“Three years ago: Volvo Penta abandons Seven Marine engines: historic decision or is it hiding other intentions?”

 It was a historic moment in the world of marine propulsion when the Swedish company Volvo Penta announced, about three years ago, that it would abandon production of   Seven Marine engines in favor of a more sustainable marine propulsion system. Although the decision was seen as a step towards a cleaner marine environment, some questioned whether it could mask the Company’s differing intentions.

To understand the context, it is important to remember Seven Marine’s significant contribution to the marine industry. Seven Marine was founded in 2010 as a small family business in the United States and quickly earned a reputation for its powerful outboards. For example, the 557 model has set new power standards in its class and offers an impressive 557 horsepower. Later, the company introduced the 627, which further increased the horsepower to a whopping 627 horsepower. These products were developed by transforming a car engine into an outboard engine and immediately attracted the attention of the sector and high-performance pleasure boating enthusiasts.

In 2017 Seven Marine underwent a big change when Volvo Penta, the world’s leading supplier of marine and industrial engines, became the American company’s largest shareholder. The move has raised doubts and uncertainty about how the acquisition could affect the future of Seven Marine and its role in the marine energy sector.

The turning point towards sustainability:

In November 2020, Volvo Penta firmly announced its decision to cease production and distribution of Seven Marine engines in January 2021. This strategic move is the result of growing pressure to reduce harmful emissions in the maritime sector and the need to develop more sustainable solutions.

The company has underlined its commitment to technological innovation by introducing more fuel-efficient inboard and outboard engines, using hybrid, electric and renewable technologies and promoting a zero-emission future. The move appeared to be in line with growing global awareness of the importance of environmental sustainability.

 

 

Doubts about the real intention:

Despite initial enthusiasm for the decision, some observers raised doubts. Some wonder if Volvo Penta had reasons other than sustainability for abandoning Seven Marine engines. Here are some of the concerns and theories put forward:

Strategic reorientation: Some experts say Volvo Penta’s decision may have been the result of a broader strategic reorientation that could mean cutting production costs or focusing on other, more profitable product lines.

Internal competition: This is a crucial aspect to consider when deciding to remove the Seven Marine product line from the Volvo Group. Some observers may interpret this move as a deliberate attempt to eliminate internal competition within the company.

First, it is important to understand that the presence of competing departments in an organization can have both advantages and disadvantages. The good thing is that internal competition can cause different business units to improve their performance, constantly innovate and strive for greater efficiency. This competition can stimulate a culture of growth and innovation within the company, which can lead to improved overall performance.

However, from a negative point of view, internal competition can also lead to wasted resources, duplication and internal conflicts. If Seven Marine had actually been a competing division within the Volvo Group, the company may have felt that the benefits of its presence did not outweigh the associated costs. These costs may include the need to invest financial and human resources in both departments, which could result in inefficient use of the company’s overall resources

Furthermore, the abandonment of the Seven Marine division can be seen as an attempt to strengthen the company’s control and resources for other projects considered more promising or strategically important. This might make sense if Volvo wants to focus its resources on areas or products that it believes have a significant competitive advantage or higher growth potential.

Brand Reputation: Others may suspect that Volvo Penta’s brand reputation is at risk due to the Seven Marine product or related issues. This raises the question of whether the company is trying to maintain its brand image in a highly competitive industry and whether the prospect of sustainability is a public justification for a more strategic move. Some believe the company may have responded to growing competition from other environmentally friendly marine engine manufacturers in an effort to maintain its leadership position in the industry.

The future of the industry: Some may see this decision as a reflection of the future of the marine engine industry. Market trends and technology forecasts can influence a company’s strategic direction. Some observers may wonder whether Volvo Penta has foreseen an impending change in the maritime landscape and is seeking to position itself favorably to respond to such changes.

Regulatory pressure: Some suspect the decision was driven by regulatory pressure or the threat of environmental sanctions rather than a genuine desire to promote sustainability.

The truth behind the decision:

While theories and concerns still exist regarding the decision Volvo Penta made three years ago, it is important to note that the company has continued to develop and promote more sustainable marine technologies and engines. Positive effects include the reduction of emissions in the marine environment and technological innovations in the sector.

Despite the doubts, it is clear that the decision has had a tangible impact on the marine industry and helped push the sector in a more sustainable direction. However, open debate continues as to what Volvo Penta’s true intentions were in making this historic decision.