TheChek News Flow

Actionnaire clé de TotalEnergies, Editis, Casino et Fnac Darty, investisseur dans les médias, l’homme d’affaires tchèque alerte sur les menaces pesant sur l’attractivité du pays. Il juge aussi que les pays européens ont de « fortes tendances à l’autodestruction ».

À un an de l’élection présidentielle, l’homme d’affaires tchèque Daniel Kretinsky, un des principaux investisseurs étrangers en France, souligne l’importance de continuer la politique pro-business d’Emmanuel Macron.

DANIEL KRETINSKY. - Contrairement à une idée répandue, notre ambition n’est pas de gérer le déclin, mais de chercher de la croissance dans l’énergie, la grande distribution et la logistique. Ces secteurs ont pour point commun la nature essentielle des services fournis aux citoyens, où notre obsession est de proposer le meilleur service au meilleur prix. Nous cherchons à la fois de la croissance organique et des opérations de consolidation. EPH est la société d’énergie qui a eu la plus forte croissance en Europe. Notre priorité est la bonne exécution de nos stratégies dans les sociétés dont nous sommes l’actionnaire de contrôle et celles où nous avons annoncé vouloir le devenir. De nouvelles acquisitions sont possibles dans l’énergie et la logistique des colis, où nous avons acheté Relais Colis la semaine passée. Mais nous n’avons pas l’ambition d’investir dans des métiers nouveaux, sauf le cas échéant comme actionnaire minoritaire. C’est le cas partout et bien sûr en France, pays pour lequel j’ai une très grande affection.

Investir dans les médias (Marianne , Franc Tireur , Libération , TF1, T18…) est-il une façon de vous imposer dans l’establishment français ou de peser sur le débat public ?

C’est d’abord un engagement citoyen en faveur de la démocratie libérale, du pluralisme et d’une information sincère. Nos démocraties sont fragilisées par la montée des populismes, favorisée et amplifiée par l’hyperpuissance des plateformes numériques. Elles ont détruit le débat public et contestent l’existence même de l’objectivité et de la vérité, la distinction entre le vrai et le faux. Des médias indépendants ont cette fonction essentielle de résister à cette vague et de proposer une vision alternative, rationnelle et pluraliste, de la chose publique. C’est la première raison de nos investissements : pas pour soutenir nos intérêts, mais pour défendre les valeurs auxquelles nous croyons.

Dans notre façon de concevoir ces métiers, les interventions de l’actionnaire n’existent pas, sauf pour assurer le respect des valeurs démocratiques et de la déontologie journalistique. L’important est de garantir une information honnête et un débat contradictoire. Je crois aux contre-pouvoirs : un actionnaire tout-puissant, c’est dangereux, mais une rédaction toute-puissante aussi. Le pouvoir absolu de qui que ce soit n’est jamais bon pour la liberté de pensée et d’expression individuelle des journalistes.

TotalEnergies, dont vous êtes le deuxième actionnaire (4,1 % du capital) se trouve au centre de polémiques. Comprenez-vous ces attaques ?

Je constate dans les pays européens, y compris la France, de fortes tendances à l’autodestruction. Nous croyons à tort que nous sommes le centre du monde et que nous décidons seuls de notre destin. Alors que nos deux premiers concurrents, les États-Unis et la Chine, font tout pour renforcer leurs entreprises clés, qui dominent déjà le marché global, nous faisons tout pour affaiblir nos rares champions mondiaux. Nous avons largement détruit les grandes sociétés énergétiques en Europe, et sommes en train de détruire nos constructeurs automobiles et notre industrie chimique. Pensez-vous que cibler les grands producteurs de pétrole et de gaz européens est intelligent ? Alors que les États-Unis mettent tout en œuvre pour renforcer ExxonMobil, Chevron et Conoco, la France réfléchit à la manière de déstabiliser Total, par la taxation, les menaces de nationalisation… Pensez-vous que les sociétés américaines vont soutenir les consommateurs français comme le fait Total avec son plafonnement du prix à la pompe ? Pensez-vous que s’il y a une rupture de livraisons de pétrole, elles vont donner la priorité aux consommateurs français ? Avec un Total fort, la France jouit d’une sécurité d’approvisionnement. Des mesures de surtaxation vont compromettre les investissements, sans lesquels aucun pays ne peut prospérer. Pensez-vous que les investisseurs vont choisir un pays qui pénalise le succès ? Certes, la taxation provisoire des superprofits n’est pas la taxe Zucman, qui signerait la fin économique de la France. Mais le débat doit être très prudent et les conclusions très raisonnables. 75 % des profits de Total viennent de l’étranger. Une stratégie agressive menacerait les intérêts vitaux de la France.

Pourquoi lancez-vous une OPA sur Fnac Darty, dont vous êtes le premier actionnaire (28,5 %) ? Pour empêcher le géant chinois de l’e-commerce JD.com d’en prendre le contrôle ?

Nous sommes entrés au capital de Fnac Darty en 2021 car nous avons confiance dans la stratégie et le management de l’entreprise mené par Enrique Martinez. Nous sommes devenus leurs partenaires pour l’acquisition de la chaîne italienne Unieuro : la part de l’international est ainsi passée de 20 % à 40 % du chiffre d’affaires, et les synergies attendues dépassent 20 millions d’euros. L’OPA s’inscrit dans cette continuité et vise à faire de cette enseigne française un champion européen.

Bruxelles enquête sur une possible concentration verticale, car vous êtes propriétaire d’Editis, le deuxième éditeur français. Craignez-vous que la Commission exige des contreparties ?

En cas de succès de notre offre, il n’y aura pas d’intégration entre Editis et la Fnac. Elles resteront deux entreprises distinctes, avec des directions, des équipes commerciales et des objectifs propres. Nous respectons religieusement les engagements pris lors de l’acquisition d’Editis. La logique économique rend le favoritisme absurde. Fnac Darty ne représente que 14 % des ventes d’Editis. Il serait irrationnel de pénaliser les autres réseaux qui font 86 % de nos ventes. La force de Fnac Darty repose sur la diversité de son offre et sur la confiance des consommateurs dans sa neutralité. Fnac Darty est en compétition féroce avec Amazon et les plateformes chinoises. Le service aux consommateurs doit être sans faute et la largeur de l’assortiment est un des principaux atouts. Depuis qu’Editis appartient à notre groupe, les conditions commerciales accordées à Fnac Darty sont restées inchangées. Lagardère contrôle Hachette Livre et le réseau Relay : personne n’observe pourtant de distorsion structurelle du marché du livre.

Le milieu français de l’édition est en émoi depuis l’éviction d’Olivier Nora de Grasset. Editis pourrait-il profiter de cette crise pour récupérer des auteurs à succès et des éditeurs ?

Je ne vais pas commenter et moins encore critiquer les actions d’Hachette, concurrent d’Editis et fournisseur de la Fnac. Olivier Nora est quelqu’un de très bien, et je lui souhaite de continuer à jouer un rôle clé dans le monde de l’édition, dont il est l’une des grandes figures. Chez Editis, l’indépendance des éditeurs est sacrée, sauf s’ils portent atteinte à la loi ou aux valeurs démocratiques essentielles. Tous nos éditeurs et auteurs vous le confirmeront. Nous sommes entrés dans les médias et l’édition avec une logique de long terme. Nous entendons, avec Denis Olivennes, être les collègues des acteurs du livre pour longtemps et nous battre aux côtés des éditeurs au sein du Syndicat national de l’édition et de son président, Vincent Montagne, et aux côtés des libraires vis-à-vis desquels Editis a une politique exemplaire, notamment en matière de remise ou de délais de paiement. La librairie est le poumon de l’édition et l’édition l’un des organes vitaux de l’exception culturelle française.

Comprenez-vous les inquiétudes suscitées par Vincent Bolloré dans l’édition, le cinéma et les médias ?

Ne comptez pas sur moi pour des attaques personnelles. La philosophie de gestion dans le groupe Bolloré est différente de la nôtre. Mais le paysage de l’édition et des médias en France est très concurrentiel et personne n’est forcé de travailler avec une maison particulière, chez Hachette ou chez Editis. Les bons éditeurs, les bons auteurs et les bons journalistes peuvent faire les choix qui leur conviennent.

Dans la distribution alimentaire, Casino peut-il subsister avec une si faible part de marché ?

Ce qui compte, c’est la pertinence du positionnement, la cohérence du modèle et la capacité à générer de la valeur pour ses consommateurs. Sur ces trois dimensions, Casino a aujourd’hui une réponse efficace. Le plan de son équipe managériale de grande qualité, gérée par Philippe Palazzi, en qui j’ai une grande confiance, se concentre sur le commerce de proximité sur trois marchés porteurs (courses alimentaires, restauration à emporter et nouveaux services du quotidien) où se déplace la consommation. Le plan prévoit la rénovation de l’intégralité des Monoprix et le déploiement du nouveau concept de Franprix dans 800 magasins, un travail engagé avec nos entrepreneurs franchisés. Nous sommes au bon endroit, au bon moment avec de belles marques, la bonne stratégie et les bonnes équipes. Il faut maintenant avoir la structure financière qui permet de franchir cette étape majeure de croissance du groupe.

Actionnaire à plus de 51 % de Casino, vous négociez actuellement avec ses créanciers. Certains craignent que vous abandonniez le groupe si vous en perdiez le contrôle.

La situation n’est pas facile pour les investisseurs, les actionnaires, les hedge funds et les créanciers de la partie de la dette moins sécurisés que les banques. Nous avons tous investi sur des hypothèses qui se sont avérées loin de la réalité. La valorisation du groupe et le montant de la dette ne sont donc pas soutenables. Nous faisons face à l’impératif d’accepter la réalité, c’est-à-dire des pertes financières importantes, pour protéger la société qui mérite de prospérer, car son modèle économique est durable et pérenne. J’accepte que les actionnaires soient subordonnés aux créanciers et doivent subir les pertes en premier mais l’abandon total de la capitalisation de Casino ne suffit pas. Les créanciers doivent se comporter d’une manière responsable et accepter la réalité et la valeur actuelle du groupe. Le droit français a les moyens d’imposer une solution pour protéger la société. Je peux rassurer tous les clients, salariés et partenaires de Casino, franchisés, fournisseurs et assureurs-crédit : le groupe n’est pas menacé. Il est prospère, stable et soutenu par ses banques partenaires. Son bilan sera rééquilibré soit par un accord soit par une décision du tribunal. Nous sommes prêts à investir des sommes considérables, de plusieurs centaines de millions d’euros, suffisantes pour assurer le futur de Casino. Il y a sur la table une solution qui garantit son avenir.

Il y a quelques années, vous estimiez qu’Emmanuel Macron était une chance pour la France. Alors que la situation se dégrade dans le pays, voyez-vous un possible candidat à la présidentielle qui soit une chance pour la France ?

La révolution de l’intelligence artificielle n’est qu’à son début et va entraîner une croissance digne de celle des Trente Glorieuses pour les pays qui sauront en profiter. Encore faut-il se mettre en situation pour cela. La France a bénéficié de la politique de son président, qui a séduit les investisseurs par ses politiques rationnelles. Cela a permis d’éviter à la France la chute économique de l’Allemagne. C’est le crédit du président Macron. Je trouve injuste qu’il n’obtienne pas de reconnaissance pour cet apport majeur. Je souhaite à la France que cette politique d’attraction du capital et des talents continue. C’est vital. La concurrence est globale et féroce, avec les premières puissances mondiales défendant brutalement leurs intérêts économiques et ceux de leurs sociétés. Si la France réagit avec des politiques hostiles au capital, aux talents et à la motivation des entrepreneurs, elle va le payer très cher. J’espère que nous allons éviter ce scénario. Si vous voulez partager la richesse il faut d’abord la créer.

Industry-wide shortage has sent their values soaring

Companies that lease aircraft to airlines have in some cases begun leasing engines rather than whole planes as an industry-wide shortage has sent their rental values soaring.

The recent grounding of Spirit Airlines in the US has led to almost-new A320neo aircraft being dismantled for their engines, according to industry executives and analysts.

The aircraft are powered by geared turbofan engines from Pratt & Whitney which have been in short supply as the US group has struggled with manufacturing problems. The release of the engines into the market could help ease an industry-wide shortage and reduce the number of aircraft currently grounded, according to industry experts.

Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary said two of the bigger lessors that had reclaimed their aircraft from Spirit in the past two weeks had told him they had “just taken the engines off the aircraft”.

“They’re not trying to redeploy the aircraft,” he told the FT. “There’s simply so much money being made by the engine manufacturers — or spare engine suppliers now — it’s more profitable to just take the engines off the aircraft.”

Engine constraints have been one of the biggest concerns for the industry as manufacturers have struggled to keep up with booming demand for Airbus and Boeing planes. At the same time, problems with some of the newest engines have led to long waits for repairs and a shortage of crucial spares.

Engine lease rates soared last year, prompting some owners to dismantle some Airbus A320neo narrow-body aircraft, equipped with the most fuel-efficient engines.

Whether to lease an aircraft or its engines is “always quite a complex decision but the balance of decision-making right now is in favour of leasing the engines given the demand”, said aviation analyst Rob Morris.

The engine market, he added, is “still really tight”, with engines from CFM International and P&W coming up for scheduled maintenance and people looking for spare engines to keep their planes flying during the overhaul.

Industry executives said decisions on whether to lease engines rather than an entire plane were taken on a case-by-case basis, depending on their relative condition.

Remarketing an aircraft can also entail significant work and cost, including reconfiguring the seating and removing the old branding from the previous airline operator. 

“It’s probably easier to move an engine right now than an aircraft,” Morris said.

P&W’s GTF engines power at least 40 per cent of all Airbus A320neos in service. They compete with engines from CFM International, the joint venture between GE Aerospace and France’s Safran.

Airbus has been locked in a dispute with P&W over deliveries of engines for new aircraft. The planemaker has complained that the US group has been prioritising deliveries of engines to the in-service fleet of impacted aircraft rather than delivering new engines for Airbus.

Aengus Kelly, chief executive of AerCap, last month told analysts it had taken back aircraft and engines from Frontier Airlines in the US and re-leased the CFM engines as spares, helping to ease overall supply constraints. As part of the deal, AerCap also secured an agreement with Airbus for 100 new A320neo planes with deliveries starting in 2028.

AerCap is the world’s largest commercial aircraft and engine lessor, as well as providing spare engine capacity.

The company, Kelly told analysts, was “able to take aircraft and engines out of Frontier, put them into our engine leasing pool, and . . . because we did that, that freed up capacity in the Airbus production line, and we were able to exercise options and get [delivery] slots that no one else in the world could get access to . . . they start in 2028”.

Kelly told the FT that AerCap had done a similar transaction involving planes from Icelandic low-cost operator Play last year. Between the Spirit and the Frontier transactions, AerCap has placed more than 60 engines.

“We built the engine pool to support the manufacturers with spares during maintenance,” said Kelly. By releasing engines from the pool, aircraft were able to keep on flying.

Given the “straightened engine production . . . we had to get engines into the short-term pool to keep planes flying,” added Kelly.

Tank maker KNDS vows to guard against political meddling as it readies IPO

Avoiding power struggles between France and Germany is seen to be key to the success of the group

The head of Franco-German tank maker KNDS has pledged that the group will have a corporate governance structure that will protect it from political interference as it pushes ahead with a market listing. 

The company, which makes the best-selling Leopard 2 tank as well as munitions, is owned equally by the French government and several German families. The families are in the process of negotiating a sale to the German government alongside a planned IPO this summer, which, if finalised, is expected to leave both Berlin and Paris with a 40 per cent stake.

Avoiding power struggles between the two countries once they are co-owners will be key to the success of the group as Europe seeks to bolster defence co-operation in the face of Russian aggression.  

Jean-Paul Alary, chief executive, said getting the “right governance” for KNDS was a “key element” for the “value” of its future shareholders. 

“I will pay a lot of attention to make sure that [there will be] market-ready governance,” Alary told the FT, adding that it was critical that he had the “tools and the means” to develop the company according to its strategy. 

The threat of state interference has loomed over KNDS’s proposed listing amid strained relations between France and Germany due to a dispute on a joint fighter jet project. 

Under the plan, Berlin would take a 40 per cent stake in KNDS while Paris will reduce its existing 50 per cent stake to the same level, with a view to cutting these over time.

Alary declined to comment on what valuation KNDS was targeting but the FT has previously reported the group hoped to achieve a market capitalisation of €15bn to €20bn. The CEO said talks with potential investors were going well despite the backdrop of falling defence valuations in recent weeks. 

While his priority remained the IPO, Alary did not rule out deals, including a possible tie-up with ammunition maker Czechoslovak Group, which has made an offer to the German families to buy their stake. 

“We can have a discussion with CSG in the future, why not . . . But it’s not on the agenda of today,” said Alary. 

KNDS on Tuesday reported a 32 per cent jump in operating profit to €661mn, with sales rising 16 per cent to €4.4bn. KNDS said it had an order backlog of €33.1bn.

The company also said on Tuesday that a probe by law firm Freshfields launched last month into bribery allegations related to a 2013 deal with Qatar’s armed forces was “sufficiently complete” to finalise the audit of its 2025 financial statements.

The results underlined rapid growth in Germany as the country has dramatically stepped up defence spending in response to the war in Ukraine. It plans to spend €780bn between now and the end of 2030.

The ammunition unit grew the fastest to rise 24.7 per cent to reach €612mn year on year. 

Given the increase in German spending, a revenue and growth imbalance exists between the French and German units. Revenue at the German land systems segment grew 17 per cent to €2.5bn last year, almost double the €1.3bn at the French equivalent, which grew at almost 10 per cent.

Alary said there was a “much stronger acceleration” in Germany given its shift after years of under-investment. He added that more capital investment and jobs would flow to Germany to fulfil the order book. 

KNDS was created in a merger between France’s Nexter and Germany’s Krauss-Maffei Wegmann in 2015 when France and Germany were eager to share costs following years of under-investment following the end of the cold war. But the two sides continued to operate separately and have rarely developed products together.

Alary played down the suggestion that faster German growth and revenue would stoke tensions. Given that national armies are the only customers of defence groups, industrial co-operation can be difficult because of the expectation that work will be distributed fairly and disagreements over manufacturing, timing and specifications of weapons. 

KNDS was also growing capacity in France, Alary added, insisting that his job was to forge a single entity that would be pan-European.

“Growth is everywhere . . . we have one group, we have one strategy and we have to deliver this strategy.”

Referring to investors’ views in pre-IPO meetings, Alary said: “The story regarding the pan-European model of KNDS [is] very appealing so far.

“I also expect additional capacity and capability outside France and Germany,” he added, so as to serve other countries.

Officials cite need to maintain sovereign control over critical national infrastructure

The UK government would oppose any attempt from Sunil Bharti Mittal to increase his stake in telecoms group BT, people familiar with the matter have said, citing the need to maintain sovereign control over “critical national infrastructure”.

The stance will limit the Indian billionaire’s influence over BT, whose broadband infrastructure arm Openreach provides fibre broadband to more than 22mn homes in Britain.

Mittal’s Bharti Enterprises conglomerate bought a 24.5 per cent stake in the company in 2024 from French-Israeli billionaire Patrick Drahi, and has now moved to 24.95 per cent.

It would require government approval to move above the 25 per cent threshold. British officials made clear that they would look to block such a move.

“It’s not to do with Bharti or India specifically, it’s a matter of keeping critical national infrastructure in sovereign UK control for obvious reasons,” said one British government figure.

“It’s important the market knows this isn’t personal, but resilience and sovereign capability have a different threshold in today’s world than for generations.”

They added that in general the UK government seeks to make its position clear to valued overseas investors in anticipation of possible future investments in order to avoid embarrassment. 

Any attempt by Bharti to increase its stake above 25 per cent would trigger a formal review under the National Security and Investment Act, a quasi-judicial process.

Since acquiring his stake in 2024, Mittal has enjoyed a close relationship with BT chief executive Allison Kirkby, with whom he has held several strategy meetings. Last year he secured two board seats.

People familiar with the position of BT’s board in recent months have said that while Mittal had given directors the impression he had no immediate intention to increase his stake, they noted his ambitions for both the company and his own investment in the UK telecom operator.

A spokesperson for Mittal declined to comment. BT also declined to comment.

Mittal has been a longstanding investor in the UK, partnering with the government on a 2020 plan to take control of the failed space start-up OneWeb. His Airtel Africa group is also exploring listing its mobile money business in London after the Iran war disrupted its original plan to float in the Middle East.

The UK government declined to comment.

More Chinese companies could be coming to the U.S. after Trump and Xi agreed to establish ‘board of investment’

“Made in China” is becoming “made by China”—all over the world.

Faced with higher Western tariffs and weak demand at home, many Chinese factories are moving abroad, making everything from appliances to automobiles everywhere from North and South America to Eastern Europe.

More Chinese companies could be coming to the U.S., after President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping reached a deal in Beijing this month to establish a new bilateral “board of investment.”

Yet many leaders, especially in the U.S. and Europe, worry the Chinese businesses are bringing China’s brutal rat-race competition with them, potentially crushing local incumbents and curbing salaries.

Gotion, a Chinese battery maker, planned to build a $2.4 billion plant in Michigan, but the project is at a standstill after years of local opposition over the company’s Chinese roots. Another Chinese battery maker, CATL, has had to settle for licensing its technology to companies such as Ford, which is building a $3 billion plant in Michigan to make CATL-designed batteries.

In Brazil and Hungary, electric-vehicle seller BYD has been dogged by complaints that Chinese migrant workers hired to build its factories were subject to labor rights violations, including what Brazilian authorities called slavery-like conditions. Some European Union officials fear BYD’s new plant in Hungary could undermine carmakers across the continent, threatening an industry that accounts for 7% of EU economic output and 13 million jobs.

BYD says it stopped working with its contractor for the Brazil factory and that it has zero tolerance for violations of human rights and labor laws across its operations. It has also said its Hungary business will create thousands of jobs, boost the local economy and support local supply chains.

“Our target is to be a more global manufacturer,” said BYD Executive Vice President Stella Li at a conference this month. “To build up more capacity overseas is the trend, is the business plan.”

CATL also has projects under way in Hungary, Indonesia and Spain. Household-appliance maker Midea, which has built production facilities in Brazil and Thailand, recently announced a partnership with Stockholm-based Electrolux to jointly run manufacturing operations in South Carolina and Mexico.

While local leaders often welcome such investments, critics fear China’s manufacturers could gain access to lucrative consumer markets without generating as much local employment or economic value as the firms they threaten to replace.

Several dozen Democratic lawmakers recently urged Trump to bar Chinese automakers from building cars in the U.S. and called for a ban of Chinese cars made in Mexico or Canada, saying, “We must not cede the American auto industry to a strategic competitor intent on global dominance.”

Details of the new U.S.-China investment board remain scant. A senior U.S. official said in the run-up to the recent Trump-Xi summit in Beijing that it would allow the two governments to consider Chinese spending plans in the U.S. and wouldn’t interfere with existing entities that screen investments for national-security risks, such as the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S.

Some economists say it will be hard to keep Chinese manufacturers at bay. After decades in which China churned out much of what the world consumed from within its vast borders, its factories now face overcapacity, cutthroat competition and weak domestic consumption. That has driven down prices and eroded profits, making owners wary of investing at home and eager to expand abroad.

Last year, Chinese outward direct investment rose 7.1% compared with a year earlier. A measure of domestic investment fell 3.8%, the first annual decline on record, according to government data.

Over the long term, economists say China’s push to expand its factory floor worldwide could entrench its position as the dominant force in global manufacturing. Chinese businesses call it chuhai in Mandarin, meaning “going overseas.”

Some policymakers believe the investments could help reinvigorate local manufacturing industries. When Japanese carmakers expanded in the U.S. in the 1980s and 1990s, it forced U.S. carmakers and suppliers to adopt new approaches that ultimately made those companies more resilient and benefited car buyers.

In Mexico, Chinese investment in industries such as the automobile sector generated more than 100,000 jobs from 2020 to 2023, according to one analysis.

“What we need is more Chinese foreign direct investments in Europe, in some key sectors, to contribute to our growth, to transfer some technologies and not just to export towards Europe,” French President Emmanuel Macron said at the World Economic Forum this year.

In 2024, Chery Automobile, China’s top car exporter, helped to rescue a small factory in Barcelona that struggling Japanese automaker Nissan no longer wanted. It took a 40% stake in a joint venture that invested 400 million euros, equivalent to $468 million, to relaunch production under the historic Spanish brand Ebro.

For locals, the venture has been a success. It directly employs roughly 1,600 staff, many of them previously laid off. It has set records for the growth of a car brand in Spain, boosting shares of Ebro EV Motor, the startup that controls the JV.

But EU Executive Vice President Stéphane Séjourné has criticized the arrangement, arguing it doesn’t help European industry. Under the hood, the technology and parts are mainly from China, though Ebro wants to increase the share of local content over time.

Séjourné is the driving force behind a EU plan to require some products, including cars, to contain a certain share of European components to qualify for public procurement or support.

The initiative, launched in March as the Industrial Accelerator Act, also attaches strings to foreign direct investment from China that is worth more than €100 million, equivalent to $116 million, in areas such as EVs, batteries and solar panels.

If the act makes it through the EU legislative process into law, Chinese companies in these sensitive sectors will need to commit to hiring locals for at least half their European staff, and pledge to transfer technology and buy European parts.

Chery didn’t respond to requests for comment.

A number of Chinese carmakers are in discussions with European rivals about using their factories to build vehicles locally for the European market. Jeep maker Stellantis this month said it planned to build EVs with two separate Chinese companies in Spain and France. Ford and Geely are in discussions about a potentially similar deal in Spain, and have also discussed whether the collaboration might extend to the U.S.

Letting out spare factory space helps struggling European carmakers cover their high overheads. But analysts worry it also gives Chinese manufacturers an easier route into Europe, potentially bringing the intense levels of competition characteristic of China’s auto market to Europe.

Locals have also raised other concerns. In Hungary, residents and environmental groups protested the arrival of CATL and other battery makers, concerned about the projects’ environmental impacts.

In Brazil, authorities alleged last year that some Chinese workers hired to build BYD’s factory worked seven days a week and slept on beds without mattresses. One dormitory had one toilet for 31 people, they found.

Kelly Rao, founder of Jumpstart Asia Consulting, a Georgia-based staffing firm that has worked with Chinese firms investing in the U.S., said Chinese companies often struggle to adapt to local norms, especially around labor practices. Working overtime is commonplace in China, but is strictly regulated in the U.S.

“You cannot use the Chinese way,” Rao said.

Midea, the home appliance maker, grew into one of the world’s largest manufacturers of air conditioners and other appliances after its founding in southern China in 1968, mostly making products for other brands.

But it wasn’t until late 2023 that it really committed to selling products under its own brand and growing overseas, a strategy aimed at making Midea more resilient in the face of global trade tensions.

Shoppers browsing Midea Group Co. home appliances in a Casas Bahia megastore in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Appliance maker Midea’s overseas sales have soared, which has led to more tension for Western competitors. Maira Erlich/Bloomberg News

It opened a roughly $100 million factory in Brazil making refrigerators and washing machines in 2024. Its subsidiary, Welling Auto Parts, opened its first overseas manufacturing facility in Mexico last year.

“Domestically, incremental growth has stalled, stock growth is shrinking and a wave of new competitors is flooding in,” Midea Chief Executive Paul Fang said in a 2025 interview with Chinese publication LatePost. “That’s why we must look outward.”

Midea’s overseas sales have soared. For Western competitors, it has meant more tension, squeezing their profits and forcing some to consolidate or bail out of certain markets.

Electrolux, which makes Frigidaire brand refrigerators, has lost market share in the home appliance industry over time to Chinese firms. Its recently announced joint venture with Midea is designed to help shore up its North American business, by using Midea’s manufacturing know-how to try to gain share in the higher-margin laundry category and improve the cost-competitiveness of its refrigeration products.

In return, Midea gets a bigger foothold in the U.S.

High gas prices, rising interest rates and stubborn inflation are keeping buyers at home and cars on the lots

The U.S. auto industry faces sobering new math: Some one million prospective buyers have defected from the new-car market since the start of the decade—and they aren’t expected back soon.

Until recently, auto executives, analysts and economists believed that U.S. new-car sales were on a steady climb back to volumes last seen before the pandemic closed factories and scrambled global supply chains.

That’s no longer the case. General Motors GM 5.43%increase; green up pointing triangle, Ford Motor F 3.66%increase; green up pointing triangle, Toyota 7203 0.73%increase; green up pointing triangle and other automakers have said they are planning for sales of new cars to shrink or stagnate this year after consumers—stung by persistent inflation, rising fuel prices and high interest rates—are balking at prices that have risen to around $50,000 on average.

Americans were buying around 17 million cars and trucks a year before 2020; industry analysts don’t expect the market to return to that level until the end of the decade or later. They now forecast total annual sales of about 16 million vehicles or fewer this year, and that outlook has grown even dimmer as the conflict in Iran keeps gas prices high.

“This is a real threat to the whole industry,” said Erik Severinson, Volvo’s chief commercial officer, noting the same dynamics are roiling the European auto market. “It’s a proof point of something more fundamental which is wrong in the general economy—that people are not able to buy new cars.”

While around one-quarter of models in the U.S. go for between $25,000 and $35,000, an even bigger share tops $55,000, according to data from the car-shopping website Edmunds.

Executives at the world’s biggest automakers say they recognize that a new car is out of reach for more Americans. Some have promised to bring out more affordable models. But no one predicts significant relief soon.

Historically, stagnating sales led automakers to juice demand by rolling out deals and incentives that eroded their profit margins. That isn’t the case this time, particularly as America’s automaking giants, GM and Ford, are making solid profits selling fewer vehicles.

“I don’t want to say automakers are OK with this level of sales, but they kind of are,” said Ivan Drury, an Edmunds automotive analyst. “It’s not like back in the day when they’d be hacking away at the price to lift sales.”

That’s because selling big trucks and SUVs that dominate those automakers’ lineups is more lucrative than selling larger volumes of cheaper cars.

“I don’t think there’s a dealer in this country who would say ‘I don’t want a more-affordable product to offer,’” said Patrick Manzi, chief economist of the National Automobile Dealers Association. “For now, things are going well. But what happens if we hit another recession?”

Buyers are left with few options. They could turn to used cars, but those are similarly climbing in price. Many choose to keep their old cars running longer. The average car on U.S. roads is now about 13 years old, a historic high, according to S&P Global.

Profits from more-expensive vehicles are helping offset the higher costs of doing business in the auto industry in the 2020s. Nearly every automaker is paying billions of dollars more each year to foot the bill for President Trump’s tariffs. Ford incurred about $2 billion on tariffs last year. Car companies are also erasing billions from their balance sheets as they walk back costly electric-vehicle investments.

But automakers face a balancing act. They stress the need for more affordable options, yet right now, their business is fine without them.

GM, for instance, is spending billions to upgrade factories that make lucrative pickups, SUVs and V8 engines. At the same time, the automaker just pumped $600 million into a South Korean unit that builds its lowest-cost U.S. models that are in hot demand and short supply. GM has said that, even with tariffs, those models—four compact SUVs that sell for less than $30,000—make money.

Yet introducing new cheap models isn’t part of GM’s plan. A spokesman said the company is “very comfortable” with its portfolio as it stands today, noting that developing a new vehicle is costly and money the company should spend only if a model will add value over time.

At Ford, many dealers are irate after the automaker scrubbed its lineup of all sedans and cheaper SUVs over the past few years. Last to go was the compact Escape SUV.

Ford CEO Jim Farley has said the company may get back into sedans, which Detroit automakers ceded almost entirely to foreign rivals over the past decade. But the company has grappled with how to make those lower-cost models cheaply enough so they don’t lose money.

Farley has promised a string of more-affordable models, including an electric pickup truck starting around $30,000. For now, the company is touting the success of some of its priciest models, like the Expedition and Bronco SUVs.

Stellantis, the parent of Jeep, Chrysler and other brands, last week told investors that it also is working on lower-priced offerings for the U.S. Those include seven new cars under $40,000, including a pair under $30,000, in coming years, executives said. Asian automakers such as Toyota, Nissan and Hyundai still offer smaller, more budget-friendly cars, but they too have emphasized larger SUVs and trucks in recent years.

John Murphy, a longtime auto analyst and corporate adviser, for years had been certain that the auto market would return to its 17-million-a-year days. He doesn’t think that anymore.

Reaching that level would require a big surge in vehicles available for less than $40,000, which doesn’t appear in the cards.

“Automakers are more disciplined,” Murphy said. Covid-driven supply-chain shortages showed automakers that they could make a lot of money selling fewer vehicles at higher prices. Before then, companies would slash prices to outsell one another, afraid of losing market share.

“It’s great for investors, great for stock prices and good for cost of capital,” he said. “They’re actually running the business in a much more focused way.”

Jack Weidinger, a Long Island dealer selling Land Rovers, Cadillacs and GMC trucks, said he was unconcerned.

“It’s just a lot of noise,” he said, noting that he serves an affluent customer base. “I don’t think people are driving less or buying less.”

Sal Arevalo is less sanguine. A federal government employee living outside of Los Angeles, Arevalo recently set out to replace his fuel-thirsty Ford Explorer SUV. He hadn’t shopped for a new car in years and was stunned by the prices. “I’m looking at these numbers and could not even contemplate signing on the bottom line,” he said.

A lifelong car buff, he visited numerous dealerships and crunched numbers for all sorts of cars, sedans, EVs and hybrids. Nothing seemed manageable.

“The cold reality set in,” Arevalo said. “I may have to do what everybody else is doing and just hold on to my vehicle as long as I can.”

The Trump Administration Is in Talks to Fund U.S. Drone Companies

Neros and Donald Trump Jr.-linked Unusual Machines are among companies in deal talks

The Trump administration is pursuing funding deals with a group of drone companies as part of its effort to increase domestic production and lower the costs of the increasingly vital weapons, people familiar with the matter said.

The potential deals follow months of discussions between a diverse set of private-sector drone companies and the Pentagon, the people said. The discussions have included the Office of Strategic Capital, a lending office set up by the Biden administration to fund companies deemed important to national security supply chains.

The deal talks are still in a negotiation phase, the people cautioned, and Pentagon dealmakers are continuing to vet the companies before finalizing any terms. At least some deals, however, might comprise both debt and equity stakes through different funding mechanisms, giving the U.S. government a slice of ownership in the companies, some of the people said.

Among the companies the Pentagon has identified for possible funding are Performance Drone Works, which won a contract to supply the Army with reconnaissance drones; Unusual Machines, a drone components supplier that counts Donald Trump Jr. as a shareholder and advisory board member; and Neros Technologies, a Sequoia Capital-backed startup building small first-person view drones, some of the people familiar with the matter said.

Prior Pentagon investments have involved conditional loans that require the companies to meet certain benchmarks before receiving the money. The Office of Strategic Capital, which the Pentagon said has about $210 billion in lending authority, has also made a number of critical-minerals bets.

A Defense Department official said the department wouldn’t comment on “pre-decisional matters that remain subject to change. Any final decision from the Department will be shared in a formal announcement at a later date.”

The aim of the funding deals is to support drone makers’ production build-out to create supply, while also bringing down prices, the people familiar with the deals said. The funding won’t be for buying drones, the people said.

The effort dovetails with the aims of the Pentagon’s Drone Dominance program, a $1.1 billion initiative to amass an arsenal of around 300,000 low-cost attack drones by the end of 2027. Many defense officials said the U.S. needs to beef up manufacturing capacity significantly and push costs down to achieve those goals. Many U.S.-made drones sell for tens of thousands of dollars more than the roughly $5,000 apiece price cap the Pentagon is targeting in Drone Dominance. Neros placed second in a recent Drone Dominance competition.

According to an estimate from 2025, the U.S. has the capacity to build up to 100,000 drones a year. Ukraine, as one counterpoint, built about four million last year. The drone industry has persistently blamed the Defense Department for not buying enough drones to fund future production.

Neros, whose tiny drone made a cameo in Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s July video announcement about new policies to turbocharge domestic production, has raised more than $120 million from venture capitalists. PDW has raised close to $200 million from investors. Publicly traded Unusual Machines has invested in another drone project backed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump and in a deal with suppliers of China-made drones.

The Pentagon-led deals would be the strongest signal yet from the U.S. military that it is committed to supporting drone startups.

Before Trump’s second term, Pentagon sales accounted for less than 2% of all the commercial and government drone system sales each year in the U.S., according to the Defense Innovation Unit, a branch of the Defense Department that works with startups. That is likely to change substantially if the Pentagon gets the new budget it wants.

The department has requested more than $54 billion for its drone nerve center, called the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, or DAWG, up from around $225 million this year.

Draft strategy marks shift from regulating Big Tech to favouring European services

The EU is preparing a sweeping push to loosen its dependence on US technology by backing European alternatives in sectors from semiconductors and cloud computing to AI.

A draft European tech sovereignty strategy seen by the FT says the bloc must “reclaim its place in the global race for geoeconomic power” at a “defining moment to assert its technological sovereignty”.

The plan envisages incentives to accelerate the construction of European data centres and favour homegrown cloud and AI technologies.

The strategy signals a marked shift in the European Commission’s approach to Big Tech — from chiefly regulating Silicon Valley groups to promoting European alternatives — despite lobbying from US officials and tech companies. The paper is still subject to change before publication next week.

The Commission did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The move follows months of mounting concern in EU capitals about reliance on American tech that underpins most of the bloc’s economy. Officials and companies also fear US President Donald Trump could suspend or restrict access to critical US tech services amid rising transatlantic tensions.

At the centre of the EU strategy is a Cloud and AI Development Act, aimed at accelerating European data centre capacity by simplifying and harmonising procedures for data centres. The goal is to triple EU capacity in the next five to seven years.

The law also seeks to encourage the development of “sovereign” cloud and AI. European governments will have to carry out “sovereignty risk assessments” to improve resilience and identify European alternatives.

The law could boost existing European tech players such as SAP, Mistral and OVHcloud.

Currently, more than 70 per cent of the cloud market in the EU is dominated by three US participants: Amazon, Microsoft and Google. In a bid to stave off concerns, several US tech companies have offered European customers more control over where their data is localised. Microsoft has said it will contest any US government order to cease cloud services to European customers, including through the courts.

To avoid any “sovereignty-washing”, meaning foreign companies still being the main driver behind European tech services, the Commission will define four levels of cloud sovereignty. Those rankings will be linked to criteria including who controls the service, the supply chain, the processing of data for AI models, and the infrastructure’s location and cyber security.

Brussels is also planning a second iteration of its law on chips to strengthen domestic semiconductor manufacturing and reduce dependence on foreign providers, especially after a chips shortage following the takeover of chipmaker Nexperia by China’s Wingtech.

That law seeks to boost domestic demand for chips designed and manufactured in the EU by linking suppliers with users, for example via offtake agreements.

The Commission insisted the plan was not about “isolation, protectionism or tech decoupling” but rather about creating “strategic counterweights that enhance Europe’s capacity to remain open to the world without compromising its interests and values”.