RE: Is Lotus in proper bother this time?
Discussion
Alfa numeric said:
MX7 said:
So this can't be described as a period of due diligence can it? No cars since February? This seems like the opposite of due diligence to me. Am I wrong?
It's due diligence according to Malaysian law though, and as lotus isn't central to the business I don't think they can get any cash until it's finished. Of course it should have finished by now...
k for once.Lotus has been limping as a car company since the early eighties. Even Chapman lost interest, taking a Seagull management approach whilst he played in F1.
In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’”
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’”
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
MX7 said:
Kermit79 said:
All this DNA marketing 'horsesh*t'....
You've got an Alfa! To me, that's one of those brands who religiously follow the DNA formula, and I like it when companies do that. When a new Alfa comes out, you can immediately recognise who made it, even if you've never seen one before, which I think is of real value to the manufacturers. If I happened to drive past some of the not-yet-released Lotus's, I wouldn't have a clue what they are, and in fact I think I could well mistake some of them for replica kits of other manufacturers.Kermit79 said:
With regards to the Lotus press release, I actually don't think they have come acoss badly in it.
It reminded me of a stroppy teenager throwing his toys out the pram! Each to their own I guess.
I think that the press release will not appeal to everyone. To me it set the record straight on a number of points, if a little sarcastically. If it proves to be non-factual then I think the parties that put it together should be strung up. Time will tell.
jbi said:
IMO lotus should be building something RWD, light and CHEAP to compete with cars like the Subaru BRZ, Toyota GT-86 and Hyundai Genesis
That is, I'm afraid, absolutely impossible. You can't hand build a few cars a year in Norfolk and sell them at a competititve price with stuff from big Asian factories unless you're willing to lose substantial money on every sale. I really hope there is a way for Lotus to emerge from this still building cars at Hethel. IMO the Exige V6 Convertible is their best chance.
SrMoreno said:
jbi said:
IMO lotus should be building something RWD, light and CHEAP to compete with cars like the Subaru BRZ, Toyota GT-86 and Hyundai Genesis
Isn't that the strategy that saw them lose money for years with the Elise/Exige?Elise sales could have been improved with a larger/more powerful engine which they never bothered to fit.
BBC are reporting that Genii are looking to buy Group Lotus:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17714...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17714...
carl_w said:
BBC are reporting that Genii are looking to buy Group Lotus:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17714...
It would be the best solution...let's hopehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17714...
MX7 said:
I genuinely can't blame anyone for not reading the whole thread, but is it possible that you missed what Tenchman7 posted on Wednesday 11th?
No I've read that hence my second sentence indicating what is rumored as being anything but normal... "Stopping or curtailing activities only .... ".. Alfa numeric said:
It's due diligence according to Malaysian law though, and as lotus isn't central to the business I don't think they can get any cash until it's finished. Of course it should have finished by now...
Well Proton are still producing product and for that matter a car transporter full of new proton's docked in the past week, to me it sounds more like a forensic audit into activities to understand where the money is going and why hence little further money being made available. Cash must still be forthcoming from Malaysia to pay existing supplier bills and wages etc. Tydeides said:
Lotus has been limping as a car company since the early eighties. Even Chapman lost interest, taking a Seagull management approach whilst he played in F1.
In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’”
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
Agree with you here. In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’”
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
From what I've seen, I really believe DRB-Hicom would be a good fit for Lotus - they seem to be a large enough backer that would benefit from the synergies without having products in the same space. Talk about a Toyota or Honda buyout would anesthetize the company, and Gennii don't appear to have the money to make the changes that Lotus need to make to become long term competitive.
The Toyota connection sounds great, but the 'peak' of the Lotus/Toyota relationship was resulted in the Excel and Supra. As much as I love the Excel, it was a middle of the road car and not capable of setting the world alight. To me, any relationship with a mainstream manufacturer is likely to result in more of the same - they need cars that fit in with their global brand, however much they claim to want a 'hands off' relationship. That worked for Lamborghini and Audi, but I don't think Lotus could survive the merger.
jbi said:
61GT said:
Redlake27 said:
It would be the best solution...let's hope
Sounds a little more promising - Will they stick with Bahar's 5-year plan?Have a look at what Cerberus did to Chrysler
If they understand the brand, I think they will stick to Lotus core values, which means light sportscars, but realise that F1 can drive more aspirational cars too. Evora is a good platform to make an 'Esprit', so Lotus could go into supercars without huge investment.
However, the PH forum is a very UK-centric forum. Remember that the biggest selling Lotus cars in the world are 4 door saloons and hatchbacks (rebadged Protons sold into the Chinese market). Lotus has a very different perception in other bigger markets. If Lopez is as shrewd as he has proven to be so far, he will ensure that whoever owns Proton in the future has to pay handsomely to continue that brand licencing arrangement.
Tuna said:
As much as I love the Excel, it was a middle of the road car and not capable of setting the world alight.
It took Lotus nearly a decade to get the 2+2 Elite/Eclat/Excel into good enough shape to be a saleable motor car. Why they have repeated the same mistake defies understanding because they aren't going to be given a decade to get the Evora right! Tydeides said:
Lotus has been limping as a car company since the early eighties. Even Chapman lost interest, taking a Seagull management approach whilst he played in F1.
In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’â€
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
I tend to agree entirely that Lotus needed one massive shot to get it up and put of its continuous flat line. In 2005 Mike Kimberly was asked take over as CEO of Lotus, where he worked to turn the company from an £11m operating loss in 2006 to a £2m operating profit in 2009. With the achievement of a turn-around of financial decline, Kimberley retired in July 2009, and was replaced by Dany Bahar.
Bahar’s vision for the Lotus has been expressed as “It's not really rocket science. What we want is simply to return the Lotus brand to its rightful place in the public's hearts and minds - back to where it was 25 years ago, alongside the likes of Porsche and Ferrari.’â€
Who amongst the real Lotus fans thinks this is a bad ambition? Kimberly’s skill helped Lotus to keep limping along, but for Lotus to survive long term something more radical was required.
Bahar and Chapman have a lot in common in their approach. When Lotus F1 was sponsored by Essex, the Esprit launch was the most expensive car launch in history, with Shirley Bassey at the launch event it was huge.
Bahar’s plan was sound, but brave. Car manufacturing required huge gearing; Lotus would not survive producing a few low cost units a year. It will be sad if Bahar fails, but it’s not over yet.
I’m sorry for all those who own old Lotus’, who feel that they understand how to turn around a struggling company, but the market for old track cars is not the same market identified as the only viable outlet for a resurgent Lotus.
Bahar was simply trying to pick up the vision that Chapman left behind.
Good luck to him.
DBs strategy was probably spot on. Aggressive and punchy but what was desperately needed.
Sadly, the longer he failed to deliver his product the more farcical he appeared. Today we reach a point where all the mouth has failed to deliver any trousers and it looks like there is no money to keep it going.
5 models was hugely punchy and No one ever really believed they could deliver 5 top end products and market them all professionally at the same time. Even the best firms in the world tend to focus on getting one done first.
Very sad
Latest update on Joe Saward's Blog, apologies if it's a DPM but worth reading: -
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2012/04/14/a-little...
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2012/04/14/a-little...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff