RE: Aston sells stake.
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
robinessex said:
Sorry, I get really pissed off whenever another (original) UK car manufacturer passes into foreign hands. How come foreign companies can find the funds and justification, yet in the UK there are none?
In very crude terms, overseas investors are buying heritage and class whereas our companies invest abroad purely for returns. peter450 said:
DonkeyApple said:
robinessex said:
Sorry, I get really pissed off whenever another (original) UK car manufacturer passes into foreign hands. How come foreign companies can find the funds and justification, yet in the UK there are none?
In very crude terms, overseas investors are buying heritage and class whereas our companies invest abroad purely for returns. And prestige has a price. You only have to look at Mahindra's interest to see this effect clearly in action.
will261058 said:
£150m for just over a third of the company means the value of AM is around the £400m mark. This seems a bit low to me.
Incdeed. To give a sense of how much things cost these days, the new Range Rover had a total budget of... £1bn (accoring to Autocar), which included (from memory) circa £200m on developing the production facility alone, and the rest of R&D. Thats for one vehcile. On one production line. The numbers are huge now.
Roma101 said:
I think II have bought shares from ID (i.e. they are not new shares). It is also not entirely clear whether the £150m is what II paid for the shares or whether it is an "investment". The piece I read described the £150m as an "investment". Is this just another way of them saying II "bought shares for..." Also, again from the piece I read, AM's "enterprise value" now stands at £780m, which is a different number to what you get if you simply price 100% of the shares on the 150m/37.5% equation. Any corporate people out there who can help?
enterprise value is a strange concept which is composed by the company value (400m) and the value of its debt (i guess 380m). it's used in financial analysis, but it is misleading here: the company is valued at 400m, less than in 2007 and a very low value in general.overall, the deal as it is doesn't make sense: II is not injecting enough to restructure the company, and has limited control over the company. something else must happen or II just squandered a nice pile of cash.
As for AM, sales numbers below 3000/year are clearly unsustainable (that's one third of what they used to do: nobody else lost so many sales!)
virgilio said:
Roma101 said:
I think II have bought shares from ID (i.e. they are not new shares). It is also not entirely clear whether the £150m is what II paid for the shares or whether it is an "investment". The piece I read described the £150m as an "investment". Is this just another way of them saying II "bought shares for..." Also, again from the piece I read, AM's "enterprise value" now stands at £780m, which is a different number to what you get if you simply price 100% of the shares on the 150m/37.5% equation. Any corporate people out there who can help?
enterprise value is a strange concept which is composed by the company value (400m) and the value of its debt (i guess 380m). it's used in financial analysis, but it is misleading here: the company is valued at 400m, less than in 2007 and a very low value in general.overall, the deal as it is doesn't make sense: II is not injecting enough to restructure the company, and has limited control over the company. something else must happen or II just squandered a nice pile of cash.
As for AM, sales numbers below 3000/year are clearly unsustainable (that's one third of what they used to do: nobody else lost so many sales!)
3000 units is far too low. That's probably less than £500m in turnover and I'd hazard in the region of £100m margin? Makes yesterday's valuation seem very generous indeed. Especially as the business appears to have insufficient funds to expand their range, falling revenues and shareholders who want(ed) out.
It's also worth noting that II don't seem to have a record for holding investments much beyond the standard turnaround window.
We don't know if DAR have reduced their holding and lent the money raised or if this were a dilution via issue but £150m isn't much unless it is complemented with other facilities.
But what is interesting is II's remark that the funds will be used to expand the product range. I very much doubt that this means another GT style car. Especially as they are contracting the number there.
So this must mean something else and one can only assume it is an SUV and probably on someone else's chassis to keep costs down. Would this be an ML with AMG power?
Maybe they'll do a saloon? I can't imagine they'd go smaller as they haven't the capacity to build high numbers for the same revenue.
virgilio said:
Roma101 said:
I think II have bought shares from ID (i.e. they are not new shares). It is also not entirely clear whether the £150m is what II paid for the shares or whether it is an "investment". The piece I read described the £150m as an "investment". Is this just another way of them saying II "bought shares for..." Also, again from the piece I read, AM's "enterprise value" now stands at £780m, which is a different number to what you get if you simply price 100% of the shares on the 150m/37.5% equation. Any corporate people out there who can help?
enterprise value is a strange concept which is composed by the company value (400m) and the value of its debt (i guess 380m). it's used in financial analysis, but it is misleading here: the company is valued at 400m, less than in 2007 and a very low value in general.overall, the deal as it is doesn't make sense: II is not injecting enough to restructure the company, and has limited control over the company. something else must happen or II just squandered a nice pile of cash.
As for AM, sales numbers below 3000/year are clearly unsustainable (that's one third of what they used to do: nobody else lost so many sales!)
So the equity value of AML has fallen to £400m, but the enterprise value apparently risen to £780m (if these numbers are right). This can only have happened if the group took on more borrowings (probably from UK banks as it happens).
Why raise £150m of new equity? Either to support the existing debt, or perhaps more positively to allow AML to increase its borrowings by maybe another £150m to invest in something. (New model, new distribution network in far east or whatever).
Finally, have they bought shares off existing investors or subscribed for new ones? Probably both, it's probably a mix of new share, some junior loans and some existing shares to square the valuation circle.
For those who really want to understand the finer points, it's all here:
http://www.icaew.com/~/media/Files/Technical/Corpo...
shalmaneser said:
wst said:
So hypothetically I could own 1/3rd of Aston Martin for the same amount of money it takes to buy a car from them...
Does 1/3rd ownership of a company entitle me to a company car? I'll take an Aston.
Missing three zeros there laddy.Does 1/3rd ownership of a company entitle me to a company car? I'll take an Aston.
Pr1964 said:
Asia is the key to Aston Martins future. Sales there will make the difference.
Aston Martins image in Asia is not good as all their products look the same / similar to many Japanese and American generic sports cars Asian buyers don't see a reason to buy.
To succeed it's going to require some Italian flair in the design, fingers crossed the new investor can bring onboard a new design chief who can build on the heritage of Aston Martins of old so they get away from the recent bland shape which was past is sell by date when new.
The V8V had some beauty but failed technically it should have been a 911 beater but ran a distant second down to too many pies.
The age of the quirky British Car company are finished without the critical mass now required the costs involved in launching new models are prohibitive only links with specialists "AMG" will make the numbers work.
The UK"s short term financial views will mean AM is destined to be owned by the Germans.
I though is strange that Mclaren and AM were never linked. Maybe I've missed something. Two British companies working together that could never work.... .?
I think the DB7/9 Vantage looked great when first launched and freshAston Martins image in Asia is not good as all their products look the same / similar to many Japanese and American generic sports cars Asian buyers don't see a reason to buy.
To succeed it's going to require some Italian flair in the design, fingers crossed the new investor can bring onboard a new design chief who can build on the heritage of Aston Martins of old so they get away from the recent bland shape which was past is sell by date when new.
The V8V had some beauty but failed technically it should have been a 911 beater but ran a distant second down to too many pies.
The age of the quirky British Car company are finished without the critical mass now required the costs involved in launching new models are prohibitive only links with specialists "AMG" will make the numbers work.
The UK"s short term financial views will mean AM is destined to be owned by the Germans.
I though is strange that Mclaren and AM were never linked. Maybe I've missed something. Two British companies working together that could never work.... .?
Saying the styling was old when new seems very harsh
I do agree though that they have fallen into a rut of late, and the DBS, Virage simply looked to much like mild reskins as opposed to brand new models, and it seems that having made a great looking car to start with in the DB9, there content to just stick with that same design over and over on every model
The differant models need more variation in styling, and that includes the interiors
Did a bit of research on who owns Aston. Ultimate holding company is THE INVESTMENT DAR COMPANY K S C which is registered overseas but Aston Martin Holdings (UK) Ltd is owned by (probably wont include this new deal)
Aston Martin Holdings (UK) Ltd
Shareholders Name; Class of Shares; Joint Shareholder; Number of Shares; Issued Capital,
06265105 DAR CAPITAL (UK) LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 142,233; 0
ULRICH BEZ; Ordinary; No; 21,714; 0
DAVID RICHARDS; Ordinary; No; 32,571; 0
ADEEM AUTOMOTIVE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 362,578; 0
ASMAR LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 624,401; 0
PRIMEWAGON (JERSEY) LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 720,997; 0
Total Ordinary; 0.00; 1,904,494;
Will be interesting to see how this changes.......
Aston Martin Holdings (UK) Ltd
Shareholders Name; Class of Shares; Joint Shareholder; Number of Shares; Issued Capital,
06265105 DAR CAPITAL (UK) LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 142,233; 0
ULRICH BEZ; Ordinary; No; 21,714; 0
DAVID RICHARDS; Ordinary; No; 32,571; 0
ADEEM AUTOMOTIVE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 362,578; 0
ASMAR LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 624,401; 0
PRIMEWAGON (JERSEY) LIMITED; Ordinary; No; 720,997; 0
Total Ordinary; 0.00; 1,904,494;
Will be interesting to see how this changes.......
GokTweed said:
If you make a pretty car what's wrong with making another look similarly pretty? porsches aren't pretty and they get away with it!
This is what I think. Only personal opinion of course, but to those who say the cars are bland, or all the same, upload your picture of a new, more attractive design that Aston could use, or something distinct for each car. Much like Porsche have with the Boxster, Cayman, 911 and Panamera. Oh, hang on......... andyps said:
GokTweed said:
If you make a pretty car what's wrong with making another look similarly pretty? porsches aren't pretty and they get away with it!
This is what I think. Only personal opinion of course, but to those who say the cars are bland, or all the same, upload your picture of a new, more attractive design that Aston could use, or something distinct for each car. Much like Porsche have with the Boxster, Cayman, 911 and Panamera. Oh, hang on......... What all other main manufacturers do is diversify into other sectors so as to obtain better economies of scale and so better margins and profit per unit.
If you look at JLR they even diversify within the SUV sector but also the Jag brand covers saloons and GTs.
Aston have only managed the expand with the Rapide and as lively as it is it doesn't really break into a different client pool. By building a saloon or an SUV they will tap separate client pools and so increase unit sales, efficiencies and margins.
Porsche is a really good example of how a single product company expanded in such a way and gained financial security for the first time ever.
DonkeyApple said:
The real issue is that you are only targeting the people who want a top GT.
What all other main manufacturers do is diversify into other sectors so as to obtain better economies of scale and so better margins and profit per unit.
If you look at JLR they even diversify within the SUV sector but also the Jag brand covers saloons and GTs.
Aston have only managed the expand with the Rapide and as lively as it is it doesn't really break into a different client pool. By building a saloon or an SUV they will tap separate client pools and so increase unit sales, efficiencies and margins.
Porsche is a really good example of how a single product company expanded in such a way and gained financial security for the first time ever.
You are right, but it highlights the real issue Aston have. They have the basic VH platform which they have shrunk to produce the Vantage and stretched to produce the Rapide, but fundamentally it is a GT/sports car platform. Porsche had to work woth VW to make the Cayenne, and the forthcoming smaller SUV. Jaguar have a link to Land Rover to make an SUV. Aston don't have that relationship and can't afford to do it on their own, as Porsche couldn't and still can't. The Lagonda was based on a Mercedes, but unless the new investment gives access to a sharing arrangement Aston will probably struggle to introduce new product classes.What all other main manufacturers do is diversify into other sectors so as to obtain better economies of scale and so better margins and profit per unit.
If you look at JLR they even diversify within the SUV sector but also the Jag brand covers saloons and GTs.
Aston have only managed the expand with the Rapide and as lively as it is it doesn't really break into a different client pool. By building a saloon or an SUV they will tap separate client pools and so increase unit sales, efficiencies and margins.
Porsche is a really good example of how a single product company expanded in such a way and gained financial security for the first time ever.
DonkeyApple said:
In very crude terms, overseas investors are buying heritage and class whereas our companies invest abroad purely for returns.
Why buy into a struggling firm which will need more money when you can buy a factory abroad which needs nothing but will give good solid returns.
We own more assets overseas than others own UK assets.
Didn't you put Aston Martin forward as a shining example in a Morgan thread not too long ago ?Why buy into a struggling firm which will need more money when you can buy a factory abroad which needs nothing but will give good solid returns.
We own more assets overseas than others own UK assets.
I guess to some extent this makes sad reading when you remember the heritage of what Aston has been over the years, and what an iconic brand it has been. Much the same as now all (maybe not Atom in Somerset) Uk car makers, fortunes have changed. I would have thought that whatever the value of Aston's shares, the company clearly needs to stand back and think about the direction it's going in.
When you think about where the brand sits in the market now, then given that you can spend £180k on one to £35k on a second hand car that in many ways to many people is not that different in looks to new model. Ferrari has been bold yet it has covered it's bases on all levels, with the entry level California to breaking with tradition and building a Z3M Coupe, oooops, I mean FF. The 458 sits in the less price sensitive super rich segment, and the new F12 will do the same. Whatever you say, there are still plenty of people globally who have money to spend, and Aston needs to tap into this.
Many may have hated what BMW first did with the Mini, yet they have taken that icon, and turned it into something enduring again. Aston need to think hard about their product, maybe some kind of modern heritage BMW'esq style throwback to what have been some of the most beautiful cars in the world. £150m of invest/shares, isn't going to do this, and so more change will be needed. It's interesting to see that viewpoints on overseas investment into the UK, and I would remind people there are a handful of UK football clubs that are a going concern in their own right, yet are seen as play things of many dubious and not so dubious overseas investors. Aston's future lays with a group of people with a passion for what the brand could be, and that will be huge risk to kick off in light of the vast costs to take a new model to market.
Aston doesn't stand up next to Ferrari and even Porsche now, and what else is there? Low volume premium Merc's? This won't be the last posting on here about changes at Aston that's for sure, I just hope someone is bold enough and take the company back to what it should be.
When you think about where the brand sits in the market now, then given that you can spend £180k on one to £35k on a second hand car that in many ways to many people is not that different in looks to new model. Ferrari has been bold yet it has covered it's bases on all levels, with the entry level California to breaking with tradition and building a Z3M Coupe, oooops, I mean FF. The 458 sits in the less price sensitive super rich segment, and the new F12 will do the same. Whatever you say, there are still plenty of people globally who have money to spend, and Aston needs to tap into this.
Many may have hated what BMW first did with the Mini, yet they have taken that icon, and turned it into something enduring again. Aston need to think hard about their product, maybe some kind of modern heritage BMW'esq style throwback to what have been some of the most beautiful cars in the world. £150m of invest/shares, isn't going to do this, and so more change will be needed. It's interesting to see that viewpoints on overseas investment into the UK, and I would remind people there are a handful of UK football clubs that are a going concern in their own right, yet are seen as play things of many dubious and not so dubious overseas investors. Aston's future lays with a group of people with a passion for what the brand could be, and that will be huge risk to kick off in light of the vast costs to take a new model to market.
Aston doesn't stand up next to Ferrari and even Porsche now, and what else is there? Low volume premium Merc's? This won't be the last posting on here about changes at Aston that's for sure, I just hope someone is bold enough and take the company back to what it should be.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff