. Imagine what YOUR taxes will look like to support that?
I have no alligence to brands (yes I do drive a VE Sportswagon) having owned Saabs, Toyotas, Mitsubishi’s and Kia’s in the past, but working in the industry I know the problems the industry faces all too well. Oh and at a recent FAPM meeting, be under no illusion what will happen to Ford and Toyota if Holden go. The local manufacture/assembly of the Aurion, Camry, Falcon and Territory will be very difficult indeed.
Zorro

eh179driver

what is FAPM?
eh179driver

Zorro, FAPM is Federation of Automotive Parts Manufacturers. It’s an Australian organisation set up to represent all Original Equipment components manufacturers. There are similar organisations in Europe and Northe America. It is used to lobby Government agencies, provide some training and all sorts of other things in the auto industry.