New TVR still under wraps!
Discussion
natben said:
I think as we head towards the end of 2018 with just one car, and still crash test approval to be sought as well as no production staff or facility and doubts over funding it looks more and more unlikely that cars will be delivered to customers next year.
Nah, les has said once the paperwork’s done you can set up a factory and produce cars immediately with istream. 
Do you even need funding or a factory or employees or anything? You just finish of some forms, decide to start the istream process and it’s done.
Jhonno said:
robsco said:
Plan B said:
I attended the Topcats day today. Saw the car and had a chat to Les. The car is a lot better looking in the flesh than the photos I’ve seen. I asked Les how close the car is to the planned final product. He said very close. - Some changes to the front grill and the splitter underneath it and apart from crash testing and homologation that’s about it.
That sounds like an awful lot to me. Redesign of the front? Surprised nobody has picked up on this yet! How many cars are required for crash testing? Crash testing will obviously be carried out on a production ready car; up to press there is no factory, no tooling, and one pre-production mule. This could be 18-24 months away, no?Les has said many times the factory is just a box, the actual setting up requires very little due to the iStream process, and gave the impression it wouldn't take long to get production tooling up and running.
robsco said:
Jhonno said:
robsco said:
Plan B said:
I attended the Topcats day today. Saw the car and had a chat to Les. The car is a lot better looking in the flesh than the photos I’ve seen. I asked Les how close the car is to the planned final product. He said very close. - Some changes to the front grill and the splitter underneath it and apart from crash testing and homologation that’s about it.
That sounds like an awful lot to me. Redesign of the front? Surprised nobody has picked up on this yet! How many cars are required for crash testing? Crash testing will obviously be carried out on a production ready car; up to press there is no factory, no tooling, and one pre-production mule. This could be 18-24 months away, no?Les has said many times the factory is just a box, the actual setting up requires very little due to the iStream process, and gave the impression it wouldn't take long to get production tooling up and running.
On top of that "homologation" and "certification" are also significant tasks, even if your car passes every test at the first try. Today the VCA (Vehicle Certification Agency) the .gov department who witness and countersign all the certification work are understaffed and overloaded. It can take several months just to get a witness booked in for say a power cert test, despite that test taking just a morning! Large OE's throw massive manpower at this sort of thing, carrying out pretests, data reductions, and report writing, to ensure the VCA have the least amount of actual work to do. TVR may not have that luxury is budgets are tight......
8ball_Rob said:
Zippee said:
8ball_Rob said:
Do we know for certain that the deposits are included in the company accounts though? Presumably if the deposits are being held in escrow, that would make them assets of a third party rather than of TVR, in which case they might not appear in the accounts at all. I'm not an accountant though so I may be barking up completely the wrong tree...
It's been confirmed several times the deposits are not in escrow and are unprotected. I guess it's then a reasonable assumption they make up part off the companies assets.
unrepentant said:
The accounts make no reference to deposit holders. So unless they are somehow "off balance sheet" in escrow deposit holders are unsecured creditors. There is a charge over all of the assets of TVR Automotive. So in the unlikely event of a failure the pecking order is presumably HMG, charge holder, Welsh Assembly, bank, unsecured creditors. The assets of the company are mainly intangible.
Thanks for the explanation. So is the working assumption then that the deposits are included in the ~£3.87m 'loans' figure under the section 'Creditors - Amounts falling due after more than one year', or that they are included in the ~£1.35m due to 'other creditors' under the section 'Creditors - Amounts falling due within one year'? Given that the deposits could theoretically be withdrawn at any time, I'd have thought it would make sense to include them in the latter figure, but this doesn't seem high enough to include all the deposits (plus presumably other creditors) - hence I was wondering whether another explanation could simply be that the deposits are not actually included in the accounts at all. Furthermore, the Ts&Cs on the site for "deposits" are clear that they are not deposits - they are the purchase of an opportunity to buy a car, i.e. there's an exchange of consideration at the point of paying the "deposit." The Ts&Cs also make no mention of such "deposits" being refundable on-demand (or indeed at all).
In consequence of the Ts&Cs, TVR can (should?) recognise the "deposits" as revenue when they are paid, not as loans or prepayments.
Neither company files actual P&L figures that would help in this analysis.
The bottom line? We don't know
As the FAQ on the site says, the only thing to go on is the credibility of Les when he says "don't worry, it will be ok." Given that he's made some pretty big personal bets on that outcome, I'm not at all saying that his word is not good in this context. What I am saying is that there is nothing - good or bad - in the accounts or the Ts&Cs to support or demolish a proposition that the "deposit" money is "safe."skwdenyer said:
8ball_Rob said:
Zippee said:
8ball_Rob said:
Do we know for certain that the deposits are included in the company accounts though? Presumably if the deposits are being held in escrow, that would make them assets of a third party rather than of TVR, in which case they might not appear in the accounts at all. I'm not an accountant though so I may be barking up completely the wrong tree...
It's been confirmed several times the deposits are not in escrow and are unprotected. I guess it's then a reasonable assumption they make up part off the companies assets.
unrepentant said:
The accounts make no reference to deposit holders. So unless they are somehow "off balance sheet" in escrow deposit holders are unsecured creditors. There is a charge over all of the assets of TVR Automotive. So in the unlikely event of a failure the pecking order is presumably HMG, charge holder, Welsh Assembly, bank, unsecured creditors. The assets of the company are mainly intangible.
Thanks for the explanation. So is the working assumption then that the deposits are included in the ~£3.87m 'loans' figure under the section 'Creditors - Amounts falling due after more than one year', or that they are included in the ~£1.35m due to 'other creditors' under the section 'Creditors - Amounts falling due within one year'? Given that the deposits could theoretically be withdrawn at any time, I'd have thought it would make sense to include them in the latter figure, but this doesn't seem high enough to include all the deposits (plus presumably other creditors) - hence I was wondering whether another explanation could simply be that the deposits are not actually included in the accounts at all. Furthermore, the Ts&Cs on the site for "deposits" are clear that they are not deposits - they are the purchase of an opportunity to buy a car, i.e. there's an exchange of consideration at the point of paying the "deposit." The Ts&Cs also make no mention of such "deposits" being refundable on-demand (or indeed at all).
In consequence of the Ts&Cs, TVR can (should?) recognise the "deposits" as revenue when they are paid, not as loans or prepayments.
Neither company files actual P&L figures that would help in this analysis.
The bottom line? We don't know
As the FAQ on the site says, the only thing to go on is the credibility of Les when he says "don't worry, it will be ok." Given that he's made some pretty big personal bets on that outcome, I'm not at all saying that his word is not good in this context. What I am saying is that there is nothing - good or bad - in the accounts or the Ts&Cs to support or demolish a proposition that the "deposit" money is "safe."It's been a while since I was on the board of a UK company or even a resident of the UK so I'm a bit rusty but I'm not sure it's legal to give preference to certain creditors unless there are charges in place or some other mechanism. For instance when I was running a sportswear business supplying retailers our terms of business had a retention of title clause. When the receivers or administrators were called in we could claim retention of title to all goods unpaid for. It was something that we used on many occasions to claw back cash or stock from failed businesses. The accounts are silent about the deposits and I think if there were some special protection it would have to be disclosed so that the other creditors were aware of it.
It's all irrelevant anyway because Les says everything's going to be just fine.
skwdenyer said:
The website is operated by TVR Manufacturing Ltd, not TVR Automotive Ltd. The Ts&Cs on the site for deposits simply states "TVR" as the contracting party, the clear implication of which would therefore be that (absent any other documentation). That being so, the relevant accounts would be those for TVR Manufacturing Ltd.
Furthermore, the Ts&Cs on the site for "deposits" are clear that they are not deposits - they are the purchase of an opportunity to buy a car, i.e. there's an exchange of consideration at the point of paying the "deposit." The Ts&Cs also make no mention of such "deposits" being refundable on-demand (or indeed at all).
In consequence of the Ts&Cs, TVR can (should?) recognise the "deposits" as revenue when they are paid, not as loans or prepayments.
Neither company files actual P&L figures that would help in this analysis.
The bottom line? We don't know As the FAQ on the site says, the only thing to go on is the credibility of Les when he says "don't worry, it will be ok." Given that he's made some pretty big personal bets on that outcome, I'm not at all saying that his word is not good in this context. What I am saying is that there is nothing - good or bad - in the accounts or the Ts&Cs to support or demolish a proposition that the "deposit" money is "safe."
I wouldn't have put my deposit down after talking to Les in a car park 3 and a half years ago if I wanted 'safe' and or no 'risk'.. Furthermore, the Ts&Cs on the site for "deposits" are clear that they are not deposits - they are the purchase of an opportunity to buy a car, i.e. there's an exchange of consideration at the point of paying the "deposit." The Ts&Cs also make no mention of such "deposits" being refundable on-demand (or indeed at all).
In consequence of the Ts&Cs, TVR can (should?) recognise the "deposits" as revenue when they are paid, not as loans or prepayments.
Neither company files actual P&L figures that would help in this analysis.
The bottom line? We don't know
As the FAQ on the site says, the only thing to go on is the credibility of Les when he says "don't worry, it will be ok." Given that he's made some pretty big personal bets on that outcome, I'm not at all saying that his word is not good in this context. What I am saying is that there is nothing - good or bad - in the accounts or the Ts&Cs to support or demolish a proposition that the "deposit" money is "safe."given that we actually have a working prototype now. now is a lot more 'safe' than then.. I'm not worried about my deposit. I just don't care. as I expect many others do not care. if they do worry, get it returned, as others have done, and others taken their place.
can we drop the 'are the deposits' safe boredom now.. people can make their own judgement, without all the keyboard worrydom.
I for one do not care. as Les and others have taken far more risk?!!
bullittmcqueen said:
My perfect car.Downside - I can’t even make an air fix kit.
If they were offering ready built - I would bid les Edgar farewell and get myself an awesome car!
Testarossa said:
bullittmcqueen said:
My perfect car.Downside - I can’t even make an air fix kit.
If they were offering ready built - I would bid les Edgar farewell and get myself an awesome car!
bullittmcqueen said:
I am sure you can pay someone to build it for you and still come out at a fair price. The problem that i see, is that there is close to zero chance to make it street-legal (at least in Germany, UK might be more accessible due to it's more active kit-car scene. But even there things are tightening up).
I wonder if Les would?I wouldn't trust an individual to make it Bullitt, would prefer a business, so I knew what my rights were. I didn't realise it may not be street legal.
Oh well, maybe sagaris' prices will drop when Les shuts down the company and runs off with our deposit money - as long as they drop by more than £5k, it will be a result
.
t parts in there. Testarossa said:
bullittmcqueen said:
I am sure you can pay someone to build it for you and still come out at a fair price. The problem that i see, is that there is close to zero chance to make it street-legal (at least in Germany, UK might be more accessible due to it's more active kit-car scene. But even there things are tightening up).
I wonder if Les would?I wouldn't trust an individual to make it Bullitt, would prefer a business, so I knew what my rights were. I didn't realise it may not be street legal.
Oh well, maybe sagaris' prices will drop when Les shuts down the company and runs off with our deposit money - as long as they drop by more than £5k, it will be a result
.I am not sure whether it's street-legal or not, but the fact that there is not a single word about it is a very strong indication. They explicitly state that no donor-car is needed, that means the first date of admission will be 2019. So 2019 rules and regulations apply. At least in Germany that is close to impossible and would be prohibitively expensive. You could spin this approach a bit further and say "Hey, let's build a car and get type approval for it, maybe use a known brand that is for sale cheaply and also let's throw in a car designer who has done something iconic in his past. How hard could it be ?" and maybe in 5 years you'll find a PH-thread with 350+ pages and still no car
I visited Top Cats Racing yesterday to have a look at the new car. I saw it at the NEC last year and was impressed with how good it looked in the flesh. I had an opportunity to see it up close today and sit in it. I am really impressed with it, I think it looks fantastic inside and out. I did of course complain to TVR that is was not authentic as the panel lines were too good, cannot be a true TVR In all seriousness I think they have the right amount of quality in terms of interior spec / equipment while still keeping the car raw / lightweight. It is nice any easy to get in and out of compared to my Griff and the cabin still feels like a special place to be with some TVR design quirks thrown in.The clutch and gears have a really nice weight as well. Or course no-one can argue with the cars very exciting spec of ground effect, naturally aspirated, manual, V8 and most importantly light-weight. I am really looking forward to hearing the next update.
Such a shame to see all the historical negative comments on this thread, I do not understand the need to speculate and try to undermine what other people are trying to achieve. Deposit holder or not, true enthusiast should be supporting this project, it is in all our interests for this to be a success.
In all seriousness I think they have the right amount of quality in terms of interior spec / equipment while still keeping the car raw / lightweight. It is nice any easy to get in and out of compared to my Griff and the cabin still feels like a special place to be with some TVR design quirks thrown in.The clutch and gears have a really nice weight as well. Or course no-one can argue with the cars very exciting spec of ground effect, naturally aspirated, manual, V8 and most importantly light-weight. I am really looking forward to hearing the next update. Such a shame to see all the historical negative comments on this thread, I do not understand the need to speculate and try to undermine what other people are trying to achieve. Deposit holder or not, true enthusiast should be supporting this project, it is in all our interests for this to be a success.
We should indeed get in support of the TVR resurrection. Unless there is clear evidence of things going wrong we need to give full support to Les and team to return the TVR marque back into greatness. I must confess to past slight scepticism from initial photos but after having seen the car in the flesh I must say they seem to have done a great job in being well on the way to building an iconic British sports car.
Come on guys let’s quit the loser speculation.
Come on guys let’s quit the loser speculation.
N7GTX said:
Adeje, Tenerife is the contact place with a telephone number.
What happened to copyright? Surely Les and Co own the name etc?
Yeah, but even that aside, i don't know what to make of it. It truly looks like a classic kit-car (albeit with modern engines and everything), but it's a kit-car still (don't get me wrong, i have great sympathy for kit-car makers). This is 2019, not 1990. As i said in previous posts, there is no chance this thing will ever pass any kind of approval of 2019 standards, even for single cars without major major pain and money. And i'm also sure you don't want to be involved in any 15+mph accidents in one of those.What happened to copyright? Surely Les and Co own the name etc?
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff