Giorgetto Giugiaro sold out to the tedeschi at Volkswagen. Bertone is teaching budding Chinese car designers in brutally cold Changchun. And now, the last vestige of inspired Italian car design is on the auction block: Pininfarina . Actually, they had hired the Italian investment bank Banca Leonardo in August 2009, but they took their time. Now, the bidding is getting serious. And guess who wants to take Pininfarina home.
“Some 10 automakers, three of which are Chinese, are bidding for the Italian car design firm, Pininfarina, “ reports China’s Global Times.
Pininfarina shaped many, mostly high-end cars from Ferrari to Maserati, from Rolls-Royce to Volvo, from Alfa Romeo to Cadillac, from Jaguar to Lancia. If you want a designer of a luxury car, Carozzeria Pininfarina are first to call (+39 011 9438111). Now, the designer of the Ferrari Testa Rossa is looking for the highest bidder. Designing luxury cars doesn’t seem to be a good business anymore. According to Bloomberg, Pininfarina already racked-up $45.8 million in losses in the first nine months, with more red ink to come.
Global Times unearthed that “Beijing Automobile Works Co. Ltd (BAW) and Mahindra Group, from India, top the list of bidders followed by Brilliance Auto, Jianghuai Automobile Co., Ltd. (JAW), Bajaj from India and Magna International Inc.” BAW of course is part of BAIC.
This is a strange assortment of bidders. What BAW wants to do with Pininfarina remains a mystery. BAW is known a a maker of civilian and milspec off-road vehicles and trucks. Mahindra? Also known for trucks. Jianghuai is a relative nobody by Chinese standards, they made about 320,000 units last year. A lot of them trucks. Bajaj? Even stranger: The Indian company produces gadzillions of two-wheelers, and has problems coming up with a low cost car together with Renault-Nissan. Magna? A parts company that also will gladly build your car on an outsourcing basis. They want to design them too?
Global Times called around. Not very successfully. The PR Dept. of Jianghuai said they hadn’t received a memo yet, hence no comment. As for BAW, Global Times go a bit testy: “Constant calls from the Global Times went unanswered to BAW’s Publicity Department.”
Word from Europe is that Magna would not mind having Pininfarina, but they don’t want to pay a lot. The Italians are supposedly hoping to get more money from India or China. Or are they just playing the yellow (and brown) card to drive up the price? On the other hand, Pininfarina is already one step in China: This week, they opened an office in Shanghai. Which again doesn’t mean much. Anybody who’s somebody in the autobusiness must be present in China.
But then again, what do all these truck makers want to do with a company that designed Ferraris? Rattle presumptive bidders with the thought that Ferrari know-how could end up with Indian or Chinese truckbuilders?
The heyday of the independent coachbuilder is long past. The Italians were the last holdouts, and while they did it very well, their peak was probably the ’70s both in terms of influence and profitability. They managed to keep the game going a little longer with production contracts (unsurprisingly, mainly with the Fiat group), but once those went away, they were effectively done.
Still, it’s a shame to see them go. I am a particular fan of Marcello Gandini’s work at Bertone in the early ’70s – the Lancia Stratos and the Lamborghini LP400 Countach are, to my mind, two of the greatest car designs ever.
Pininfarina may have done and may still do occasional coachbuilding work. Their main line of business is the design of automobiles for other manufacturers. They may also build and test prototypes. Pininfarina designed a long list of cars for a long list of automakers. Some reports say that Pininfarina already designs 30% of China’s home-grown cars.
I was probably unclear – I was using “coachbuilder” in a generic sense, in that the Italian styling houses grew out of the coachbuilding tradition. While designing automobiles may be their current primary line of work, the reality, certainly in Bertone and Pininfarina’s case, is that building cars under contract provided most of the profits. To my knowledge only Giugiaro was able to make industrial design by itself a long term profitable business.
Besides bread & butter vehicles (what would Peugeot be without him) Pininfarina also did the design for trains, streetcars, buses…
So, why not trucks?
I think the interest is two-fold. First, Pininfarina sits on a lot of design know-how, knowledge that could be useful for aspiring carmakers without a design language of their own, or even perhaps without the knowledge of what a design language is in the first place. Second, Pininfarina actually build cars. They have their own production lines, capacity which other automakers take advantage of when they are sourcing out work that is too small to handle themselves. That production capacity could be useful for any carmaker that wants a foot on the European market, without the burden of starting from scratch. So, it could actually be a win-win, because it goes both ways. Design knowledge going east, production going west.
Did Glickenhaus hire Jason Castriota directly to do the P4/5, or did he hire Pininfarina?
I suspect he hired Ferrari and Ferrari did the usual.
I think the interest is two-fold. First, Pininfarina sits on a lot of design know-how, knowledge that could be useful for aspiring carmakers without a design language of their own, or even perhaps without the knowledge of what a design language is in the first place. Second, Pininfarina actually build cars. They have their own production lines, capacity which other automakers take advantage of when they are sourcing out work that is too small to handle themselves. That production capacity could be useful for any carmaker that wants a foot on the European market, without the burden of starting from scratch. So, it could actually be a win-win, because it goes both ways. Design knowledge going east, production going west.
It should be either Toyota or Honda who needs to buy Pininfarina. The current corps of “designers” at both carmakers are incompetent at best, blind at worst, probably a combination of the two.
Yeah, it’s a strange era in automobile design. Bangle’s postmodern nihilism still lingers, as does the Tonka toy look that has dominated the SUV market. Clean and efficient, form-follows-function design is still considered old fashioned. Perhaps it will take a few more years of recession to change that.
Not hugely familiar with Pininfarina’s recent designs. What have they done that really stands out (in a good way)?
Bangle’s postmodern nihilism
WTF?
Which do you think stands out?
whoever buys Pini will pimp him out thats all, using him to build trucks that got to be like using elephant gun to shoot ducks.
@Dr Lemming:
Standing out the good way:
2008: Maserati GT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maserati_GranTurismo9
2009: Ferrari 458 Italia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_458_Italia)
Don’t know;
2006: Volvo C70 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_C70)
2010: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_2uettottanta
Rather not:
Brilliance BS4: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brilliance_BS4
Peugeot 1007: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peugeot_1007
Hyundai Matrix: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Lavita