A Palmer interview on mid-engined Aston Martin
Discussion
https://www.autoblog.com/amp/2017/10/06/aston-mart...
Interview with Andy Palmer about the new mid-engined Aston Martin and poaching staff from Ferrari
Interview with Andy Palmer about the new mid-engined Aston Martin and poaching staff from Ferrari
It had been suggested in the past, that it costs hundreds of millions of Pounds, for a car manufacturer to develop a new model.
Have AML found some new way of dealing with this? They rolled over a loan of about £500m and raised a further £200m for I think the electric Rapide. There was further money ref. St. Athan.
How many models are being spoken about altogether now, from DB11 to Ferrari 488 successor challenger? The stated plan is that sales of one model will pay, the development costs of the next model. Seems that they must now be working on about five new models at once.
I am puzzled, Rob.
I've got no idea how it's all funded Jon, albeit clearly db11 sales are going well and the margins on valkryries must be substantial. Maybe the talked-about IPO is going to give a capital injection?
I find it interesting that they're attracting a fair amount of talent in from places like Ferrari (and of course Matt Becker). Dr Palmer must be very persuasive
I find it interesting that they're attracting a fair amount of talent in from places like Ferrari (and of course Matt Becker). Dr Palmer must be very persuasive
I would think sales are up with more new models coming on stream - DB11 V8, DB11 Volante and new Vantage all due next year -, discounting down - DB11, GT12, GT8, Valkyrie and AMR - all means their sales model has changed dramatically.
Think back to JLR and the losses they made which were dramatically turned round thanks to volume and good margins. The cash that business generates now supports bringing in numerous new models across the range. If the Vantage is well received then who says Aston can not replicate that.
If this translates through to improved residuals then it may even persuade the owners to change their cars more frequently then that will help even further.
If Dr Palmer can deliver on improved quality as well then his plans could well be achieved. I hope that he can!!
Think back to JLR and the losses they made which were dramatically turned round thanks to volume and good margins. The cash that business generates now supports bringing in numerous new models across the range. If the Vantage is well received then who says Aston can not replicate that.
If this translates through to improved residuals then it may even persuade the owners to change their cars more frequently then that will help even further.
If Dr Palmer can deliver on improved quality as well then his plans could well be achieved. I hope that he can!!
RobDown said:
the margins on valkryries must be substantial.
What makes you think that? Genuine question.And - to which firm do you think any profit accrues?
I suspect that Red Bull actually "own" the project, based on quotes from Newey about "Nebula" and how the project started. AML is just there for emissions testing, crash testing and experience of dealing with all of the hassle of selling street legal, homologated production cars.
I understand that the mid-engine layout provides the ultimate turning ability.
The physicists on here will be able to explain the reasons. Something to do with rotation. Even though present Aston Martins have perfect weight balance, about 50:50 due to the mid-front engine layout, when as much weight as possible is near the centre of a car there is apparently a rotational advantage.
My point though is in practice on the road, is all this just a sales ploy?
The practical disadvantage of course is less internal space for occupants and luggage.
To me, the present Vantage layout is ideal and very practical for a sports car. Excellent weight distribution for handling, a tailgate and there is more luggage space than the bigger brother DB9.
Do some of you prefer to have 3G cornering on the road, but hardly any luggage capacity?
Jon39 said:
I understand that the mid-engine layout provides the ultimate turning ability.
The physicists on here will be able to explain the reasons. Something to do with rotation. Even though present Aston Martins have perfect weight balance, about 50:50 due to the mid-front engine layout, when as much weight as possible is near the centre of a car there is apparently a rotational advantage.
My point though is in practice on the road, is all this just a sales ploy?
The practical disadvantage of course is less internal space for occupants and luggage.
To me, the present Vantage layout is ideal and very practical for a sports car. Excellent weight distribution for handling, a tailgate and there is more luggage space than the bigger brother DB9.
Do some of you prefer to have 3G cornering on the road, but hardly any luggage capacity?
Moment of inertia dictates the rate of change of cornering (ability to swerve).The physicists on here will be able to explain the reasons. Something to do with rotation. Even though present Aston Martins have perfect weight balance, about 50:50 due to the mid-front engine layout, when as much weight as possible is near the centre of a car there is apparently a rotational advantage.
My point though is in practice on the road, is all this just a sales ploy?
The practical disadvantage of course is less internal space for occupants and luggage.
To me, the present Vantage layout is ideal and very practical for a sports car. Excellent weight distribution for handling, a tailgate and there is more luggage space than the bigger brother DB9.
Do some of you prefer to have 3G cornering on the road, but hardly any luggage capacity?
It's a good question John (on margins on Valkyries). My thinking was that if they sell all 150 + 25 track versions then we're looking at gross proceeds of £450m.
The cost of building them is going to be a modest percentage of that. Let's say £0.5m per car to be conservative so a short £90m. So a gross profit of £360m
The real cost will be in development and I have no idea how much that is but iirc (will dig out the account later), AML spends £200m per annum on development (actually it capitalises a lot of that which is why we get these periodic big writedowns as clearly money spent developing a car isn't worth much ten years later).
But you're right I have no idea how the profits are split. Do you think Red Bull own the rights?
The cost of building them is going to be a modest percentage of that. Let's say £0.5m per car to be conservative so a short £90m. So a gross profit of £360m
The real cost will be in development and I have no idea how much that is but iirc (will dig out the account later), AML spends £200m per annum on development (actually it capitalises a lot of that which is why we get these periodic big writedowns as clearly money spent developing a car isn't worth much ten years later).
But you're right I have no idea how the profits are split. Do you think Red Bull own the rights?
M5MarkM said:
Interestingly in another thread there is a link to another interview with AP. I wonder if the replacement Vanquish will be mid-engine? Timing looks to be about right....
I think the other interview confirms the replacement Vanquish as 2019 with the mid-engined car not coming before 2020. Guessing the replacement Vanquish will use an updated version of the 5.2l twin-turbo out front
BenjiS said:
JLR were also helped by a small matter of around £11bn being put in by Tata...
I thought apart from the initial acquisition price JLR had been self funding and Tata had acquired the business just at the right time to benefit from a great model range and an upturn in sales. Interested to hear when the funds were invested and what they were used for? The articles I goodled make no mention so would be interested to know.IanV12VR said:
I thought apart from the initial acquisition price JLR had been self funding and Tata had acquired the business just at the right time to benefit from a great model range and an upturn in sales. Interested to hear when the funds were invested and what they were used for? The articles I goodled make no mention so would be interested to know.
Tata came to the rescue at the 11th hour and 59th minute (almost literally) as Gordon Brown's government would not under-right the loan they had secured.Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff