Regarding the double-integration policy, there are many opinions. Regardless of whether it supports or opposes, it has been formally implemented since April 1 this year. After the implementation, how will the price of a single point be set? How much will a point be suitable for? Does the new energy point exceed supply? How are the points traded? These problems still test the competent department's policy design capabilities.
Wang Yunshi, the author of this article, is the director of the China Energy and Transportation Center of the Davis Institute of Transportation, University of California, and a member of the International Expert Advisory Committee of the China Electric Vehicles 100.
He believes that the final unit price of new energy vehicles in 2019-20 depends on three factors: 1) Whether China's emerging new energy auto companies can produce and sell a large number of customer-friendly products in the short term; 2) Whether the joint venture can turn at a high speed ;3) How strict is the integration policy in China in 2021 and beyond.
The double-integration policy was formally implemented on April 1 this year, but the new energy credit policy does not actually begin until 2019. As far as companies are concerned, the latest can be completed by August 30, 2021, 2019 and 2020. In the past two years, the negative integral compensation task has been prepared for the full deployment of the double-integration policy. This year, the government has a lot to do.
First of all, we will introduce the situation related to point trading in California's zero-emission vehicle policy. Because California has only about ten companies that are subject to zero-emission vehicle policies, no trading platform has been established. Companies are trading behind closed doors and need only air resources to California. The committee reports on the number of points traded and the units traded (without divulging the price). The California Air Resources Board publishes an annual balance of each company's points. In addition, the company can still accept fines if it fails to complete the requirements for points. The Health and Safety Code section 43211 of California lacks an integral penalty of US$5,000. Until now, no firm has chosen to accept fines. The main reason is that companies believe that they have been guilty of wrongdoing, affect reputation, and have laws. Risk. The fine price in California provides a guidance price for the participating companies.
There are about 100 companies that are regulated by the double-credit policy in China. The one-on-one transaction method is obviously inappropriate. Trading through a trading platform is a consensus. However, the establishment of this platform is also very particular. Fairness, transparency and independence are the The basic elements of the success of the platform. The most feared is that platform management operators use insider information to profit and disturb the order of the trading market; this is a precedent in other trading markets. The good news is that the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is now establishing this independent, non-profit. The platform. I wish this platform and trading mechanism to be established as soon as possible.
In addition, there are many factors that need to be considered in the future operation of the platform. For example, if a company reports its entire production in the previous year on June 30 of each year, or whether it reports once a month, the last one-time notification is beneficial to companies with surplus points. Because the missing companies will be very anxious to find new energy vehicle points that can be purchased within a limited time. Moreover, whether non-automotive industry's third parties can participate in the transaction, or whether the company can buy and sell more than they need to produce. Points? These are questions that are worth studying.
In January, the electric car 100-person meeting also suggested setting a minimum price for the points, and fearing that the points would be too low to harm new energy companies. On other occasions, it was also proposed that a ceiling price should be set to prevent the price from disrupting the market. However, 2019-20 How much is the value of a single new energy vehicle integrated in the end?
Recently, the first electric vehicle network published the article 'How to calculate the price of new energy points when the implementation of the double-integration policy is on the way?' (hereinafter referred to as: how to calculate). The author made a very convincing analysis of the new energy car price points. The conclusion is that the value of a single new energy vehicle will be around 1,800 yuan in 2019 and about 1,500 yuan in 2020. That is to say, 3.8 electric vehicles with a driving range of 250 kilometers will be calculated based on 2020 prices. The earning of points is only 9,500 yuan, far below the 34,000 yuan of state subsidies to be implemented after June 2018, 1/3 of which is unacceptable and does not include local subsidies. An important reason for the introduction of double-integration policy is to use Points are used instead of subsidies. Such low integral prices will hinder the development of commercialization of new energy vehicles. In 2020, the price of a single new energy vehicle with an integral of about RMB 2,500 will be far lower than the forecast of another professional professional unit: In the range of 6,300-8,800 yuan (recently updated to five thousand yuan). I think the unit price of new energy vehicles is likely to be higher than 8,800 yuan. The reason is very simple, there are both in the supply and demand of new energy car points Unbalanced relationship.
For companies that have points for sale, if the buyer bids below the expected price, the transaction cannot be concluded, and there will be no impact on the survival of the selling company. Before 2020, the integrated surplus enterprises can still obtain subsidies from the central and local governments at least. The price expectation is at least not lower than the subsidy level, otherwise there will not be so many investors scrambling to enter the new energy automobile production industry. Why would Volkswagen and Ford have to rush to find new energy vehicles joint ventures?
According to traditional economics knowledge, there will be an intersection between supply and demand; but if the transaction is unsuccessful, the integrated-surplus company will be much better off than the deficit-losing corporate days. Because of the just-needed presence in the points market, the company has a few major integral surpluses. For example, selling half the points may be more profitable than selling all the points. Selling one-third may be more profitable. If possible, they can only release 10-20% of the surplus points in each negotiation. , and claimed that other points are being negotiated for sale. For companies with deficits in points, not buying points means partial suspension of production, leaving the market, especially the luxury car market, permanently to competitors, which is unacceptable; The pressure of corporate Chinese managers is huge. Under the order of “Getthe deal done or else!” at the headquarters, even if the unit price is RMB 10,000, it will be a piece of cake.
Many forecasters have emphasized that the new energy points will be slightly oversupplied in 2020. They may not have considered that many enterprise groups must keep their new energy car points in the group in order to meet the needs of the brother companies within the group. Effects. Local governments may also step in and contribute to the local surplus of new energy vehicle companies to sell credits to local credit-deficient companies at 'friendly prices'. In local companies, it is often large-scale state-owned companies that are ineligible for taxation. Large and corporate leaders go straight to the central government, and the local government has the obligation to support them. More severely, a few companies control the market for surplus new energy points. Some dual companies lack the points to buy new energy vehicles. In addition to buying points to reach new energy vehicles without points.
The data for each legal entity is not easy to obtain, but as shown in Table 1, if we assume that we need to complete the 10% requirement for points in 2017, the top five group companies with joint ventures are all big players. If we assume 2017 If you need to complete the 6% points requirement, only Changan has excess points in the top five groups, but Changan and its joint venture Ford need positive points for new energy vehicles to meet the fuel consumption standard negative points. Of course, the first major SAIC passenger vehicle itself, Excluding the joint venture, the new energy vehicle mileage in 2017 has reached 13%; it can be assumed that SAIC's excess points will remain in the group. Among all the companies, BYD has the most surplus balance, followed by Geely and Beiqi. Among the local companies, the Great Wall is the lowest, but it is still far better than the joint venture. As shown in Table 1, the average annual energy of each new energy vehicle in the entire industry is 2.9 points. The new energy vehicle of Dongfeng Group can get 4 points for each vehicle. Since BYD has many plug-in hybrids, it is divided into 3. On average, SAIC's new energy vehicles receive an average of 2.6 points per vehicle.
If we envisage a 6% new energy vehicle integration policy in 2017, there are a total of 9 group companies with surplus points in Table 1. BYD's surplus points account for 30% of the total tradable surplus points. BYD, Geely and BAIC Group It accounts for 70% of the market (Table 2).
If we envisage a 10% new energy vehicle integration policy in 2017, there will be a shortage of new energy vehicle points for the entire industry. In Table 1, only seven group companies have surplus points. BYD can control 40% of the total surplus points (Figure (3). BYD, Geely and Beijing Automotive Group together account for 74% of the market! These three companies will not, should not be OPEC?
However, please don’t panic. The entire industry’s claim that the supply exceeds demand in 2020 is not unfounded. In 2019, 15 emerging new energy auto companies are estimated to have more than 900,000 capacity; and many joint ventures will also launch them. Of new energy vehicles. Don't forget Tesla. Tesla sold more than 16,700 cars in China in 2017. It was calculated in five cents per car and could reach 84,000 new energy car points. The fourth position in the list of all the integrated surplus companies can play a certain role in stabilizing the points market (see the last line in Table 1). I think Tesla could really share the share of the new energy vehicle market in China Also proved the openness of the market.
To sum up, the final unit price of new energy vehicles in 2019-20 depends on three factors: 1) Whether China's emerging new energy auto companies can produce and sell a large number of customer-appropriate products in the short term; 2) Whether the joint venture can turn at high speed ;3) How strict is the integration policy in China in 2021 and beyond.
Therefore, my prediction is that the possibility of new energy vehicles with a unit price of more than RMB 8,000 in 2019-20 is greater than 50%. However, the government does not need to set a minimum maximum guidance price. The unit price is low, indicating that China New Energy The automotive commerce market has matured and consumers have embraced new technologies; the unit price is high, indicating that those who dare to eat crabs need to receive the high-risk returns they deserve.
Of course, the strictness of the implementation of the double-integration policy is not the same; if the punishment is not strict, the final unit price of the integration will indeed be lower than the price of the imported baby carriage; this point, of course, the domestic authors understand the facts better than I do.
The author divides the fuel consumption integral value and the new energy vehicle integral value by two, and the value of a single mixed credit of RMB 3,750 in 2020 is still very low. Moreover, the calculation of mixed value is more complicated and it is superimposed on the double-minded branch company. Relationships, not averages.