MALAYSIANS generally have a love-hate relationship with Proton. Some love it, some hate it. Either way, it has been a big part of Malaysian traffic, economy, society and life since its inception in 1983, growing in leaps, bounds and more than a few tumbles over the years.

So when an announcement is made about a Chinese car manufacturer taking ‘over’ Proton, a hue and cry shouldn’t be entirely unexpected.

After all, 34 years is a long enough time to endear itself to the Malaysian public.

The majority of the public who choose Proton do so out of necessity more than desire. It’s the go-to choice for those whose bank balance does not allow them an extra RM20,000 for that entry-level Korean or Japanese car.

But like it or loathe it, to most of us, Proton was our first car, and to many, their only car.

Through the years, Proton has also contributed significantly to the local automotive scene, creating demand for design engineers and creative specialists as they progressed from simply selling rebadged Japanese models to producing their own engine, car design and ethos. With all that come the creation of jobs and interdependent economic opportunities – from manufacturing, marketing and financing those cars.

After all they have given us, did we really fail Proton? Or was Proton to be blamed?

All of us could be culpable.

The financiers who typically charge a higher interest for local cars?

The government who saw fit to allow a second national car in 1994, and relaxed rules on locally assembled cars?

The management who attempted one-too-many joint ventures with as many as five partners across multiple segments at the same time, resulting in almost twenty car models in total?

The idea that manufacturing eight car models at the same time would be strategic though your closest rival is only producing half the models you are?

The strategists that saw fit to assemble cars of far better quality for lower prices to European countries while reserving the problematic power windows for the Malaysian market segment?

The service centres that often charged higher prices than import models?

Or is the blame to go to Perodua, whose business practises ironically somewhat mirror Proton’s early days of limited models and a single partner, saw it gaining significant acceptance among Malaysians, and even, for a few years, knocking Proton off the throne for best sales?

Having our own car label is a romantic idea. After all, only fifty or so countries can claim a car industry and less than a third of that can claim the capability to build a car from the ground up. 

But perhaps it is time we face the fact that the car industry is rapidly changing. The car industry is increasingly being influenced by China and India. Many older, more established brands before Proton have fallen into foreign hands, and many will continue to. Proton itself bought over the well-known English sports car manufacturer, Lotus, but not before an Italian company purchased it first.

The Chinese company purchasing the 49.9% share in Proton, Geely, is also the owner of Volvo, a globally well-known Swedish luxury car brand. Volvo was established in 1927, and had already been sold to Ford prior to Geely coming in. At the time of purchase, Geely only had one-third the number of workers Volvo did.

Like many Chinese companies taking the world by storm, Geely is a relatively young car company – established 3 years after Proton.

Geely also owns, among others, the iconic London Taxi Company, responsible for the famous London Black Cabs.

If allowing Proton to have such a large foreign equity is forbidden, perhaps we should look inwardly, towards a single, larger Malaysian car company like the Germans have in Volkswagen or the Americans in Ford.

Or perhaps a new, long-term strategic partnership like Suzuki-Maruti in India. Or a merger like Hyundai-Kia.

Sadly, the most telling thing about the whole Proton share sale fiasco may have nothing to do with Proton or even the car industry at all, but that the near-complete trust once enjoyed by the government to make sound economic choices on behalf of the people may be fast eroding. – May 30, 2017.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.