Mahindra Truck will be here 4th Quarter

ac5501 said:

The term vapor ware comes to mind here. I'm now starting to believe that we will never see these vehicles.

Click to expand...

kcfoxie said:

Wasn't that also said about the proposed Liberty diesel...?

Click to expand...

oilhammer said:

Phil, while I am sure your truck serves some purpose, it is a freakin' zip code to me. Yes, I have owned full-sized trucks. But really have no use for something that can pull my house down. That's silly. Full sized pickups flourish nowhere else on the planet but here, really. Yet others still seem to have roads, bridges, schools, etc. just like we do.



Farmers everywhere else can get by just fine with a Toyota HiLux diesel. That is what I want. Was just watching a documentary on building a huge hydroelectric power plant in New Zealand....nothing but 4 cyl diesel compact pickups. Not a single F series anywhere.

If you need to pull something that weighs 30,000 pounds, that's certainly going to take a truck larger than a HiLux. But I have never, nor will I ever, need something like that. And I bet 90% of people in the USA that buy those monsters do either. Seeings how I share the road every day with dozens of empty full size behemoths with nothing but the driver to carry I'd say I may be on to something. And I live in the middle of farm country (I literally have a field in front of and behind my house!).

Click to expand...

michigandon said:

A 5000 lb towing capacity is certainly believable. A 2.7L Sprinter is rated for that, and isn't the Liberty CRD as well?

Click to expand...

kcfoxie said:

Wasn't that also said about the proposed Liberty diesel...?

Click to expand...

ac5501 said:

Its interesting that you bring that up. I have always been amazed (happily so) that Chrysler even bothered to put a diesel in the Liberty.

Consider this:

The stricter diesel emissions(the supposed reason the CRD lib was canceled) that went into affect in 07 were known well in advance. This means:

Chrysler had to have known that the diesel lib would only be in production for less than 2 years.

How many car companies would go through the cost introducing a "new" type of engine into an existing vehicle knowing up front that the production run would be less than 2 years. Costs like engineering, testing, establishing parts supply chain, training dealers and much more.

Maybe I don't know enough about car making, but that seems like a callosal waist of money. Especially knowing from the very beginning that the production run would never recoup the costs of development.

I am still glad they did it though

Click to expand...

kcfoxie said:

Which is why the rubber is inferior to the 2004 or earlier models (across all 05 and 06s), the leather was cheaper, the $130 dodge lift pump was omitted (causing the vehicle to leak air into the system and STALL OUT after merging on the highway, especially in the winter time), the crappy bosch filter housing they picked (it was super cheap) that is known to catch fire (2 libby's down, another like 1000 must go before a recall is issues par NHTSA), etc etc etc.

You think a VW is a hassle, the Liberty CRD is a REAL labor of love.

But I also raise parrots; I am used to being crapped on by the things I love. Literally.

Click to expand...

kcfoxie said:

I'm glad one person has had no issues with their liberty.

we need a glow plug, again not a warranty item it's a wear item.

....

except that we've never had the vw only go 20mph because of pressure issues due to a really poor and inexcusable fuel system design from the same powerhouse that brings us the RAM with Cummins engine. It's not like D/C/J does not know how to build a proper diesel truck.

but even with its issues, we love it. it is a lovable truck, but far too fickle for most.

Click to expand...

Oberkanone said:

US certification was finally obtained by Mahindra.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/0...ication-to-sell-diesel-pickups-in-the-us.html

Click to expand...

Mahindra just announced that it has received long awaited EPA certification for the pick-up trucks it plans to import into the United States by the end of this year. Moreover, Global Vehicles remains committed to distributing vehicles to its dealers under the terms of its agreement with Mahindra as expeditiously as possible through the ongoing litigation between the parties or otherwise.
Mahindra has posted on their website a press note claiming its relationship with Global Vehicles has been terminated. This claim is inaccurate. While it is true Mahindra attempted to terminate the exclusive Distributor Agreement with Global Vehicles after Global Vehicles filed an arbitration demand seeking to compel Mahindra to deliver vehicles to its dealers, such attempted termination is invalid under applicable laws of the United States and the State of Georgia, something which Mahindra continues to disregard.

Click to expand...

$35 million-plus factory order will be placed today for U.S.-spec Mahindra TR20 and TR40 pickup trucks to begin the launch of the brand in the United States, exclusive Mahindra importer Global Vehicles U.S.A., Inc. announced. Together, Global Vehicles and the nearly 350 Mahindra dealers it recruited in 49 states have invested almost $100 million to bring the rugged, affordable and fuel-efficient trucks to the United States.
Mahindra said in an August press release that it had EPA certification to sell the trucks, and they announced plans to begin selling vehicles in December.
"We are proud of the sales and service network we created to support the launch of Mahindra vehicles, and we look forward to bringing American buyers something truly unique in the marketplace – rugged, high-quality, clean diesel pickup trucks that can achieve nearly 30 miles per gallon," said John Perez, CEO of Global Vehicles. "Our dealers are all seasoned auto industry professionals who will treat customers with honesty, integrity and respect. We built our business on these bedrock principles, which should be the foundation of every business relationship."
Perez expressed confidence that Global Vehicles will prevail in pending arbitration hearings and court proceedings that the company initiated to force Mahindra to honor the terms of Global Vehicle's distribution contract, which Mahindra inaccurately claims is no longer in force.

Click to expand...

Automobile Magazine
The never-ending saga of the Mahindra pickup truck took yet another turn today as the embattled U.S. distributor proudly proclaimed that it was placing an order for vehicles despite a legal battle over their contract with the manufacturer, Mahindra, who meanwhile defended itself from allegations by the distributor that it tried to back out of the deal.






If you've been following the story for the last four years like we have, you know it's already quite the soap opera. For those that haven't, it's gone pretty much like this: Mumbai, India-based Mahindra signed a deal with Global Vehicles U.S.A. out of Alpharetta, Georgia, to distribute the trucks in the U.S. once certification and testing was completed. The companies originally promised to have trucks on dealer lots in early 2009 and they've been delayed ever since. Things came to a loggerhead in June when Global Vehicles sued Mahindra to force the company to deliver the vehicles.

This is where the story gets interesting, depending on who you believe. According to Global Vehicles, they've plunked down some $35 million to prepare for the launch of the TR20 and TR40 light-duty, diesel-powered pickup trucks in the U.S. The company lined up some 350 dealers in 49 states to sell the trucks who collectively spent $60 million on franchise fees and built dedicated showrooms for the brand. Global Vehicles says that Mahindra continually ran into delays in engineering the trucks to meet strict U.S. crash and emissions regulations and no less than three extensions to the original contract were made to keep the deal alive. Global Vehicles says they tried to have the expiration clause removed from the contract earlier this year but Mahindra refused. The last extension expired on June 11, 2010 and Global Vehicles claims that Mahindra refused to grant another extension. Global Vehicles then sued Mahindra in State and Federal courts to force Mahindra to honor the original contract and bar the company from partnering with a new distributor.

"We trusted Mahindra when they said they wanted to cap their losses if the vehicle couldn't be sold here," said Global Vehicles CEO John Perez in a statement. "We patiently waited and accommodated Mahindra through years of delays and kept an extremely powerful distribution network intact while the factory worked through the complicated task of meeting U.S. emissions standards. We did this because we believed we were all working toward the same goals. Now Mahindra is trying to change the rules. We delivered our end of the contract, and we're ready to get down to business."

Global Vehicles claims that Mahindra intentionally stalled the certification process so that the contract with Global Vehicles would expire. The distributor says that Mahindra added the expiration clause to the original contract negotiations at the last minute to protect itself from losses if the trucks couldn't be certified in the U.S. Global Vehicles claims that Mahindra waited until 10 days after the contract expired (June 21) to file certification papers with the EPA. Global Vehicles then sued to reinstate the contract. Mahindra announced on August 20, 2010 that the trucks had received certification and at the same time announced that their relationship with Global Vehicles had ended. Global Vehicles claims that Mahindra is trying to back out of the contract for reasons unknown, but presumably to craft a more profitable deal with another distributor.

Mahindra, of course, disagrees with Global Vehicles' version of events. The company claims that it worked tirelessly to keep the contract alive through multiple contract extensions and that it had every intention of honoring the original contract. Contrary to what Global Vehicles claims, though, Mahindra claims that Global Vehicles never asked for a fourth contract extension and instead simply let the contract expire on June 11, then sued without warning and started a negative PR campaign against the company. Mahindra says it has every intention of winning the court battle and introducing its trucks to the U.S. market as planned.

Mahindra's statement, however, leaves several questions unanswered. As it's written, the statement implies that Mahindra didn't pursue a contract extension and simply let the deal lapse, suggesting that it was Global Vehicles' fault for not asking for another extension. The company offers no explanation as to why, after giving the relationship its "best efforts" for nearly four years, it would allow the contract to expire so easily. The statement also fails explain the cause of the delays or why the company waited to file its EPA paperwork until just after the contract expired. It also does not explain why Mahindra is fighting Global Vehicle in court to keep the contract void rather than working out an extension. Despite speaking highly of the relationship and the efforts made to preserve it, Mahindra's release gives no indication that the company wishes to resume its relationship with Global Vehicles despite being so close to actually selling its vehicles in the U.S.

Despite the war of words and lawyers, both companies say they're all geared-up to put trucks in the hands of customers soon, even by December. Mahindra says that it "will endeavor not to allow this dispute and the changed business circumstances to affect its plans to introduce its vehicles to the United States." Global Vehicles, meanwhile, says that it placed an order for "$35 million-plus" worth of trucks today with Mahindra in anticipation of a December launch date. Global Vehicles still refers to itself as the "exclusive Mahindra importer" and is confident it will win the legal battle.

Global Vehicles also has some predictions for the little trucks: the distributor hopes to see first-year sales climb as high as 30,000 units, or roughly half of the 2009 sales of the Ford Ranger. Within four years, the company hopes to see sales hit as much as $1.4 billion annually. Should Global Vehicles win the court battle, deliveries would begin in the Southeast near the company's headquarters and spread throughout the country over the following eight months.

"We are proud of the sales and service network we created to support the launch of Mahindra vehicles, and we look forward to bringing American buyers something truly unique in the marketplace - rugged, high-quality, clean diesel pickup trucks that can achieve nearly 30 miles per gallon," said Perez. "Our dealers are all seasoned auto industry professionals who will treat customers with honesty, integrity and respect. We built our business on these bedrock principles, which should be the foundation of every business relationship."

As alluded to at the beginning, the trucks themselves are still caught in the middle of this mess. Until the legal battle is over, we aren't likely to see them on U.S. roads regardless of the distributor. Even if the court case wraps up quickly, it could still be months before the first sale is made and the December deadline seems as unlikely as every other launch date we've heard over the years. Regardless of whose story you believe, neither side is likely to emerge from this mess happy and, as Mahindra notes, is likely to only hurt the dealers and customers. So for now, as we have for years, we wait.

Click to expand...

Dieselfitter said:

It would be easier to HI-JACK the car carrier trucks leaving the Chrysler Plant in Fenton, Missouri that are carrying Diesel Minivans and Diesel Chrysler 300's that are destined for Europe, than wait for THIS TRUCK to come here!

Seriously , we could have a CHOP SHOP set up to take the Engines Out. Then the Moderator could close this Thread!

Click to expand...

According to a press release from Mahindra:

"Mahindra and Mahindra announced that it had received and was rejecting an invalid order for pick-up trucks from former distributor Global Vehicles USA, Inc.
Mahindra views this order as another example of Global Vehicles’ policy of engaging in PR theatrics while pursuing an unnecessary lawsuit. This is Global Vehicles’ continued attempt to manipulate the press to damage Mahindra's reputation. Mahindra also believes that this is an attempt by Global Vehicles to distract Mahindra from pursuing other plans to bring its vehicle to the US market.
As stated in Mahindra's September 24 statement, the contract with Global Vehicles has expired. In light of this fact, Mahindra will be contacting U.S. dealers to make other arrangements for distribution."
​

Click to expand...

oilhammer said:

There have not been any vehicles leaving that plant in over a year. In fact, they are tearing the whole place down as we speak. Sad, but nobody wants to utilize the plant because they do not want to mess with the UAW. All "new" auto assembly plants are being built in the south (south of the Mason-Dixon line). And there are a LOT of them, the newest of course is Veg's plant in TN. HM (KIA), BMW, MB, Toyota, Nissan, etc. all have plants, are building plants, or are planning to build plants, in the south.

All our Chrysler minivans come from Canada, and all our Ram pickups come from Mexico. Good job, UAW!

Click to expand...

Automotive News

John Perez's plan to find an undiscovered global automaker and deliver it to the United States burst into flames -- just when it was a whisker away from success. In August, after four years of waiting for Indian truckmaker Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. to get its compact diesel pickup certified for U.S. sales, Perez found himself ousted from the distribution deal he created.

Six days later, Mahindra said it had won approval from regulators in Washington to go ahead with U.S. sales of the pickup.

After quarreling for a year with Perez over his finances and marketing plans, the Indian manufacturer informed the world in a terse, unilateral announcement in August that its contract with Perez's company, Global Vehicles USA Inc., had expired.

Perez had already sued Mahindra in the United States and filed for arbitration in England by then. Most recently, Perez sent Mahindra an order for pickups -- which Mahindra rejected.

"I believe that, legally, I'm still their U.S. distributor," Perez says stoically in his deep baritone voice. "And I want trucks delivered to our dealers."

That question will be decided in court. But the story of how the plan to sell Indian pickups in the United States hit the skids is one of broken trust, fights over money -- and 347 dealers potentially left out in the cold.

Mahindra says the dealers that Perez recruited to his distributorship have no valid franchise agreement. The automaker says it will consider granting franchises to the dealers, who paid Perez up to $200,000, but is not obligated to do so. One lawyer for dealers says they may wind up suing Perez, even as he fights to keep his company -- and their franchises -- alive.

For Perez, a 63-year-old Cuban-American businessman from Atlanta, it was the second time such a deal has imploded. For more than a decade, he tried and failed to import a Romanian SUV called the Aro and later renamed the Cross Lander.

The soured relationship with Mahindra is in court in two countries. In June, before Mahindra declared the contract expired, Perez requested arbitration in London, as the contract requires, to force Mahindra to drop financial demands it was making. He then sued in U.S. District Court in Atlanta, asking a U.S. judge to force Mahindra to do business with Global Vehicles and its dealers.

A string of delays


Dealers have been waiting since early 2009 for the start of truck sales, which has been delayed three times as Mahindra sought regulatory approval for the truck.

If Mahindra succeeds in ending its relationship with Global, which it refers to as "GV," the dealers would have no legal relationship with Mahindra, a spokeswoman said.

In response to questions from Automotive News about the fate of Perez's dealer body, Roma Balwani, Mahindra's senior vice president of corporate communications in Mumbai, offered this written answer: "That is an issue for GV, not Mahindra."

Asked if Perez's dealers would retain their franchises if Mahindra succeeded in ending its relationship with Perez's company, Balwani wrote: "The current dealers' contract is with GV and hence they do not automatically become Mahindra dealers. However, we would be considering these dealers for our network if they are interested."

Balwani wrote: "The dealer contracts are with GV. We will need a new distribution network and soon we will start a dialogue with potential dealers, including the ones who are signed up with GV, if they are interested in signing up with Mahindra."

The 'Jim Moran law'


Robert Byerts, a Florida lawyer who represents some dealers who signed on with Perez, has been tracking the affair.

"Somebody is going to get sued here," Byerts warned. "There are laws in some states -- not all states -- that specifically address this issue of whether a manufacturer can replace a distributor and its dealers."

The statutes Byerts refers to are sometimes called the "Jim Moran law." The late Chicago retailer Jim Moran became a billionaire through his ownership of Southeast Toyota Distributors Inc., an independent company that has controlled Toyota sales and distribution in Florida, Georgia, Alabama and the Carolinas since the 1960s.

Statutes in Florida and Georgia specifically prevent a manufacturer from eliminating a distributor like Moran -- or theoretically Perez -- unless it has specific complaints against him. Even when there are such complaints, the manufacturer is required to give the distributor time to correct his problems.

But Byerts, whose law firm advises auto dealers on franchise issues around the country, admits that the law is a bit gray.

"I don't know that any of this has ever been tested in court," he acknowledged. "When you come down to it, there really aren't too many vehicle distributors in the United States. And what few there are, I can't say if any of them has ever been challenged by a manufacturer."


Who gets sued?

ENLARGE​

John Perez says Mahindra used the contract clause above to reject him as its pickup distributor.




But who would be the most advantageous target of a dealer lawsuit? Perez and his company, which is trying to keep its plan -- and dealers' franchises -- intact, or Mahindra, which says it has done nothing more than follow its contract?

To complicate the situation further, some of Perez's Mahindra dealers were grandfathered into a Mahindra franchise at no cost after investing with Perez to become Cross Lander dealers. But at least half of his 347 Mahindra dealers paid fees for their franchise arrangements.

Automakers do not sell franchises; they award them for commitments to invest in stores and inventory.

Byerts said dealers who signed on with Perez and are left without franchises would have little recourse but to sue Global Vehicles to get their fees back. Mahindra likely would be a co-defendant, he said.

Mahindra is a diverse Mumbai-based industrial conglomerate run by Anand Mahindra. Its primary U.S. exposure to date has been through the sale of diesel tractors and information technology services. Mahindra's automotive sector is run by Pawan Goenka, a former General Motors executive.

When contacted by Automotive News, dealers who had signed on with Perez largely demurred from discussing the situation.

One dealer, who asked not to be identified, said he expects to write off the franchise fee, adding that it was a speculative investment. Neither Perez nor Mahindra has communicated with him lately, the dealer added.

Another dealer, Larry Neuwirth, owner of Safeway Chevrolet in Burgaw, N.C., paid Global $200,000 and remains optimistic the truck somehow will make it to market late this year.

"I'm not going to sue anybody," Neuwirth said. "What good would that do? We all knew this was a gamble when we got into it. We did it anyway. And I still believe it's going to work out."


Legit order or 'theatrics'?


Indeed, both Perez -- a former Atlanta Dodge-Chrysler dealer -- and his alienated partners at Mahindra also insist things will work out. They just disagree on how.

"We are working diligently to bring the product to market," Mahindra's Balwani told Automotive News. "It will be our endeavor to not let this dispute and the changed business circumstances affect our plans to introduce our vehicle in the United States."

Perez said he also is trying to move forward. On Friday, Sept. 24, Perez ended the day by sealing a Federal Express envelope and sending it to Mumbai. Inside were factory orders for approximately 2,000 Mahindra pickups, an order worth $35 million.

A press release Global sent out that day alerted newspapers around the country that the company was taking steps to bring in the trucks. It did not mention the legal morass.

Mahindra rejected two previous orders he submitted in 2009. According to court documents, the manufacturer alleged that Global vehicles did not have adequate capital to pay for the trucks -- an allegation Perez denies.

He said the rejections caused him to question Mahindra's intentions. He traveled to Mumbai and accused executives there of attempting to undermine his distribution deal.

Last month's vehicle order was the first Perez had submitted since the truck received regulatory approval.

But the following Monday, Mahindra issued its own press statement. It rejected the Global order and called the move "theatrics" and an "attempt to damage Mahindra's reputation."


Late-night call


Even the question of how the partnership ended -- if indeed it has -- is a matter of ongoing debate.

In explaining Mahindra's actions in ending the arrangement, spokeswoman Balwani says Mahindra did not "end" it. She blamed Global Vehicles for failing to extend its deadline, as Global had done in the past, she said. Perez says that is untrue.

The partners did have a June 11 deadline for consummating Mahindra's U.S. market entry. Both sides acknowledge that the deadline had been extended previously as Mahindra prepared its truck for U.S. regulatory scrutiny.

But Perez says the base for the deal's collapse was laid four years ago, in the late-night hours immediately before the partnership was created.

It was in Paris in September 2006, as he tells it. Perez and his two primary partners and private investors had traveled there to sign the U.S. distribution deal with Mahindra.

With Perez was Manuel Baez, a fellow Cuban-American investor who had been executive vice president of health care giant Baxter International Inc., and Bill Goetze, an auto industry veteran who worked for 40 years with Chevrolet, Chrysler, Mazda and Subaru. Baez remains chairman of Global Vehicles; Goetze has retired and moved to Edgewater, Fla. Reached by Automotive News, Goetze says he remains a shareholder in the company.

At that point, Global Vehicles and Mahindra had agreed upon contract wording. Perez said the next morning's signing was to be largely ceremonial. According to Perez, he was in his hotel room at 10:30 p.m. when the room phone rang.

On the other end was a Mahindra executive also staying at the hotel, telling Perez there was a problem.


Last-minute clause


According to Perez, the Mahindra executive told him the board in India wanted a last-minute clause added that protected them in case Mahindra couldn't win U.S. approval for the pickup. The clause set a date when the parties could give up and walk away, with no liability.

Perez said he called his partners in their rooms, dressed and went downstairs to talk through the clause.

Goetze, who said he vividly remembers the late-night crisis, says he suggested that the contract signing be postponed until lawyers in America could review it -- a recommendation Perez also recalls. But Perez told his partners there was no need for that. The clause was harmless and sensible and could be penciled in with no problem, he recalls telling the group.

The walk-away clause was added, permitting the deal to end on Aug. 29, 2009, if Mahindra failed to get the truck homologated for U.S. sales.

It was that clause, later extended to June 11, 2010, that Perez says Mahindra used as its out when it announced in August that the deal was dead.

A key question: Does the clause grant a unilateral right of withdrawal, with no advance notice to the other party? A copy of the penciled-in addendum provided by Perez does not address the issue.

On Aug. 26 -- just six days after Mahindra declared the Global deal dead -- the EPA certified the truck. According to Mahindra's interpretation, that left the automaker free to market it in the United States as it saw fit -- and Perez out of the picture.


'I'm baffled'


Perez said he's stunned by Mahindra's bailout.

"I wonder all the time: Why is this happening?" Perez asked out loud in his partially empty offices in Alpharetta, Ga. "Why is this happening? I thought we were friends."

Perez acknowledged that he was arguing with Mahindra over financial matters. He said Mahindra asked him to have $29 million in his bank account to cover marketing and advertising costs for the truck's entire first year of sales. Perez balked, arguing that no such requirement was in his contract. On top of that, he argued, marketing is not funded that way in the U.S. industry. He told Mahindra that marketing funds are collected from the sale of vehicles.

But as recently as May, those disagreements appeared to be resolved. In a telephone interview with Automotive News on May 12, Goenka said the issue was subsiding.

"I think Global has sufficient cash available for to launch in the U.S.," Goenka stated then.

He said concerns about marketing funds were "getting sorted out now." He added: "By the time we launch, there will be no question of financing."

When asked what changed at Mahindra between the time of Goenka's May comments and the company's Aug. 20 statement that the deal was dead, Balwani answered: "What changed was the inability to reach a satisfactory level of understanding with GV on the marketing plan."

But in his May interview, Goenka expressed contentment with the marketing plan. He said Mahindra would pay for a pre-launch brand advertising campaign to help U.S. consumers understand what Mahindra is. Mahindra and Global together would pay for marketing during the actual launch, he said, and Global would then take over the cost of post-launch co-op dealer advertising.


Olive branch


Perez told Automotive News his company has invested $57 million in the Mahindra deal. Half came from the dealers' franchise fees, he says. The other half came from private investors like Baez and Goetze.

Goetze, who was Global Vehicles' president until his retirement in 2009 at age 72, said the startup was expensive: "Putting together a dealer body of almost 350 dealers and all the systems that will support it is pretty costly."

Perez is adamant that he has not mismanaged the business or squandered dealer funds. "Nobody took money from the dealers and bought a yacht," he said indignantly. "The money we got from the dealers we reinvested back into the company, plus our own cash.

"We're clean. Our books are audited every year. I can lay my head on my pillow at night and sleep good."

Perez extends an olive branch to Mahindra, saying that an entire dealer network and sales and service organization is prepared to begin selling trucks and is "waiting for them on a silver platter."

He added: "If Mahindra would move forward, I could look the other way. I can forget everything that's happened and move forward."

But Mahindra doesn't appear to be interested.
​

Click to expand...

A legal battle between India's Mahindra & Mahindra and its sole U.S. distributor has thrown into doubt its planned December launch of two mid-sized diesel pickup trucks in the United States.
Managing director Anand Mahindra said Friday the company now has "no date" for the U.S. launch. Regulatory delays pushed back earlier deadlines.
"We're still interested in getting into the U.S.," Mahindra said in an interview, declining further comment due to the legal case. "We don't want to turn this into a war of words."
The company's sole U.S. distributor, Global Vehicles USA Inc., maintains that Mahindra improperly terminated its contract in June after a failed takeover offer.
"The bottom line here is Mahindra now believes this is a huge project. They want us out of the way so they can go direct and save the money we were going to make," Global Vehicles chief executive John Perez said by phone Friday.
Global Vehicles filed a case in U.S. Federal District Court in Georgia on June 14, claiming that Mahindra had violated its contractual obligations and urged the court to block any other U.S. distribution of Mahindra products. It initiated arbitration proceedings on June 11.
The distribution agreement dates to 2006. Global Vehicles, based in Alpharetta, Georgia, says it has recruited 347 Mahindra dealers in 49 states.
Perez said his company has spent $57 million on the project and dealers have spent over $40 million more on upgrading their facilities in preparation for the Mahindra launch.
He said a team from Mahindra came to his office the week of June 11 to try and buy the company, which was created expressly to distribute Mahindra products in the U.S. He claimed the price offered was less than the $57 million already invested.
"When we first signed the contract with Mahindra, they thought this would be a small project in the States, maybe 5,000 to 6,000 vehicles a year," Perez said. "Our dealers can sell over 50,000 vehicles a year without any issues. Our dealers today have over $300 million in financing to buy Mahindra vehicles."
Mahindra maintains that the lawsuit is without merit as the contract with Global Vehicles expired on June 11.
"The contract with Global Vehicles has expired. In light of this fact, Mahindra will be contacting U.S. dealers to make other arrangements for distribution," Mahindra said in a statement. It also said Global Vehicles is trying to "manipulate the press to damage Mahindra's reputation."
Mahindra & Mahindra, India's largest utility vehicle maker, has been eager to expand overseas in an effort to transform itself into a top global SUV player.
It said in August that it had received environmental clearance to sell the two pickups in the U.S.
That month it also successfully bid for a majority stake in South Korea's cash-strapped Ssangyong Motor, in the hopes that Ssangyong's over 1,200 global dealerships and 5 brands would help it access new markets across Europe, Russia and Latin America.

Click to expand...