The Euro VI changeover

HIGHWAY INTELLIGENCE
- THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER January, 2014
Executive Summary
Heavy (>16 tons) truck registrations in Europe (EU + EFTA) 2013 were reported close to 239,000 units. As a
result of the Euro VI deadline on December 31, we had forecast a full-year market just above 225,000 units but
the actual level surprised us. Based on research of historical episodes, we had expected more restraint in production from the OEMs, but the December month was the strongest on record, and will probably rank among
the top 5 months of all time. The pre-buying in 2013 will have a significant negative impact on 2014 demand;
registrations could definitely fall by as much as 80% in January vs. December, but this effect should be brief and
not upset the supply-demand balance in the road freight market. et.
Die Umstellung auf Euro VI
Die Zahl der europäischen (EU + EFTA) Neuzulassungen von Lkw über 16 t hat 2013 annähernd 239.000 Einheiten erreicht. Wegen der Euro-VI-Frist zum 31.12.2013 hatten wir bereits 225.000 Neuzulassungen prognostiziert, aber die tatsächliche Zahl hat unsere Erwartungen übertroffen. Basierend auf unserer Analyse der relevanten Erfahrungen der Vergangenheit hatten wir mehr Zurückhaltung der OEMs bei der Produktion erwartet,
aber Dezember 2013 war ein Rekord-Dezember, der höchstwahrscheinlich zu den fünf stärksten Monaten der
Geschichte gehören wird. Die vorgezogenen Käufe von Lkw über 16 t werden die Nachfrage 2014 maßgeblich
negativ beeinflussen und die Neuzulassungen im Januar 2014 könnten durchaus um maximal 80% im Vergleich
zum Vormonat fallen. Die Auswirkungen sollten aber zeitlich begrenzt bleiben und das Verhältnis zwischen
Angebot und Nachfrage im Transportmarkt nicht wesentlich ändern.
This Dieser Bericht ist eine gekürzte und aktualisierte Version des Berichts von Rementum Research & Management vom November 2013. Wenn Sie sich für eine vollständige Version dieses Berichts oder für andere
Nfz-Forschungsergebnisse von Rementum interessieren, gehen Sie bitte zu www.rementum.de oder kontaktieren Sie uns unter den folgenden Angaben telefonisch oder per Email:
Für den Inhalt:
Ansprechpartner für unsere
deutschen Kunden:
Carl Holmquist
[email protected]
Tel: +46 40 20 53 80
Carlsgatan 12A
SE-211 20 Malmö
SCHWEDEN
Douglas Floyd
[email protected]
Tel: 030-408 173 372
Fax: 030-408 173 450
Friedrichstraße 88
10117 Berlin
Rementum © 2014. All Rights Reserved.
Volume: 2, Issue: 1, Publisher: Rementum Research
SHORT, BUT NOT SO SWEET
Fig. 1: Sharp swings in 2012-13 European truck orders
Source: Rementum Research, OEM reports
KEY CONCLUSIONS
1.) Road carriers pulling vehicle investments forward due to legislative changes is
a historical fact in several regions.
2.) A complicated and confusing EuroVI
introduction in 2014 has created extensive
pre-buying behaviour. Several surveys, including Rementum’s own, point at 15-20%
of carriers pre-buying in 2013.
3.) OEMs have historically managed to remain fairly disciplined ahead of emissions
standards changeovers. EPA 2010 and
Euro VI are exceptions, however.
4.) We estimate the full-year magnitude
of the pre-buying to 23,000 vehicles >16
tons. This should not impact the capacity
balance, carrier earnings and underlying
investment needs negatively in 2014. The
underlying vehicles market is growing
NOT ALWAYS AS PLANNED
about their investment decisions.
Authories are of course very aware
of the temptation in adjusting one’s
behaviour around cost-increasing
changes in the legislative framework.
Environmental legislators therefore
often try to actively shorten the period
of potential cost imbalances by offering different types of incentives for
investments in newer, cleaner technology. Sometimes this intention from the
authorities falls short.
In the past fifteen years we have seen
numerous examples of volatile investment patterns around the changeover
dates to new engine emission standards. A certain time period ahead of
the changeover net truck orders rise
sharply (fig.1, as an example) for carriers to take deliveries of new vehicles,
but with old engine standards, ahead
of the deadline. Subsequently there
is a sharp drop in orders for a period
after the implementation of the new
engine standard.
This happened in the US in 2002
(with the expedited implementation
of EPA 2004 regulations) and 2006
(ahead of the EPA 2007 implementation). In the former development a
market rumour started in early 2002
2
that heavy truck engines developed for
the EPA ’04 standard would malfunction, particularly in the winter season
– as diesel fuel tends to increase in
viscosity at lower outside air temperatures. The background to this rumour
was probably that the introduction
of the EPA ’04 standards had been
brought forward by fifteen months,
from the original plan of January 2004
(hence “EPA 2004”) to October 2002.
This expedited launch was a partial
retribution from the US EPA for the
US heavy truck engine suppliers failing
to comply with previous emission
standards. The new engines had consequently been allowed one year less of
proper winter testing before the launch
and among US freight carriers the concerns were high about this drawback.
In 2006 – ahead of the upcoming
EPA 2007 introduction – the focus
was on the relative merits and drawbacks for operators from using either
Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) or
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
technologies to reduce NOx (more on
these two technologies shortly). This
debate – mainly between the “European” SCR proponents and the “American” EGR proponents - was not
always transparent for an outsider and
carriers consequently were confused
Perhaps the most extreme period of
erratic order patterns in North America could be seen in 2009 – ahead of
the EPA 2010 deadline. In this case
it was not an overall industry phenomenon, but rather a dramatic shift
in market shares between OEMs. To
meet the significantly tighter standards for NOx emissions, there was a
very clear strategic choice to be made
for engine developers: either build
on one existing technology for NOx
-reduction – particularly the method
of using re-circulated exhaust gases (EGR) to reduce the amount of
oxygen in the engine cylinders and
thereby creating combustion at a lower
chamber temperature, which tends to
reduce NOx – or use a combination
of several technolologies? Caterpillar
came to the conclusion in 2008 that it
would not meet 2010 standards based
on EGR technology alone, as the
most common applications of vehicles with “Cat” engines did not allow
sufficient cooling of the cylinders. It
consequently pulled out of the North
American heavy truck market entirely.
The company had gone from being a
heavy duty diesel engine market leader
to exiting the market in less than ten
years.
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
Navistar International, however, believed that the headwind for long-haulage vehicles cruising down the highway
would sufficiently support the process
of cooling the combustion chamber. It
was proven wrong. As the EPA 2010
deadline crept closer, Navistar tried all
possible methods to avoid an introduction of new rules allowing SCR-vehicles. This failed. So the last hope for
Navistar was to run up a huge backlog
of orders for the EPA 2007-compliant
vehicles ahead of the 2010 deadline,
as vehicles in production at the end
of 2009 could still be delivered later in
2010. Allegedly the Navistar assembly
lines were littered with half-finished
chassis for months. The strategy
worked, as can be seen in fig. 2, at least
for some time. Navistar’s market share
rose dramatically ahead of EPA 2010
and somewhat after. When the backlog
of 2007-compliant vehicles was empty,
however, all Navistar was left with was
a non-compliant captive (and therefore
usually more profitable) truck engine
platform. Aggregated fines were massive for Navistar, and the market share
started dropping again at a brisk pace.
This drop may not have stopped yet.
The company has a strained financial
structure and credit rating agencies
during the course of 2013 downgraded Navistar debt several times due to
its eroding market position.
LESS DRAMATIC IN EUROPE
E
urope has historically seen relatively limited impact from emission
standards changeovers on truck order
patterns. Euro III was introduced
in the year 2000 without even much
of a discussion. There was a heated debate among European vehicle
OEMs around the Euro IV introduction in October 2005. It focused on
the relative merits and drawbacks for
operators from using either EGR or
SCR technologies to reduce engine
emissions. This debate was not always
fully transparent for an outsider and
carriers consequently were confused
about their investment decisions. Despite this we cannot trace any dramatic
impact on European order levels from
that time. By the time implementation
of Euro V was underway, in October
2008, SCR was established as a dominant technology and the global economy in one of its worst tailspins for decades. Pre-buying of Euro V vehicles
was consequently of limited interest
for European operators and order levels are difficult to analyse by isolating
the general impact from the economy.
Before 2013 the only really noticeable
impact from regulatory changes on
European registrations data was in
April 2006, ahead of the introduction
of compulsory digital tachographs.
That massive spike in registrations was
not affecting build schedules to the
same extent, as major technological
risks were obviously not present for
the OEMs. We will later see - and the
section on Navistar’s problems with
meeting EPA 2010 demands highlights
this - that the behaviour of OEMs in
triggering speculative pre-buying is
critical for the actual fluctuations in
orders and deliveries.
Fig. 2: Market share development, North America, trucks >8t
Source: Rementum Research, JD Power, OEM data
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
ENTER EURO VI
The lack of major previous pre-buy-
ing periods in Europe makes the 2013
pre-buying of Euro V vehicles all the
more interesting to understand and
analyse. The first Euro VI-compliant
vehicles were actually brought into operation by Scania already in early 2011,
but most OEMs showcased their new
engine generations at the September
2012 IAA exhibition with production
starting in spring 2013 (although not
for the higher engine output ranges).
The old EGR vs. SCR debate was
back, although with a nuanced twist.
The problem with insufficiently cooled
EGR was increased considerably compared with Euro V (hence the need
to introduce SCR). This has created
vehicle design issues – such as a need
to increase grill sizes to increase air inlet. For the higher hp-ranges (13- and
16 litre engines) non-cooled EGR has
been introduced. Most of the OEMs
were convinced that only a combination of the two emission-reducing
technologies could produce desired
results, but Iveco has remained firm
that its Euro VI vehicles will only use
AdBlue (after-treatment fluid) to reach
the standards. The additional cost of
AdBlue should be more than offset by
reduced fuel consumption, according
to the OEM.
ASSESSING THE COSTS
It is obvious that the Euro VI intro-
duction has created an exceptional
challenge for the heavy truck OEMs.
Irrespective of the chosen technological solution there will be additional
costs associated with Euro VI vehicles.
A survey by Royal Bank of Scotland
in early 2013 gave a clear indication
of Euro VI purchase price increases
in the range of EUR10-12,000 (or
10-12% vs. Euro V) for an average
vehicle. The number of independent
fuel consumption tests are limited and,
if available, inconclusive. Few OEMs
expect a dramatic impact on fuel
efficiency, but when introducing the
Euro VI standards, European authorities predicted a 3% increase in overall
fuel consumption. Later reports (such
3
as from TNO Science and Industry in
2006 and 2008) indicated an increase
in fuel consumption of up to 8%. In
addition; service and maintenance
life cycle costs will be higher than
previously. Combined with a reduced
payload in the magnitude of 150-200
kilograms, these effects will clearly be
noticeable for many carriers.
Although scientifically challenging to
discuss an “average” vehicle, we need
to have some standard benchmark in
order to estimate the full economic
implications for the carriers using
Euro VI vehicles relative to the Euro
Vs. Basing the analysis on a “plain
vanilla” heavy 4x2 over-the-road
tractor in long-haulage international
transport is one option. For the case
of simplicity we have assumed no
impact on the fuel economy from the
changeover. As can be seen in fig. 3; in
this particular case the cost of capital
is not significant in relation to the
major costs of operation, being the
driver and the fuel. This will of course
change, to an extent, if the other cost
factors vary. In a market were driver
wages are lower and interest rates
are higher, the propensity to pre-buy
Euro V vehicles should be higher, all
else equal. The same goes for vehicles
with lower annual mileage (less total
fuel consumption), but the opposite
should hold for vehicles with relatively
expensive configurations. The best
answer we can state about pre-buying
based on the question “how much is
the additional cost” is consequently, “it
depends”:
- In Eastern Europe the propensity to
pre-buy Euro V should be higher (due
to relatively lower labour costs).
- In Southern Europe the propensity
to pre-buy Euro V should be higher
(higher interest rates).
- In local distribution applications the
propensity to pre-buy Euro V should
be higher (lower mileage).
- In larger fleets the propensity to prebuy Euro V should be higher (maintenance costs will rise relatively more).
Larger fleets are also more likely to
have access to financing at any given
time and could therefore invest more
opportunistically.
THE MAIN PROBLEM
These are only general conclusions
on incremental cost effects. In reality
there are literally hundreds of other factors that will decide whether a
freight carrier has an incentive to prebuy Euro V vehicles:
- Governmental subsidies
- Preferred vehicle brands
- Access to capital
- Etc, etc.
Just looking at the first of these points,
subsidies, we must conclude that the
regulatory environment has been
unusually vague in 2012-13. Taking the
UK as our first example; Derogation is
a scheme that allows existing vehi-
Fig. 3: Cost split for a typical European long-haulage road tractor
Sources: Navistar International
4
cles not meeting incoming legislation
to be registered after the legislation
comes into force. This is carefully
controlled and is only available under
certain pre-defined rules and for a
limited time period. Although Euro
6 becomes mandatory for new trucks
registered for the first time from 31st
December 2013, derogation means it
will still be possible to register Euro
5 trucks for up to one year after that
date subject to the following: The vehicle meets all other legislative requirements applicable at the time of first
registration.
This means that any vehicles manufactured during October, November
or December 2013 must be registered
before 31st December 2013. A vehicle
purchased and manufactured before
1 October 2013 could consequently,
under certain conditions, be legally
registered up until 31 December 2014.
Recently DAF’s UK managing director, Ray Ashworth, commented in
Transport Engineer: “We sold 3,500
trucks in December, compared with
less than 700 the year before. And 700
of those were sold and registered in
the last week before Christmas, ready
for bodying over the next few weeks.”
Ashworth continued: “The high volumes also suggest that many vehicles
that could have been derogated to
enter service during 2014 have actually
gone on the road already,” he adds.
His point is certainly borne out by
the strength of the UK market in the
heavy sector at 16 t and above, which
turned out to be more than 30% larger
than in 2012 and the highest since
1989. The purpose of the UK engine
changeover legislation is not entirely
clear to us and probably not to all
carriers either.
In Holland the government already
in 2011 announced there would be a
subsidy for Euro VI purchases, but the
introduction in early 2012 was postponed due to uncertainty about the
expected return. Mid 2012 the Dutch
government clarified that EUR 39m,
or a maximum of EUR4.5k per vehicle, was earmarked for subsidies, with
more than 80% to be paid out in 2013
as the availability of Euro VI engines
was still limited.
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
The perhaps most important
long-haulage road freight traffic
incentive in Europe is the German
Maut, or highway toll for commercial
vehicles. With well over 35m registered
border crossings annually, the country
set out an ambitious target to drive
the introduction of Euro V vehicles in
Germany over a four-year time period.
Starting in 2006, a reduced Maut was
offered for those vehicles compliant
with Euro V standards, although the
deadline for new vehicles was not
until 2009. This of course helped the
phase-in of new emission standards
across many parts of Europe. This
time around, when the technological
challenge seems significantly higher,
the situation has been marked by confusion. In a truck dealer survey, made
by the financial research company
OTR Global in July 2013, a German
MAN dealer stated: “Customers seem
to be insecure over what to buy. The
toll incentive law has been postponed,
and we have elections in three months,
so the toll won’t take effect before
summer 2014.” As of late November
the German elections were over, a
coalition government looked likely to
be formed, but there was still no clear
indication of what subsidies would be
offered for Euro VI vehicles on German roads in 2014. In December 2013
German heavy truck registrations all
of a sudden reached the highest level
since September 2008.
MARKET IMPACT
Already before November 2013
we could conclude that the phase-in
of Euro VI engines was not running
smoothly. Although the technology
had been available for over two years,
albeit not in all engine ranges, less
than 4% of registrations in that period
were estimated to have been Euro VI
vehicles. This was less than half the
level estimated at the same time at the
run-up to Euro IV.
Many stakeholders have been forced
to manage this uncertain situation and
tried to steer road carrier behaviour in
a manner most likely to benefit them.
OEMs and asset finance companies
are only two examples of stakeholders
Fig. 4: Question: Has Euro VI changeover affected your investments?
Sources: Rementum Research
that have their private agendas when
it comes to managing the EuroV/VI
changeover. DAF CEO, Harrie Schippers, was interviewed by Commercial
Motor magazine in July 2013 on this
issue: “In the UK, Daf has chosen to
roll out Euro-5 for as long as possible”. While this makes sense in terms
of market sentiment, it’s not without
risk and could depress the Euro-6
price as OEMs with only Euro-6 to offer have to compete at Euro-5 prices.
Is Daf running the risk of launching a
Euro-6 product in 2014 into an already
discounted market? Schippers isn’t
worried. “We invested a lot of money
on Euro-6, but I’m glad we took the
decision to incorporate some of the
fuel-economy improvements we had
planned for Euro-6 into our Euro-5
range,” he says. “Our Euro-5 ATe
models offer a very attractive alternative to Euro-6 right now. We’re breaking new records in many European
countries with the best fuel consumption ever on certain test routes, and in
markets such as the UK, that’s extremely important. “We see that there’s
a lot of demand for Euro-5 from
those customers who want to have the
benefit but not the cost increase of
Euro-6. A Euro-6 truck with all the
additional content will see a significant
price increase; I don’t see how we can
avoid that.” The DAF assembly plant
in Eindhoven raised its day rate from
142 trucks to 190 trucks in August.
In early November the manufacturer
reached 205 trucks per day, an all-time
high, and for the first time in DAF
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
history; more than 1,000 vehicles were
assembled in the same week.
This behaviour by the OEMs is
crucial in understanding the unusually
large impact on heavy truck deliveries
in 2013. The two markets in Europe
showing by far the sharpest jump in
registrations at the end of last year are
the Netherlands and the UK. DAF is
the market leader in both.
CARRIER SURVEYS
To get an independent assessment
of the tendency among European
carriers to pre-buy Euro V vehicles,
Rementum in the late summer of 2013
conducted its own survey among approximately 200 larger (>100 vehicles)
road carrier fleets. Generally speaking
we can confirm the picture presented
in a 2012 Texaco/Motor Carrier survey: carriers do not seem particularly
inclined to state the Euro VI introduction in 2014 as a major reason to
invest more in 2013. Actually, the vast
majority of the respondents to our
survey have not been investing above
normal last year; 87% have invested
as normal or below. When it comes
to the question on whether Euro VI
has had an impact on investment
decisions, only 17% of the respondents state so (fig. 4). This is broadly
in line with the 20% of respondents
in the 2012 Texaco/Motor Carrier
survey stating an intention to pre-buy
Euro V engines. These results are not
sufficient to more precisely quantify
5
the pre-buying, however. For instance,
there may be respondents that have
pulled forward investment decisions in
H2 ‘13 but they may still be investing
below normal in the 2013 FY, due to
the poor economic start to the year.
TIME SERIES ANALYSIS AND
ECONOMIC FACTORS
Can this widespread indifference towards the complicated and confusing
Euro VI emission standards changeover really be true among carriers?
Both “yes” and “no”:
Yes, if we look at the carrier economics again there may not be so
strong incentives to pre-buy after
all. In total, we must say, the overall
economic case for pre buying Euro V
vehicles is not extremely compelling.
That said; as demonstrated above,
there can be very significant differences in incentives between different carriers. This depends on the factor cost
mix pointed out earlier. A response
rate of 15-20% of carriers conducting
pre-buying of Euro V vehicles could
be consistent with such an analysis.
EPA 2004 AND 2007
The circumstances around the
United States EPA 2004 emission standards changeover have already been
described more in detail earlier in this
report. We have analysed this episode
numerically and the result can be seen
in fig. 5. What can be clearly seen is
that monthly net class 8 orders rose
very sharply in the spring of 2002.
About a year before the changeover
the order level was just above 11,000
units. Six months later the average
monthly order level had risen close to
70%, to just below 19,000 units. At the
time of the changeover, and the immediate months afterwards, order levels
receded to the 11,000 level (-40% from
the pre-buying phase).
But if we extend the window just a
few months after the EPA 2004 engine
introduction, orders are well exceeding
those seen a year ahead of the changeover. About 15 months after the new
emission standard introduction net
class 8 truck orders were surpassing
the pre-buying levels in mid-2002 and
kept rising.
are starting to decline sharply, bringing
heavy truck orders down as well. Consequently we see very limited - if any
- impact on order levels ahead of EPA
2007 as the US is heading in to one of
its worst recessions in decades.
What does this tell us about pre-buying in a period marked by considerable
uncertainty regarding engine economics?
1. It certainly does happen. The 2002
increase, and subsequent fall, in orders
is exceptional in such a short time
frame. Going back to the start of 1996
we have not been able to find such a
pattern in order levels anywhere else.
2. OEMs in general have not been
willing, or able, to meet such a short
surge in demand. Looking at fig. 5,
we can clearly see that the swings in
volumes delivered are not near the
order levels.
3. The economy still has the last word
on heavy truck demand. The US
economy had started a very significant
economic recovery about a year before
the EPA 2004 changeover. Pre-buying
orders were consequently placed early,
with a growing market in mind. This
economic strength also resulted in renewed momentum in vehicle demand
shortly after the post-EPA 2004 dip.
We can also not ignore the order
levels developing throughout 2013 (see
fig. 1, above) One obvious suspicion
when looking at the results from
our study and the one conducted by
Texaco/Motor Carrier in 2012 is that
carriers may have a good reason to
understate the amount of pre-buying
when discussing the matter in public.
In figure 6 (page 7), we can clearly
see the impact of EPA 2004 on class
8 deliveries, as the truck retail sales
growth pauses in early 2003, despite a
strong improvement in carrier earnings. It subsequently catches up in
early 2004. This pattern is even more
pronounced around EPA 2007. During
2006 North American carrier earnings
A final option in truly assessing the
heavy truck market impact in 201314; truck order and delivery data from
historical episodes of pre-buying, can
provide us considerable insight to what
should be expected from the current
Euro V phase-out. As stated earlier,
the periods of pre-buying in Europe
have thus far been few and relatively
limited in scale. In North America, however, we have experienced a
couple of quite significant pre-buys.
Below we will display graphs on and
discuss the available order and delivery
data from these historical episodes.
Fig. 5: Average monthly class 8 orders and deliveries around EPA ‘04
These three observations and particularly the last one - on the overriding
role of the freight economy – are
Sources: Rementum Research, ACT Research
6
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
crucial to draw qualified conclusions
about the 2013 Euro V pre-buying;
the sharply rising order volumes
from the early summer of 2013 are
not only coming from carriers pulling investments forward. As we have
written several times in our monthly
market reports; there is a positive
underlying trend in European carrier
earnings, due to rising freight volumes, an improving capacity balance
and relatively stable developments in
factor costs. The situation is consequently similar to that around US
EPA ’04. The window of pre-buying
in Europe has been shorter, however, due to the sluggish state of the
European freight economy in Q1
2013. Therefore, we estimate that only
Sep- Dec. heavy truck registrations
have been significantly affected by
the Euro VI introduction in 2014. In
our November edition of this report
we estimated the total impact to be
about 3-4,000 units (>16t) per month
in that period. Today (late January)
we know that the OEMs took a more
opportunistic approach to a market
inflated by pre-buying. The immediate
impact on our deliveries estimates for
2013-‘14 is an additional pull-forward
effect of about 10,000 units (>16t);
totally 23,000 units in 2013 (see fig. 7
for an indication of magnitude). We
have consequently lowered our 2014
European OE deliveries forecast to
355,000 >6t units (previously 370’); an
approximate decline of 7%, compared
to our preliminary deliveries data for
2013. We expect continued underlying
freight volume improvements throughout 2014 (fig. 8). The exceptional
registration figures in Q4 2013 does
not significantly alter the picture of a
gradually tightening supply-demand
balance in the road freight market so
European deliveries in 2015 should
reach over 385,000 units >6t.
Fig. 6: North American carrier earnings and vehicle investments
Fig. 7: Average monthly heavy truck registrations around Euro VI
Fig. 8: European carrier earnings and vehicle investments
Malmö, 27 January 2014
Sources: Rementum Research, ACEA, ACT, Carrier earnings reports
This document has been prepared by Rementum Research & Management AB for information purposes only and should be viewed solely in conjunction with the oral presentation provided by Rementum. It is not an offer or solicitation of any offer to purchase or sell any financial instrument. Whilst reasonable care has been taken to ensure that its
contents are not untrue or misleading, no representation is made as to its accuracy or completeness and no liability is accepted for any loss arising from reliance on it. Rementum
AB staff are not permitted to invest in securities issued by companies mentioned in the presentation. Copyright (2014) Rementum Research & Management AB (corporate id
no. 556841-0491). All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without permission.
REMENTUM RESEARCH: THE EURO VI CHANGEOVER
7

Download Report