Stellantis N.V. (STLAM) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, depending on where you are connected to attend to this first press conference of Stellantis. We are very happy, and a warm welcome to each of you. I'm Bertrand Blaise, in charge of communication for Stellantis. Before handing over to Carlos Tavares, who will deliver a speech and followed by a Q&A session, I propose that we just have a watch to the Stellantis film. [Presentation]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and good afternoon, and good evening to all of you. Welcome to this Stellantis day 1 session. I sincerely hope that you and your family are well, and I would like to wish you all a very Happy New Year. Well, today is day 1 for the Stellantis group. And I would like to, of course, to welcome you, to tell you that this has been intense journey since we signed a binding agreement back in December 2019. Since then, our cross-company teams have been working intensively. They have delivered more than 12,500 pages of documents for the different filings that we had to implement. The job has been done. It has been done rigorously, properly with a very good timing, no delay from the COVID-19 crisis. Job is done. Stellantis exists. Stellantis exists since Saturday, January 16. And today, we are here to answer your questions about this day 1 of the Stellantis group. So I would like not only to send a warm thanks to our teams, to the FCA and the PSA teams that made this closing possible, but also I would like to thank you all, the media, the investors for the support that you have given us through this transient period, which is, as you know, not always an easy one. But thanks to our teams, thanks to your support, thanks to all the stakeholders, we could overcome all the challenges and be here today to celebrate day 1 from Stellantis. This is going to be the beginning of a new journey. It's an exciting journey. This merger is not a defensive move. Of course, there is a defensive dimension based on the challenges that we see ahead of us. And certainly, this merged company will help us to overcome those challenges. But there will be also an offensive move to make sure that we start this new company with a new mindset, with open eyes, looking at what is simulating us in the marketplaces, looking at the society trends, making sure that this unique company is going to have a different sense of competition, will be able to develop more efficiency and effectiveness, will be able to grasp opportunities and will become, at the end of the day, a mobility leader. This is the reason we are here today. From here, I would like to share with you a few thoughts. You will find those thoughts quite simple. But I think they are meaningful to describe what we want to do. We believe that Stellantis needs to be great rather than big. We want to gain scale, of course, to make sure that we use this scale to develop innovation, use this scale as a lever to be more disruptive and that we use this scale to do things that some other companies could not do. It's important that we understand that the purpose is not to be big. The purpose is to be great at what we do, to create a great place to work, to attract the best talents, to provide great products and great services, to make a great contribution to our communities and to find great ways to innovate and great ways to be creative and innovative using the power of scale. So we want to be great rather than big. But of course, if things are properly done, if the job is well done, eventually, we'll become an even bigger company. So from here, as you know, the major numbers, you know that the combined entity, PSA and FCA into Stellantis, have a strong footprint selling cars in more than 130 countries, having industrial operations in more than 30 countries, having leading market positions in at least 3 regions and have a very strong R&D global footprint. You see on the right-hand side of this slide, that's the 2 families have been demonstrating their skills, their ability to transform their companies, to turn around their companies. The numbers are self-explanatory. And you see that this is the reason why I feel so confident today. We have strong teams. They are able to execute difficult plans. They have demonstrated that in the last few years. And the combined entity, as a consequence, based on the 2019 numbers, would have an adjusted operating profit of around EUR 12 billion and adjusted operating profit margin of around 7% and an automotive operational free cash flow above EUR 5 billion. So it's very, very strong. And our purpose is to use this power, this scale to do great things and to be offensive in the way we will bring innovative solutions to the new mobility era in which we are going to be hopefully one of the major players. There is a very strong foundation for this Stellantis group. As it was said, we have been also supported by the rating upgrades from the different rating agencies. Our shareholders have approved this merger by more than 99%, more than 99% support from our shareholders. As you know, the value creation of EUR 5 billion has been increased through the bottom-up proposals of our teams, not because we have asked them to improve the number, but just because they came up with many additional and great ideas, which, of course, is a very good start with a strong bottom-up dynamic for this merger. We have a great geographical footprint, strong in the Americas, 44% of the turnover, even slightly stronger in Europe with 46% in Europe, Middle East and Africa. And we see that from here, we have 2 very efficient companies. And you can measure the efficiency and the effectiveness of the company through the automotive operating profit margin that you see on this slide. So if we continue our journey, we know that those EUR 5 billion of synergies will come from 2 major buckets. One is the product-related synergies. It's all about being smart in the way we are going to use our engineering common assets, being smart in the way we are going to give procurement, a good position to enhance the cost competitiveness of everything we buy. And we know that 80% of our variable costs are bought-out parts. So with the product-related synergies and with the purchasing-related synergies, we have around 80% of the total amount of synergies and 20% to 25% will be the remaining ones. So at the end of the day, I feel very excited and very confident on the fact that, yes, indeed, we will deliver those EUR 5 billion of synergies and 80% of that will be achieved within 4 years. This means that we will have a net positive cash flow for those synergies from year 1. We have planned for a total one-time cost at EUR 4 billion. But we'll try, of course, to optimize that moving forward. And that means that this will lead to a value creation of EUR 25 billion, which is the foundation of this merger. From here, we have set our business governance way. This has been presented today to our Senior Vice Presidents and the top leadership team. So this business governance way has been presented based on a 3-dimensional matrix organization: the regions, the functions and the brands. We have, I believe, from both families a quite refined way to drive the business, I think, very focused, very rigorous. It's based on 9 major committees that you can see on this slide. With those 9 major committees, we can make all the relevant decisions of a company like ours in a professional way, in a focused way, in a fast way, that leads to a rigorous and fully aligned execution in the company. We presented this to our top leadership team. I think everybody feels that this is the right way for a company like ours. And we will make sure that we are going to use this enlarged family for a significant and intensive internal benchmarking. We will value and leverage the diversity of our people. We don't need to have one unique culture. We are going to leverage the diversity of our people. They are great. They are coming from very different horizons. And each of them needs to stay as he or she is right now because we love them as they are. And it is going to be our job, my job to leverage this fantastic diversity of the company to create exciting proposals to the customers in which we operate. We think that this diversity is a huge strength. By the way, we can compare our diversity with the diversity or the lack of diversity of some of our competitors. And I believe that having a highly diverse company is a strength in today's world because the world is diverse. The world is from time to time difficult to understand. And with a highly diverse people -- group of people inside of the company, we will be understanding those places in a more precise way. So you have those 9 committees. I will not comment more. And of course, if you wish, please feel free to ask any questions about those management committees. We will continue to look for operational excellence. But we will also make sure that inside of those committees, we have open discussion on strategic matters to completely open the door to many disruptive innovations that, of course, I will have the pleasure to present to you within the Stellantis long-term strategic plan to come. Like also today that this is going to be a significant group of people, more than 400,000 people, more than 150 citizenships. We will value a strong focus on performance, efficiency and effectiveness. It's all about doing the right things right, always focus on performance, always making sure that with a competitive mindset, we demonstrate that we are a better team than the teams of our peers. And this is exactly where we want to be. Because we understand that this merger needs to be as offensive as it is defensive based on the challenges that we already know. But we also know that it's not only about overcoming the challenges, which are visible. It's not only about being excellent in zero-emission mobility, being excellent in autonomous vehicles and excellent in connected vehicles. It is also about being very innovative, and if not provocative, on the innovation of our business models, doing different things, understanding that we need move more on the tech company side, understanding that to move in that direction, some strong business model innovations are needed, some strong technologically driven innovations are needed and the way we are going to use our diversity and our fantastic engineering footprint also to move in that way. And again, I believe that the diversity of our people is going to be a strong lever for our performance. So diversity, competitive spirit, we know that the 2 families are coming from situations and they have achieved impressive results. Many turnarounds: Fiat in 2004; Chrysler, 2009; PSA, 2013. Successful business integrations, Fiat Chrysler to create FCA, Opel Vauxhall. We know that both families have made records over the years. And we have some significant brand growth wins: Jeep, growing from 340,000 cars in 2009 to 1.5 million cars in 2019; Peugeot and Citroën that improved their pricing power enormously; Citroën, which was the strongest growth among the top 12 brands in Europe in 2019. So strong brands, strong leadership of those brands and some very nice wins that give confidence in our ability to drive this business forward. We also, with those iconic brands, a high diversity of models, going from LCVs, vans to pickups, passenger vehicles, SUVs, crossovers, you name it. And you can see on this slide that we are present on the most significant markets, most significant profit pool areas of the market. And you can see that with this brand portfolio and the model market coverage that we can deliver, we can be in the right place on the right timing to harvest what we need to ensure the sustainability of the company. We are in key markets. We still have an opportunity to do something good in China. We are making money in the Americas. We are making money in Europe. We have the technologies. We have the products. We have the people. We have the execution capability. So I think the starting point of the Stellantis group is a point of confidence, a point of a strong foundation to do great things in the future. If we look at the long-term goals that we are going to be working on, we have, of course, to recognize that we need to exceed our customer expectations. Many things can be done to enhance our performance. We want to contribute to the well-being of the communities in which we operate. We understand that in order for us to be able to operate in the future, our company will have to carbon-neutral as a condition to operate in the markets and the communities where we want to make business. This is going to be at the core of our long-term strategic plan. Those are some of the long-term goals that we want to achieve and understanding what are the business models for freedom of mobility in the future. If we look at the opportunities and the challenges ahead, we understand that electric vehicle sales are going to represent more than 1/3 of the total sales, possibly more in Europe. We understand that shared mobility will be increasing, and we are happy that we have now understood how to make money on the car-sharing activities and mobility service activities. We know that 5G-enabled vehicles are expected to reach 16 million in the U.S., Europe and China by 2030 and that there will be newcomers and disruptors that represent a strong stimulation for our teams. And this is, of course, what is going to drive the offensive part of the long-term plan of Stellantis. We also understand that the cost of those new technologies, electrification but not only, will be significant. This cost is going to increase significantly. And we see the merit of the scale here to dilute those costs, being variable cost in terms of volume scale effect for the competitiveness of the procurements or R&D and CapEx, which will be diluted on a wider basis in terms of sales. All of this is going to give us the ability to face the challenges that we have ahead. And all of this is, of course, demonstrating to which extent this new company, coming out of the merger of PSA and FCA, is the right move on the right timing. So we believe that we are properly grounded to face this. We know that customer behaviors are moving in terms of new mobility. We have 2 mobility-dedicated brands: Leasys and Free2Move. We know that autonomous driving is going to be one of the expectations. We have a significant partnership with a high-tech company called Waymo. We know that we have already in our hands technology that not only we master for the emission reductions, but also the ability to integrate vertically as all the major components of the electric powertrains are now manufactured and engineered in-house, which, of course, puts us in control of our destiny for those components, being electric motors, automatic electrified transmissions, battery packs, battery cells. All of this is going to be developed and manufactured either in-house or with JVs in which we have an important role. We also understand that the scale is going to help us significantly to dilute the R&D and CapEx costs to have a better procurement position at the end of the day to deliver on what we believe is the challenge for the next 5 years, which about delivering safe, clean and affordable mobility. So moving on. Today, we already have a significant offer in electrified vehicles. Already 29 models are currently on sale, 29. By the end of 2021, we will have 39 electrified models on sale. So you can see that we are in the right dynamics. We are perfectly on the right timing for the market expectations. And you can see on this slide the pictures of all of those electrified models. And you can be assured that for each new model that we will launch from now up to 2025, there will be an electrified version of that model so that we just support the market trend. And of course, the real challenge is not anymore about having electrified models. The real challenge is to make those models affordable so that we can keep the customer base that we have today and even grow it because we would be safe, clean and affordable. So from there, we believe that we need to be working in terms of quality. Quality is not only to make customers happy. It's also to make sure that we have the right level of focus, the right level of demand and the right level of rigor inside of the company. It's very important. This is the reason why we will continue to keep a strong focus on quality, product quality, service quality, quality at every touch point of the customer when interacts with our company. It's a key element. It's all about doing the right things right. It's all about making sure that the level of rigor that we have is going to somewhere push the company in the direction that will make it very safe for us to operate with no disruptions and no bad surprises. So from there, we know that we need to react quickly. We need to understand that the COVID-19 crisis has clearly shown us that we need to be more disruptive. And this is exactly what we have in mind. We have a strong foundation, a lot of great things. But we have to add to that certainly more disruption. So what are the takeaways before we go to your questions? Firstly, I would like you to understand that Stellantis is more than the sum of its parts as we are going to create EUR 25 billion of value through this merger. It is clear that this merger will ensure Stellantis sustainability and the capability to develop appealing, distinctive, versatile and affordable solutions. The scale will help us to be more efficient in the things we already do and will give us more capability to innovate in a certain number of areas. We need to realize that we have highly experienced teams with a benchmark execution capability and that we are going to use that to our competitive advantage. We are blessed with a 14-brand iconic portfolio, 14 fantastic brands. And those brands will absorb our passion for freedom of mobility as we understand that freedom of mobility is becoming an even stronger expectation. After everybody has experienced the lockdown situations, everybody understands to which extent freedom of mobility is important and to which extent freedom of mobility can be delivered by a mobility device, which is called an automobile. So it's important that we answer that expectation in the most efficient way. We will be working, as I said, to carbon neutrality, to ensure carbon neutrality for our company, as I understand that at one point in time, it's going to be a must to be able to operate. And wrapping up all of this, we believe that great is better than big. So those are my introductory points. I would like now to hand over to you for your Q&A.

[Operator Instructions] And the first question comes from the line of Nora Naughton from The Wall Street Journal.

I have two questions. First, I'm curious if you've settled on where the global headquarters will be for Stellantis? And also, I am curious what some of your plans are for this stable of brands as a new company, if you have plans to move things around, remove anything from any markets and what your plans for Peugeot might be in the U.S.

Well, thank you. Thank you for the two important questions you raised. As you know, from a legal perspective, our company is a Dutch company, so the headquarters will be in Amsterdam. That's where the headquarters is. So that's the answer to your first question. Regarding the brands, we believe that with these 14 iconic brands, we have a strong foundation to be rebounding in a certain number of things, and specifically on the brands where for prioritization reasons in the past, we could not invest as much as we wished. And we see that with Stellantis, we are bringing the capability to be making sister cars with smaller entry tickets, which makes the business plans fly in an easier manner. And that is going to create some significant business opportunities for certain brands that will be able to enjoy exciting new products with a profitable business plan, enjoy some common engineering assets that can be purchased at a high-volume rate, which means at an appropriate cost-competitive level. So you will see some of those brands rebound based on the clarification of the vision destination of those brands, based on the understanding of what the brand stands for, where is exactly the brand in terms of positioning, are we talking to the right customers, are we clear in the direction we want to take as a vision destination. And to support that, to support that clarification, that will most probably be done by the brand CEOs. It is their mission to do so. We will bring the efficiency and the effectiveness of a larger company that is able to make highly effective sister cars to make sure that the customers can enjoy completely differentiated products but benefiting from the fact that some of those components that they do not see are high-volume components. And therefore, they will be very cost-competitive and cost-effective. So at the end of the day, the brands will be given a strong opportunity to rebound or even to invest more based on the efficiency that is coming out of the implementation of the synergies, which is exactly the value-creation factor. And we are quite excited about that because we see in our synergies plan that many things that were not possible on a stand-alone position are now becoming either possible or more profitable within the scale effect of Stellantis. We also see that there is already a very strong position for our brands in the U.S. market, above 12% market share in the U.S. And that at this stage, it is possibly more important to focus on the profitable growth of those brands rather than bringing a new brand on top of what already exists, but we'll see in the future. Nothing is final on this matter. We'll see if there are opportunities or not. For the time being, we consider that it's better to focus on what is already quite efficient and try to continue to grow profitably on those markets as it has been the case, thanks to a fantastic work done by the FCA teams in North America. So that's where we are, which means at this stage, we have no specific final decision for the Peugeot brand in the U.S. And Peugeot has a very strong base camp in Europe, strong base camp in Africa, Middle East, a reasonable presence in Latin America. And we are going to continue to develop that presence in the base camp of Peugeot. That's my answer to your two questions.

The next question comes from the line of Guillaume, Gilles from Reuters.

Mr. Tavares, can you hear me?

Very well. Thank you.

I've got two questions. The first question is how are you going to reach the EUR 5 billion synergies? I imagine you will cut the jobs which duplicate between the 2 companies? Can you tell me how many jobs could go? And another question on China, are you planning in your reboot in China to bring a new partner aboard? And are you going to focus on the Jeep brand to try to rebuild your presence in that market?

Thank you. Thank you for your two questions. I will start with the first one about jobs. I think that the reality that we need to recognize is that what would have been dramatic for jobs would have been a situation where for any bad reason, we would not have been able to merge. The merge of FCA and PSA is a fantastic shield against social problems in the 2 companies. Why? Because in fact, if you don't have a significant scale, you cannot offer safe, clean and affordable mobility. As you know well, to ensure that the mobility is clean, which is a must, the costs are increasing significantly. So when the costs are increasing significantly, either you increase your pricing to compensate and you lose part of your customer base or you reduce our margins and you need to restructure the company. In both cases, you have social issues coming up. The reason why Stellantis is a shield against this kind of situation is because Stellantis is bringing the scale to dilute the R&D and the CapEx over a wider volume base and to give ourselves, in terms of procurement through the volume scale effect, a better cost competitiveness at the end of the day, which then helps to ensure the affordability, which then helps to keep the customer base, which then prevents bad things from happening from a social perspective. So what I would like to share with you is, first, that the dramatic situation that you were mentioning would have happened had this merger not been a success, which means that we should be and I'm very happy that we could conclude a merger as a shield vis-à-vis that black scenario that you were describing. I would like also to tell you that synergies are not only about cost-cutting. Synergies are also about creating additional revenue. And I was mentioning to you that through a highly efficient process, family development process, we can create business plans for sister cars, which are very profitable, which give more products to certain brand portfolios, which then give us a better coverage of the market and therefore more activity and therefore less pressure on jobs. And finally, I would like to tell you that the #1 driver that represents a challenge for jobs is very simple to understand. And it comes from the pressure, of course, on the pricing. Everybody in the world wants to enjoy a high level of competition between the different carmakers for the best benefit of the consumers, so strong pressure on the pricing, on the revenue per unit. On the other side, everywhere in the world, a significant cost inflation based on new regulations, so regulations that are generating a significant cost inflation with a strong pressure on the pricing, which means then, over time, margins get thinner and thinner. And if you cannot compensate by great ideas on productivity, then at one point in time, the companies need to address the job issue. So the mechanism by which you have this pressure on jobs is the mechanism I just explained, which is about open markets with strong pressure on pricing, combined with strong cost inflation as a consequence of stringent regulations that we, of course, we understand and we comply with. But they generate a significant amount of cost. And that's where the pain point is. That's what we should understand. In all of these situations, the good news is that Stellantis is live and Stellantis is a fantastic way to address those challenges. That's for your first question. Second question on China, which is a very fair point. We don't exclude anything at this stage. We believe that the results we have been experiencing in China are disappointing, to say the least. So we are currently sharing the diagnosis, sharing the root causes for those difficulties. I have set up a specific strategic task team that is based on 5 top executives of Stellantis. Their mission is understand what went wrong, come back with a new strategy for China, propose a new -- a winning strategy for China that will be discussed at the Strategic Committee and that will most probably validated by the Board. At this stage, we do not exclude any scenario. We'll see based on what this strategic task team is going to propose to us and then we'll see in which direction we are going to move. But at this stage, we do not exclude any scenario. We just want to do a better job. And so far, we couldn't do it. So we have to understand what needs to be changed. But certainly, doing more of the same thing will not get us there. So we start from that reference point, saying, "Well, if we couldn't do it, then let's change something and see what would be the different way of doing things that would work in China." That's our mindset. That's my answer to your question.

The next question comes from the line of Pedro Kutney from Automotive.

I'd like to make also two questions. First one is due to the huge overcapacity of manufacturing plants in Brazil and Argentina, does Stellantis intends to make a consolidation with the closing of these factories in the region? And the other question is how long do you think Brazil and Argentina can survive with automotive industry, apart from the electrification wave in the automotive world?

That's two great questions. First, on the capacity issue, as we have seen, there is a very important carmaker that has announced that they would shut down a certain number of plants in Brazil. I would say that it is more a question for the governments than a question for the carmakers. There is a point in time where when you pile up all of the constraints, when you pile up all the headwinds, when you pile up all the regulations, the custom duties, you end up by having a situation that is not manageable anymore. So far, our teams, and specifically the FCA teams, have been doing a stellar job in Latin America. As you know, the combined presence of FCA and PSA in Latin America is around 17% market share. And it's a profitable market share. So, so far, the teams have been able to be more competitive than their peers and, by the way, to keep on creating value for the stakeholders, maintaining a presence that, as you said, creates jobs, a presence that offers good mobility for the citizens. But at one point in time, any of us need to realize that there is a limit to the headwinds that we can face coming from external stakeholders. And that's something that may lead to very sharp decisions that like the one we saw last week. And this is something that, at this stage, is not for us a problem. So far, we are not in that situation. We will continue to enhance our operations. We'll continue to make sure that Latin America has a significant autonomy to engineer and manufacture the products that are warm to the hearts of our Latin American customers. But what happened last week is also a warning light to say, "Well, there is a limit. There is a limit." So either the countries and the regions want an automotive industry or they don't. It's also a question of freedom of mobility, to which extent do we want to protect in a given region or a given country the freedom of mobility by offering safe, clean and affordable mobility. This is our job. This is our responsibility, our ethical responsibility. We work very hard to do that and continuously push the limits as much as we can. But there is a moment where the headwinds may be too strong. So far, it's not the case for us. So far, we are moving. And our teams have been demonstrating a very high level of resilience, a very high level of skills, a very high level of expertise, and I would like to congratulate them. But you never know what will happen in the future. You have to be mindful of the fact that any company has its own limits. And I think that people should be aware of that in a -- this is a friendly comment. But people need to understand that we cannot keep on adding constraints on the automotive industry. There is a moment in time where it is not manageable anymore, which is not the case of Stellantis so far. Electrification is again is a question for the governments. We have the technology. We have the manufacturing capabilities. But can we ensure at the end of the day that, that mobility is affordable enough for the purchase power of those citizens? That's the question. So electrification, as you know, is a significant cost increase. So either the companies put themselves in trouble either because they reduce their margins to keep the affordability or they increase their pricing to protect their margins and then part of their customer base disconnects or we find another way. But you see electrification is not leading today to something which is highly affordable for the middle classes of the societies in the communities. So the question is for the local governments, how do you want to play this? From which angle do you want to improve the emissions? Is it we continue to work on internal combustion engines and we try to improve them and we have a lot of technologies that can be used? It's one way. Or you copy/paste what is happening in other regions. But then you need ensure that the level of affordability is going to bring the freedom of mobility that is requested by your citizens. So that is a political decision. It's not to the carmakers to decide. We bring the technology. We bring the manufacturing capability. We bring the sales and marketing networks. But at the end of the day, can the customers afford that kind of mobility? And that's the question for, of course, the governments of the communities and the countries where we operate. It's not a question for us. We are there to support. We are there to bring solutions. At this stage, the state-of-the-art is that electrification is not a cheap technology. It's complex. It's costly. The cost will go down as the volume scale effects will appear. But so far, I don't think it is a technology that you can deploy all over the world. Many of those communities don't have the purchasing firepower to afford the cost increase and the price increase goes along with it. That's my answer to your question.

The next question comes from the line of Fabio Savelli from Corriere della Sera.

What do you think of Toyoda's views that electricity is not convenient, not carbon-neutral? It would be the first question. The second question is that in Italy, we are worried about the [ supply chain ] because the impact on the Faurecia, imagine, would depend on the next year's -- the synergy in the next year.

Thank you. Thank you for the two important questions. The first one, on EVs, it is not new for us as we have been commenting this matter now for at least 3 to 4 years. We have been saying that you cannot look at emissions just from a tank-to-wheel perspective. You need to look at emissions from a life-cycle analysis, a 360-degree approach, where you take care of the carbon footprint of everything that contributes to the mobility. What contributes to the mobility is not only the emissions from tank-to-wheel of the mobility device called the automobile. You have also to take into consideration the carbon footprint to extract the raw materials. To transport the raw materials, to manufacture the batteries, to recycle the batteries, the carbon footprint offsetting up a full, highly dense charging network, you have to take into consideration the investments that are needed to create a high-density charging network to support the volume growth of EV vehicles. You have to take care of the tax revenue that is going to disappear from the petrol side and where are you going to find that money for the balance of the budgets of the states. All of this needs a 360-degree approach. But it is clear that if you look at the carbon footprint of manufacturing a battery, you start the life of an EV with a penalty that comes from this carbon footprint to manufacture a battery. And then you need to drive a certain number of miles before you cross the line and you become a better actor vis-à-vis a conventional car. All of this is public. All of this is public research that any of us can find on the Internet. So it's done by very serious scientific third parties. And I'm sure that the NGOs will soon shift from tank-to-wheel emission approach to full life-cycle approach. This is something that we know. This is something that we have been explaining for a while. We have said many times that the scientific responsibility for selecting lead technology is now in the hands of the states, not in the hands of the OEMs. Because the objectives are set in a way that they can only be met if you use a certain technology. So the direction is very clear. If I said the objective here for the next 3 years, I know exactly that you can only reach this objective if you use this kind of technology. So at the end of the day, the decision -- the scientific decision on technology is made by the government. And we are here to support. We are here to support the governments and the communities in which we operate, which doesn't mean that we should not be explaining the things which we have done in an ethical and transparent manner. But this is the reality that we are faced. We meet the regulations that are decided by the governments. We are fully compliant. As you know, in Europe, the PSA part of Stellantis is the leading carmaker in terms of CO2 emissions, which means we have done the job. Stellantis right now has more than 29 electrified models on sale. As I said, by the end of the year, 39 models will be on sale. So we are doing the job. But if you look at the life-cycle analysis, you may have some surprises. But this is not our research. Because as a carmaker, we are considered as being completely biased. So it's not our research. This is third-party, independent, scientific entities who have been doing those studies. And you can read them and you can reach the same conclusion. So I think we are going to move in a direction where life-cycle analysis will be much more rigorous than just tank-to-wheel evaluation of emissions. That is going to change a certain number of things. It will put more focus on the carbon footprint of manufacturing the battery. It will put much more focus on the carbon footprint of creating the energy and the electricity that you use to charge the batteries. So the spot is going to move on the energy side. The spot is going to move on the manufacturing of the battery side. That's what is going to happen. At the end of the day, is this the best, less costly way to move to zero-emission mobility? This is a question that you have to ask the governments rather than to us. We are here to provide the solutions. And we are bringing significant number of solutions with an enormous amount of investment as you know well. Now the question for Italy. I think the good news for Italy is that Stellantis is acting as a shield because Stellantis is bringing more efficiencies and effectiveness through the synergies that will make the business plans fly for a certain number of models that so far could not be decided because the profitability was not enough. So through the efficiencies and the synergies of Stellantis, through the volume scale effect, through the ability of Stellantis to make sister cars with a smaller entry ticket, there is a higher capability to make a certain number of business plans fly for models, many of them are Italian brands, for models that up to now could not be decided because it was not profitable. So we could not decide unprofitable models. Now with Stellantis and the synergies of Stellantis, some of those models are going to become profitable. And we are going to be able to decide them, which means that this merger is acting as a shield to protect the activity on the plants rather than representing a risk for the people who may be anxious about the creation of this new entity. So it's exactly the reverse. It's a shield that brings you volume scale effect. It's a shield that brings us a higher efficiency in terms of entry ticket to make business plans fly on models that up to now could not be decided because they were unprofitable and now they are profitable, which means more models, more activity, more protection for our plants and for our people, including Italy. So my sincere opinion about the question that you raised and rightly so is exactly to say Stellantis is an answer. It is a solution rather than a problem. And I think that we have demonstrated this many times over the last few years. And I feel quite confident about that. Now is it going to be easy? No, it's not easy. Nothing is easy in automotive. This, you have to work hard to be at the right level of manufacturing costs, to be at the right level of quality, to be at the right level of modernity, to meet the customer expectations. Everybody has to perform. The designers, the engineers, the manufacturing officers, every employee of the company, including the blue collars will have to perform so that we align all the stars. At the end of the day, we make the customer happy with profitable cars and with a high-quality service. And if we do that, everything will go fine. That's my answer to your question.

The next question comes from the line of Thomas Hanke from Handelsblatt.

I would like to ask a question on Fiat. A lot of people seem to agree that there are three types of problems at Fiat: that some models are too old, the factories are not profitable enough and the emissions are too high. So my question is do you think you could apply the, let's say, Opel treatment to Fiat, mainly offer some type of voluntary departure schemes, rebase the models on PSA platforms and discontinue some models?

Thank you. Thank you for your question. I think that we have clear answers to what you have just asked. First, it is clear that if we were to consider that we need to bring more younger Fiat models, I think we have the right tools to achieve that in terms of efficiency of the entry tickets. Volumes can affect for the cost competitiveness of the variable costs. And therefore, I'm quite confident that we are going to find a profitable way to make Fiat products at the end of the day as much as we were able to make a profitable new Corsa that, as you know, is facing a big success in Germany, if my information is correct, selling more than the best product of one of our German competitors, which means that we were able to do with the Opel Corsa what we could do eventually with other Fiat models. And I believe we can make those business plans fly. Of course, we need to do the job. And so far, we didn't because today, it's day 1. But this is the direction in which we are going to work. Secondly, this direction means that we need support that with some reasonable level of efficiency and effectiveness of the Italian plants. And I think that they can achieve that, first, because I believe they want to; secondly, because we are going to bring an internal benchmarking that will give them a certain number of directions that can help them to improve the quality and the costs at the same time. I think it's possible. I think it has nothing to do with a number of people. It has to do with the way with the manufacturing way, the way we manufacture the cars. And I think that's something that, of course, we can offer. With a wider company like Stellantis, we can offer all the internal benchmarks. And the how to achieve those numbers, that, of course, we can always copy/paste and people can be inspired by those experiences that have been so far quite successful. Last but not least, the emissions. It's a different situation from Opel. I understand that we have no compliance CO2-related issues in Stellantis for the next few years. And therefore, I don't believe we'll have do what we had to do with Opel, which was to discontinue a certain number of products because they were not good enough in terms of CO2, which, of course, created some kind of disruption. But it was a result of insufficient planning of the CO2 performance of the brand portfolio in the past, which is now fixed. We are implementing a very strong product planning for Opel with the new electrified technologies. After the success of Opel Corsa, we have the Opel Mokka coming. And all the first feedbacks we got from experts like you is extremely positive. So we don't have the emission issue at Fiat. We can bring the synergies to make the business plans fly, to invest in new models. And we have an open book inside of Stellantis with many, many best practices that can be copied to enhance the efficiency and the effectiveness in the plant in a sporty way, in a positive way. And I think that our Italian friends will be eager to demonstrate that they can also achieve that kind of performance. This is my answer to your question. Thank you.

Sorry, but in 2 years, the certificates from Tesla will have run out. So at the end of '22, you will have an emission issue, won't you?

No, I don't think so. I don't think so. And you will understand that very quickly through the products that you will see coming up. That will not happen. I can assure you that we will be compliant on CO2 for the next 3 to 5 years.

The next question comes from the line of Tom Krisher from AP Detroit.

I'm wondering, what I'm hearing is, just to clarify from the previous answers, you would have no plans to get rid of any brands, at least not immediately, and there would be no job cuts, at least to start, if I'm correct there. And then the slide said that you showed said that 40% of the EUR 5 billion in, I think, that's annual savings would be manufacturing, engineering and platform consolidation. How do you save 40% of that money without reducing salary expenses? You've got 3 or 4 engineering centers and all that unused factory capacity in Italy.

You see your question is absolutely important. And I would like to be very respectful. And I would like to tell you that our commitment on this merger is that we will not shut down plants as a consequence of the merger. I want to tell you that when we took over from GM, the Opel Vauxhall operations that we're making ready for 20 years, we could turn around the company in 18 months to make it a highly profitable operation right now. It's not perfect by far. We still have a lot of work to do, but it has moved swiftly in the right direction. And you are right to say that we want to keep the brands. Why? Because we believe that they represent a strong asset of the company. And there is no reason why we would not leverage the strong assets of the company. Do we have a lot of work to clarify the brand positionings, to make sure that the business destination is clear, to make sure that we know to whom we should be talking to in terms of marketing communications, make sure that business plans fly with a good stress test, meaning they are not too much dependent on the volumes? All of these are things that we regularly do for all of the brands. And I believe that we have the capability to do that. Now I was explaining to one of our teammates a little bit before, the mechanism, the mechanism by which you put pressure on jobs. And you not -- you don't put passion on jobs because of the synergies because the synergies help you to ensure sustainability of the company. So the synergies are acting as a shield. But you put pressure on jobs by keeping a very open market that puts a high level of pressure on the pricing for the best benefit of the consumers and at the same time, creating a piling-up of new stringent regulations that represent a significant cost increase, which then creates an inflation that is hitting your margins. And if you cannot compensate the squeeze on margins by additional ideas on productivity, then you get caught in exactly what you said and then jobs are at risk. So in fact, what I'm telling you is that it's exactly, with all the respect and friendship, it's exactly the other way around, exactly. If you want to protect jobs, you need scale for your procurement to be cost-competitive. You need scale to dilute the R&D and CapEx from new technologies as a consequence of stringent regulations. And you need to use this to make sure that you can accommodate the new objectives without destroying the jobs. And this is something that I could elaborate as long as you wish. It is something that is important. By the way, you were asking how can we improve operations without shutting plants. Well, that's a competitive skill of Stellantis. That's a competitive skill of Stellantis. There are so many things in our industry that can be improved, so many, that reducing the complexity of our industry to jobs is just inaccurate. Of course, jobs are part of it. Let me tell you one thing. If you look at the total manufacturing cost when the car goes out of a plant, the car is validated, certified on quality, goes to the shipping yard, you put it on a trailer, the car leaves the plant. If you measure the total manufacturing cost of that car at that precise moment, the amount of bought-out parts represents 80% of the total manufacturing cost. The cost on added value, which actually is made in the plant, is around 10%. So when you are talking to me about jobs, you are talking about those 10%, which means I have tons of other things to do on the remaining 90% to improve the profitability of my programs. And this is exactly what we have been doing. And with all the respect, I don't want to unveil to the world exactly where our competitive actions are made to make sure that at the end of the day, we can improve the profitability of our programs. But with all the respect I have for my peers, I know that they know what they have to do as much as I do. But then execution capability may be the differentiator at the end of the day. So with all the respect, I think that there's many more things to do in a car company than just cutting jobs. Eventually, there are moments where you cannot avoid it. But there are many, many other things to do. And that's why I believe Stellantis is acting as a shield. This is my answer to your great question. Thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Jack Ewing from The New York Times.

I have a question about Britain. Now that there's a Brexit deal, I wondered what -- how that affects the outlook for auto manufacturing in Britain, specifically for Opel Vauxhall in Ellesmere? And then looking further out, could you imagine building electric vehicles in Britain, given some of the obstacles of bringing components across the channel?

It's a great question. Thank you for raising that point. First of all, I think that we are relieved by the fact that there is a Brexit deal. It would have been dramatic, had we not have this kind of deal at the end of the day. So I'm pleased with that. And as you know, we have been keeping cool-headed during the Brexit negotiations, hoping that at the end of the day, good sense would prevail. And I believe this is what has happened, and congratulations to the people that could find this deal. Now this deal is putting different milestones. All of those rules of origin are moving in the direction of making sure that the products, which are sold in the U.K. or in Continental Europe, are made inside of U.K. plus Continental Europe with a certain number of localization rate and pulling the value creation inside of these two areas, U.K. plus Continental Europe. I think it makes sense. And I think it is very aligned with the Stellantis strategy, which is about engineering, investing and manufacturing the electric components in Europe. Electric motors, electrified automatic transmissions, battery packs, battery cells, we have invested in all of this. And in the time windows that were proposed by this deal, we are able to come up with the sourcing. So what we are now doing is if we are able to comply with those rules of origin, and I believe we can, where should we be putting the investments based on the places where those markets are going to be sold? And this is something which is still under review. And your question is very fair. Should we put some EV-related investments in the U.K.? Or should we put those EV-related investments Continental Europe? At the end of the day, they all contribute to respecting the same rule of origin at the end of the day. So both could work. But of course, the biggest market is on the Continental European side. So if you look at it from a pure logistics perspective or from a paperwork perspective, perhaps it's better to put it in Continental Europe, perhaps not. It depends also on U.K. government's willingness to protect some kind of automotive industry in his own country, which is about their strategy on the automotive manufacturing field. So we are now reviewing those different scenarios. I think we now have a good understanding of the deal. We congratulate the leaders that were able to come up with the deal. I think it's a reasonable deal of U.K. and for Continental Europe. We are now deciding where we are going to put those investments. And we do not forget, coming back to the question of one of our teammates, we do not forget that we have a strong asset, which is a brand called Vauxhall, which is warm to the hearts of the U.K. consumers. So there is something there that we need to strategically think. We did not make our decision yet, but we are on our way. And we most probably will be able to make a decision within a few weeks. And of course, that decision will be made public at one point in time. Thank you for your question.

The next question comes from the line of Gabrielle Coppola from Bloomberg News.

Can you hear me?

Yes. Thank you.

Yes. Could you talk about what the status of the JV that Fiat Chrysler formed with Foxconn a year ago? I'm wondering what the status -- this JV was to, as you know, make electric vehicles for the Chinese market. Can you say what is the status of that? And also, I'd like to hear your views on potentially working with Apple in the car industry.

Thank you. Two important questions. First of all, working with Apple or any tech company is something that we are always open to. I would like to remind you that we have a very good, thoughtful and effective partnership with Waymo on autonomous vehicles. But on a principle position, discussing with any tech company about doing things together for us is something that we welcome. Nothing is limited there. We believe that to make safe, clean and affordable cars, we believe that we have some level of skills that eventually a tech company may not have at least in the beginning. So a strategic collaboration may be a win-win for both. We are open for the discussion. We have already done that. And the example that I have presented to you with the Waymo partnership on autonomous vehicles just demonstrates that. And I would like just to make sure that everybody knows that Stellantis is open for business always as long as it creates win-win situations and as long as it doesn't create any technology dependence that would penalize the future of the company. So that's where we are on that matter. Regarding the JV with Foxconn, it is something that is part of the broader strategic work that we have now started and that we will conclude in a few in a few months, most probably. Of course, that JV is there and we'll take that into consideration, when we look at what are the results. Are we on track? And what should we do about it in a wider perspective for creating a winning strategy for China, which, at this stage, we have not yet finalized? As you can understand, today is day 1. That's what I can answer to your question. Thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Jasper Jolly from the Guardian.

I just wanted to follow up, first of all, on the U.K. question. If the -- if you don't go ahead with the investment in Ellesmere Port, that would be the end of the plants as far as I can see. How would that square with your pledge not to cut jobs in the merger? And also, a slightly different question on battery sourcing. Are you confident that Stellantis will be able to reshore battery procurement to within Europe's borders as the European Commission's ambitions have it?

Two great questions. On the first one, I would just like to highlight that we should not confuse things. We believe that the merger is a shield and that the merger is bringing scale to face the additional costs of the stringent regulations, which are imposed on us. So the merger is acting as a shield and the merger is a protective move. Now if at one point in time, governments or countries create situations which destroy the business model by adding custom duties or by adding constraints, as soon as you say that we are going to ban the sales of this kind of car or this kind of car or this kind of car, we stop investing, of course. If we are told that in 2030, internal combustion engines cannot be sold in the U.K., which we respect as a decision from the country, then we are not going to invest in internal combustion engines anymore because that makes no sense. That means that we are going to work on other directions and then we see if there is a business model for the other direction. So you see, I think it will be confusing if we were to mix the protective shield of Stellantis from one side and then the change on our ability to create a positive, profitable business model if the rules under which we are operation -- operating are completely changed by the governments of the countries in which we operate, we completely respect those rules. We completely comply with those rules. But if they lead to a situation where there is no business model, then the consequence is clear for everybody and the root cause of that consequence is also clear for everybody. And in that kind of situation, again Stellantis would be acting as a shield because of the volume scale effect, because of the fact that we are bringing highly efficient development schemes. All of this is trying to help. But there is a limit for the headwinds. There is a limit where if one region or one country is putting so many barriers that there is no room to find something that creates value, then we have to conclude that. You saw it in the recent decisions of one of our competitors in Brazil. Very clear, there is a point where there is no more room and there is then an ethical responsibility from the officers of those companies to make the appropriate decision. So, so far, I'm just expecting that we can find a good agreement, where there is in the electrified world a business model that sticks for electrified products to be sold in the U.K. out of Continental European sourcing or out of a U.K. sourcing. And that's what we are right now studying. But I think I should ask you not to mix the two things. One is the merger, bringing a protective shield, volume scale effect, efficient developments. And on the other side is if you change brutally the rules and if you restrict the rules for business, then there is at one point in time a problem. And we should also recognize that. And of course, the more we put stringent objectives on the automotive industry, the more you get close to that limit. It's just natural. And it's normal that, that kind of situation is at one point in time visible. And we are doing our best to avoid that because our ethical responsibility is to protect our people and to protect the freedom of mobility of the citizens. That's what we are trying to do. So starting from the point where you decide that there are no more internal combustion engine-driven new car sales in the U.K. from 2030, immediately that stops all the investments on internal combustion engine-powered cars as a consequence immediately. Then we say, "Oh, there is room for EV." Fine. Let's look at EV. But then if -- because of the unbalanced between the volumes in the U.K. market and the volumes on the Continental European markets, you put your investment close to the market where you sell the highest volume, what is left for the U.K.? That's the things that people should understand. This is not rocket science. This is just plain, good sense thinking. And we are doing our best efforts to discuss with all the stakeholders, including the U.K. government, to try to find a way that protects our people because we respect and love our people in the U.K. They have been doing tremendous efforts to go through this COVID crisis and we have been supporting them. Many of them have moved from one plant to the other plants to accommodate the workload. And they have been absolutely great people. We have been keeping a very good relationship and dialogue with the local unions because they understand exactly what I'm telling you. But then everybody needs to accept the consequences of the decisions that are made. That's what I can tell you on this matter. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Leo Klimm from Süddeutsche Zeitung.

Can you hear me?

Yes. Absolutely.

Okay. You mentioned there was still a lot of work to do on Opel and it wasn't perfect yet. Of course, it never is. But what in your eyes is still to do on that brand and that company? You just have been talking about Vauxhall. What about the Opel part? And how can you more specifically separate this brand now from, I'd say, brands which are close to it on the market with Fiat and Citroën?

Thank you. Great question. First of all, I don't think at all that there is a proximity with Fiat and Citroën. I think Opel is a German brand that will remain German. And you asked me what is left to do. First, I would like to tell you that, given the highly demanding environment in which we are operating, progress and work and productivity never stop in a car company. I've been working in this industry for 40 years now. I can tell you that the amount of work, the amount of progress has never been so strong as it is right now. So we are moving. We are moving to ensure safe, clean, affordable mobility. And there is a lot of things to do to anticipate on the next regulations and to anticipate on the expectations of our customers. So there is nothing different for Opel compared to the other brands. We are on the move, improving the quality, reducing the emissions, reducing the costs, reducing the pricing to make sure that we give sustainability to our company. And I would like say something which is very important. You have to know that after the turnaround of Opel Vauxhall on the first half of 2020, as much as it was published on the first half of 2020, you can see that Opel was profitable. So in the worst part of the COVID crisis through spring, we could keep Opel profitable, which means that it says a lot about the quality of the turnaround work that has been done by our Opel team. It says a lot about the quality of Michael Lohscheller's leadership to turn around the operations and make sure that they remain profitable. Because they could resist to the most hurting lockdown, which was the spring one. So that's something that I think we need to recognize. We have a fantastic Opel product pipeline coming. I can tell you that the product pipeline of Opel for the next few years is stellar. I feel extremely excited not only because it's a fantastic set of cars, but also because they are carrying the right technology and the way they are planned is very levelized. And we are bringing the cars one after the other, always rebounding on the marketplace. And yes, we still have a lot of things to improve, certainly on the per unit profitability, which is not the highest in the company. And of course, our brands are systematically benchmarking each other and they see that the per unit profitability is not the same. So we want to invest more in our future. We want to protect that. So there is room for improvement. There is also room for improvement to make sure that the positioning of the brand is clear, understood and fully leveraged with all the stakeholders, starting with our dealer network. And this is important that everybody understands what the brand stands for. It has been significantly clarified over last year. But now we need to train. We need to make sure that everybody understands the same thing. Everybody is talking about the same thing and that we are communicating to the final consumer this brand positioning in a very clear and efficient way through the marketing tools. Still a lot of work to be done, we are not there. But the product pipeline and the technology, which is embedded in those products, is stellar. I feel so excited and so confident. And I think that we are going to do great things with Opel. Now if you ask me, can we have a break? Well, that's something that does not exist in automotive industry. There is no break in the automotive industry. We are always on the move, always trying to do better in quality, in affordability, in emissions for the best benefit of our consumers and for the best benefit of the societies in which we operate. And I don't believe we have any issue in terms of positioning of Opel brand vis-à-vis the other brands you mentioned, namely Fiat and Citroën. Opel is bringing a very different position. It's all about being cool instead of being cold. It's all about expressing exciting designs with a high level of rigorous implementation of our technologies. This is something that is very specific to Opel. But we still have a lot of work to do to make that clear and to communicate that message to the consumer. So a lot of marketing work to be done, a lot of execution of the different projects. And I'm very confident for the Opel brand. But we will keep on working. There is no reason to stop our working dynamics on that brand as many -- as much as on the other brands. Thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Juliana Estigarribia from Exame.

I have two questions. Specifically, about Brazil, I want to understand your explanation about regulatory issues. What are those exactly? Were they the lack of test incentives for electric vehicles since Ford just announced they're down shutting around 3 factories here? And my second question is about the dealership. How is it going forward globally? How are the brands going forward, together or separated?

Well, thank you. Thank you for your important questions. Regarding the plant shutdown, you have to ask the question to the company that has made that decision. I think that they are going to explain to you that the business did not make sense. But it's up to them to answer, so please ask them the question. What I can tell you is that the electrification of mobility represents a significant additional cost on the product. That cost is significantly high. As long as the volumes are not reaching a certain level, we will not have volume scale effect on those components and the cost is going to be very high, which means then you have 2 possibilities. If the cost is much higher than the current models, either you increase the pricing to protect your margins, and in that situation, one part of our customer base will not be able to buy those cars because they don't have the purchasing power. Or you do not increase the pricing, but the margins are squeezed and you need to restructure your company. So on both sides, you have social issues as an outcome. So there is a moment where you need to make sure that if we introduce a new technology, you can protect the affordability and the margins so that you can bring those new solutions to your customer base. And why does it relate to regulations? Because most places of the world right now, the introduction of the electrification is an answer to more stringent regulations on CO2, which we completely understand, completely support to bring our fair contribution to the global warming issue. And we want to solve that issue as soon as we can. But there is, as I said, an issue with affordability. So who is going to pay at the end of day? If you ask the OEMs to pay, they will put themselves in trouble. That is going to create social issues at the end of the day. If you ask the governments to pay, that means unbalancing the budgets, that means more taxes for the people. So in a way or another, you have to find a solution to this contradiction. And that's in the hands of the governments of the countries in which we operate. We are eager to collaborate and propose things and say, "Well, if you choose this direction, this is the ballpark of where you are going to be. If you choose this direction, it's different." We are absolutely fine to collaborate because we are strong mobility actors in Latin America and are very, very eager to propose things and to collaborate. But from what I see today, the level of affordability that we need in Latin America, and specifically in the Mercosur, is somewhere so demanding that I don't see how in the short and mid-term we would be able to introduce electrification in Latin America. But we can do it. We have the technology. We can consider that if it is a must from the markets and the governments with whom we work continuously. In terms of dealerships, the other thing we want to make sure is that the brands are respected. We want the brands to be respected in their differentiation with the other brands. And we want to ensure that through the implementation of the different standards for service quality, we are making the customers happy. So the future of dealerships is, first, about making the customers happy. Because given the cost of distribution, if the customers are not happy, then we have a potential candidate for disruption. So the least we could do is to ensure that for the existing distribution cost of an automobile, we ensure through the quality of the relationship with the consumer that we make them happy. If not, we are creating a candidate for disruption. And of course, when we look at the different dealerships and showrooms, we want our brands to be respected in their unique positioning with their unique brand pillars so that we don't get any kind of cannibalization between the different brands. But there is a bright future for our dealer network if they are able to make the customers happy and if they are able to continue to progress as much as we do to face the additional costs coming from the new regulations that, of course, we need to comply with and we comply with. Thank you very much. This is my answer to your question.

The next question comes from the line of Colleen Barry from Associated Press.

You've referenced a couple times the possibility of sister cars being very key to keeping the factories running. Is this a reference to sharing the platforms? Or is there something else that is envisioned for the -- in the sister car model? And for a long time in Italy, hopes have been placed on Alfa Romeo and Maserati as bringing forward the plans of getting them back to full operation. Is that still where we see the future of Italian manufacturing? Or will the strategies you have in mind allow other sorts of manufacturing in Italy?

Thank you for the two great questions. First, when you talk about sister cars, of course, we think about having the same platform for the 2 sister cars but also some other systems that would not be visible by the customer and that they would deliver the right cost and the right quality at the end of the day. So a sister car is a car that is completely different from the other car. So for a normal consumer, he would say, "Well, an Opel Corsa is, of course, a very different car from a Peugeot 208." But those 2 are sister cars. And that's what we would call a sister car, which means we share any components as we can as long as they are perceived by the consumers as very different cars and that does not limit our ability to express the strength and the unique selling points of the different brands. And we believe that we have now a significant skill in doing that. We have demonstrated that. I will give you another example of 3 sister cars that you will, I'm sure, recognize as very different cars. DS7 Crossback, Peugeot 3008, Citroën C5 Aircross, very different cars for very, very different brands, sharing many components to the best benefit of our consumers. So yes, it's about platforms, but not only about platforms. It's all about any system or any part that would deliver the right performance and the right quality and that the customer does not see, which means it does not limit our ability to differentiate the brands and express what the brand stands for. Regarding Alfa Romeo and Maserati, it's too soon to talk about it. But I can tell you that we completely recognize the high value of those brand assets. And therefore, our intention is to study how to support the profitable growth of those 2 brands. So we believe that we are going to find a way to make them progress. But so far, the Stellantis long-term strategic plan has not been built. So we need to wait for our teams to work on the directions that we are going to set for them. But certainly, we do recognize that the Alfa Romeo brand and that the Maserati brand, premium and luxury, respectively, are absolutely great assets of Stellantis. And we have no intention to do anything else than to support the rebound or the profitable growth of those brands. This is very clear.

This is the last question of today's session. And this comes from the line of Mike Wayland from CNBC.

Most of the mine have been answered. But just wondering in general, you talked about obviously great is better than scale. But obviously, you also talked about growing the company even more so from where you are today. I'm just wondering, how much more can you grow? And are you going to kind of try to move up into the ranks of the global automakers from hereon out? And then secondly, just wondering in general, I know you've talked a lot about the brands and not necessarily taking them away. But if you could address just some of the sales problems here with Fiat as well as Alfa Romeo because obviously that's an independent dealer network compared to all the other brands here.

And sorry, when you say here is where?

My apologies, in the U.S.

In the U.S., okay. Great. Thank you. Well, of course, nothing is perfect. And there is no such thing as a brand where we would say we are doing all the right things and that it's moving up and we are so happy with the results. There is always something that needs to be improved. And there is no exception in our U.S. market and U.S. business. And certainly, we have noticed that for the European brands in the U.S., there is something that we can improve. So it's part of the plan that we are going to bring to the market. I think we can also help with new solutions, with a better understanding of the way we are marketing the cars, the way we are setting up the specs for those cars, the way we are supporting our dealers to have the right marketing communications in the market. So that's something that we are eager to do. This is the reason why I explained to one of our teammates that, for the time being, we don't think we will need to introduce more brands than the ones we already have in the U.S. I think we should first focus in understanding what needs to be improved and then from there, try to rebound to something else. So we are reasonably confident that we can improve the situation. And one of the things you know, of course, is that with the new Biden administration, it is most probable that there will be more focus on emissions. And of course, we have all the technologies that we need to move faster and in an efficient way towards zero-emission mobility. And hopefully, Stellantis will be also contributing to bring into the U.S. consumers lower-emission mobility in the future. And if we can contribute to the community, then we are extremely happy to do so and we can do it quickly with the right components and the right specs. So that's our commitment to the U.S. market is to support any lower-emission direction that would be requested by the authorities. We think we can help, and we'll be very glad to do so. But of course, we are first going to focus on things that are not perfect in the way we are currently marketing some of those European brands. I think there is room for improvement from what I have understood so far. But the job needs to be done, and we'll come back to you on that one later on. Thank you. I believe this was the last question. It was my great pleasure to answer your questions. Thank you for your interest in Stellantis. Please keep in mind that Stellantis is bringing a shield. It's an opportunity for sustainability, much more than a risk. This is what, I think, I would like to remind you. Because of the scale, because of the mastering of the technologies from both families, because of the complementarity of the business footprints, because of the complementarity of the technology, mastering of the 2 families, I think we are bringing a shield to our people and to our stakeholders. And we are eager to move forward and to contribute. Thank you to all of you. Thank you for your interest in Stellantis. See you soon. Bye-bye.