RE: Lotus jobs at risk
Discussion
kambites said:
DonkeyApple said:
Not if you're going to fill it with gizmos. The market is flooded with gadget laden large sports cars. But I so think there is a market for car with the lotus ethos.
The problem is, the "Lotus Ethos" is to avoid adding anything which isn't strictly necessary and to keep making things lighter until something breaks... it leads ot cars like the Elise both in terms of their level of comfort and their tendency to fall to bits. Lotus chassis setup isn't magic - as soon as they build a car with the NVH and build quality to compete with the mainstream manufacturers, it wont drive significantly better than the cars it's trying to compete with. I suppose you could say that ultimately the Lotus Ethos is to build cars badly. Above all else, Chapman was renowned for his willingness to keep making things weaker and weaker... usually until someone died. I kinda hope they don't go to that extent these days (although toe-link failures on the Elise have done some damage) but the general idea is still much the same.
Edited by kambites on Saturday 27th September 18:32
Sports cars are really quite large these days and I've never fully understood why Lotus stick to making the smallest car they possibly can every time. We all know chapman was a short arse but he's been dead thirty years.
Maybe I am the only potential customer but outside of utility runabouts I buy English cars. I would buy a Lotus, I like what they are and stand for. What I don't like is that they are far too small.
DonkeyApple said:
I really just mean build a larger car. Nothing more or less. By only making small cars they automatically miss out in quite a few potential buyers.
Sports cars are really quite large these days and I've never fully understood why Lotus stick to making the smallest car they possibly can every time. We all know chapman was a short arse but he's been dead thirty years.
Maybe I am the only potential customer but outside of utility runabouts I buy English cars. I would buy a Lotus, I like what they are and stand for. What I don't like is that they are far too small.
Maybe because you can position a smaller car on the road better? The F Type is a pretty big car (with a small cockpit). Sports cars are really quite large these days and I've never fully understood why Lotus stick to making the smallest car they possibly can every time. We all know chapman was a short arse but he's been dead thirty years.
Maybe I am the only potential customer but outside of utility runabouts I buy English cars. I would buy a Lotus, I like what they are and stand for. What I don't like is that they are far too small.
I'm pretty sure that it would be a bad move for Lotus to Porsche/Jaguar, they wouldn't be able to get near them on price as they don't have the buying power or resources of VW group or JLR. They would spend millions developing a car that internet experts would say is too expensive.
I like the size of the Elise, but then I'm a shortarse and it fits me. It's based on an architecture which deliberately excluded large drivers on the grounds that it was a low volume track car which would be better if it didn't have to accommodate the usual ninety-somethingth percentile - probably not a decision which would have been taken with hindsight. I think Lotus could have another crack at the Europa segment with a shortened Evora platform and a V6 engine - the Elise platform is not suitable for that application and it showed.
Craikeybaby said:
Maybe because you can position a smaller car on the road better? The F Type is a pretty big car (with a small cockpit).
I'm pretty sure that it would be a bad move for Lotus to Porsche/Jaguar, they wouldn't be able to get near them on price as they don't have the buying power or resources of VW group or JLR. They would spend millions developing a car that internet experts would say is too expensive.
I'm not saying build a Porsche or a Jaguar I'm pretty sure that it would be a bad move for Lotus to Porsche/Jaguar, they wouldn't be able to get near them on price as they don't have the buying power or resources of VW group or JLR. They would spend millions developing a car that internet experts would say is too expensive.
. I'm saying build a Lotus which is larger. And why would it be more expensive? It's just a little more GRP and aluminium. They claim that their chassis tech allows them to build in any size and layout and panel moulds are panel moulds. At no point am I saying fill it with electric seats, heavy furnishings etc etc. quite the opposite.
I don't buy the road positioning argument. By being tiny cars Lotus are cutting out a lot of potential in a market that has spent 30 years building bigger and bigger cars.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Sunday 28th September 10:00
otolith said:
I like the size of the Elise, but then I'm a shortarse and it fits me. It's based on an architecture which deliberately excluded large drivers on the grounds that it was a low volume track car which would be better if it didn't have to accommodate the usual ninety-somethingth percentile - probably not a decision which would have been taken with hindsight. I think Lotus could have another crack at the Europa segment with a shortened Evora platform and a V6 engine - the Elise platform is not suitable for that application and it showed.
Well I am 6'3" and 17 stone and can easily get in and out and have room to spare once inside. Unless you're dramatically bigger than I am, I can't see how people say its a faff to get in and out!MJK 24 said:
otolith said:
I like the size of the Elise, but then I'm a shortarse and it fits me. It's based on an architecture which deliberately excluded large drivers on the grounds that it was a low volume track car which would be better if it didn't have to accommodate the usual ninety-somethingth percentile - probably not a decision which would have been taken with hindsight. I think Lotus could have another crack at the Europa segment with a shortened Evora platform and a V6 engine - the Elise platform is not suitable for that application and it showed.
Well I am 6'3" and 17 stone and can easily get in and out and have room to spare once inside. Unless you're dramatically bigger than I am, I can't see how people say its a faff to get in and out!DonkeyApple said:
MJK 24 said:
otolith said:
I like the size of the Elise, but then I'm a shortarse and it fits me. It's based on an architecture which deliberately excluded large drivers on the grounds that it was a low volume track car which would be better if it didn't have to accommodate the usual ninety-somethingth percentile - probably not a decision which would have been taken with hindsight. I think Lotus could have another crack at the Europa segment with a shortened Evora platform and a V6 engine - the Elise platform is not suitable for that application and it showed.
Well I am 6'3" and 17 stone and can easily get in and out and have room to spare once inside. Unless you're dramatically bigger than I am, I can't see how people say its a faff to get in and out!My son is 6ft 4 and he finds the Evora more comfortable than my Tuscan and has more headroom in it than he has in a Cayman and in my wife's Outback
All of this "why not simply develop a City car or an SUV" stuff is absolutely ridiculous. How many times does it have to be said; Lotus do not have the financial resources to develop new models. They just don't. Deal with it. Ain't gonna happen. Dream on.
Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
Dynamic Turtle said:
All of this "why not simply develop a City car or an SUV" stuff is absolutely ridiculous. How many times does it have to be said; Lotus do not have the financial resources to develop new models. They just don't. Deal with it. Ain't gonna happen. Dream on.
Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
i think you've missed the point of that view. Lotus is corporately structured to build far more cars than they ever can with the current models. So the discussion is really whether they restructure to the smaller size to fit their current sales profile or find a higher volume product so that their volumes match their structure. Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
otolith said:
...Fibreglass bodywork should enable them to change the styling at lower cost than pressed steel, so why has the Elise only had two bodies?...
Yep, just the S1, S2 and the S2 facelift, and the S1 Sport Elise/Exige, 340R, VX220, S2 Exige, Europa, 211 and the V6 Exige. Just those two bodies.Captain Muppet said:
otolith said:
...Fibreglass bodywork should enable them to change the styling at lower cost than pressed steel, so why has the Elise only had two bodies?...
Yep, just the S1, S2 and the S2 facelift, and the S1 Sport Elise/Exige, 340R, VX220, S2 Exige, Europa, 211 and the V6 Exige. Just those two bodies.DonkeyApple said:
MJK 24 said:
otolith said:
I like the size of the Elise, but then I'm a shortarse and it fits me. It's based on an architecture which deliberately excluded large drivers on the grounds that it was a low volume track car which would be better if it didn't have to accommodate the usual ninety-somethingth percentile - probably not a decision which would have been taken with hindsight. I think Lotus could have another crack at the Europa segment with a shortened Evora platform and a V6 engine - the Elise platform is not suitable for that application and it showed.
Well I am 6'3" and 17 stone and can easily get in and out and have room to spare once inside. Unless you're dramatically bigger than I am, I can't see how people say its a faff to get in and out!
t load more legroom! I don't know how anyone my size can drive an MX5 - seat simply doesn't go anywhere near far enough back for me!DonkeyApple said:
Dynamic Turtle said:
All of this "why not simply develop a City car or an SUV" stuff is absolutely ridiculous. How many times does it have to be said; Lotus do not have the financial resources to develop new models. They just don't. Deal with it. Ain't gonna happen. Dream on.
Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
i think you've missed the point of that view. Lotus is corporately structured to build far more cars than they ever can with the current models. So the discussion is really whether they restructure to the smaller size to fit their current sales profile or find a higher volume product so that their volumes match their structure. Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
These are typically lower-margin models
Why remove limited manufacturing capacity away from higher margin models?
There's nothing wrong with the current models (as JMG also seems to belives) - they'd probably sell a lot better with the "appropriate distribution bandwidth" (sorry for the MBA w
k) as their international sales figures attest.Having said that if there's unproductive bureaucratic fat that needs trimming, then apply the knife. Another poster on this thread seemed to claim that that the firm was middle-management heavy?
Dynamic Turtle said:
DonkeyApple said:
Dynamic Turtle said:
All of this "why not simply develop a City car or an SUV" stuff is absolutely ridiculous. How many times does it have to be said; Lotus do not have the financial resources to develop new models. They just don't. Deal with it. Ain't gonna happen. Dream on.
Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
i think you've missed the point of that view. Lotus is corporately structured to build far more cars than they ever can with the current models. So the discussion is really whether they restructure to the smaller size to fit their current sales profile or find a higher volume product so that their volumes match their structure. Yes Lambo are developing an SUV but have the resources and balance sheet of Vee Dubya behind them. Lotus need to prove that they have maximised their existing product utility and exhausted all other options before worrying about "halo" cars (all you Esprit dreamers forget that this also requires the gigantic balance sheet - think Veyron, GT-R, NSX, LFA, Carrera GT etc).
As I said earlier in this thread and to an extent latterly confirmed afterwards by JMGs interview with PH the other day, Lotus have the product but are hamstrung by limited distribution capacity. This will not be cheap to expand either but the demand side must be sated before an increase in production capacity can be justified. Walking into a dealership and finding out that the car you're interested in is suffering from a six month backlog due to outrageous demand might, counter-intuitively, be viewed as a positive thing.
Dealer network investments aside I really do think they need to spend any R&D budget on increasing reliability (particularly their forced induction variants) given the propensity for Lotus owners to drive in a spirited fashion and track their cars. I think customers can forgive the odd electrical niggle or some badly finished trim if the powertrain allows them to enjoy the car 95% of the time.
DT
These are typically lower-margin models
Why remove limited manufacturing capacity away from higher margin models?
There's nothing wrong with the current models (as JMG also seems to belives) - they'd probably sell a lot better with the "appropriate distribution bandwidth" (sorry for the MBA w
k) as their international sales figures attest.Having said that if there's unproductive bureaucratic fat that needs trimming, then apply the knife. Another poster on this thread seemed to claim that that the firm was middle-management heavy?
Sure, head count can be cut but it doesn't address the core issue that seems to be at the heart of the matter and that is that Lotus have a global orientated business structure but regional sized sales.
It is clear for all to see that they are simply not going to triple sales of existing models. However we try to spin it that hurdle is far too high. And as they pitch themselves So much as track cars for the road then we know this market is too small to support the volumes required.
None of this of course is new. This has been the way for Lotus Cars for a very, very long time ever since they weren't able to build on the spike of business the Elise gave them.
What is new and triggering much of the discussion is that the Cars have been subsidized by either cheap parental debt or Lotus Engineering and the news that Egineering is cutting its workforce quite dramatically clearly highlights that that business is not at all healthy.
So if Cars are not going to be supported by parental debt or rolled by Engineering then it has to either reverse its business model to fit its volumes or grow its volumes to fit its model but this latter approach requires greater volumes than merely selling a few more Exiges. It needs something bigger than that.
What sort of volume do you think they need in order that the current structure works?
4000?
8000?
If the former, surely better distribution in some key markets (US, Japan, China, Germany) would help bump those sales, which ultimately are only a tiny nick into Porsche's sales, while being a dramatic improvement for Lotus.
4000?
8000?
If the former, surely better distribution in some key markets (US, Japan, China, Germany) would help bump those sales, which ultimately are only a tiny nick into Porsche's sales, while being a dramatic improvement for Lotus.
braddo said:
What sort of volume do you think they need in order that the current structure works?
4000?
8000?
If the former, surely better distribution in some key markets (US, Japan, China, Germany) would help bump those sales, which ultimately are only a tiny nick into Porsche's sales, while being a dramatic improvement for Lotus.
I think they need more than that. More than is feasible for this type of product. 4000?
8000?
If the former, surely better distribution in some key markets (US, Japan, China, Germany) would help bump those sales, which ultimately are only a tiny nick into Porsche's sales, while being a dramatic improvement for Lotus.
I agree that having some kind of competent sales operation should increase volumes well but looking at how many people they employ, how much they spend to run the business and assuming a very generous 30% net margin per sale, doubling or trippling current sales won't lead to a stable, growth business.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff