New TVR still under wraps! (Vol. 3)
Discussion
Mr Berriman has resigned from all his TVR directorships on 22nd May. He was the CEO of Spitfire and Thunderbolt and a director of all the others.
TVR Spitfire
TVR Thunderbolt
TVR Parts
TVR Electric Vehicles
TVR Automotive
TVR Developments
TVR Finance
Another nail in the coffin. At the time of his appointment Edgar extolled his virtues and vast experience naming his involvement with Triumph motorcycles as CFO. Perhaps just a coincidence but the company accounts are due by the 30th June.
TVR Spitfire
TVR Thunderbolt
TVR Parts
TVR Electric Vehicles
TVR Automotive
TVR Developments
TVR Finance
Another nail in the coffin. At the time of his appointment Edgar extolled his virtues and vast experience naming his involvement with Triumph motorcycles as CFO. Perhaps just a coincidence but the company accounts are due by the 30th June.
Edited by Viper201 on Tuesday 3rd June 09:59
DuncHK said:
Hi, I know I m opening myself up to plenty of probably justified abuse for not having done this sooner, but
Emailed TVR to cancel my deposit in early Dec 2024. Was told it would take 4-6 weeks to receive the £5K refund. Since then precisely nothing, despite many chase emails to various TVR people including LE.
Am pondering next steps. Anyone have a phone number for TVR Electric Vehicles Limited?
Emailed TVR to cancel my deposit in early Dec 2024. Was told it would take 4-6 weeks to receive the £5K refund. Since then precisely nothing, despite many chase emails to various TVR people including LE.
Am pondering next steps. Anyone have a phone number for TVR Electric Vehicles Limited?
DuncHK Can you tell us if you got your deposit back? You would be the first on here if you have not.
PAUL.S. said:
What was he actually doing all day for all those years? and if he was full time with TVR how did he also do all that "consultancy" as well?
There really are some horses
t resumes out there.
Full-time is one of a handful of employment type options you can select on LinkedIn- it normally means that you are on payroll. There really are some horses
t resumes out there.I find it hilarious when someone calls themselves a ceo when they have a small team, small turnover etc. It’s such a w
ky job title and in some ways underlines one of new TVRs problems. Gazzab said:
Full-time is one of a handful of employment type options you can select on LinkedIn- it normally means that you are on payroll.
I find it hilarious when someone calls themselves a ceo when they have a small team, small turnover etc. It s such a wky job title and in some ways underlines one of new TVRs problems.
[Goes to check my job titles on LinkedIn]...ahem. I agree. I have just changed mine though as AI revamped my profile. I find it hilarious when someone calls themselves a ceo when they have a small team, small turnover etc. It s such a w
ky job title and in some ways underlines one of new TVRs problems. crosseyedlion said:
Gazzab said:
Full-time is one of a handful of employment type options you can select on LinkedIn- it normally means that you are on payroll.
I find it hilarious when someone calls themselves a ceo when they have a small team, small turnover etc. It s such a wky job title and in some ways underlines one of new TVRs problems.
[Goes to check my job titles on LinkedIn]...ahem. I agree. I have just changed mine though as AI revamped my profile. I find it hilarious when someone calls themselves a ceo when they have a small team, small turnover etc. It s such a w
ky job title and in some ways underlines one of new TVRs problems. Lefty said:
Forgive me, I dip in and out of this thread so haven t read all of it.
Is there any hope of the brand surviving? Just the brand, literally. If, say, another company wanted to acquire it and make cars with the TVR name?
Doubtful imo. About as likely as Jensen and a host of other lost car brands.Is there any hope of the brand surviving? Just the brand, literally. If, say, another company wanted to acquire it and make cars with the TVR name?
bad company said:
Lefty said:
Forgive me, I dip in and out of this thread so haven t read all of it.
Is there any hope of the brand surviving? Just the brand, literally. If, say, another company wanted to acquire it and make cars with the TVR name?
Doubtful imo. About as likely as Jensen and a host of other lost car brands.Is there any hope of the brand surviving? Just the brand, literally. If, say, another company wanted to acquire it and make cars with the TVR name?
It would be relatively simple if that's all it was but the other directors have bought a lot of shares too and of course they would want a return.
Then there's the Ensorcia issue. They have handed over sizeable amounts towards an electric TVR (possibly up to £10m) and would want their cash back.
Adding up that comes to roughly £30m. Who on earth would pay that amount for a brand name that hasn't produced a car for almost 20 years? And if you were buying the company that's all you would get - no factory, no workforce, nothing more - plus some debt that probably runs to another £10m+.
Viper201 said:
It could be a minefield. If it was up for sale then Edgar would want his money back and the company was valued at around £15m when the Welsh Govt 'invested' their £500k.
It would be relatively simple if that's all it was but the other directors have bought a lot of shares too and of course they would want a return.
Then there's the Ensorcia issue. They have handed over sizeable amounts towards an electric TVR (possibly up to £10m) and would want their cash back.
Adding up that comes to roughly £30m. Who on earth would pay that amount for a brand name that hasn't produced a car for almost 20 years? And if you were buying the company that's all you would get - no factory, no workforce, nothing more - plus some debt that probably runs to another £10m+.
They sure want to get their money back, but it will pretty irrelevant what any of them want. The only thing that matters is, what a potential buyer would be willing to pay. Depending on the pressure they have, the only degree of freedom left is to decide not to sell. It would be relatively simple if that's all it was but the other directors have bought a lot of shares too and of course they would want a return.
Then there's the Ensorcia issue. They have handed over sizeable amounts towards an electric TVR (possibly up to £10m) and would want their cash back.
Adding up that comes to roughly £30m. Who on earth would pay that amount for a brand name that hasn't produced a car for almost 20 years? And if you were buying the company that's all you would get - no factory, no workforce, nothing more - plus some debt that probably runs to another £10m+.
The number of prospective buyers is probably zero with little prospective of one showing up. Brand is now 12 years older and has another failed attempt in the books. Hardly encouraging or value-adding.
I still applaud them for trying and wish they had succeeded. We need guys like them. I'm sure that after the reveal there were only very few fun moments in this venture and in hindsight, none of the guys would have taken the thing on.
bullittmcqueen said:
I still applaud them for trying and wish they had succeeded.
In some ways and using the GM name to improve the dynamics and boost the image was a good movebullittmcqueen said:
We need guys like them.
but I'm not convinced about this bit. They did a Jaguar, ignoring the past. Continuing to service the old cars, sell parts, very limited re-runs of old models, perhaps a Sag with the 'new' Ford engine, etc. would have kept the marque and skills alive whilst providing an income to pay the directors something.TA14 said:
but I'm not convinced about this bit. They did a Jaguar, ignoring the past. Continuing to service the old cars, sell parts, very limited re-runs of old models, perhaps a Sag with the 'new' Ford engine, etc. would have kept the marque and skills alive whilst providing an income to pay the directors something.
Not sure that would have worked. The fundamental problem they faced was, that any "new" car, i.e. a car that can be registered today and is road-legal, be it the new Griffith or any re-issued Sagaris would have faced the same tough, regulatory requirements. So even if they had decided to reissue the Sag, all the development effort, cost, tooling etc. would have been roughly the same. No way they could have sold some steel-frame, fibreglass deathsled. So it would have been the same story, with the same outcome, just a different looking prototype.
bullittmcqueen said:
TA14 said:
but I'm not convinced about this bit. They did a Jaguar, ignoring the past. Continuing to service the old cars, sell parts, very limited re-runs of old models, perhaps a Sag with the 'new' Ford engine, etc. would have kept the marque and skills alive whilst providing an income to pay the directors something.
Not sure that would have worked. The fundamental problem they faced was, that any "new" car, i.e. a car that can be registered today and is road-legal, be it the new Griffith or any re-issued Sagaris would have faced the same tough, regulatory requirements. So even if they had decided to reissue the Sag, all the development effort, cost, tooling etc. would have been roughly the same. No way they could have sold some steel-frame, fibreglass deathsled. So it would have been the same story, with the same outcome, just a different looking prototype.
Problem is they poured money into it. Which makes the business case for small volumes at this price point non-existant.
crosseyedlion said:
bullittmcqueen said:
TA14 said:
but I'm not convinced about this bit. They did a Jaguar, ignoring the past. Continuing to service the old cars, sell parts, very limited re-runs of old models, perhaps a Sag with the 'new' Ford engine, etc. would have kept the marque and skills alive whilst providing an income to pay the directors something.
Not sure that would have worked. The fundamental problem they faced was, that any "new" car, i.e. a car that can be registered today and is road-legal, be it the new Griffith or any re-issued Sagaris would have faced the same tough, regulatory requirements. So even if they had decided to reissue the Sag, all the development effort, cost, tooling etc. would have been roughly the same. No way they could have sold some steel-frame, fibreglass deathsled. So it would have been the same story, with the same outcome, just a different looking prototype.
Problem is they poured money into it. Which makes the business case for small volumes at this price point non-existant.
TA14 said:
crosseyedlion said:
bullittmcqueen said:
TA14 said:
but I'm not convinced about this bit. They did a Jaguar, ignoring the past. Continuing to service the old cars, sell parts, very limited re-runs of old models, perhaps a Sag with the 'new' Ford engine, etc. would have kept the marque and skills alive whilst providing an income to pay the directors something.
Not sure that would have worked. The fundamental problem they faced was, that any "new" car, i.e. a car that can be registered today and is road-legal, be it the new Griffith or any re-issued Sagaris would have faced the same tough, regulatory requirements. So even if they had decided to reissue the Sag, all the development effort, cost, tooling etc. would have been roughly the same. No way they could have sold some steel-frame, fibreglass deathsled. So it would have been the same story, with the same outcome, just a different looking prototype.
Problem is they poured money into it. Which makes the business case for small volumes at this price point non-existant.
Gassing Station | General TVR Stuff & Gossip | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff