DMG Mori Aktiengesellschaft
German machine tool manufacturer / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about DMG Mori Aktiengesellschaft?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
DMG Mori Akiengesellschaft (stylized as DMG MORI AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT) is one of Germany's largest manufacturers of cutting machine tools and a manufacturer of CNC-controlled lathes and milling machines.[2] The focus is on turning, milling, grinding, drilling as well as ultrasonic, lasertec and additive manufacturing for customers in aerospace, automotive, die & mold, medical and semiconductor industries. The SDAX technology group has 21 production sites worldwide and 161 international sales and service sites. The company is based in Bielefeld. Until September 2013 it was known as Gildemeister AG, and until June 2015 as DMG Mori Seiki Aktiengesellshaft. In 2015, the Japanese company DMG Mori Seiki Co. acquired a 52.54% controlling stake in the German company DMG Mori Aktiengesellschaft, and in 2016, an ownership transfer to a wholly-owned subsidiary of DMG Mori Seiki was approved, but this agreement has yet to conclude.[3][4][5][6][7]
Company type | Aktiengesellschaft |
---|---|
FWB: GIL | |
Industry | Manufacturing |
Founded | October 1, 1870 (153 years ago) (1870-10-01) |
Headquarters | Bielefeld, Germany |
Key people |
|
Products | Machine tools |
Revenue | € 2.265,7 billion (2022)[1] |
Number of employees | 7,464 (September 30, 2023)[1] |
Parent | DMG Mori Seiki Co. |
Website | http://ag.dmgmori.com/en |
On September 20, 2023, DMG MORI AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT was added to the list of sponsors of Russian war by the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption.[8] This body concluded that it has not severed relations with its Russian subsidiary which continues to assist the Ulyanovsk Machine Tool Plant in producing weapons of war. After an internal investigation regarding alleged ongoing production in the Russian facility, the company denied the claims. The continued production proceedings were explained through existing binding contracts established prior to the market withdrawal, which still had to be fulfilled to avoid breach of contract claims.[9]