{"id":2580,"date":"2008-12-03T14:18:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-03T14:18:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.certitrek.com\/nlpa\/2008\/12\/03\/the-automaker-bailout-do-common-suppliers-pose-systemic-risk\/"},"modified":"2021-08-10T11:17:48","modified_gmt":"2021-08-10T15:17:48","slug":"the-automaker-bailout-do-common-suppliers-pose-systemic-risk","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.certitrek.com\/nlpa\/blog\/the-automaker-bailout-do-common-suppliers-pose-systemic-risk\/","title":{"rendered":"The Automaker Bailout: Do Common Suppliers Pose Systemic Risk?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Whitepaper Wednesday will return next week. I wanted to jump on the automotive industry bailout news in a timely fashion.<\/p>\n

Many eyes across the business world are on Capitol Hill where the leaders of GM, Ford, and Chrysler will be pleading for taxpayer dollars to save their companies and \u2013 as a result, they claim \u2013 the entire economy of the free world.<\/p>\n

Personally, I\u2019ve pondered whether letting the weakest of the automakers fail would be the right decision. Theoretically, it would allow the stronger two to have an opportunity to snatch up some market share and return to profitability, however thin those profits may be.<\/p>\n

And, philosophically, it would help bring supply in line with demand. After all, if auto demand is down 37%, I\u2019m not sure that we should be investing taxpayer dollars to sustain historical supply levels.<\/p>\n

So one would think that the stronger two automakers would love to see the weakest one fail. Companies generally love to see their competitors die.<\/p>\n

But there\u2019s one reason \u2013 one big reason \u2013 for counterintuitive thinking to prevail here.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s that reason?<\/p>\n

Supply chain risk.<\/p>\n

Consider that, in today\u2019s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, GM said that it needs government financial support because \u201cAbsent such assistance, the company will default in the near term, very likely precipitating a total collapse of the domestic industry and its extensive supply chain.\u201d<\/p>\n

The article later stated that \u201cGM said its collapse would cause \u2018catastrophic damage to the U.S. economy, with failures rippling through suppliers to other automakers, dealers and financial firms.’\u201d<\/p>\n

So in other words, if GM goes out of business, so will many of its suppliers. Many of these suppliers are also used \u2013 nay, depended upon<\/em> \u2013 by Ford and Chrysler. The collapse of these suppliers would so inhibit Ford and Chrysler from producing vehicles that they, too, would collapse.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m sure (well, hopeful) that each of these automakers understands who their common suppliers are, the prospective solvency of those suppliers given a failure by one or more of their competitors, and contingency plans<\/a> in the event of a competitor\u2019s collapse.<\/p>\n

If one or more of the automakers does fail, there will be game-changing procurement lessons to be had. Make or buy procurement decisions \u2013 which, in recent years have always favored the \u201cbuy\u201d outcome \u2013 may face a pendulum-like swing towards the preference of making in order to reduce such systemic supply risk<\/a>.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ll just have to wait and see what happens.<\/p>\n

Hold onto your hats\u2026it\u2019s gonna be a wild \u201cride.\u201d<\/p>\n

NLPA Learning<\/b><\/a>:<\/b>\u00a0Looking for authoritative procurement templates, tools, webinars, and more? Stop trying to create resources from scratch and start taking advantage of having exactly what you need right at your fingertips in\u00a0NLPA Learning.<\/span><\/p>\n

Recommended Reading<\/b><\/p>\n