The past several of weeks we seen Mary's revenge trash lawsuit against FCA get smacked down by U.S. Federal Judge Borman with ''prejudice'' (
Oh Mary....FCA Wins as GM's Trash lawsuit is dismissed with ''with prejudice''! ), and the birth of Stellantis name coming out of the ''folding'' of PSA into FCA: making the world's Third or Fourth largest Automaker depending ones views of the Renault-Nissan relationship.
Nevertheless, the idea being the forming of Stellantis is to better handle challenges that occurs during life. With economics of scale, Stellantis (in theory ) should launch new technologies throughout the merged company portfolio of models & brands quicker than either FCA or PSA standalone with greater efficiency to boot. But the majority of the benefits will be felt in the new EMEA (Europe, Middle East, Africa),along there's less International benefits than the FCA deal with Renault that fell apart( thanks to the French Government) and no Nissan/Mitsubishi for a roll-in event creating a giant producing 15 million vehicles annually(which would have been the World's Largest Automaker).
The November Federal General Election in the United States adds another large layer of challenges for Stellantis to deal with. I know we all (well most) can't stand politics whether it is in Italy, France, or the U.S. but an understanding of the trends is essential to get what the challenge is. The one element that both FCA and GM (along with Toyota) have agreed on is to push back new U.S. Vehicle Emissions standards (the late 2020's). FCA along with GM's ally is let's just say a ''Certain Donald'' whom is against State-based emission regulations. FCA and GM's fleet is now more weighted towards CUV's/SUV's/Pickups largely driven by the market shift away from standard passenger sedan, but also FCA's and GM's own financial agenda.
However, within the U.S. Gen Y/Gen Z age range is a hunger to fight climate change & clean the environment no matter the political affiliation (shout out to @Ryan) (Millennial and Gen Z Republicans stand out from their elders on climate and energy issues) putting FCA/GM/a ''certain Donald'' in a opposite direction from the U.S. most powerful consumers.
The other element is a growing opinion that the standards '' FCA/GM/a ''certain Donald'' are fighting in court don't go far enough, and the November opponent to a ''certain Donald'' let's called a ''certain Joe'' agrees with that point-of-view about previous EPA standards & California+other States regulations . A ''certain Joe'' at the very least wants to impose standards modeled off of the E.U. C02 emission standards despite the appeal of larger vehicles in the U.S. together with giving just another 2-5 additional years(vs European Union) to achieve these tough standards(2031-2034). With a quick turnaround from lax emission standards increases to among the strongest in the world will create stress shock in the U.S. Auto industry, and such stress shock have a real chance of happening.
In most of Europe, there's are elections where citizens go out to vote for their preferred candidate, then the winners have to go and create a coalition Government. In the U.S. there's the Electoral College which game to reach the score of 270 points/electoral vote by winning a correct/winning combination of States. While things can always change, at this point a''certain Joe'' would beat a ''certain Donald'' in critical game breaking states like Michigan(48 to 43), and Florida (50-44)(https://www.changeresearch.com/post/states-of-play-battleground-wave-11 ).
With 80 days remaining , a''certain Donald'' is running out of time to change the course by stop going after petty small things/issues,reach a deal to pass a new round of Stimulus (especially direct payments, and renew unemployment insurance aid payments), make a National address to the entire United States , and get get unemployment below 9%.
Also to Show ''certain Donald'' cares about racism, he shall rename certain U.S. Military Bases instead of pushing back against the Military's own wishes.
If a ''certain Donald'' does the above actions his numbers should/likely improve with so-called ''independents'' creating moments to win at the debates against a ''certain Joe'' which generates a second-term allowing FCA and GM to continue the U.S. New Vehicle Emissions standards fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If a ''certain Donald'' doesn't make those actions, then FCA/GM's fight U.S. New Vehicle Emissions standards is burnt toast. Michigan is divide among rural Areas with Grand Rapids and what is ''Oakland County (Auburn Hills is part of )'' voted heavily for one end of the political spectrum(a ''certain Donald'' in 2016) , while Flint/Detroit/Dearborn/Lansing/ Ann Arbor goes in the opposite direction. Similar dynamic goes on with Northern Florida (''certain Donald'') vs Southern Florida (opposite direction). Overall point is just a couple of hundred votes could separate FCA/Stellantis from staying on the current pathway in North American fuel emissions vs overhauling the company powertrain plans in North America,planning a moving to fully Electric Ram when it haven't even sold one EV Truck (yet).
This unique and unexpected North American Electric challenge (if a ''certain Donald'' lose) together with still being globally significantly smaller than Volkswagen & Toyota, and the need to replace Nissan-Mitsubishi as the '''second wave-rail'' of an ''Merger package'' those bring a sense of urgency to go down a certain unpopular path: Stellantis buying GM and settling the score with Mary.
The purchase of GM by Stellantis would create an Automaker whom global volume would 13-15 million vehicles basically replacing Nissan/Mitsubishi in-terms of scale benefits, but unlike Nissan/Mitsubishi, there are unique synergies that only a GM purchase provides FCA/Stellantis. John & Sergio for years have stated that an FCA-GM Merger would save $10 billion without plant closures,the element of that $10 billion is having RAM/Chevy/GMC Full Size Pickups on one set of underpinnings. The merged Full Size BOF underpinning would be an incredible feat of purchasing scale,industrial might, and with that industrial might comes the power to steamroll EV Technology on Full Size Truck s & SUV's more effectively than otherwise.
By converging RAM and GM's BOF products on new EV-Focused BOF underpinnings makes it significantly easier to implement a''certain Joe'' emission rules in a ''electric wave'' because any potential ''demand destruction '' created by truck owners lack of acceptances of EV technology can get absorb by the cost savings & overall volumes. Another element is the crossover between new Europe,Middle East & Africa of Stellantis and these Merged EV-BOF Trucks. Even with a''certain Joe'' regulations & programs , Europe will have a head start advantage in EV adoption & penetration, and with Stellantis being a top player in the European theater it will already have establish supply arrangements, relationships and industrial supply chain base for batteries & systems that can be scaled up for North America. Because of the designs of EV technology components & parts are way more standardize there is more inter-continent part sharing then they ever was with ICE(Internal Combustion Engine) NA Truck products between ICE E.U. Passenger cars (especially powertrain)
Other benefits of EV-Focused BOF underpinnings is the lack homeroom/'heritage''/''not created here'' mindset (particular from the former GM Lifers) that might been an issue with (for example) HEMI VS Small Block''('this is how we do a Chevy Truck'') on an ICE Full Size Truck, but doesn't exist with EV's being an clean slate.
Of course Stellantis buying GM means going through a big (successful) fight on Wall Street against Mary Barra as Sergio was planning until Warren Buffett's opposition in face-to-face'' meeting with John Elkann (which together with FCA's debt at the time caused John to scrap those fighting plans).The game is announcing a bid for GM, Stellantis talks directly to GM Shareholders with goal of making an alliance with 3% of GM Shareholders/ 3% GM's Shares outstanding-float. The alliance between those GM shareholders (3% of GM Shareholders/ 3% GM's Shares outstanding-float) & Stellantis would nominate a slate of new GM Board directors run against GM's recommended Directors to form a new GM Board Of Directors whom would fire Mary Barra (and other GM management like Mark Reuss ) on day one, and champion Stellantis-GM merger. This would start one of the most epic fights in Wall Street history, but unfortunately these fights are not without disruptive sore losers.
Assuming Mary GM's Board are in a losing position / losing to the shareholder-Stellantis alliance, GM can delay the Shareholder meeting to the 8th month anniversary of closing the previous of annual fiscal year (December so delay the meeting to August) to put off their defeat. The most bitterness of all the shameful tactics is the use of lawsuits to prevent the sitting of a new Board of Directors. All Shareholder meeting include a proxy clearing house/tabulator/solicitor ,an auditor and an Inspectors of Elections. In order make a Shareholder meeting binding it must be certified by the Inspectors and auditors generating receipt of meeting that's sign by the particular company head lawyer.
The tactics is to have their lawyer refuse to sign the receipt ,and sue their own Inspectors of Elections, and auditors of the company. The goal is simple: get an Injunction from signing the receipt and therefore push off completing the Shareholder meeting. However these style lawsuits rarely succeed (let alone go to a trial),and are often dismissed. One huge problem with these style lawsuits is the NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards require companies to complete Shareholder meeting within one calendar year of annual fiscal year closing date. Failure to comply is grounds for a company to get delisted for NYSE/Nasdaq, and could be a violation of many companies debt covenants. Unless a particular company is about to go through a declaration of bankruptcy /distressed ownership change, most companies always try to avoid delisting of their common stock given the grave consequences of a statement it makes for a company. Given the delisting rules, most judges gets put on a time table to rule on the receipt of meeting of shareholders ,and given GM's annual fiscal year end is December a delayed Shareholder meeting is August giving a Judge just 4 months to make her/his ruling (deadsmack into the U.S. Holiday season ,too).
Total desperation by any company doing such lawsuit given a judge nearly always rules against the party wanting to stop the signing of the receipt of the meeting. That being stated nothing shocks me about Mary Barra ,and the depths of dirty she's willing to go even if its clear on the wall she's losing & lost on the road. So at best she puts off a new Board Of Directors from being seated to consider Stellantis bid for GM by 6-7 months....a bitter way to go out a complete loser.
Go to the new GM Board Of Directors install by Stellantis & GM shareholders.....after Mary's (& Mark Reuss and probably others) departure......the first step of the new Board is naming an intern management team follow by formally looking at Stellantis's bid proposal while acting in a independent matter without any Stellantis or EXOR influence. To create the appearance of independence, the new GM Board Of Directors likely push Stellantis and John Elkann to raise their bid for GM so they can agree to a deal that starts the timeframe for creating an formal Binding MOU merger contract.
Within that that very timeframe of creating a binding MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) merger contract , the official legal American corporate due diligence actions get undertaken by the new GM Board of Directors. One of the areas of due diligence is the likelihood of getting the merger finish and passed through various global Anti-trust regulatory systems.
One of the biggest questions marks that often comes up with FCA/Stellantis-GM deal is the combine marketshare of RAM-Chevy-GMC in the North American Full Size pickup truck, and how such powerhouse get allowed. The other FCA/Stellantis-GM deal marketshare strong holds is Latin America (especially Brazil ) assuming GM is still the region by the time of a due diligence.
Start with Latin America.....the Brazilian Government tends to take a whole of picture approach (not just sector,or category) when looking at M&A transactions including economic development, impact on society, and international benefits. The opportunity Stellantis-GM can sell to the Brazilian Government is no other OEM is committed to Brazil like Stellantis, and the merger transaction would create the ability to transform the merged Company capacity from solely Latin American consumption into global industrial exports all around the world increasing the nation's Global competitiveness. Stellantis-GM would offer to the Brazilian Government non-Latin American nations export ratio guarantee in return for approval, while also warning Brazil that a lack of merger approval would lead to thousands of job cuts by GM in the country.
Moving on to North American Full Size pickup truck marketshare, the most simple action to ensure completion to is the sale of the GMC brand given how RAM & Chevy are about similar volume and the whole concept of the merger is scale. The question is who is financially capable of paying a real price for GMC( John Elkann doesn't give assets away for free or pay companies to take assets unlike GM with FIAT & Opel),who can make the best case for anti-trust/competition, and who will still need reliance on Stellantis. The best candidate to take on GMC to improve Anti-trust chances at and pay a real price is Honda.
Divestment of GMC brand in a package sale with other GM assets including co-ownership of GM BOF Truck IP, GM's Silao Assembly plant(GM's Mexican Truck plant) , the Pontiac Engineering Center together with thousands of GM Engineers (including significant amount of GM's BOF Full Size Truck team) and GMC's (& former Pontiac ) Dealer network after a restructuring of contracts to Honda.
Why Honda?......Honda is well capitalized financially with high market capitalization but not by being an OEM maker of vehicles, but by mobility products like Motorcycles, Residential power equipment & Commercial equipment. Biggest of all, one of Honda largest source of cash is money financing the products it makes through financial services, the automobile business is actually Honda's weakest business.
First Honda only has three major markets:Japan,North America (U.S./Canada),China, and will likely pull out of European Auto market.
Honda Auto business is less international than Nissan or Toyota , and one the negative side effects of being a four nation(Japan/U.S./Canada/China) Automaker is a lack of scale.
Honda's lack of scale have caught up with it leaving it exposed on new development spending and the shift in North American marketplace from traditional passenger cars to Pickup Trucks/SUV's/CUV's which have cause havoc on Honda's Auto margins which are substantial below 2% which unsustainable for any manufacturing business.
This is where GMC brand becomes an overnight transformation for Honda,and strengths Stellantis-GM Anti-trust case. Honda becomes a 14+% marketshare player overnight bringing the auto business closer to Toyota and Ford overnight, and unlike Toyota efforts,Honda would penetrate the Full-Size Pickup Truck North America market improving Auto margins instantly.Honda and GMC also mesh well on a geographically point-of-view.
Honda's strongest areas is urban coastal U.S. markets who are weak areas for the ''legacy Michigan'' OEM's (Ford/Stellantis/GM). Opportunity arises for GMC as part of Honda to convert people buying Accord's into Sierra Pickup trucks whom live in coastal markets whom may otherwise not consider a pickup truck because of perceptions of American-branded quality+Toyota/Nissan not serious full size pickups. The GMC Dealer network that was formerly Pontiac's is well widespread throughout U.S. in rural areas giving Honda another avenue to gain buyers didn't have access to Honda or Acura brands because Honda's preference of urban/highway areas for dealers.
Only Toyota (of the Asian brands) have really attempt to penetrate rural & small towns, however despite making headway ,rural & small markets remain ''Legacy Michigan'' OEM strong holds. GMC brand with the former Pontiac gives Honda an stronger entry into rural & small town U.S. areas. With a combination urban coastal markets of rural & small towns Honda+GMC would be allow Stellantis-GM to proclaim that a merger would actual increase competition, not reduce as the U.S. would Honda+GMC/Toyota/Ford all be fighting in the 14%-16% marketshare range with Stellantis-GM at 25% marketshare.
The GMC dealer network would need to under go a restructuring as over 900 dealers GMC-Buick dealers also sell Chevy in addition to GM currently bring back Hummer as a part of GMC. The path that gets the GMC dealer contracts renegotiated is to discontinue the Buick brand in North America. Certain media outlets have laid out Buick's pipeline in North America:GM is giving Buick a version of everything Cadillac is getting outside of BOF Truck products (Escalade family). The problem is GM made Buick into nondescript -sunny skies brand which looks more polish than Chevy minus the volume of Chevy but won't be allowed to reach prices as high as Cadillac can go.
GM will allow Cadillac to go down to Buick's lower trim price points, however going all the way with Buick being proper centered as an premium brand would give Cadillac another competitor so having Buick & Cadillac co-existing in North America mostly selling FWD/AWD/ICE-Electric Crossovers makes no sense(bad planning by Mary is no new news).Because Buick is tied to the GMC dealer contracts at former Pontiac dealer network,its the one that gets axed from North America.
The GMC-Buick dealers that also sold Chevy would have to chose between building a separate showroom and service department for the two brands, or exiting one franchise entirely. This is why the importance Stellantis and Honda ''co-fund'' dealer restructuring cost (including cost from Buick North America wind-down).
Honda would takeover thousands of GM Engineers ,making the Pontiac Engineering Center (later renamed GM Powertrain Center, now currently named GM Global Propulsion Systems Center) (which has been pretty much vacant since early 2019 )into Honda's North American R&D campus....a great deal for all stakeholders.
Stellantis-GM would produce, supply vehicles & parts to Honda-GMC for at least a generation of product. GMC's SUV/CUV would lineup be redesigned on Honda underpinnings & IP with the exception of the ''suburban-sized'' Yukon XL giving Honda relatively quick boost in scale generating cost savings. As for trucks,Canyon from GMC hasn't been a great seller, doesn't standout against Chevy Colorado,so giving GMC a version of the Ridgeline might a improvement in uniqueness (may sell better as a GMC). Next generation HD which would be EV's would be supplied by Stellantis given Honda will lack the capability to produce that-series of Pickup trucks as would ''suburban-sized'' Yukon XL.
Honda is and would be dependent on Stellantis-GM for EV powertrain/tech pack,despite Honda in the power business. In 2024 Honda will be supplied with two EV model made by GM. Making EV Technology for Full-Size BOF Pickup trucks will be further uncharted territory for Honda, and given the timeframe for the new regulations from a''certain Joe'' (2031-2034) there isn't enough time for Honda form their own Full Size EV Pickup Truck powertrain/tech pack solution yet alone in the amount of volume that's needed.
Honda would be sourcing their EV powertrain/Tech pack for the Sierra EV Pickup from Stellantis-GM, saving money for both OEM's. The reliance on Stellantis-GM by Honda allows for the scale benefits of GMC brand to be kept for the first model cycle of the merged Stellantis-GM, and gets lessened overtime. The first Honda generation of the GMC Sierra would be a ''rework'' of the BT1/T1XX platform(again given the timetable of GMC sale closing together with the regultions), whereas Stellantis-GM would use an all-new EV Full Size BOF Truck underpinnings.
To replace the long-term financial benefits that get loss from selling GMC to Honda , there are big offsets inside of GM that can only be be taken advantage by Stellantis. GM has higher hourly labor cost vs FCA/Stellantis driven by too much capacity due to poor product decisions creating demand problems which in turn eliminates the need to make new hires.
Keep mind, new post-bankruptcy bankruptcy hires make substantially less compensation per hour than the Pre-Bankruptcy workforce, and the Pre-bankruptcy workers are the majority of GM's U.S. factory workforce. In the case of FCA/Stellantis's U.S. factory workforce nearly 4/5 are post-bankruptcy hires. The quickest way to reduce GM 's labor cost is for Stellantis-GM to get GM's older & costlier pre-Bankruptcy workforce to retire, and the action to get them to retire is through buyout offers.
The retirement buyout offer have to be real, sizable sums of cash at least in the range of $180,000-$230,000
The combine size of Stellantis-GM's leaves it in a better position to extract concessions out of the U.S. Auto labor union ; the UAW for significantly more temps, and part-timers (get paid less than full-time new hires) unified workrules base on World Class Manufacturing systems that have worked for FCA very well and are more efficient than GM's (GM admits in its trash lawsuit that FCA's World Class Manufacturing systems works better than GM's manufacturing systems named ''GMS'').
The next lever is better management of capacity, something GM has been horrible at executing with many GM North American plants having sub-50% capacity utilization. Given special mix of circumstances including contract terms,product line type,condition & location of plants, the unfortunate action of targeted plant closures is an important step to right the capacity problem.
Unfortunately the big block of factories that's the most straight forward to close for Stellantis-GM is to exit all Canadian manufacturing. Plants included would be GM's CAMI Auto plant (Ingersoll, Ontario),FCA/Stellantis's Brampton and Windsor Assembly. As well would Etobicoke casting plant and GM's St. Catharines Powertrain/Propulsion plant.
Plain & simply the Canadian labor under Unifor( the successor to the CAW whom itself is spin-off of the UAW) is more costly than the avenues of U.S. New Hires, temporary hires, part-timers & Mexican Labor. Next disadvantage ist he product line type made in the Canadian facilities. With the U.S. joining the E.U. C02 regulations under a '' Joe'' (& his party in power in both chambers of American congress:the Senate and the House of Representatives) powertrain plants that produce V8 Engines are goners, and St. Catharines is one GM's main V8 powertrain factories.
The sole model made at GM's CAMI plant is the Chevy Equinox which is also made in two plants in Mexico (Ramos Arizpe Assembly,San Luis Potosi Assembly) meaning there's no unique output coming out CAMI . Next is the factor of condition & location of plants where Lansing Grand River Assembly, a modern plant opened in 2001 is capable of producing RWD/AWD passenger vehicles current operates mostly vacant with the flop of 6th generation Camaro (again Mary's decisions) together with two Cadillac (CT4/5) models that GM is already planning to discontinue (one generation models!).
This brings us to the home of Charger & Challenger, Brampton Assembly which have some dated industrial hard points, and needs a major overhaul. But instead giving Brampton a major overhaul, Charger & Challenger can be redesigned as electric models produced at Lansing Grand River Assembly. Filling capacity, lower labor, and no more currency fluctuations.
The Canadian dollar over the last couple of years been going through significant volatility with unpredictable changes in the currency's value creating another headwind for Automotive manufacturing in Canada . By shutting factories in Canada, Stellantis-GM would eliminate the Canadian dollar as an element in operations, and gain the benefits of logistics with the North American supply chain getting centralized in Michigan & Mexico (suppliers with significant industrial operations in Michigan & Mexico being preferred).
GM is developing an all new midsize-to large Modular FWD-AWD underpinnings, so there's no reason why the Pacifica and its clones (Chrysler Grand Caravan,Voyager) can't be redesign on such underpinnings. Currently GM plans to make these new underpinnings at four different plants: Ramos Arizpe Assembly (Mexico), Lansing Delta Township (GM's last new U.S. Auto plant built, opened in 2006),Orion Assembly and Spring Hill Manufacturing. Lansing Delta Township is currently running on three shifts, Ramos Arizpe will be busy making Equinox's so any capacity not use for Equinox (que planned large electric Cadillac Crossover and lame Chevy Blazer) will be changed by Stellantis in the face of CAMI closure, and Orion Assembly is a ghost town with plans of Cadillac & Buick electric crossovers(currently Orion only produces the Bolt BEV). Spring Hill Manufacturing is dependent on the GMC Acadia's volume but that would end with the GMC-Honda deal, so between it along with Orion Assembly, Windsor's capacity is simply not needed by Stellantis-GM.
Put together the buyouts of GM's pre-Bankruptcy factory workforce, the adoption of World Class Manufacturing at GM's plants,Stellantis-GM's ability to bargain increase amounts of part time & temporary workers out of the UAW and the unfortunate closure of Canadian Manufacturing(increase capacity usages at surviving lower labor cost GM plants, no more of the Canadian dollar as an issue, better logistics from centralize supply base), and Stellantis-GM would more than offset the medium-long term financial loss of GMC to Honda.
On maximizing revenue,GM doesn't put the same effort into special editions/special trim levels/craftsmanship FCA/Stellantis does with any of its brands,and that effort will do wonders for a brand like Cadillac.
That effort going into the Chevy brand will elevate the brand to charge pricing that's in-line with Ford, instead of being at a value vs Ford brand.
Buick, GMC being gone allows more room for Chevy feature/options depth instead of GM's behavior under Mary (and to be fair other GM CEO's, too) who holds Chevy down outside of a country theme(High Country),while GMC gets the polish with Denali (even then GM does a increasing lazy effort) but actual ends up pushing the Chevy brand below Ford who sales multiple fancy trim packages and have a strong commercial business(an another area where FCA/Stellantis will help Chevy brand).
By overhauling Chevy advertising & marketing where the brand can support polish-fancy trim levels, Stellantis-GM will get to offset some of the loss revenue from the GMC sale to Honda. Cadillac can clearly get more into entry level premium, and all together have more total range of offerings without Buick in North America.
To concluded, with the upcoming U.S. General elections in 80 days could create a historic shift in environmental policy with a''certain Joe'' and his party being swept to near complete political power allowing for the elimination of the U.S. Senate filibuster (no more 60 votes needed for legislation) allowing for the most aggressive environmental policy ever for the United States. All indications from the ''noise'' taken from the party of a ''certain Joe'' is banning ICE engines(directly or indirectly by extreme targets for C02) no later than 2034 (as early as 2031) making electrics the law of the land in turn forcing rapid adoption by OEM's.
Give the uniqueness of such electrification challenge on large vehicles,on mass scale, a Merger between FCA/Stellantis and GM gets more important with time.The $10 billion in non-factory savings together with the sheer scale of Stellantis-GM will make the change change over to 100% Electric Full Size BOF Trucks & SUV's less bumpy.
Stellantis-GM can secure & scale the parts & supplies needed for Electric Full Size BOF Trucks & SUV's better than FCA or GM could on their own powers(having large European business that is electric also helps Stellantis-GM),and $10 billion of non-factory savings is nice cushion to fallback on in case demand problems with such Full Size products exist.
Stellantis also gains an In-house Captive Finance company(GM Financial),another opportunity Premium & Luxury with Cadillac in North America and China while having protection against any version of combination by VW-Ford.
To surely get the deal pass through Anti-Trust , GMC gets sold (Honda) in a package (saving many engineers jobs), but to offset the impact, Stellantis-GM manufacturing presence in Canada gets ''Day of reckoning'' moment for much like what's currently (likely) in store for Vauxhall's manufacturing presence in Britain.
With all that stated , Stellantis-GM merger would be a major pride/legacy item for John Elkann crafting & carrying out Sergio's ultimate vision, and settling the score with Mary & Mark (as well other GM mangaement) with their ousters.
Stellantis-GM merger would be the ultimate humiliation for Mary & Mark as they get to go out as failed executives due to side effects(quality of revenue, labor cost, capacity,etc) of various versions of bad product decisions (losing marketshare,market presence, and market relevance in every continent on the plant) that have been harmful to product demand and brands.
Stellantis's predecessors have extracted a series of embarrassing payouts out of GM from the $2 billion in 2005 (to FIAT),getting a payout of $3.8 billion (to PSA) so GM could get rid of Opel....only for Opel to become profitable (the first profitable era for Opel snce 1998), now because of the death of the ICE by regulators comes the most embarrassing of all payouts... the payout Stellantis pays GM Shareholders for GM.
The urgency of 2031-2034 ICE death date in North America that drives the necessary of Stellantis-GM merger goes out the window if a''certain Donald'' is reelected for a second term. In that case Stellantis's next deal is likely global mass premium/luxury automobiles (Jaguar-Land Rover/BMW/Daimler) in order to rival Audi's role at VW.
Nevertheless, the idea being the forming of Stellantis is to better handle challenges that occurs during life. With economics of scale, Stellantis (in theory ) should launch new technologies throughout the merged company portfolio of models & brands quicker than either FCA or PSA standalone with greater efficiency to boot. But the majority of the benefits will be felt in the new EMEA (Europe, Middle East, Africa),along there's less International benefits than the FCA deal with Renault that fell apart( thanks to the French Government) and no Nissan/Mitsubishi for a roll-in event creating a giant producing 15 million vehicles annually(which would have been the World's Largest Automaker).
The November Federal General Election in the United States adds another large layer of challenges for Stellantis to deal with. I know we all (well most) can't stand politics whether it is in Italy, France, or the U.S. but an understanding of the trends is essential to get what the challenge is. The one element that both FCA and GM (along with Toyota) have agreed on is to push back new U.S. Vehicle Emissions standards (the late 2020's). FCA along with GM's ally is let's just say a ''Certain Donald'' whom is against State-based emission regulations. FCA and GM's fleet is now more weighted towards CUV's/SUV's/Pickups largely driven by the market shift away from standard passenger sedan, but also FCA's and GM's own financial agenda.
However, within the U.S. Gen Y/Gen Z age range is a hunger to fight climate change & clean the environment no matter the political affiliation (shout out to @Ryan) (Millennial and Gen Z Republicans stand out from their elders on climate and energy issues) putting FCA/GM/a ''certain Donald'' in a opposite direction from the U.S. most powerful consumers.
The other element is a growing opinion that the standards '' FCA/GM/a ''certain Donald'' are fighting in court don't go far enough, and the November opponent to a ''certain Donald'' let's called a ''certain Joe'' agrees with that point-of-view about previous EPA standards & California+other States regulations . A ''certain Joe'' at the very least wants to impose standards modeled off of the E.U. C02 emission standards despite the appeal of larger vehicles in the U.S. together with giving just another 2-5 additional years(vs European Union) to achieve these tough standards(2031-2034). With a quick turnaround from lax emission standards increases to among the strongest in the world will create stress shock in the U.S. Auto industry, and such stress shock have a real chance of happening.
In most of Europe, there's are elections where citizens go out to vote for their preferred candidate, then the winners have to go and create a coalition Government. In the U.S. there's the Electoral College which game to reach the score of 270 points/electoral vote by winning a correct/winning combination of States. While things can always change, at this point a''certain Joe'' would beat a ''certain Donald'' in critical game breaking states like Michigan(48 to 43), and Florida (50-44)(https://www.changeresearch.com/post/states-of-play-battleground-wave-11 ).
With 80 days remaining , a''certain Donald'' is running out of time to change the course by stop going after petty small things/issues,reach a deal to pass a new round of Stimulus (especially direct payments, and renew unemployment insurance aid payments), make a National address to the entire United States , and get get unemployment below 9%.
Also to Show ''certain Donald'' cares about racism, he shall rename certain U.S. Military Bases instead of pushing back against the Military's own wishes.
If a ''certain Donald'' does the above actions his numbers should/likely improve with so-called ''independents'' creating moments to win at the debates against a ''certain Joe'' which generates a second-term allowing FCA and GM to continue the U.S. New Vehicle Emissions standards fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If a ''certain Donald'' doesn't make those actions, then FCA/GM's fight U.S. New Vehicle Emissions standards is burnt toast. Michigan is divide among rural Areas with Grand Rapids and what is ''Oakland County (Auburn Hills is part of )'' voted heavily for one end of the political spectrum(a ''certain Donald'' in 2016) , while Flint/Detroit/Dearborn/Lansing/ Ann Arbor goes in the opposite direction. Similar dynamic goes on with Northern Florida (''certain Donald'') vs Southern Florida (opposite direction). Overall point is just a couple of hundred votes could separate FCA/Stellantis from staying on the current pathway in North American fuel emissions vs overhauling the company powertrain plans in North America,planning a moving to fully Electric Ram when it haven't even sold one EV Truck (yet).
This unique and unexpected North American Electric challenge (if a ''certain Donald'' lose) together with still being globally significantly smaller than Volkswagen & Toyota, and the need to replace Nissan-Mitsubishi as the '''second wave-rail'' of an ''Merger package'' those bring a sense of urgency to go down a certain unpopular path: Stellantis buying GM and settling the score with Mary.
The purchase of GM by Stellantis would create an Automaker whom global volume would 13-15 million vehicles basically replacing Nissan/Mitsubishi in-terms of scale benefits, but unlike Nissan/Mitsubishi, there are unique synergies that only a GM purchase provides FCA/Stellantis. John & Sergio for years have stated that an FCA-GM Merger would save $10 billion without plant closures,the element of that $10 billion is having RAM/Chevy/GMC Full Size Pickups on one set of underpinnings. The merged Full Size BOF underpinning would be an incredible feat of purchasing scale,industrial might, and with that industrial might comes the power to steamroll EV Technology on Full Size Truck s & SUV's more effectively than otherwise.
By converging RAM and GM's BOF products on new EV-Focused BOF underpinnings makes it significantly easier to implement a''certain Joe'' emission rules in a ''electric wave'' because any potential ''demand destruction '' created by truck owners lack of acceptances of EV technology can get absorb by the cost savings & overall volumes. Another element is the crossover between new Europe,Middle East & Africa of Stellantis and these Merged EV-BOF Trucks. Even with a''certain Joe'' regulations & programs , Europe will have a head start advantage in EV adoption & penetration, and with Stellantis being a top player in the European theater it will already have establish supply arrangements, relationships and industrial supply chain base for batteries & systems that can be scaled up for North America. Because of the designs of EV technology components & parts are way more standardize there is more inter-continent part sharing then they ever was with ICE(Internal Combustion Engine) NA Truck products between ICE E.U. Passenger cars (especially powertrain)
Other benefits of EV-Focused BOF underpinnings is the lack homeroom/'heritage''/''not created here'' mindset (particular from the former GM Lifers) that might been an issue with (for example) HEMI VS Small Block''('this is how we do a Chevy Truck'') on an ICE Full Size Truck, but doesn't exist with EV's being an clean slate.
Of course Stellantis buying GM means going through a big (successful) fight on Wall Street against Mary Barra as Sergio was planning until Warren Buffett's opposition in face-to-face'' meeting with John Elkann (which together with FCA's debt at the time caused John to scrap those fighting plans).The game is announcing a bid for GM, Stellantis talks directly to GM Shareholders with goal of making an alliance with 3% of GM Shareholders/ 3% GM's Shares outstanding-float. The alliance between those GM shareholders (3% of GM Shareholders/ 3% GM's Shares outstanding-float) & Stellantis would nominate a slate of new GM Board directors run against GM's recommended Directors to form a new GM Board Of Directors whom would fire Mary Barra (and other GM management like Mark Reuss ) on day one, and champion Stellantis-GM merger. This would start one of the most epic fights in Wall Street history, but unfortunately these fights are not without disruptive sore losers.
Assuming Mary GM's Board are in a losing position / losing to the shareholder-Stellantis alliance, GM can delay the Shareholder meeting to the 8th month anniversary of closing the previous of annual fiscal year (December so delay the meeting to August) to put off their defeat. The most bitterness of all the shameful tactics is the use of lawsuits to prevent the sitting of a new Board of Directors. All Shareholder meeting include a proxy clearing house/tabulator/solicitor ,an auditor and an Inspectors of Elections. In order make a Shareholder meeting binding it must be certified by the Inspectors and auditors generating receipt of meeting that's sign by the particular company head lawyer.
The tactics is to have their lawyer refuse to sign the receipt ,and sue their own Inspectors of Elections, and auditors of the company. The goal is simple: get an Injunction from signing the receipt and therefore push off completing the Shareholder meeting. However these style lawsuits rarely succeed (let alone go to a trial),and are often dismissed. One huge problem with these style lawsuits is the NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards require companies to complete Shareholder meeting within one calendar year of annual fiscal year closing date. Failure to comply is grounds for a company to get delisted for NYSE/Nasdaq, and could be a violation of many companies debt covenants. Unless a particular company is about to go through a declaration of bankruptcy /distressed ownership change, most companies always try to avoid delisting of their common stock given the grave consequences of a statement it makes for a company. Given the delisting rules, most judges gets put on a time table to rule on the receipt of meeting of shareholders ,and given GM's annual fiscal year end is December a delayed Shareholder meeting is August giving a Judge just 4 months to make her/his ruling (deadsmack into the U.S. Holiday season ,too).
Total desperation by any company doing such lawsuit given a judge nearly always rules against the party wanting to stop the signing of the receipt of the meeting. That being stated nothing shocks me about Mary Barra ,and the depths of dirty she's willing to go even if its clear on the wall she's losing & lost on the road. So at best she puts off a new Board Of Directors from being seated to consider Stellantis bid for GM by 6-7 months....a bitter way to go out a complete loser.
Go to the new GM Board Of Directors install by Stellantis & GM shareholders.....after Mary's (& Mark Reuss and probably others) departure......the first step of the new Board is naming an intern management team follow by formally looking at Stellantis's bid proposal while acting in a independent matter without any Stellantis or EXOR influence. To create the appearance of independence, the new GM Board Of Directors likely push Stellantis and John Elkann to raise their bid for GM so they can agree to a deal that starts the timeframe for creating an formal Binding MOU merger contract.
Within that that very timeframe of creating a binding MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) merger contract , the official legal American corporate due diligence actions get undertaken by the new GM Board of Directors. One of the areas of due diligence is the likelihood of getting the merger finish and passed through various global Anti-trust regulatory systems.
One of the biggest questions marks that often comes up with FCA/Stellantis-GM deal is the combine marketshare of RAM-Chevy-GMC in the North American Full Size pickup truck, and how such powerhouse get allowed. The other FCA/Stellantis-GM deal marketshare strong holds is Latin America (especially Brazil ) assuming GM is still the region by the time of a due diligence.
Start with Latin America.....the Brazilian Government tends to take a whole of picture approach (not just sector,or category) when looking at M&A transactions including economic development, impact on society, and international benefits. The opportunity Stellantis-GM can sell to the Brazilian Government is no other OEM is committed to Brazil like Stellantis, and the merger transaction would create the ability to transform the merged Company capacity from solely Latin American consumption into global industrial exports all around the world increasing the nation's Global competitiveness. Stellantis-GM would offer to the Brazilian Government non-Latin American nations export ratio guarantee in return for approval, while also warning Brazil that a lack of merger approval would lead to thousands of job cuts by GM in the country.
Moving on to North American Full Size pickup truck marketshare, the most simple action to ensure completion to is the sale of the GMC brand given how RAM & Chevy are about similar volume and the whole concept of the merger is scale. The question is who is financially capable of paying a real price for GMC( John Elkann doesn't give assets away for free or pay companies to take assets unlike GM with FIAT & Opel),who can make the best case for anti-trust/competition, and who will still need reliance on Stellantis. The best candidate to take on GMC to improve Anti-trust chances at and pay a real price is Honda.
Divestment of GMC brand in a package sale with other GM assets including co-ownership of GM BOF Truck IP, GM's Silao Assembly plant(GM's Mexican Truck plant) , the Pontiac Engineering Center together with thousands of GM Engineers (including significant amount of GM's BOF Full Size Truck team) and GMC's (& former Pontiac ) Dealer network after a restructuring of contracts to Honda.
Why Honda?......Honda is well capitalized financially with high market capitalization but not by being an OEM maker of vehicles, but by mobility products like Motorcycles, Residential power equipment & Commercial equipment. Biggest of all, one of Honda largest source of cash is money financing the products it makes through financial services, the automobile business is actually Honda's weakest business.
First Honda only has three major markets:Japan,North America (U.S./Canada),China, and will likely pull out of European Auto market.
Honda Auto business is less international than Nissan or Toyota , and one the negative side effects of being a four nation(Japan/U.S./Canada/China) Automaker is a lack of scale.
Honda's lack of scale have caught up with it leaving it exposed on new development spending and the shift in North American marketplace from traditional passenger cars to Pickup Trucks/SUV's/CUV's which have cause havoc on Honda's Auto margins which are substantial below 2% which unsustainable for any manufacturing business.
This is where GMC brand becomes an overnight transformation for Honda,and strengths Stellantis-GM Anti-trust case. Honda becomes a 14+% marketshare player overnight bringing the auto business closer to Toyota and Ford overnight, and unlike Toyota efforts,Honda would penetrate the Full-Size Pickup Truck North America market improving Auto margins instantly.Honda and GMC also mesh well on a geographically point-of-view.
Honda's strongest areas is urban coastal U.S. markets who are weak areas for the ''legacy Michigan'' OEM's (Ford/Stellantis/GM). Opportunity arises for GMC as part of Honda to convert people buying Accord's into Sierra Pickup trucks whom live in coastal markets whom may otherwise not consider a pickup truck because of perceptions of American-branded quality+Toyota/Nissan not serious full size pickups. The GMC Dealer network that was formerly Pontiac's is well widespread throughout U.S. in rural areas giving Honda another avenue to gain buyers didn't have access to Honda or Acura brands because Honda's preference of urban/highway areas for dealers.
Only Toyota (of the Asian brands) have really attempt to penetrate rural & small towns, however despite making headway ,rural & small markets remain ''Legacy Michigan'' OEM strong holds. GMC brand with the former Pontiac gives Honda an stronger entry into rural & small town U.S. areas. With a combination urban coastal markets of rural & small towns Honda+GMC would be allow Stellantis-GM to proclaim that a merger would actual increase competition, not reduce as the U.S. would Honda+GMC/Toyota/Ford all be fighting in the 14%-16% marketshare range with Stellantis-GM at 25% marketshare.
The GMC dealer network would need to under go a restructuring as over 900 dealers GMC-Buick dealers also sell Chevy in addition to GM currently bring back Hummer as a part of GMC. The path that gets the GMC dealer contracts renegotiated is to discontinue the Buick brand in North America. Certain media outlets have laid out Buick's pipeline in North America:GM is giving Buick a version of everything Cadillac is getting outside of BOF Truck products (Escalade family). The problem is GM made Buick into nondescript -sunny skies brand which looks more polish than Chevy minus the volume of Chevy but won't be allowed to reach prices as high as Cadillac can go.
GM will allow Cadillac to go down to Buick's lower trim price points, however going all the way with Buick being proper centered as an premium brand would give Cadillac another competitor so having Buick & Cadillac co-existing in North America mostly selling FWD/AWD/ICE-Electric Crossovers makes no sense(bad planning by Mary is no new news).Because Buick is tied to the GMC dealer contracts at former Pontiac dealer network,its the one that gets axed from North America.
The GMC-Buick dealers that also sold Chevy would have to chose between building a separate showroom and service department for the two brands, or exiting one franchise entirely. This is why the importance Stellantis and Honda ''co-fund'' dealer restructuring cost (including cost from Buick North America wind-down).
Honda would takeover thousands of GM Engineers ,making the Pontiac Engineering Center (later renamed GM Powertrain Center, now currently named GM Global Propulsion Systems Center) (which has been pretty much vacant since early 2019 )into Honda's North American R&D campus....a great deal for all stakeholders.
Stellantis-GM would produce, supply vehicles & parts to Honda-GMC for at least a generation of product. GMC's SUV/CUV would lineup be redesigned on Honda underpinnings & IP with the exception of the ''suburban-sized'' Yukon XL giving Honda relatively quick boost in scale generating cost savings. As for trucks,Canyon from GMC hasn't been a great seller, doesn't standout against Chevy Colorado,so giving GMC a version of the Ridgeline might a improvement in uniqueness (may sell better as a GMC). Next generation HD which would be EV's would be supplied by Stellantis given Honda will lack the capability to produce that-series of Pickup trucks as would ''suburban-sized'' Yukon XL.
Honda is and would be dependent on Stellantis-GM for EV powertrain/tech pack,despite Honda in the power business. In 2024 Honda will be supplied with two EV model made by GM. Making EV Technology for Full-Size BOF Pickup trucks will be further uncharted territory for Honda, and given the timeframe for the new regulations from a''certain Joe'' (2031-2034) there isn't enough time for Honda form their own Full Size EV Pickup Truck powertrain/tech pack solution yet alone in the amount of volume that's needed.
Honda would be sourcing their EV powertrain/Tech pack for the Sierra EV Pickup from Stellantis-GM, saving money for both OEM's. The reliance on Stellantis-GM by Honda allows for the scale benefits of GMC brand to be kept for the first model cycle of the merged Stellantis-GM, and gets lessened overtime. The first Honda generation of the GMC Sierra would be a ''rework'' of the BT1/T1XX platform(again given the timetable of GMC sale closing together with the regultions), whereas Stellantis-GM would use an all-new EV Full Size BOF Truck underpinnings.
To replace the long-term financial benefits that get loss from selling GMC to Honda , there are big offsets inside of GM that can only be be taken advantage by Stellantis. GM has higher hourly labor cost vs FCA/Stellantis driven by too much capacity due to poor product decisions creating demand problems which in turn eliminates the need to make new hires.
Keep mind, new post-bankruptcy bankruptcy hires make substantially less compensation per hour than the Pre-Bankruptcy workforce, and the Pre-bankruptcy workers are the majority of GM's U.S. factory workforce. In the case of FCA/Stellantis's U.S. factory workforce nearly 4/5 are post-bankruptcy hires. The quickest way to reduce GM 's labor cost is for Stellantis-GM to get GM's older & costlier pre-Bankruptcy workforce to retire, and the action to get them to retire is through buyout offers.
The retirement buyout offer have to be real, sizable sums of cash at least in the range of $180,000-$230,000
The combine size of Stellantis-GM's leaves it in a better position to extract concessions out of the U.S. Auto labor union ; the UAW for significantly more temps, and part-timers (get paid less than full-time new hires) unified workrules base on World Class Manufacturing systems that have worked for FCA very well and are more efficient than GM's (GM admits in its trash lawsuit that FCA's World Class Manufacturing systems works better than GM's manufacturing systems named ''GMS'').
The next lever is better management of capacity, something GM has been horrible at executing with many GM North American plants having sub-50% capacity utilization. Given special mix of circumstances including contract terms,product line type,condition & location of plants, the unfortunate action of targeted plant closures is an important step to right the capacity problem.
Unfortunately the big block of factories that's the most straight forward to close for Stellantis-GM is to exit all Canadian manufacturing. Plants included would be GM's CAMI Auto plant (Ingersoll, Ontario),FCA/Stellantis's Brampton and Windsor Assembly. As well would Etobicoke casting plant and GM's St. Catharines Powertrain/Propulsion plant.
Plain & simply the Canadian labor under Unifor( the successor to the CAW whom itself is spin-off of the UAW) is more costly than the avenues of U.S. New Hires, temporary hires, part-timers & Mexican Labor. Next disadvantage ist he product line type made in the Canadian facilities. With the U.S. joining the E.U. C02 regulations under a '' Joe'' (& his party in power in both chambers of American congress:the Senate and the House of Representatives) powertrain plants that produce V8 Engines are goners, and St. Catharines is one GM's main V8 powertrain factories.
The sole model made at GM's CAMI plant is the Chevy Equinox which is also made in two plants in Mexico (Ramos Arizpe Assembly,San Luis Potosi Assembly) meaning there's no unique output coming out CAMI . Next is the factor of condition & location of plants where Lansing Grand River Assembly, a modern plant opened in 2001 is capable of producing RWD/AWD passenger vehicles current operates mostly vacant with the flop of 6th generation Camaro (again Mary's decisions) together with two Cadillac (CT4/5) models that GM is already planning to discontinue (one generation models!).
This brings us to the home of Charger & Challenger, Brampton Assembly which have some dated industrial hard points, and needs a major overhaul. But instead giving Brampton a major overhaul, Charger & Challenger can be redesigned as electric models produced at Lansing Grand River Assembly. Filling capacity, lower labor, and no more currency fluctuations.
The Canadian dollar over the last couple of years been going through significant volatility with unpredictable changes in the currency's value creating another headwind for Automotive manufacturing in Canada . By shutting factories in Canada, Stellantis-GM would eliminate the Canadian dollar as an element in operations, and gain the benefits of logistics with the North American supply chain getting centralized in Michigan & Mexico (suppliers with significant industrial operations in Michigan & Mexico being preferred).
GM is developing an all new midsize-to large Modular FWD-AWD underpinnings, so there's no reason why the Pacifica and its clones (Chrysler Grand Caravan,Voyager) can't be redesign on such underpinnings. Currently GM plans to make these new underpinnings at four different plants: Ramos Arizpe Assembly (Mexico), Lansing Delta Township (GM's last new U.S. Auto plant built, opened in 2006),Orion Assembly and Spring Hill Manufacturing. Lansing Delta Township is currently running on three shifts, Ramos Arizpe will be busy making Equinox's so any capacity not use for Equinox (que planned large electric Cadillac Crossover and lame Chevy Blazer) will be changed by Stellantis in the face of CAMI closure, and Orion Assembly is a ghost town with plans of Cadillac & Buick electric crossovers(currently Orion only produces the Bolt BEV). Spring Hill Manufacturing is dependent on the GMC Acadia's volume but that would end with the GMC-Honda deal, so between it along with Orion Assembly, Windsor's capacity is simply not needed by Stellantis-GM.
Put together the buyouts of GM's pre-Bankruptcy factory workforce, the adoption of World Class Manufacturing at GM's plants,Stellantis-GM's ability to bargain increase amounts of part time & temporary workers out of the UAW and the unfortunate closure of Canadian Manufacturing(increase capacity usages at surviving lower labor cost GM plants, no more of the Canadian dollar as an issue, better logistics from centralize supply base), and Stellantis-GM would more than offset the medium-long term financial loss of GMC to Honda.
On maximizing revenue,GM doesn't put the same effort into special editions/special trim levels/craftsmanship FCA/Stellantis does with any of its brands,and that effort will do wonders for a brand like Cadillac.
That effort going into the Chevy brand will elevate the brand to charge pricing that's in-line with Ford, instead of being at a value vs Ford brand.
Buick, GMC being gone allows more room for Chevy feature/options depth instead of GM's behavior under Mary (and to be fair other GM CEO's, too) who holds Chevy down outside of a country theme(High Country),while GMC gets the polish with Denali (even then GM does a increasing lazy effort) but actual ends up pushing the Chevy brand below Ford who sales multiple fancy trim packages and have a strong commercial business(an another area where FCA/Stellantis will help Chevy brand).
By overhauling Chevy advertising & marketing where the brand can support polish-fancy trim levels, Stellantis-GM will get to offset some of the loss revenue from the GMC sale to Honda. Cadillac can clearly get more into entry level premium, and all together have more total range of offerings without Buick in North America.
To concluded, with the upcoming U.S. General elections in 80 days could create a historic shift in environmental policy with a''certain Joe'' and his party being swept to near complete political power allowing for the elimination of the U.S. Senate filibuster (no more 60 votes needed for legislation) allowing for the most aggressive environmental policy ever for the United States. All indications from the ''noise'' taken from the party of a ''certain Joe'' is banning ICE engines(directly or indirectly by extreme targets for C02) no later than 2034 (as early as 2031) making electrics the law of the land in turn forcing rapid adoption by OEM's.
Give the uniqueness of such electrification challenge on large vehicles,on mass scale, a Merger between FCA/Stellantis and GM gets more important with time.The $10 billion in non-factory savings together with the sheer scale of Stellantis-GM will make the change change over to 100% Electric Full Size BOF Trucks & SUV's less bumpy.
Stellantis-GM can secure & scale the parts & supplies needed for Electric Full Size BOF Trucks & SUV's better than FCA or GM could on their own powers(having large European business that is electric also helps Stellantis-GM),and $10 billion of non-factory savings is nice cushion to fallback on in case demand problems with such Full Size products exist.
Stellantis also gains an In-house Captive Finance company(GM Financial),another opportunity Premium & Luxury with Cadillac in North America and China while having protection against any version of combination by VW-Ford.
To surely get the deal pass through Anti-Trust , GMC gets sold (Honda) in a package (saving many engineers jobs), but to offset the impact, Stellantis-GM manufacturing presence in Canada gets ''Day of reckoning'' moment for much like what's currently (likely) in store for Vauxhall's manufacturing presence in Britain.
With all that stated , Stellantis-GM merger would be a major pride/legacy item for John Elkann crafting & carrying out Sergio's ultimate vision, and settling the score with Mary & Mark (as well other GM mangaement) with their ousters.
Stellantis-GM merger would be the ultimate humiliation for Mary & Mark as they get to go out as failed executives due to side effects(quality of revenue, labor cost, capacity,etc) of various versions of bad product decisions (losing marketshare,market presence, and market relevance in every continent on the plant) that have been harmful to product demand and brands.
Stellantis's predecessors have extracted a series of embarrassing payouts out of GM from the $2 billion in 2005 (to FIAT),getting a payout of $3.8 billion (to PSA) so GM could get rid of Opel....only for Opel to become profitable (the first profitable era for Opel snce 1998), now because of the death of the ICE by regulators comes the most embarrassing of all payouts... the payout Stellantis pays GM Shareholders for GM.
The urgency of 2031-2034 ICE death date in North America that drives the necessary of Stellantis-GM merger goes out the window if a''certain Donald'' is reelected for a second term. In that case Stellantis's next deal is likely global mass premium/luxury automobiles (Jaguar-Land Rover/BMW/Daimler) in order to rival Audi's role at VW.
.