Workflow
车身零部件
icon
Search documents
超长账期问题:整车厂之后,零部件巨头该出来说话了
Jing Ji Guan Cha Wang· 2025-06-17 14:40
Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing issues in the automotive supply chain, particularly focusing on the extended payment terms imposed by large parts manufacturers on smaller suppliers, despite recent commitments from automakers to shorten their payment periods [3][4]. Group 1: Payment Terms and Industry Dynamics - A recent lawsuit highlights the contract disputes between a mold company and a joint venture parts manufacturer, revealing underlying issues related to payment terms and cash flow for small enterprises [3]. - Automakers have received praise for their commitment to a 60-day payment term, but the larger issue lies with major parts manufacturers who impose even longer payment terms on smaller suppliers [3][4]. - For instance, Huayu Automotive, a major parts supplier under SAIC, has an accounts payable turnover period of 163 days, while Dongfeng Technology has a turnover period exceeding 196 days [4]. Group 2: Impact on Smaller Suppliers - The accounts payable turnover days do not equate to the contractual payment terms, indicating that actual payment cycles can be significantly longer, affecting the cash flow of smaller suppliers [4]. - Larger parts manufacturers, such as CATL, have been able to maintain a favorable accounts receivable turnover period of around 60 days, while their own accounts payable turnover days exceed 258 days, further straining smaller suppliers [4][5]. - The article suggests that these large manufacturers are leveraging their negotiating power to impose harsher terms on smaller suppliers, exacerbating the financial strain within the supply chain [5]. Group 3: Call for Transparency and Fairness - The article advocates for greater transparency in payment policies from large manufacturers, similar to the commitments made by automakers, to foster a healthier competitive environment [5]. - It emphasizes that while extended payment terms may seem like a financial strategy, they should not undermine fair competition and the integrity of the supply chain [5]. - The article questions whether large parts manufacturers should also take responsibility and clarify their payment practices to ensure fairness across the industry [5].