Jaguar Land Rover goes after replica community

[Bodo]

darreni said:

DeejRC said:

I can only echo the others - it appears an insane reaction from JLR. I just don’t see any winners from this.

It certainly puts any plans I had of finally sorting out my XKSS rep back on hold.

Why?, reading the JLR release above, they are not interested in existing cars in private ownership, only those who are looking to to make a business of producing replicas.

I've seen that line in particular:
Jaguar Land Rover is not going after private owners of pre-existing individual replica vehicles, nor insisting upon the destruction of their vehicles.

When they mention 'pre-existing' specifically, what may be their position about replicas that are not pre-existing, such as DeejRC's?

Open question - not directed at darreni specifically.

[a8hex]

InitialDave said:

darreni said:

Why?, reading the JLR release above, they are not interested in existing cars in private ownership, only those who are looking to to make a business of producing replicas.

Though if you use a business to make parts for that one replica - even a business you own outright so you're still effectively making them yourself - they'll try and use that as an argument it's a commercial enterprise in order to get you.

Given they are buying in all the parts they are using to make their continuation cars I guess it would be possible to buy most of the bits from the same place as Jaguar do. I can't see them turning around to C&G and saying make me 7 engines then you'd better shut up shop. (Not that this isn't unkown behaviour from companies).

[InitialDave]

a8hex said:

Given they are buying in all the parts they are using to make their continuation cars I guess it would be possible to buy most of the bits from the same place as Jaguar do. I can't see them turning around to C&G and saying make me 7 engines then you'd better shut up shop. (Not that this isn't unkown behaviour from companies).

You can quite easily do this with make to print suppliers. That's effectively what I do for plane bits, and the design authority gets to say who is allowed their stuff.

But my point was more that, yes, make your own bits at home, that's (seemingly) ok, but make them in your own business machining workshop, and, well, look at the court documents.

[DonkeyApple]

InitialDave said:

Is the difference that you built yours for your own use, whereas in Sweden they had set up a business to build them, even though the end result was only one car for themselves?

Or is there a difference between the law in Sweden and the UK that affects matters?

Jaguar have always tended to help individual enthusiasts with their own personal projects and still do. When that 'enthusiast' transpires to possibly be seeking to actually monetise that as a business and that car is in fact a sales tool then it seems quite logical for a company to seek to end that behaviour.

Who knows what happened here. Maybe the company was accidentally set up and there were no plans to use the existing car as anything other than a personal toy and this is all terribly unfortunate. Or maybe someone really took the piss.

If a fellow enthusiast asked for my help on something and I gave it and then learned that they were in fact a business not an enthusiast then I would do what I have always done and go
After them legally. If someone bizarrely thinks it's unfair of me to go after someone who has taken my help in one capacity and then gone and or intended to set up a business to compete against me just because that person is a sweet little old man then I can live with that.

Few 'gofundme' pages of this nature ever offer a balanced view and it seems hard to believe that a corporate would go after a loyal customer and enthusiast who just built up a single car for himself as his great passion. And given that JLR have a track record of supporting those people and that this chap had seemingly set up a company to sell them then Inactually think the poor form lies with the person who took the piss out of JLR and took up employees time. Time that other enthusiasts not of a commercial mind could have had and arguably time that future enthusiasts won't be given because of this behaviour.

Jury's our but I'm not initially inclined to look at just one side of the story and draw a finite conclusion.

[Fastpedeller]

DonkeyApple said:

InitialDave said:

Is the difference that you built yours for your own use, whereas in Sweden they had set up a business to build them, even though the end result was only one car for themselves?

Or is there a difference between the law in Sweden and the UK that affects matters?

Jaguar have always tended to help individual enthusiasts with their own personal projects and still do. When that 'enthusiast' transpires to possibly be seeking to actually monetise that as a business and that car is in fact a sales tool then it seems quite logical for a company to seek to end that behaviour.

Who knows what happened here. Maybe the company was accidentally set up and there were no plans to use the existing car as anything other than a personal toy and this is all terribly unfortunate. Or maybe someone really took the piss.

If a fellow enthusiast asked for my help on something and I gave it and then learned that they were in fact a business not an enthusiast then I would do what I have always done and go
After them legally. If someone bizarrely thinks it's unfair of me to go after someone who has taken my help in one capacity and then gone and or intended to set up a business to compete against me just because that person is a sweet little old man then I can live with that.

Few 'gofundme' pages of this nature ever offer a balanced view and it seems hard to believe that a corporate would go after a loyal customer and enthusiast who just built up a single car for himself as his great passion. And given that JLR have a track record of supporting those people and that this chap had seemingly set up a company to sell them then Inactually think the poor form lies with the person who took the piss out of JLR and took up employees time. Time that other enthusiasts not of a commercial mind could have had and arguably time that future enthusiasts won't be given because of this behaviour.

Jury's our but I'm not initially inclined to look at just one side of the story and draw a finite conclusion.

A balanced perspective from DA there. It's unclear when the "producing others to sell" matter was discussed (maybe not until late in proceedings, maybe I need to read the proceedings again?), but yes, that would seem pivotal to the 'argument'

[NMNeil]

Could it be that the only way JLR can make any money is through litigation?
https://www.thedrive.com/tech/37746/jaguar-land-ro...

[lowdrag]

Donkeyapple makes the point that Jaguar will help people building their own replica, but at the same time have issued a "cease and desist" to the company making kits so that someone can build his own replica. Jaguar gave me all the help they could when I built the "Kettle" C-type, and I thank them for that, but mine was a personal project to build a car that had not existed for 60 years. It wasn't to be a run of 10 cars for example. But let us look at the wider picture. People such as Martin Robey, who have kept the original moulds and made panels not only for the E-type but many other Jaguars as well, has enabled so many cars that otherwise would have gone to the crusher. Barratt's, Manners, Norman Motors, and many others have stocked and sold us parts when Jaguar couldn't give a toss about us.

Personally, I think - perhaps erroneously - that the problems started with the forming of JLR Classic. Suddenly, you have a new separate enterprise tasked with making a profit out of the classic car market. Now, they have built seven lightweight E-types nine XKSS, and 25 D-types and are now to build eight C-types, the latter with a profit margin of about 500%. If the Magnussens can turn out a perfect copy and sell it at €250,000, why the hell are JLR Classic selling their cars - cars they admit are not able to be road-registered - for £1.5 million? What I see is a company that is tasked to make money, and are doing so in any way they can to keep their jobs. But, where do we go from here? They have used up their catalogue of valuable cars, unless they decide to make a run of SS100 models of course. And I am sure they won't build any XJ 13 cars. So tell me people, what is left for JLR Classics from here in? I only see a very bleak future.

[Bodo]

DonkeyApple said:

...
Few 'gofundme' pages of this nature ever offer a balanced view and it seems hard to believe that a corporate would go after a loyal customer and enthusiast who just built up a single car for himself as his great passion. And given that JLR have a track record of supporting those people and that this chap had seemingly set up a company to sell them then Inactually think the poor form lies with the person who took the piss out of JLR and took up employees time. Time that other enthusiasts not of a commercial mind could have had and arguably time that future enthusiasts won't be given because of this behaviour.

Jury's our but I'm not initially inclined to look at just one side of the story and draw a finite conclusion.

Both, published arguments from JLR, and the family are offering very different -and one-sided- views. The (auto-translated) court document on the other side, is soberly neutral - I recommend a spot dive into it. That said, I took from the same document that the court found that the company or the Magnussons didn't actually offer a car for sale.

On JLR side, I believe that Jaguar (and JLR) changed directions a couple of years ago from offering their heritage to the enthusiasts
to using it for their greater marketing purpose, and thus going into jurisdictions where they have chances to set right what they should have done decades ago - and write home about it by carefully positioned press releases.

[Touring442]

lowdrag said:

So tell me people, what is left for JLR Classics from here in? I only see a very bleak future.

Restoration of existing cars to be sold via dealerships as Mercedes Benz do. If you want an effectively brand new 280CE, they will do one for you at a price, full MB warranty and all.

There is one buyer out there for a perfect Morello Cherry Series 1 Double-Six VdP at £150,000. Ditto XJC's, Mark 1 3.4 saloons etc. There is enough heritage and enough donor cars to to make a very good business from this. If I had the money, I'd commission a 'new' pre HE manual XJ-S, white with red please and I don't care what it costs. I just want it.

'Certainly Sir'.

[DonkeyApple]

lowdrag said:

Donkeyapple makes the point that Jaguar will help people building their own replica, but at the same time have issued a "cease and desist" to the company making kits so that someone can build his own replica. Jaguar gave me all the help they could when I built the "Kettle" C-type, and I thank them for that, but mine was a personal project to build a car that had not existed for 60 years. It wasn't to be a run of 10 cars for example. But let us look at the wider picture. People such as Martin Robey, who have kept the original moulds and made panels not only for the E-type but many other Jaguars as well, has enabled so many cars that otherwise would have gone to the crusher. Barratt's, Manners, Norman Motors, and many others have stocked and sold us parts when Jaguar couldn't give a toss about us.

Personally, I think - perhaps erroneously - that the problems started with the forming of JLR Classic. Suddenly, you have a new separate enterprise tasked with making a profit out of the classic car market. Now, they have built seven lightweight E-types nine XKSS, and 25 D-types and are now to build eight C-types, the latter with a profit margin of about 500%. If the Magnussens can turn out a perfect copy and sell it at €250,000, why the hell are JLR Classic selling their cars - cars they admit are not able to be road-registered - for £1.5 million? What I see is a company that is tasked to make money, and are doing so in any way they can to keep their jobs. But, where do we go from here? They have used up their catalogue of valuable cars, unless they decide to make a run of SS100 models of course. And I am sure they won't build any XJ 13 cars. So tell me people, what is left for JLR Classics from here in? I only see a very bleak future.

I think there is a bleak future in general for vehicles from these eras at the current market valuations. They are very generation specific and that generation has begun stopping driving. The following generations aren't as interested in these cars and certainly don't exist in the same numbers with the same financial firepower.

The wider issue for JLR is what later models are worthy of restomodding? What did they produce from the 80s onwards that the next generation of consumers will pay enough money for? Electrifying the drivetrains is probably the next phase. Plenty of people want an EV but don't want all the technotripe being wedged into modern cars. Big old Jags and Land Rover products are quite well suited for EV restomods.

The key being that as a business when one client base grows too old to buy one set of products they will have moved on already to cater for the next generation of clients.

An EV XJ6 would be a rather stylish urban wafter.

[a8hex]

InitialDave said:

a8hex said:

Given they are buying in all the parts they are using to make their continuation cars I guess it would be possible to buy most of the bits from the same place as Jaguar do. I can't see them turning around to C&G and saying make me 7 engines then you'd better shut up shop. (Not that this isn't unkown behaviour from companies).

You can quite easily do this with make to print suppliers. That's effectively what I do for plane bits, and the design authority gets to say who is allowed their stuff.

My point was that C&G have been making XK engines for years, it's not uncommon for people with a real a D to have an original engine and a C&G engine for use when allowed. Jaguar are unlikely to order a batch of engines from them followed by a cease and desist notice. Rather than the case you're talking about where you go to a fabricator and ask them to make a batch of parts, when they wouldn't be able to continue making the parts after your contract was completed. I guess in the case of C&G that would be the case when they made Mercedes replicas of some of their classics to order.
I do know of a case where a company ordered a batch of books about one of their products as it was much better than any docs they had in house, and then once they'd received the copies they wanted they did send a cease and desist notice.

[a8hex]

DonkeyApple said:

An EV XJ6 would be a rather stylish urban wafter.

back in the discussion about electrifying classics, I said that an EV version of a X300 would be tempting, a series XJ like wise. For these cars the engine is not the major feature of the car. An electric motor could make a better XJ, it would be even quieter and the torque characteristics would really suit one. Perhaps even doing it to an XJS. An EV classic XK however wouldn't make sense to me.

[ettore]

DonkeyApple said:

I think there is a bleak future in general for vehicles from these eras at the current market valuations. They are very generation specific and that generation has begun stopping driving. The following generations aren't as interested in these cars and certainly don't exist in the same numbers with the same financial firepower.

I really don’t think this is true - this level of classic operates wholly differently and has a separate appeal. Your logic would mean that nothing old would ultimately have value and that’s clearly not true.

Go and try and buy a nice Bugatti 57SC or Bentley Speed Six. They’re not being bought by people who remember them. Veteran cars have continued to increase in value in there is literally no one alive who can remember them.

I think you’ll find people desiring C-Types for a long while yet.

[DonkeyApple]

ettore said:

I really don’t think this is true - this level of classic operates wholly differently and has a separate appeal. Your logic would mean that nothing old would ultimately have value and that’s clearly not true.

Go and try and buy a nice Bugatti 57SC or Bentley Speed Six. They’re not being bought by people who remember them. Veteran cars have continued to increase in value in there is literally no one alive who can remember them.

I think you’ll find people desiring C-Types for a long while yet.

It's just about the money. The biggest generation ever is also the wealthiest ever. Those that follow simply don't have the wealth to support current prices in the first instance and it's also very clear that they like slightly different things more. Hence the boom in 80s cars. The reality is that as the current owners of things like E types stop driving and eventually sell there won't be the same numbers of buyers with the same wealth to pay anywhere near what their current prices are and those with the money are already showing the market what they prefer.

Companies like JLR are banging out the continuations while there are still customers who'll pay those prices for that era of car. But the buyers who follow will be favouring different products

[InitialDave]

DonkeyApple said:

It's just about the money. The biggest generation ever is also the wealthiest ever. Those that follow simply don't have the wealth to support current prices in the first instance and it's also very clear that they like slightly different things more. Hence the boom in 80s cars. The reality is that as the current owners of things like E types stop driving and eventually sell there won't be the same numbers of buyers with the same wealth to pay anywhere near what their current prices are and those with the money are already showing the market what they prefer.

Companies like JLR are banging out the continuations while there are still customers who'll pay those prices for that era of car. But the buyers who follow will be favouring different products

I think that's pretty much right on the money (so to speak!)

[ettore]

Let’s see, I simply don’t agree - tastes come and go but no other form of art, antique, property or trinket works that way.

Money also doesn’t evaporate - there’ll be even more rich people in 50 years.

[200Plus Club]

Interesting case seeing both sides of this one. A few years ago when I built a Lola T70 replica I approached the Lola Heritage division (now all folded sadly I believe) and got an unbelievable amount of help with original pictures of one of the Surtees cars and other info. They even sent me some Lola bodyshell stickers for the front and rear clams, rather than me using the supplied kit badges.
This was also at the time Lola did their own run of 6 or so mk3 T70 continuation cars which were hundreds of thousands each.
I also have a brand new unstamped Lola chassis plate set that another enthusiast sent me as a gift but obviously were not used as it wasn't a genuine chassis or car and would have been stupid to have used.
Lola have since folded but I don't think there was ever any beef with companies making what were clear replicas.

[DeejRC]

Bodo said:

darreni said:

DeejRC said:

I can only echo the others - it appears an insane reaction from JLR. I just don’t see any winners from this.

It certainly puts any plans I had of finally sorting out my XKSS rep back on hold.

Why?, reading the JLR release above, they are not interested in existing cars in private ownership, only those who are looking to to make a business of producing replicas.

I've seen that line in particular:
Jaguar Land Rover is not going after private owners of pre-existing individual replica vehicles, nor insisting upon the destruction of their vehicles.

When they mention 'pre-existing' specifically, what may be their position about replicas that are not pre-existing, such as DeejRC's?

Open question - not directed at darreni specifically.

For clarity chaps...when I say “my” I do not mean a pre-existing car. It’s been an on/off thing of mine about buying one over the last few years, depending on a variety of factors. I was very much looking again at buying one this yr.

Apologies for any confusion.

[Bodo]

DeejRC said:

For clarity chaps...when I say “my” I do not mean a pre-existing car. It’s been an on/off thing of mine about buying one over the last few years, depending on a variety of factors. I was very much looking again at buying one this yr.

Apologies for any confusion.

I think it's more the message from JLR that is causing confusion - or to be more specific: fear, uncertainty and doubt amongst those involved with Jaguar replicas.

My impression is that JLR is blowing that out of proportion in their communication, and much deliberately so; one example:
Both, PH, and the CarDealer quote Amanda Beaton, global IP counsel for Jaguar Land Rover:

"The Intellectual Property Division of the High Court in Sweden has ruled in Jaguar Land Rover's favour..."

Yet, looking at the court paper, it says: tingsrätt - the court of first instance in Sweden, the very reverse of High Court.

What JLR doesn't say is, that the decision has been appealed to by the defendants; ie. the verdict is without legal capacity.

JLR is keen to publish this outside Sweden, beyond the reach of any Swedish court, while at the same time JLR doesn't know or doesn't think they could get the legal capacity in the UK to destroy the replica market, and thus using the instrument of communication to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt.

[DonkeyApple]

ettore said:

Let’s see, I simply don’t agree - tastes come and go but no other form of art, antique, property or trinket works that way.

Money also doesn’t evaporate - there’ll be even more rich people in 50 years.

Everything works exactly that way. It's simple supply and demand.

50 years is irrelevant though. Current owners' estates are already selling chattels and that is only going to gather pace from now on. The current owners are not going to live for another 50 years

All these cars will simply start being sold off in a very small time window as the owners all start dying or stopping driving. So you therefore need to look at who is going to be there on the demand side as supply expands and gathers pace.

Well, the demand side has a bit of a problem as there are fewer of Gen X than the Boomers. They also have less wealth and they also have different tastes. That means we now know two quite essential facts: Supply is absolutely guaranteed to rise and future demand is lower than current demand. So what that means is that values are guaranteed to fall in order to for demand to rise to meet supply.

Here's another thing to consider: most Boomers couldn't afford to buy the assets they currently own at today's prices. They acquired the bulk of these assets at much lower levels. So if the largest and wealthiest generation cannot itself afford to buy these chattels at current values we certainly know that those who follow can't

People will still want an Etype, they aren't going to disappear but that can't pay the current prices even if they wanted to.

Edited by DonkeyApple on Saturday 13th February 10:01