Magna and Sberbank Consortium - Essay Example

Doing Business in Europe, Asia and the Americas Case Study: Magna and Sberbank Consortium The purpose of this essay is to provide answers to the four questions provided in the case study, relating to the recent consortium between Canada’s Magna International Inc. and Russia’s Sberbank Rossii. This paper will draw on a number of external sources in addition to information provided in the case study and will aim to provide a firmer understanding of the consequences of such an alliance for business entities that may be established in the future.. Question #1 With reference to academic literature justify the decision of Canadian company Magna and Russian bank Sberbank Rossii to form a consortium for the specific purpose of acquiring a stake in General Motors European operations. Your answer should address possible reasons why Magna and Sberbank identified each other as suitable partners, why a consortium was chosen as the vehicle of co-operation and what external events gave rise to the opportunity of investing in General Motors European Operations. Firstly this paper will identify what events lead to the opportunity for companies to invest in GM’s European operations using a PESTL analysis as well as Porters Five forces. Secondly this essay will provide an example as to why it is that a consortium might be the best possible solution to acquire a stake in GM’s European Operations. Lastly, this essay will provide an answer as to why Magna and Sberbank chose to form a consortium with each other. When utilizing a PESTEL analysis one sees that the situation for GM was quite precarious. Political: In the domestic market it is the case that in the public’s eye there was a very negative reception to “Bailing-out” the American automobile manufactures owing to the transition to a new government as well as a general feeling in the American public that it was larger corporations that brought about the economic crisis. As a result, the company sold off a number of its brands including its newly established and highly cherished ‘Hummer’ brand (Smith, 2009). As anybody familiar with the Senate hearing on bailing out the automobile industry, all of the company heads were negatively portrayed in the media for flying-in on private jets. Economic: In regards to economic factors it is the case that according to Hughes et al. (2009) the company recognized poor sales across all of its brands in the international markets owing to increased competition and a portfolio that were dependant on outdated, heavier models that required far ore fuel than many competitors. In the wake of higher oil prices this negatively affected the firm, and as a result, Japan’s Toyota Motor Corp. overtook General Motors as the world’s larges automobile maker. Furthermore in terms of the company’s global operations the firm saw a huge hit to their bottom line in terms of sales in their European operations as well. According to GM’s company website (2008) the sales for its Saab brand cars was down 21.9%. Whilst there were a number of major contributing factors to the economic climate probably the most important was the impact of the 2008 financial crisis that affected the whole industry negatively. Social: Building on this point it is the case that there is a high level of competition and by extension a high degree of substitution in the Automobile industry particularly in the European market. As it is the case that there are already a large number of domestic automobile producers as well as increased competition from Japanese as well as Korean auto makers. Technological: Foreign competitors have long held a strong upper hand over GM in terms of automobile technological advances. It is the case that Toyota was the innovator in the Hybrid market of automobiles and when the price of gasoline skyrocketed it was Toyota that was able to capitalize on consumer preference for gasoline saving vehicles and not the heaver truck based portfolio as employed by GM. Environmental: As highlighted above it is the case that there is a growing trend for more energy efficient vehicles and as it is the case that competitor automobile companies were able to produce a more energy efficient vehicles over GM’s top brands (Cadillac, GMC, Buick, and Chevrolet). Legal: There is little question that the legal situation of the General Motors Corporation and its filling for bankruptcy protection. According to Hughes et al (2009) the company originally pursued a filling for bankruptcy protection (Chapter 11) through one of its affiliates in the summer of 2009, and ultimately continued the process though the Manhattan, New York Federal Bankruptcy Protection Court on June 1st, 2009. Which permit the company to stay under the bankruptcy protection laws of the United States of America but as per government legislation may require the company to sell off unprofitable divisions. When utilizing a Porter’s Five Forces analysis of GM’s operations, one finds that the situation is also not good for the American auto giant. Threat of New Entrants: As it is the case that the cost of starting up a major automobile production facility and all of its ancillary functions (Design, safety ratings, procurement, legal, etc) one could argue that the threat of major new entrants is low. Bargaining Power of Buyers: Although it is the case that there may not be many different major companies there are still millions of consumers. As customers may switch from brands like Skoda to Audi it is the case that these brands are both owned by the same company (Volkswagen), as such the bargaining power of customers is low. Threat of Substitute Products: In the European market it is the case that much of the continent is highly urbanized, and with access to excellent public transportation in many countries, and the prevalence of motorized scooters & bicycles. Furthermore, as customers have a great deal of choice, and relatively low switching costs one could argue that the threat of substitutes is high Bargaining Power of Suppliers: Most suppliers rely on auto makers and usually cannot manufacture the automobiles themselves. As such the bargaining power of suppliers can be considered low. Degree of Rivalry among Competitors: The degree of growth in this industry in Europe can be considered low and the number of automobile companies seems to be well entrenched. As such companies are not keen to loose loyal customers and as such one could argue that the degree of rivalry is high. As such is for these reasons that the company sought to sell their European division to a suitable automobile company. The second issue that this question hopes to address is why it is that a consortium might be the best possible solution to take over GM’s European operations and not an equity Joint Venture. By its plainest definition according to thefreeictionary.com a consortium is little more than an association between two organizations that hope to pool their resources to achieving a common goal. As such it may be the case that with the expertise that Magna has with the automobile industry and equally importantly, the access to capital that Sberbank has, it seems like a perfect match for taking over GM’s global operations. Furthermore as it is the case that although Magna had been a supplier to major European companies it is evident that the company is still primarily based in Canada and as such would seek the help of a major European investor as well. As such one could argue that the relationship between the two companies is simply an opportunistic alliance. Building on this point, in terms of building a consortium it is the case that no new company has to be formed. If the working relationship were to fall apart, there would not need to be a lengthy termination process. The reasoning behind why an equity joint-venture strategy was not pursued in its most simple form is the divested responsibilities of the two organizations. It is the case that Sberbank is a banking firm and Magna is an automobile company. By pursuing this strategy it is the case that the company would have to form an entirely new business entity, would have to create a complex profit sharing and payment package, it involves a process that is difficult to terminate and finally the corporate cultures of the two organizations perhaps are too difficult to simply amalgamate. As such by pursuing a consortium both company’s can focus on their core competencies. The last issue that this question will address is why Magna and Sberbank chose each other to form a consortium and not some other company. Canada’s Magna Corporation has been a major player in the global automobile industry. Whist it is the case that the company has been in operation since 1957 as an auto parts manufacturer/supplier to major automobile manufacturers, in the last fifty years the company has grown to include 242 manufacturing operations as well as 86 product development, engineering and sales centers across all continents according to the company website (Magna.com, 2009). It is from this perspective that the company has become a major player in the international community and as explains why it may be the case that Magna would be a suitable candidate for running the GM’s European operations. As it is the case that Magna has been a long time supplier to General Motors operations in North America, it is evident that the company is already familiar with the operations and manufacturing processes of the automobile company. As such it is logical that magna would take an interest in the running of GM’s European operations. It is also evident from Magna’s financial statements (2009) it may have been the case that the company did not have the liquidity available to purchase outright GM’s European operations. Seeing as it is the case that many different European lending institutions were less likely to invest their money in taking over a failing automobile company because of the financial crisis, it is the case that Sberbank’s financial statements (2009) indicate that the company has the liquidity to ensure an effective takeover (In conjunction with the money already allocated from the German government) of GM’s operations. Although it may be the case that the corporate cultures of the two firms were different, the marriage of a Canadian automobile company and a European bank seemed like a suitable fit for the takeover of an American company’s European operations. When utilizing a partner selection criteria it is the case that both companies have the relative experience necessary in their core competencies, the nature of their products and services are simple enough, the compatibility between the two companies did not seem to be an issue, they both were aiming for the same goals (Magna as being an auto manufacturer, and Sberbank being a major supplier of capital in the continental European market), and the selection of a consortium seemed to display a high degree of innovation between the two firms. However as a downside it is the case that the corporate cultures may have bee very difficult and as a byproduct it may be the case that there may not have been perfect communication between the two organizations. Question #2 Using appropriate theory, critically evaluate how differing negotiating styles could have had an impact on the consortiums foundation. If the proposals from the consortium had been approved and they took control of GM’s European Operations, how could such disparate corporate cultures have had an impact on the initial period of the “new” organization? The format of answering this question will be to first identify what negotiating style would have been employed by the different parties involved then analyze what result would be generated if differing negotiation styles had been employed. Secondly this question will demonstrate what the typical corporate culture would be for Russian as well as Canadian firms and follow up with an analysis as to how these different cultures may clash in the formulation of a new entity. Negotiation Style: According to Katz (2008) when engaging in negotiation with a Russian firm it is the case that there is a procedure that one should adhere to. The protocol is for any firm to first pay attention to are establishing Relationships and Respect, Communication, Initial contact and meetings, the actual negotiation, then agreements and contracts. Katz (2008) identified that Russian attitude and style to negotiation is typically describe as being ‘distributive and contingency’ based insofar as it is the case that Magna would have been the firm seeking the assistance of the Russian party for finance it would have placed Sberbank in a position of relative advantage. The author further highlighted that in Russian Negotiations short term advantages are often highlighted over long term relationships owing to the relative instability of the country in economic terms. Furthermore it is the case that Russian firms favour slow pace of negotiation and as a parallel, pursuing a polychronic work style (Multiple actions at the same time) which may be confusing to negotiators from a foreign country such as Canada. As a final point from Katz (2008) the author highlighted that in the bargaining stage, prices can fluctuate by as much as 40% from the initial offer and the final acceptance. Building on this point it was argued by Glenn et al. (1984) Russians typically do not favour making concessions, moreover it is the case that when other parties involved make concession this is considered ‘weak’. According to Asrani (2008) in a nation such as Canada it is the case that negotiations are generally more informal than one can expect in other nations. On a practical level Canadians discourage wasting time however as it is a multicultural society Canadians generally express tolerance and reasonableness when engaging in international negotiations however it is also the case that Canadians are not afraid to say ‘No’ when negotiating. Shell (2001) indicated that organizations can employ five separate negotiation styles which are avoider, compromiser, accommodator, competitor, and problem solver all of which are geared towards achieving a compromise between the two parties. Avoiders are simply those who avoid the confrontational aspects of a negotiation. Compromisers are those interested in simply closing the gap based on standards and pre-determined formulae. Accommodators are those who simply interested in solving the problems of the other parties involved. Competitors are those who see negotiation as an opportunity to win. Collaborators are those who simply enjoy negotiations because they see negotiation as a means to solve a problem by pooling resources. One can expect a clash between Russia and Canada as t would appear that Russians utilize a competitor strategy and Canadians may utilize a collaborator strategy. As such to better accommodate the needs of the other negotiators, the Canadians can adopt a competitor negotiation style or the Russians can accept a collaborator negotiation style. In time orientation there is a clash between Polychronic (Russia) and Monochronic (Canada) cultures which LeBaron (2003) identifies in Russia one would expect meeting at flexible times, frequent brakes, overlap talking, high flow of information and deal with several agendas at the same time, whilst in Canada one can expect exactly the opposite. As it is the case that with the Magna Sberbank negotiations time was of extreme urgency it may have been best for the Russians to Adopt a Polycronic negotiation method insofar as a relaxed attitude to time may have given the government parties and GM time to change their minds. In regards to space orientation it is the case that according to LeBaron (2003) this could be a significant pain point between Russia and Canada insofar as in Canada, negotiators favour a higher level of separation between people in private as well as public space. As the opposite holds true for Russians it may have been beneficial for Canadians to embrace a shorter space between the Russian negotiators or the Russians embrace a greater distance to better accommodate the Canadians. As for Power distance according to kwintessential.co.uk (2009) it is the case that Russia could be considered a nation with a high power distance and Canada could be a country with a low power distance (See Appendix #1). As this may cause a clash between the two nations one beneficial strategy that the Canadians could employ with their Russian counterparts would be to embrace a corporate culture that employs strongly hierarchical structures, as well as appealing to the right of authority figures to use power with discretion.. Corporate Cultures: There is little secret that Russia and Canada in general have two completely different corporate cultures. According to Magnas website (2009), the company has a corporate constitution that emphasizes equality within the organization such as through profit participation that affects employees, management as well as shareholders. This builds on the idea of a corporate culture in Canada that Wahl (2005) is dedicated to making continual improvements to corporate integrity as well as dedicating resources to such things as the community, customer service and creating diverse workplace environments. In regards to Russia Sberbank, all that is indicated about the corporate culture from the 2009-20014 company strategy highlights is that the company emphasizes a “Strong Corporate Culture.” As such much of the conclusions that can be derived regarding Sperbank would be in relation to the national corporate culture. According to Potanin (2003) Russia has a low quality of corporate governance which in turn influences the corporate culture. Seeing as the two organizations probably do have very different corporate cultures it would be the case that one can expect a high degree of conflict within the newly formed entity. As such in terms of management responsibilities one can assume there might be a clash of autocratic vs. democratic styles, in terms of procurement one can assume that the clash in negotiation styles can be re applied. Finally in terms of company direction as highlighted earlier, Russian firms tend to favour short term gains over long terms gains this would have a significant impact on the strategic direction on the firm. Question #3 Critically appraise the involvement of National Governments in the process that led to the initial acceptance of the proposal. To answer this question this paper will first demonstrate exactly to what extent the national governments of Russia, Canada, the United States and Germany have been involved in the process which ultimately lead to the initial acceptance of the proposal. After this point this paper will provide a critique as to how effective these policies have been. Lastly there will be special consideration on the philosophical motivations for government involvement in the process. In regards to German involvement in the facilitation of the Magna takeover of the European operations of GM, it was highlighted by the case that the country had earmarked 4.5 billion Euros to the company in exchange for maintaining a number of jobs in the Federal Republic. After it was the case that the deal fell through it was the case that the nation demanded a repayment of 1.5 billion euros from GM for bridge financing that the company had extended to the company. According to the BBC news (2009) the Federal Government of Germany very rapidly made available the 1.5 billion euros on the promise of keeping the industry in Germany. There is little question that the public perception of government backed bailouts is mixed. In an Editorial by Weiland writing for Der Spiegel (2009) the author had articulated that in the case of Germany polls indicated that ordinary citizens are fed up with government bailouts of companies specifically because of massive failures in the past such as Holzmann which went bankrupt in 2002. Whilst some conservative ideologists would indicate that it is not a good idea for governments to bailout businesses, it is the case that the money put up by the German government would have been a significant incentive for the deal to go through. By securing a great deal of capital in exchange for keeping jobs Magna would effectively be reducing their risk resulting from diminishing investor and consumer confidence. In regards to American government involvement in the process that lead to the initial acceptance of the offer it was the case presented it was with a major American bailout of GM the same could be extended to GM’s foreign operations. As such this would make the American government a significant contributor to the policy decisions of GM and their foreign operations. It is the case that this would have been a contributing factor for GM to stay as the controlling power of the Opel brand but as such it was not a major hinderer of the process because the initial decision ultimately favoured Magna. In the long run, U.S. Government support would have been beneficial to America by GM maintaining the brand in Europe and not a Canadian company. According to the case there was no significant involvement of the Canadian government on the process that would have lead to the initial acceptance of the deal. However considering the fact that Russia’s Sberbank Rossii is a state run enterprise and is directly responsible to the Russian government one can also draw the same comparison that the bank is a direct government contributor that lead to the initial proposal being accepted. By being a major sponsor of the Magna taking over the Opel brand it is no question that the capital put up by Sberbank and by extension the Russian government would have had a tremendous effect on the overall initial acceptance of the deal. Despite the clash of corporate cultures it is the case that by having the support of the Russian government behind the strategic move by Magna it would have played a powerful role in improving the chances of initial acceptance by nature of the capital involved. From a philosophical standpoint it is the case that a number of different factors play into how governments have help to facilitate the initial acceptance of the proposal. From a Utilitarianism position governments should beg the question what brings the greatest good to the largest number of people. If it is the case that the German government would like to maintain as many jobs as possible and a Magna consortium would accommodate this, than the most logical intervention by the state was to facilitate the deal by putting up 4.5billion of capital. From a deontological perspective one can assume that intervention by the governments would have been made based on the adherence to rules. As it is the case that that there are a number of laws prohibiting bribery in developed nations. As such the most logical and legal solution to aid in the development of the consortium would be for the German government to contribute a great deal of capital to guarantee the oerations are able to stay afloat. From a position of virtue ethics the decision to provide support for the formulation of the new consortium is entirely dependant on the views of the agent (Government). If moralistically the German government were to determine that they have a responsibility in finding the best possible agent to take over GM’s Operations I order to secure employment and they believe that Magna is the company to accomplish this than they must give support to this new consortium. From an Egoism perspective the governments must do what is in their own self interest. One can assume from an egoism perspective, the German government would be dedicated to self preservation through the generation of taxes. Therefore, it may be in the best interest of the government to contribute 4.5 billion euros in loans to the Magna consortium because this would maintain a number of tax paying employees and as such over the long term the loan would pay for itself. Question #4 Critically evaluate the impact of the costs of finance for Magna upon how they could have developed their investment in GM’s European operations To answer this question this paper will first demonstrate exactly the financial constraints that magna would have had to undertake had the deal actually gone through. Secondly this paper will look at what impact these investments would have had on their potential development on GM’s European operations. Lastly a discussion of the weighted average cost of capital will be conducted. There is little question that there was controversy surrounding Sberbank’s involvement in the deal with magna to secure the Opel brand. According to Ganz (2009) it is the case that ad the deal gone through the ownership of the firm would have been broken up between GM controlling 25%, 10% to the labour unions that control the company and 55% would be broken up between the new consortium. However it is the case that a significant amount of the financial backing of the new consortium would have come from both the German government as well as the Russian Bank itself. A further complication is the indirect financial costs that Magna would have faced in the establishment of the consortium. According to Agence France-Presse (2009) it was the case that the major contributing factor to the recommendation of GM for the sale of their operations to the Canadian auto parts manufacturer was directly the amount of money put up by the German federal government. As a significant financial constraint of this action was the requirement of the firm to guarantee a certain level of employment German workers in Germany automobile plants. Whilst it is the case that this may have been part of the strategy of Magna for Opel from the beginning it does represent a significant financial constraint as it may have bee the case that strategically the company would have wanted to relocate to a European country with a relatively lower working wage. As such this represents a significant cost of finance for the firm. Furthermore as it is the case that Sberbank is a significant (financial) partner of the operations it would have been the case that according to Reiter and Wabl (2009) the consequence of finance for the establishment of the new consortium would be that Sberbak would be a major decision maker for the new consortium. Seeing as it is the case that the bank may not have much experience in the automobile manufacturing industry it may be the case that a significant amount of manpower and negotiating resources would have to be dedicated by Magna towards Sberbank that future decisions would be in the best interest of the newly formed organization. As such this would represent a huge sunk cost of the consortium that would otherwise dedicate these resources to more practical applications. According to an article on msnbc.com (2009) it was the case that no indication was given to specific long term financial repayment from Magna to Sberbank, rather it is the case that an alliance was to be formed between the two partners and almost certainly the profit would be shared equally. However purchasing a 55% stake in GM’s European operations represents a huge financial sunk cost. The ultimate cost of this finance in total would have been tremendous and represented a tremendous financial risk should the venture prove to be unprofitable. What this overall massive financial cost would have directly impacted the company strategy of Magna insofar as it is the case that the company had to make ultimate concessions to the German government (By keeping the jobs in Germany), the auto workers union (By guaranteeing labour rights and securing jobs) and to the Russian bank (Who would demand regular progress reports and expect short term dividends). Of course any analysis of the cost of finance would be incomplete without a discussion of the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). According to Bennet Stewart (1991) the purpose of this financial tool is to determine the significance of each investment component in the greater capital structure. What this tool can ultimately accomplish is providing a feasibility metric in determining whether or not project is a worthy venture. Without access to a great deal of the financial prospects of the consortium between Magna International Inc. and Sberbank Rossii an accurate calculation of the WACC would be difficult. However as both parties decided to move forward with the venture it is likely that the projected revenue streams were considered favourable, there was a reasonable degree of risk, and the expectation that the consortium would ultimately achieve an optimal mix of debt and equity. References Agence France-Presse (2009) GM to Keep 35% of Opel, Magna/Sberbank Get 55% Unions had also signed an agreement that supported the necessary cost restructuring. IndustryWeek.com [online] Available at http://www.industryweek.com/articles/gm_to_keep_35_of_opel_magna/sberbank_get_55_19939.aspx Accessed on December 29th 2009. Asrani, R. (2008) Cultural Diversity & Negotiations-A Global Perspective. N. R. Institute of Business Management, Ahmedabad, India (P. G. Centre of Gujarat University for MBA) Available online at http://www.laynetworks.com/Cultural-Diversity-Negotiations7.htm Accessed on December 28th 2009. BBC News.com (2009) Germany picks Magna to save Opel [online] available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8074924.stm Accessed on December 29th 2009. Bennet Stewart III, G. (1991). The Quest for Value. HarperCollins. Ganz, A. (2009) GM Board Approves Opel Sale to Magna/Sberbank. Leftlanenews.com[online] Available at http://www.leftlanenews.com/gm-board-approves-opel-sale-to-magnasberbank.html Accessed on December 29th 2009. Glenn, E.S. & Witmeyer, D. & Stevenson K.A. (1984) Cultural Styles of Persuasion. International Journal of International Relations. (1) GM Company Website (2008) General Motors Sales Highlights: SAAB. GM.com [online] Available at http://www.gm.com/europe/corporate/sales/european/saab/ Accessed on January 5th 2010. Hughes, J., Salas, C., Green, J., & Van Voris, B. (June, 2009) GM Begins Bankruptcy Process With Filing for Affiliate. Bloomberg. [online] Available at http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aw4F_L7E4xYg Accessed on January 5th 2010. Katz, L. (March, 2008) “Negotiating International Business- The Negotiators Reference Guide to 50 Countries Around the World: Russia.Booksurge Publishing 2nd Edition Available online at http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:kwMRZjrJysgJ:www.globalnegotiationresources.com/cou/Russia.pdf+negotiation+styles+russia&hl=en&gl=ca&sig=AHIEtbTFYt63yvTgW9X35C68ZhvmLP9I9Q Accessed on December 28th, 2009. Kwintessential.co.uk (2009) Power Distance Index. [online] Available online at http://www.kwintessential.co.uk/intercultural/power-distance-index.html Accessed on December 29th, 2009. LeBaron, M. (July, 2003) Culture Based Negotiation Styles. Beyond Intractability.org [online publication] Available online at http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/culture_negotiation/ Accessed on December 28th, 2009. Magna.com (2009) About Magna: Our Corporate Constitution [online] Available at http://www.magna.com/magna/en/about/culture/constitution/ Accessed on December 29th 2009. Magna.com (2009) About Magna. [online] Available at http://www.magna.com/magna/en/about/ Accessed on January 6th 2010. Magna.com (2009) Investors – Financial Reports and Public Fillings. [online] Available at http://www.magna.com/magna/en/investors/financial/ Accessed on January 6th 2010. Mishra, G. (2009) Using Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions to Study Social Media Usage in BRIC Countries. International Values and Communication Technologies. Msnbc.com (2009) GM says Magna, Sberbank to acquire Opel: U.S. automaker expects deal to close in ‘next few months’ [online] available at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32776199/ns/business-autos/ Accessed on December 29th 2009. Potanin, V. (2003) Corporate Governance: “Russian Model” in Progress. Journal of Foreign Affairs and International Relations [online] Available at http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/numbers/4/495.html Accessed on December 29th 2009. Reiter C. & Wabl, M. (2009) Magna, Sberbank May Invest 700 Million Euros in Opel (Update2) [online] Available at http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=amBfAIQ3ZUH8&pid=20601082 Accessed on December 29th 2009. Shell, R. (April, 2001) Bargaining Styles and Negotiation. Negotiation Journal. Plenum Publishing Corporation. Smith, A. (June, 2009) GM unloads Hummer to Chinese buyer. CNN.com. [online] Available at http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/02/news/companies/gm_hummer/index.htm?postversion=2009060207 Accessed on January 5th 2010. Sbeerbank.ru (2009) Financial Statements. [online] Available at http://www.sbrf.ru/en/financial/financial_statements/ Accessed on January 6th 2010. Wahl, A. (2005) Culture shock: A survey of Canadian executives reveals that corporate culture is in need of improvement: A survey of Canadian executives reveals that corporate culture is in need of improvement. Canadian Business Online. Available at http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/employees/article.jsp?content=20060106_160426_5512 Accessed on December 29th 2009. Weiland, S. The Opel-Magna Debacle: A Disgrace for the Populists. Der Speigel [online] Available at http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,659317,00.html Accessed o December 29th 2009. Appendices Source: Mishra (2009) Read More