Discussion
https://www.hellorayo.co.uk/hits-radio/coventry/ne...
Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
oilit said:
https://www.hellorayo.co.uk/hits-radio/coventry/ne...
Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
Sorry to read this too, but the timing is interesting, as three weeks today the FY 2025 Results are due to be released. BRM. Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
Minglar said:
oilit said:
https://www.hellorayo.co.uk/hits-radio/coventry/ne...
Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
Sorry to read this too, but the timing is interesting, as three weeks today the FY 2025 Results are due to be released. BRM. Really sorry to hear this, and hope the staff are looked after and find alternate roles quickly.
Always sad when cost cutting is forced upon any business.
Aston Martin have highly skilled employees, so experience, and expertise will be lost by the Company and morale suffers too.
As Richard points out, the 2025 full year results will soon be announced, so we can ponder reasons for the timing of this announcement. My wild guess therefore:-
Cost cutting suggests tighter financial control.
Investors like to hear that, when there is no alternative.
Could it be, that investors will be asked to dip into their wallets again.
Possibly a rights issue announcement on results day?
A random thought about cost cutting.
Operating St Athan appears to be a major unneccessary cost, simply because Gaydon has the capacity for the entire AML production.
Perhaps there is a problem though. I think a 25 year lease was signed, so maybe no early exit possible.
.....................
A couple of videos that might be of interest.
https://youtu.be/pp3TZhVMQtg?si=VOvPZmvVQxsLNYpb
Matt Watson is thrilled driving the Vanquish.
He makes a financial remark towards the end, about the AM's price contribution. His initial career was as a qualified accountant.
https://youtu.be/KgenAxnrIDk?si=s3E6coFEb5EW03uX
Hundreds of brand new vehicles abandoned in USA.
Funny where the presenter, not a car enthusiast, is puzzled by the manufacturer and concludes it must be European. -
oilit said:
I suspect if they close St Athen or have severe cuts to staff numbers they may have to repay the Welsh government, may be easier to close Gaydon if they can't get sales =>capacity
This is what I can remember. Might not all be correct.
The St. Athan factory site is owned by an insurance company, forming part of their property investments. Might be Aviva.
I think the financial commitment by the Welsh Government, was to provide a guarantee for the 25 year factory lease payments.
Therefore they might not have handed over money to AML.
I think the Gaydon factory is freehold, but forms security for part of the Company debt.
Jon39 said:
I think the Gaydon factory is freehold, but forms security for part of the Company debt.
You do wonder, if as Jon says Gaydon is big enough to make everything and they own it, why they would spend precious money on another factory they don't need. There seem to be far too many people earning fat salaries out of making very few cars.Simpo Two said:
You do wonder, if as Jon says Gaydon is big enough to make everything and they own it, why they would spend precious money on another factory they don't need. There seem to be far too many people earning fat salaries out of making very few cars.
Because they are limited to being able to make 10,000 cars a year from Gaydon and, when they launched the DBX, all of the sales guys were predicting (and the business case assumed) that total sales would exceed 10k per annum, so AP had to go look for another site.If they had known then what they know now, perhaps they'd have decided differently. It's been years since I left but I still cant get my head around the logic of shipping all sports-car bodies down to Wales to be painted, then shipping them back again. I can only assume they prime them in Gaydon, as that's what cures the adhesives.
And AML don't own the Gaydon site - it's on a very, very long lease from JLR (assuming JLR haven't sold the whole site and done a lease-back themselves, in best VC "I've got an MBA" style - I can't be bothered to check)
LTP said:
Because they are limited to being able to make 10,000 cars a year from Gaydon and, when they launched the DBX, all of the sales guys were predicting (and the business case assumed) that total sales would exceed 10k per annum, so AP had to go look for another site.
Oh dear, the price of wild marketing claims...Simpo Two said:
LTP said:
Because they are limited to being able to make 10,000 cars a year from Gaydon and, when they launched the DBX, all of the sales guys were predicting (and the business case assumed) that total sales would exceed 10k per annum, so AP had to go look for another site.
Oh dear, the price of wild marketing claims...Minglar said:
Simpo Two said:
LTP said:
Because they are limited to being able to make 10,000 cars a year from Gaydon and, when they launched the DBX, all of the sales guys were predicting (and the business case assumed) that total sales would exceed 10k per annum, so AP had to go look for another site.
Oh dear, the price of wild marketing claims...
be interesting to know how much St Athan really costs AM? They would have received major financial backing from the WG to go there, I'd suggest it isn't as huge a cost as it might seem? Unless they've really messed up and are running it badly and inefficiently.
I've visited St Athan a few times, and it never seems to be running anywhere near capacity. And it's very sales dependant being order based production. they're constantly employing staff, then laying them off due to peaks and troughs in sales. That can't be very efficient costs wise?
I've visited St Athan a few times, and it never seems to be running anywhere near capacity. And it's very sales dependant being order based production. they're constantly employing staff, then laying them off due to peaks and troughs in sales. That can't be very efficient costs wise?
LTP said:
Because they are limited to being able to make 10,000 cars a year from Gaydon and, when they launched the DBX, all of the sales guys were predicting (and the business case assumed) that total sales would exceed 10k per annum, so AP had to go look for another site.
If they had known then what they know now, perhaps they'd have decided differently. It's been years since I left but I still cant get my head around the logic of shipping all sports-car bodies down to Wales to be painted, then shipping them back again. I can only assume they prime them in Gaydon, as that's what cures the adhesives.
And AML don't own the Gaydon site - it's on a very, very long lease from JLR (assuming JLR haven't sold the whole site and done a lease-back themselves, in best VC "I've got an MBA" style - I can't be bothered to check)
If they had known then what they know now, perhaps they'd have decided differently. It's been years since I left but I still cant get my head around the logic of shipping all sports-car bodies down to Wales to be painted, then shipping them back again. I can only assume they prime them in Gaydon, as that's what cures the adhesives.
And AML don't own the Gaydon site - it's on a very, very long lease from JLR (assuming JLR haven't sold the whole site and done a lease-back themselves, in best VC "I've got an MBA" style - I can't be bothered to check)
Thank you for your clarification.
When I was writing my earlier post, I did think about Jaguar.
My understanding is that originally the extensive Gaydon site was owned by Jaguar.
Looking at old accounts does show that during the Ford era, the actual owner of AML was Jaguar (of course then a subsidiary of Fomoco).
The security (factory premises) given in respect of one of the bonds is odd if not freehold, but I suppose a long lease does also have value as security.
10,000 capacity is interesting. I was not aware it was that high. My conclusion was simply based on the record production in 2007 (about 7,200). That was achieved by fewer employees than now, but you have previously explained how contractors confuse the actual number of people involved.
I think AP anticipated sales of 7,000 sports/GT cars, plus 7,000 SUVs, so St Athan was created.
They had achieved that number of sports/GTs in 2007 and when he made his statement, the Bentley Bentaga was selling well, so 14,000 might have been a realistic expectation at the time. Just unfortunate that an overall total of around 6,000 is now being achieved.
There is an irony about this, because you will know that it is the second time that AML have arranged for secondary production and on both occasions with hindsight, it has been unnecessary.
Production of the new Rapide model was expected to result in exceeding Gaydon's capacity, so it was initially built in (was it) Switzerland or Austria. Most unfortunately economic conditions changed and AML had to pay £millions to end the contract, then continue by building the Rapides at Gaydon.
scampbird said:
nordboy said:
they're constantly employing staff, then laying them off due to peaks and troughs in sales. That can't be very efficient costs wise?
Also known as "The Automotive Business Model". Possibly.Jaguar never owned Gaydon, or even used it much until recently. Jaguar's R&D centre was at Whitley, just up the road in Coventry. Ex-Leyland Gaydon was part of Rover Cars, and went to BMW when they acquired Land Rover and Mini, so Jaguar had no presence on Gaydon until Ford bought Land Rover from BMW 10 years after it had added Jaguar plc to its nascent PAG stable (and ironically almost recreating the Jaguar-Rover-Triumph sub-brand group that existed within British Leyland).
The big act of separation for AML came when Mercedes acquired a shareholding. Before then, even though they were separate companies, there was both formal and informal co-operation, and even using (borrowing? hiring? who knew?) of some JLR Gaydon facilities. As soon as the three-pointed star turned up on the scene the barriers immediately became more formal, "no more sharing, you need your own entrance, you need your own visitor's carpark, you need your own site security, etc. etc" because before that moment in time Aston were not a real competitor or threat to either Jaguar or Land Rover. On the other hand, Mercedes were.
The big act of separation for AML came when Mercedes acquired a shareholding. Before then, even though they were separate companies, there was both formal and informal co-operation, and even using (borrowing? hiring? who knew?) of some JLR Gaydon facilities. As soon as the three-pointed star turned up on the scene the barriers immediately became more formal, "no more sharing, you need your own entrance, you need your own visitor's carpark, you need your own site security, etc. etc" because before that moment in time Aston were not a real competitor or threat to either Jaguar or Land Rover. On the other hand, Mercedes were.
Speaking to some of my former colleagues, this is the 4th round of redundancies in less than 2 years and , as usual, the wrong people are going.
Soon they will have no staff to actually do any work, just spreadsheet jockeys to produce hundreds of presentations to show how much s
t they are in (still).
Soon they will have no staff to actually do any work, just spreadsheet jockeys to produce hundreds of presentations to show how much s
t they are in (still).LTP said:
Jaguar never owned Gaydon, or even used it much until recently. Jaguar's R&D centre was at Whitley, just up the road in Coventry. Ex-Leyland Gaydon was part of Rover Cars, and went to BMW when they acquired Land Rover and Mini, so Jaguar had no presence on Gaydon until Ford bought Land Rover from BMW 10 years after it had added Jaguar plc to its nascent PAG stable (and ironically almost recreating the Jaguar-Rover-Triumph sub-brand group that existed within British Leyland).
The big act of separation for AML came when Mercedes acquired a shareholding. Before then, even though they were separate companies, there was both formal and informal co-operation, and even using (borrowing? hiring? who knew?) of some JLR Gaydon facilities. As soon as the three-pointed star turned up on the scene the barriers immediately became more formal, "no more sharing, you need your own entrance, you need your own visitor's carpark, you need your own site security, etc. etc" because before that moment in time Aston were not a real competitor or threat to either Jaguar or Land Rover. On the other hand, Mercedes were.
The big act of separation for AML came when Mercedes acquired a shareholding. Before then, even though they were separate companies, there was both formal and informal co-operation, and even using (borrowing? hiring? who knew?) of some JLR Gaydon facilities. As soon as the three-pointed star turned up on the scene the barriers immediately became more formal, "no more sharing, you need your own entrance, you need your own visitor's carpark, you need your own site security, etc. etc" because before that moment in time Aston were not a real competitor or threat to either Jaguar or Land Rover. On the other hand, Mercedes were.
An intriguing ownership structure in 1999.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I expect Mercedes-Benz might be becoming less interested in AML now.
They did not take up their rights in the last fund raising, so their holding has been diluted.
They have big problems of their own now, with worldwide sales reducing and the flop of their entire EQ model range (battery cars).
That new model range cost an enormous amount to develop, but then hardly any buyers wanted them, as illustrated below.
New Aston Martin depreciation is a mere jot, compared to an EQS.
NEW ....................£152,000
3 YEARS OLD ..... £ 37,000
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff