RE: Charles Morgan: plot thickens

[Boshly]

StraightShooter said:

Boshly said:

This is the guy.....

In my opinion...

Anyhow, I'm rambling now

No. I do not think you are rambling. It would be more accurate to say that you are crapping on Charles Morgan, his wife and a Mr. Frankel (for his expression of support). Curious. Was your Arctic tale the justification for your present anti-Charles bile or a script you have been given? Is his young pretty wife and his love of opera why you keep publicly writing that he is a "bad businessman". Or do have any verifiable facts to offer?

Edited by StraightShooter on Tuesday 29th October 00:27

What a strange quote? You still then manage to misquote me also in your Post! Will you never Change?

I'll give you one straight response, but will only enter into any further debate with you if you post under your original open persona (I believe Plushuit was your last open login) not some hidden cloak and dagger rubbish.

I shall be short and succinct and correct the misquote you attribute to me.

I have never stated that CM is a bad businessman. I don't know enough of the man to say whether he was bad or good in that manner. I do know, from what I have garnered from many meetings (social) and what I have read that I wouldn't want him to run my business as i didnt see enough to convince me otherwise. I dare say that as a shareholder he most probably wouldn't want me running his either. I think CM would make a great ambassador, his enthusiasm and character would be a tremendous asset for the company. If it's something he would want to do.

His wife's pursuit to be an actress and a model I think are distracting for him and therefore the business. No more, no less. She'sentitled of course to do what she wants, but I think the role CM envisages or indeed I aspire for him would need tremendous family support especially with young kids. Old fashioned view, I accept. I did find some of her tweets unnecessary also.

As for Andrew Frankel, well his piece was sycophantic, which he partially admitted, but contained emotion and errors which a journalist of his stature ought to be able to write without

.

[Ozzie Osmond]

Boshly said:

I have never stated that CM is a bad businessman. I don't know enough of the man to say whether he was bad or good in that manner. I do know, from what I have garnered from many meetings (social) and what I have read that I wouldn't want him to run my business.

It's pretty clear the people who own and manage Morgan don't want him running their business either!

[Dr Jekyll]

Derek Smith said:

I would have thought that a company like MMC would have been one of the major sufferers of the recession. No one needs a Morgan. It is all but the definition of a luxury item.

The years have not always been kind to MMC. When a friend of mine bought a new +4 in the 60s there was something like a 3-month wait.

It's an interesting point, specialist car firms in general are vulnerable to recessions. The reason Morgan have survived past recessions when so many others have not is that they didn't over extend themselves and kept production below demand.

[Ozzie Osmond]

I've always been interested to see companies like Morgan and Bristol claim they keep their products desirable by not building very many of them. An alternative explanation would be there's simply not much demand!

Compare the rocketing sales of previously low volume cars like Aston Martin, Bentley and Lamborghini once they produced the right cars for the right market. Whether achieving that success inevitably requires a change of ownership and massive investment is a different debate. IMO automotive success has to be "product led".

[DonkeyApple]

Dr Jekyll said:

It's an interesting point, specialist car firms in general are vulnerable to recessions. The reason Morgan have survived past recessions when so many others have not is that they didn't over extend themselves and kept production below demand.

Don't forget that recessions only impact certain demographics. Far less impact on some professions over others.

The reason Morgan had an issue in the last recession was the anomalous wipe out of a key demographic due to the Lloyds collapse.

[StraightShooter]

Boshly said:

StraightShooter said:

Boshly said:

This is the guy.....

In my opinion...

Anyhow, I'm rambling now

No. I do not think you are rambling. It would be more accurate to say that you are crapping on Charles Morgan, his wife and a Mr. Frankel (for his expression of support). Curious. Was your Arctic tale the justification for your present anti-Charles bile or a script you have been given? Is his young pretty wife and his love of opera why you keep publicly writing that he is a "bad businessman". Or do have any verifiable facts to offer?

What a strange quote? You still then manage to misquote me also in your Post!

Strange quotes? I simply wished to avoid repeating the entirety of your attacks of your Morgan targets of the day. But I will indulge you, (with my sincere apologies to others here).] Here are your full quotes on Charles Morgan and the others (posted on page 4 of this thread.

Boshly said:

Interesting maybe but regrettably many statements that do not ring true.

"Done his best for the family business"? This is the guy who after all this blows up regales his audience with his "jet-set lifestyle". A private small company making £1m a year, that has to invest heavily in R&D surely can not sustain a jet-set lifestyle. We know CM could not afford it, he has said so himself. (Yes, I got this from a newspaper article but I'm no 'journalist' with sources).

Also, as for have the support of "the 170 strong workforce" based on one twitter account called 'Mogemployees'? I cannot say with any certainty either way for obvious reasons but I personally know of a number of employees who are happy with the overall outcome. Albeit many people, myself included are 'sad' that CM couldn't/wouldn't stay on as an Ambassador and make it work.

Lastly and most notably Andrew Frankel ought to be embarrassed to use Kiera Morgans' Twitter rant and misquoting it as fact, regarding taking the company car away on the anniversary of his fathers death. Sensationalist twaddle. Funny how two days later she tweets that Morgan won't let her use the car at a photo shoot, them having "taken it away" and all

I expected more from Andrew who is an experienced journalist to be honest.

Boshly said:

Charles was (is?) passionate, charming and effusive. I would not want him running my business however. From my brief conversations with others I don't think too many of them would either.

In my opinion he is selective with his enthusiasm. I and a few others drove 3500 miles in open top Morgans 1000km into the Arctic Circle in 9 days for charity (then turned round and drove all the way back). We visited most European Morgan Dealers en route. A fabulous achievement for the Morgan factory, their cars (one minor breakdown that was overcome) and their people, yet Charles did not once see fit to tweet to his numerous followers or even give it any attention whatsoever. It didn't involve him so he had no interest whatsoever. He did however tweet about some opera somewhere or how good his wife was looking from his holiday view....

You have been sprinkling similar venom elsewhere on the internet. It is your right to do so. But the question is why you feel it is [bigI[/big] who have a vendetta against Charles? Frankly, if I did, I would simply sit back and watch you character-assassinate him, his loved ones and his supporters. To any casual observer, it appears you have chosen sides and been given an agenda to spread over the internet. I would suggest you focus and try to attack one favorite son at a time to avoid sounding so duplicitous.

[StraightShooter]

Ozzie Osmond said:

It's pretty clear the people who own and manage Morgan don't want him running their business either!

The point is that Charles hasn't been involved in the actual running of the business since 2003, when the family passed him over for Garnett as Chairman. After three years in the belfry with a hump, they allowed him back as part of a 4-man management team. But he never dealt with costs, selling, payments, production and all the things we would call "running a business". That was done by others. Those still running the company right now. He was the "spokesman" only. But he was paid a substantial amount and to the world, it certainly appeared he had the authority to bind the company. In law, if someone has the appearance of being able to bind you, do you know what the consequences are unless you make a public declaration to the contrary?

Derek Smith said:

The years have not always been kind to MMC. When a friend of mine bought a new +4 in the 60s there was something like a 3-month wait.

Yes. The UK had turned away from Morgans in the 1950s and 60s. 80% of Morgans were sold in the US..and then their regs closed that market as well. Additionally, HFS has left his estate to all his children equally, (peter and umpteen older sisters). He had to buy them all out during the period. Happily, he borrowed heavily from his first wife (Charles' mother) who was far wealthier than the Morgans. The UK market came back with the introduction of the Plus 8 in 1968.

But much of that market dropped again after the introduction of the Aeros. I believe it only produces 33% of 4 wheel sales now, down from almost 60% pre-Aero.

Derek Smith said:

Using the balance sheet and historical comparisons to judge the performance of Chas is not, perhaps, the most accurate method.

I would like to agree. But what else can we use without getting into argumentative and painful personal opinions? And few people are of a mind on what Morgan was and what it is now.

DonkeyApple said:

This recession due to the need to keep debtors afloat has been very different from others. Add in the demographic spike of the over 55s and the largest every pension reserves and highest pension incomes of all times and you can begin to see why a company like MMC have kept volumes.

I used to state the same thing. I boldly pontificated for years that Morgans could not help but do well for decades, as baby boomers retired, sold off their now empty family home and used the excess to buy their teenage dream car. And, at the risk offending anyone, old people look less ridiculous in a classic Morgan and flat cap than a hyper-modern super car with Gucchi racing gloves. And could there be a better demographic to have in your back pocket? Flush with cash and pensions.

But the years since 2008 and Morgan management has conspired to prove you and I wrong.

4 wheeler sales are down 19% for the two years ending December 2012. There is no direct current information for 2013 from the company but Germany, which has been their bellweather market with consistently rising Morgan sales through 2012, DOES post new car registrations on a monthly basis. This year, through September 2013, they are down 17%.

[slinky]

For reference, StraightShooter has now left the building.

Let's carry on a civil conversation shall we.

[wemorgan]

If you banned everyone you disagreed with, thought we liars, stupid or ridiculous this forum would change beyond recognition.

I didn't mind his posts and knew that some of the things he said were indeed correct.

Anyway, let the random guessing continue...........

[AndrewEH1]

slinky said:

For reference, StraightShooter has now left the building.

Let's carry on a civil conversation shall we.

It was getting a bit much, libelous perhaps...

[DonkeyApple]

slinky said:

For reference, StraightShooter has now left the building.

Let's carry on a civil conversation shall we.

To be fair to him, he is putting forward a more rational debate than others.

[greatmalvern]

Boshly said:

Interesting maybe but regrettably many statements that do not ring true.

Also, as for have the support of "the 170 strong workforce" based on one twitter account called 'Mogemployees'? I cannot say with any certainty either way for obvious reasons but I personally know of a number of employees who are happy with the overall outcome. Albeit many people, myself included are 'sad' that CM couldn't/wouldn't stay on as an Ambassador and make it work.

I expected more from Andrew who is an experienced journalist to be honest.

Putting to one side the differences between two gentlemen taking part in this particular thread, I do think that 'Boshly' has a point re. his quote about the views of the workforce. If an individual sets up and uses a Twitter account, then we can safely assume it is the view of that person being 'Tweeted'. However, the account referred to centres around a group of individuals, so are we to assume that the person tweeting is speaking for the whole workforce? Probably not, though they are divided in their opinions. As for journalists not getting their facts straight in relation to this story, I think it more a case of some of them being too lazy to investigate properly, which includes the simple task of spelling board members names correctly!

[slinky]

DonkeyApple said:

slinky said:

For reference, StraightShooter has now left the building.

Let's carry on a civil conversation shall we.

To be fair to him, he is putting forward a more rational debate than others.

Had he not been previously, repeatedly, banned, he'd still be here.

[asbojohn]

slinky said:

For reference, StraightShooter has now left the building.

Let's carry on a civil conversation shall we.

Seems I found this too late but what a shame I was looking forward to point where he started posting Boshlys holiday snaps.

[Derek Smith]

Dr Jekyll said:

Derek Smith said:

I would have thought that a company like MMC would have been one of the major sufferers of the recession. No one needs a Morgan. It is all but the definition of a luxury item.

The years have not always been kind to MMC. When a friend of mine bought a new +4 in the 60s there was something like a 3-month wait.

It's an interesting point, specialist car firms in general are vulnerable to recessions. The reason Morgan have survived past recessions when so many others have not is that they didn't over extend themselves and kept production below demand.

DonkeyApple said:

Don't forget that recessions only impact certain demographics. Far less impact on some professions over others.

The reason Morgan had an issue in the last recession was the anomalous wipe out of a key demographic due to the Lloyds collapse.

I think it likely that the recession has had an effect on Morgan sales regardless of which demographic has suffered the least. I would suggest that Morgan's profits, although perhaps not its existence, would have been hit to an extent. We are arguing, it would appear, on here that Morgan's returns on volume sales have dropped recently. My suggestion is that the balance sheet alone cannot be the sole way to judge his performance.

There is something tempting about keeping production low and selling on exclusivity. I doubt, however, that this would work over a long period. Regulations change, suppliers change and so the product has to. However, I'm a firm supporter of not extending oneself.

Despite appearances, the current Mog is really a pastiche of the flat rad models. Nice though.

I was at Le Mans LMES in 2003 and wandered into the Morgan pits. I took a few photos and there was lots of interest from friends, including those who had no hope of of ever buying a Morgan. For a company whose advertising budget comes out of petty cash, I can see a case for racing.

[DonkeyApple]

Derek Smith said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Derek Smith said:

I would have thought that a company like MMC would have been one of the major sufferers of the recession. No one needs a Morgan. It is all but the definition of a luxury item.

The years have not always been kind to MMC. When a friend of mine bought a new +4 in the 60s there was something like a 3-month wait.

It's an interesting point, specialist car firms in general are vulnerable to recessions. The reason Morgan have survived past recessions when so many others have not is that they didn't over extend themselves and kept production below demand.

DonkeyApple said:

Don't forget that recessions only impact certain demographics. Far less impact on some professions over others.

The reason Morgan had an issue in the last recession was the anomalous wipe out of a key demographic due to the Lloyds collapse.

I think it likely that the recession has had an effect on Morgan sales regardless of which demographic has suffered the least. I would suggest that Morgan's profits, although perhaps not its existence, would have been hit to an extent. We are arguing, it would appear, on here that Morgan's returns on volume sales have dropped recently. My suggestion is that the balance sheet alone cannot be the sole way to judge his performance.

There is something tempting about keeping production low and selling on exclusivity. I doubt, however, that this would work over a long period. Regulations change, suppliers change and so the product has to. However, I'm a firm supporter of not extending oneself.

Despite appearances, the current Mog is really a pastiche of the flat rad models. Nice though.

I was at Le Mans LMES in 2003 and wandered into the Morgan pits. I took a few photos and there was lots of interest from friends, including those who had no hope of of ever buying a Morgan. For a company whose advertising budget comes out of petty cash, I can see a case for racing.

Do sure any recession will impact. But where this brand has a benefit over many others, when we look at UK sales, is that it is more old school than modern asperational.

That is to say that many old school brands, especially clothing, have had to seek sales in Asia to grow or to finance their debt. Morgan has been able to weather the storm through EU sales as their core demographic hasn't been hit. For example, traditional UK professions such as medical, law etc haven't been hit.

Young bankers, developers by contrast have been but they bought different products. We've watched Aston sales fall for example.

Where the recession will have hit them is in their plans to expand into the non traditional markets. You can imagine that if they had broken strongly into that sector and tooled up via debt for it then they really could have been in serious trouble as their current income wouldn't have financed a big debt burden.

I do wonder if this is why they pulled the Eva?

[Derek Smith]

DonkeyApple said:

I do wonder if this is why they pulled the Eva?

I thought it had been merely 'delayed'.

It does (did?) look superb.

When the Aero was announced I was unsure from the pics.

I was in a friend's car on a motorway. We were going at a little over the limit, just a smidgen, and he glanced in his mirror and was surprised, going by his language, to be flashed by something coming up behind. It was a two-tone Aero, going like the clappers, on trade plates.

I thought then that I'd love one. I would assume that I would think the same but more so for the Eva.

The Aero was a brave move.

[DonkeyApple]

Derek Smith said:

DonkeyApple said:

I do wonder if this is why they pulled the Eva?

I thought it had been merely 'delayed'.

It does (did?) look superb.

When the Aero was announced I was unsure from the pics.

I was in a friend's car on a motorway. We were going at a little over the limit, just a smidgen, and he glanced in his mirror and was surprised, going by his language, to be flashed by something coming up behind. It was a two-tone Aero, going like the clappers, on trade plates.

I thought then that I'd love one. I would assume that I would think the same but more so for the Eva.

The Aero was a brave move.

I believe that they say they have delayed it and tied it in to their EV deal but personally I think they pulled it as it would have cost a lot to bring to market at a time of great financial uncertainty.

I thought it was the most beautiful car made/shown in my lifetime. And as a 2+2 I could have used it.

The Aero was a brave move and one they did need to do. The AeroMax is in another league but sadly as a 2 seater it's of no use.

I don't think Morgan can crack the younger demographic without a 2+2 as we all have children and the even younger demographic is priced out.

[Derek Smith]

DonkeyApple said:

I believe that they say they have delayed it and tied it in to their EV deal but personally I think they pulled it as it would have cost a lot to bring to market at a time of great financial uncertainty.

I thought it was the most beautiful car made/shown in my lifetime. And as a 2+2 I could have used it.

The Aero was a brave move and one they did need to do. The AeroMax is in another league but sadly as a 2 seater it's of no use.

I don't think Morgan can crack the younger demographic without a 2+2 as we all have children and the even younger demographic is priced out.

I went to a press day at a motor show where they had a bare Aero chassis and a willing sales staff - not Chas. I was taken over the car and the chap was so enthusiastic about it that the whole period was fun. The press were a little thin on the ground so there was no rush. I walked around the rest of the show and have to say that I wandered back to Morgan.

There was an ITN cameraman there, whom I'd been chatting to before, and he said, as you did, that with a generous 2+2 he could justify buying one, but not just as a two-seater. He was then approached by someone from the stand and chatted up for a bit of footage. He said to the chap that he wanted two extra seats and the chap mentioned the +4, which the cameraman laughed at.

As an aside: my son is a journo at ITN and was reporting on the show. I asked him to cover the TVR stand, then somewhat uninspired, and they did so, putting in on prime time. Oxley was effusive in his thanks and was so generous with his gratitude. So much so that when I saw him in the underground car park he cut me dead, turning his back when I said hello. This in front of my son.

[Vocal Minority]

I have heard several sides of the story on this one about Charles Morgan, all of which appear to completely contradict eachother.

So lord knows what is going on.

I do think that people starting petitions for his reinstatement based on nothing but some sensationalist press, a couple of tweets and the rose tinted view of family craft business and the breaking of tradition etc is far from helpful.

Edited by Vocal Minority on Tuesday 29th October 17:26