Blog Posts

The executives at Rivian, I'm sure, did their due diligence before cashing Ford's $500 million check. But it should be pointed out that the Detroit 3 own a deplorable record when it comes to investing in rival automakers.

We won't spend much time dwelling on ancient history, but a quick recap is in order: Chrysler's ownership of Lamborghini in the late '80s did nothing for the Italian supercar maker; Chrysler's investment in Maserati yielded the tragic 1988-91 TC, a vehicle so awful that it managed to sully the reputation of both automakers.

A few decent cars were borne of Ford's investment in Mazda, but that didn't last. And Ford's disastrous ownership of Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar and Aston Martin cost it billions. General Motors bought Saab and ended up destroying the Swedish brand. Hummer didn't fare much better. Opel and Vauxhall lost money for GM for decades, until they were unloaded for basically nothing to France's PSA Group.

The problem is engineers' pride (also known as NIH — not invented here) and company cultures that mostly doom these ventures. In the Ford-Rivian deal, I can't image that Ford's product development executives and engineers are going to be too enthusiastic in taking a platform or technology developed or even co-developed by a startup and integrating it into the Ford lineup.

On the other hand, it's hard to see how Rivian's image benefits from a connection to an old-school Detroit. Tesla's anti-Detroit shtick certainly worked well for a time.

Now that the deal is done, the interaction with the two companies comes next. I am reminded of the Ford-Toyota hybrid joint venture disclosed with great fanfare in August 2011. It died almost immediately when Ford and Toyota executives couldn't find a way to work together. Nothing came of it for either company.

Here's what I think it will take for the Ford-Rivian deal to bear fruit. Rivian should be treated as an equal, which means Ford has to be respectful of Rivian's culture and not try to micromanage the development of any products. Each company's bill of design — the rulebook detailing how components are developed, engineered, tested and integrated — are going to be wildly different. That will have to be reconciled somehow.

And this is where Rivian can really benefit from Ford's institutional knowledge of crash testing, and dealing with NHTSA and the EPA. No consumer will care if Rivian's product development playbook takes a page or two from Ford as long as the end result is a safe, durable vehicle. But Rivian has to be Rivian and not a badge-engineered Ford, or consumers will see through that.

I remain skeptical that Ford has spent shareholders' money wisely. History shows that these deals rarely work. It's not that there are good guys and bad guys who can't play nice. History has shown that it's just too hard blending two companies cultures, technologies and product development systems to produce a great vehicle.

And then there is perhaps the biggest challenge. I have yet to see a business case from any automaker where electric trucks and SUVs can be sold in high enough volume to make money.