The more disordered and more beautiful the joint venture

"The joint venture is autonomous, and the industry is expecting too much from it. It seems like we have to step into the sky. Actually, this is already a start for foreigners to get some technology. This is a rare 'entry point.' Your own business."

This week's discussions on joint venture autonomy have once again reached a climax. The topic of discussion was about the new model of joint venture autonomy. The "Aeolus" A60 was not enough to get Nissan Sylphy, but it also took the "Dragon Joint Venture Autonomy" that was not yet in the shadow, and hung up "Shuangfeiyan" (Dongfeng Parent Company logo). Changan Mazda, which has just passed the approval on the other side, will also produce “Changan brand new models” in Nanjing, which will be in line with the Mazda models.

If you are not a car racer, you may find it difficult to understand why there is a noun in the world called "joint autonomy." How can all of them "joint venture" and "autonomy"? An American who was engaged in the research of the automobile industry in China said that "joint venture autonomy is definitely a product of Chinese characteristics." In short, it is a new brand internally created by a joint venture company to share intellectual property rights.

There are too many topics on whether the joint venture is good or bad, right or wrong, and it is not discussed here. I just want to say that every thing has its own reasons for existence, whether it is in order to facilitate government procurement (the joint venture may be treated as an independent brand by government procurement), or the technology that has changed over the years. One way or the other, these discussions are all too heavy. Since it exists, and it is constantly turning over patterns, we should accept it and take the opportunity to see what we can get.

Some people criticized the joint venture for its own use of old technology and old platforms abandoned by foreign parties, such as the old Sidi platform for the Honda Concept S1, the Lao Tat for Dongfeng Nissan Kai Chen D50, the old Civic for Dongfeng Honda Siming, etc. Say that China does not learn anything from these platforms, but it is clear that we do not even have the technology of these platforms. If it is possible to start from the basics at the lowest cost, isn't this a good thing? Do not underestimate these "reverse development", learning to accomplish great things, when Toyota Motor Corp. founder Kiichiro was how to make a fortune, not to go to the United States to get a Chevrolet drum out.

Self-owned joint ventures, the industry expect too much to it, as if to step into the sky, in fact, this is the beginning of foreigners willing to take some of the technology to you, this is a rare "cut in point", then how to engage in research and development, is your own The matter is.

Recently, some government officials came out to support the joint venture to be sued. I think this is nothing more than nationalist sentiment. A car is just an industry, but it is only a large scale. It must also generate profits in the framework of the commodity economy cycle. Chinese auto companies must first survive. If we can learn a little bit about the joint venture, we can do it as much as we can. If we cannot stand in the future, we cannot fully assert its failure.

Now there is a new joint venture model between Dongfeng and Changan Mazda. Although we look at chaotic points and listening around points, this is a good phenomenon. The more chaotic it is, the more beautiful it is, and the formal things need not be investigated too much. We should see It is useful for us to learn technology. It doesn't matter if it's a pancake. It's good to steal technology.