RE: Jean-Marc Gales exits Lotus
Discussion
Frimley111R said:
What on earth are you two smoking??!!
You incorrectly assumed when I said "Engineering personnel" I meant Lotus Engineering.No, Lotus Engineering was pretty much mothballed by Dany Bahar before JMG arrived on the scene. But it was Gales' call to get rid of three out of every four engineers who developed the Evora 400.
This correlates quiet well with the fact that since then no new engines or chassis have appeared from Hethel and most embarrassingly for Gales no Evora convertible either.
Why? He lost the people he needed to make it happen.
Wayoftheflower said:
This correlates quiet well with the fact that since then no new engines or chassis have appeared from Hethel and most embarrassingly for Gales no Evora convertible either.
Why? He lost the people he needed to make it happen.
Pragmatically, you have a choice between hanging on to staff who are forcing you into the red each month in the hope that a new development will 'jump start' profits, or you cut staff and change the basic stuff that improves sales - like a vanishingly thin margin on a barely competitive platform. Gales addressed the stuff that was rife in Lotus - the habit of hoping that the 'next product' would turn out to be a magic unicorn rather than getting on and selling the current one.Why? He lost the people he needed to make it happen.
I don't imagine Geely would have bought Lotus if they were still in the state Bahar left them in.
John145 said:
Brooking10 said:
Alternatively brought order to the chaos of the post Bahar era, steadied the ship commercially and guided the business to what looks like a safe and long term harbour.
It's quite understandable for you to hold this view based on the quality of investigative journalism on display. If you were there you'd hold a different opinion. Gales' job was to make the business look good on paper. His method was short sighted and will see geely needing to more than double their engineering staff over the next 3 years.
The evidence available suggests geeky have seen through the fog...
Does that make you objective if so ?
It strikes me that at a commercial level he did a reasonable job and that is exactly what Lotus needed at the time.
You can argue all day about product development and engineering since Gales took charge. However, I can't imagine anyone on here will argue that the company wasn't in complete chaos when he took over. The planned models would have bankrupted Lotus and possibly their owners.
In the circumstances, he did very well to get the company into a state where Geely wanted to buy in quite a short time. Remember MG/Rover, the Chinese are quite happy to wait for one of our companies to go into receivership and then cherry pick the parts they want for peanuts.
In the circumstances, he did very well to get the company into a state where Geely wanted to buy in quite a short time. Remember MG/Rover, the Chinese are quite happy to wait for one of our companies to go into receivership and then cherry pick the parts they want for peanuts.
Tuna said:
I'm sure insiders will take a different view, but under Gales, Lotus went from being a company widely viewed as being on the verge of bankruptcy to one that is now seen as a genuine competitor to Porsche (with few of the 'yes, but' qualifiers that dogged them in the previous decade). It seems odd to claim that the redesigns, improvements in quality and fleshing out of the range were all ('already in motion') when he arrived - he's been there four years.
For sure the shoestring budget wasn't allowing much new investment, but the priority had to be getting the brand back to being competitive and profitable before engaging in new models and drive trains.
As for the new guy... Under DRB, a 'company man' was parachuted in briefly to take the reins, and it didn't go well. The use of the word 'synergy' in this article does not bode well.
And John145 it seems to me we don't need Lotus' cars to be stuffed full of technology. They compete against the likes of Porsche by taking a different tack - namely getting the dynamics right mechanically - rather than overcoming physics with technology. Both seem to be valid approaches, but Porsche have decades more experience of doing the latter, so it would seem to be to Lotus' disadvantage to try and compete on that front. If you want a technological solution, buy a Porsche - everyone else does. The Evora has become pretty competitive without needing a ton of active stuff to add weight and reliability problems.
I don't think any sensible person thinks lotus is genuine competition to Porsche at the moment. A genuine competitor would have customers thinking: do I buy a 911 or Evora...? For sure the shoestring budget wasn't allowing much new investment, but the priority had to be getting the brand back to being competitive and profitable before engaging in new models and drive trains.
As for the new guy... Under DRB, a 'company man' was parachuted in briefly to take the reins, and it didn't go well. The use of the word 'synergy' in this article does not bode well.
And John145 it seems to me we don't need Lotus' cars to be stuffed full of technology. They compete against the likes of Porsche by taking a different tack - namely getting the dynamics right mechanically - rather than overcoming physics with technology. Both seem to be valid approaches, but Porsche have decades more experience of doing the latter, so it would seem to be to Lotus' disadvantage to try and compete on that front. If you want a technological solution, buy a Porsche - everyone else does. The Evora has become pretty competitive without needing a ton of active stuff to add weight and reliability problems.
In reality lotus have barely enough customer base to staff an office.
The long term reality for Lotus now is to push. Geely is a genuinely attractive proposition but they will have a very difficult time to turn it around.
I am positive about Lotus's future now. I was not 3 years ago.
Gales made a lot of redundancies when he came in. That is not overly surprising given the situation. However what is surprising is the people who then left who were not forced. People with their whole career built at Lotus (I'm sure you can all think of one person in particular) walking away without any redundancy package.
We have 2 directions for Lotus now:
- become the next Morgan doing nothing ground breaking and just turning over based on a has been product and a committed but small customer base
- align to a larger manufacturer, investing and developing new exciting cars that have technology and appeal to increase their market share
You may think there is such a thing as "getting the mechanics right" however the painful truth is that this is a fallacy. Do you really think that Porsche, AMG et al are incapable of doing the basics? Lotus must now push and I really hope this new CEO and ownership provide an exciting 10 year plan for the guys in Hethel. Gales never did.
Times change, and it's clear (given sales figures from most manufacturers) that buyers want SUV type vehicles rather than low - slung sports cars!
If a company doesn't follow that route then maybe they have no future. To a lot of us it doesn't seem 'correct', but it's what's happening. Another example is in the bicycle industry, where customers are happy to buy bikes with far too many gears than is sensible (to us real enthusiasts), but any manufacturer who stays with only 8 sprockets on their rear wheel is long gone!
If a company doesn't follow that route then maybe they have no future. To a lot of us it doesn't seem 'correct', but it's what's happening. Another example is in the bicycle industry, where customers are happy to buy bikes with far too many gears than is sensible (to us real enthusiasts), but any manufacturer who stays with only 8 sprockets on their rear wheel is long gone!
CABC said:
John145 said:
Yes because a car that rolls twice as much as the new Bentley GT or can't put power down on the limit is really pushing the boundaries of physics!
Lotus needs to join the 21st century at some point to survive.
Do you think Porsche is where they are today because they thought: hmm coil springs and steel anti roll bars - that'll do.
I remember Lotus leading active technologies and material science.
It's bizarre people think that advanced technology and lotus do not mix! A diseased mentality.
I have a disease, i like driving.Lotus needs to join the 21st century at some point to survive.
Do you think Porsche is where they are today because they thought: hmm coil springs and steel anti roll bars - that'll do.
I remember Lotus leading active technologies and material science.
It's bizarre people think that advanced technology and lotus do not mix! A diseased mentality.
Of cars just emerging on the market i'd choose an A110.
I appreciate most people would choose a Golf R.
btw, Porsche is where it is today because it moved on from selling sports cars.
Tickle said:
Regarding the coil springs, Ohlins and Nitron are the best in the buisness at damping.
Beg to differ. These guys build way better kit (for road-cars, too):https://www.exe-tc.co.uk/
EGTE said:
Boxster/996 kept them going (actually the Japanese manufacturing techniques they brought in, did).
But the huge numbers of Cayenne/Macan have made it what it is today; a "luxury sports car manufacturer" as Lotus' new CEO stated.
Yes, but they may not have been in a position to branch out into other niches has the Boxster not arrived.But the huge numbers of Cayenne/Macan have made it what it is today; a "luxury sports car manufacturer" as Lotus' new CEO stated.
I don't really give a toss about whether Lotus is profitable. What I care about is that people continue to make cars like the Elise. Mr Feng can have Lotus make a direct competitor to the X6 for all I care, just as long as they still make somewhat-usable minimalist roadsters. If not, I will cease to care about Lotus. It really is that simple.
EGTE said:
Tickle said:
Regarding the coil springs, Ohlins and Nitron are the best in the buisness at damping.
Beg to differ. These guys build way better kit (for road-cars, too):https://www.exe-tc.co.uk/
John145 said:
It's bizarre people think that advanced technology and lotus do not mix! A diseased mentality.
I'll tell you what a TRUE "diseased mentality" is.... It is thinking that Lotus feels it must jump into the SUV producing pool and thinking people will actually buy such a product from them. I am truly astounded how there isn't more of an uproar and written\voiced opinion on the matter.
FOR GODSSAKE LOTUS FORGET ABOUT THIS SUV NONSENSE AND FRIGGEN BUILD AN AFFORDABLE FUN ELAN LIKE CAR ALREADY!!!! Think the 90s; ELAN M100, MR2s, S2000's, Miata, etc. Be the leader in that class.
JMF894 said:
Actually I think Porsche are where they are today because they built the Boxster. It saved them at the time.
but after that they made an even bigger move to SUVs. 911s and Caysters and a fraction of total sales now.Their sports cars (ones i can buy) are now softer than they once were, more 'sport GT'.
All of this is commercially successful and the products are very high quality.
My selfish interest is in smaller, purer handling cars. I'm the odd one out, the 21st century has moved away from that.
This is not rose tinted glasses, just recognition of progress. If Porsche made a 'mechanical' car the size of an earlier 911 with todays techniques it would be awesome. Something like the original 718 but a bit bigger.
I wish people stopped trolling out the usual unqualified praise for technological progress. Much of today's car tech is better for driving, but so much of it simply isn't. Rather it's for comfort and legislation for H&S and emissions. OK for a daily, not for a fun car. Turbos, throttle maps, CDVs, high gearing, over-sized wheels and more. And when you have a sporty SUV it comes with over-firm damping for 'sports feel'.
ESOG said:
John145 said:
It's bizarre people think that advanced technology and lotus do not mix! A diseased mentality.
I'll tell you what a TRUE "diseased mentality" is.... It is thinking that Lotus feels it must jump into the SUV producing pool and thinking people will actually buy such a product from them. I am truly astounded how there isn't more of an uproar and written\voiced opinion on the matter.
FOR GODSSAKE LOTUS FORGET ABOUT THIS SUV NONSENSE AND FRIGGEN BUILD AN AFFORDABLE FUN ELAN LIKE CAR ALREADY!!!! Think the 90s; ELAN M100, MR2s, S2000's, Miata, etc. Be the leader in that class.
Geely want volume and are not sentimental about Lotus’s glory years when they “Lost” so much money.
Geely want a 50,000/100,000 unit per year sportyish mark asap.
Super car (Esprit) could be on the cards as could a SUV or whatever they think they can sell.
Hardcore enthusiasts “on a budget” are not their target market. People complaining on a car website isn’t going to change anything.
Exige77 said:
Geeky want a 50,000/100,000 unit per year sportyish mark asap.
That way lies nothing more sporty than the "Lotus TT", based on a transverse front-engined Volvo platform; almost certainly neither designed nor built the UK. I'm not saying you're wrong, but whether the brand survives or not such a direction will be the death of the company. otolith said:
hyphen said:
otolith said:
John145 said:
However we have an Evora now with no active systems and a higher curb weight than a Cayman.
But lower than a Porsche with 2+2 seating, which would be a better comparison. It's not particularly light, though, I agree.Lotus on the other hand has to go looking for parts from other people and try to find light weight ones. It's always possible to buy light weight low volume parts but the cost tends to be really high, I suspect some of this is why Lotus cars have become dramatically more expensive.
Secondly a highly optimised steel or aluminium structure can be lighter than a poorly optimised composite one. Porsche have the resources to optimise the hell out of components and then the sales volumes to hide these design costs in.
Easily the most successful car at weight reduction is the MX-5 (still only 1050kg) which achieves weight reduction by shaving weight off everything (e.g. 15g of the sun visor), again volume lets them spend a great deal of time on optimisation.
kambites said:
Exige77 said:
Geeky want a 50,000/100,000 unit per year sportyish mark asap.
That way lies nothing more sporty than the "Lotus TT", based on a transverse front-engined Volvo platform; almost certainly neither designed nor built the UK. I'm not saying you're wrong, but whether the brand survives or not such a direction will be the death of the company. People harking back to the glory days of S1 Elise need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Going forward I’d expect in the short term what few engineers are left will be working on special edition Volvos which is great.
I wouldn’t bother with an SUV and I don’t believe there has been any meaningful progress on it regardless of what Gales said.
In the meantime they need to start taking and developing whatever technology they can into their products. Hybrids, full electric, active damping, it’s really exciting but certainly won’t be a new S1 Elise!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff