RE: Aston to link with AMG?
Discussion
hornbaek said:
or:
- Bentley
- Mini
- Rolls-Royce
The reason no "investor" is jumping at the opportunity is that Aston is a trophy asset rather than a sound investment. Unless you bring something to the table other than money (distribution capabilities, technology etc) you will never make money buying it. Investment Dar bought it as a trophy asset and hoped that they could sell it on at a profit to another like-minded individual or fund but the recession has pretty much put a dent in that plan.
Totally agree- they need an injection of cash, book shelved technology, or both. V12 won’t live forever as emissions regulations close in around it, they’ve also got an interesting problem with fleet emissions regulations. - Bentley
- Mini
- Rolls-Royce
The reason no "investor" is jumping at the opportunity is that Aston is a trophy asset rather than a sound investment. Unless you bring something to the table other than money (distribution capabilities, technology etc) you will never make money buying it. Investment Dar bought it as a trophy asset and hoped that they could sell it on at a profit to another like-minded individual or fund but the recession has pretty much put a dent in that plan.
V12 is port injected, so swerves most of EU6 particulate emissions limits, which are aimed at DI power trains.
I think Chinese market is headed towards <3.0litre capacity, which brings up another (expensive) engineering challenge for AM, and again either cash injection, or book shelved technology.
Aston Martin (well, actually, all British luxury marques) always stirs up a lot of emotion and there's plenty going on here, though some of it is a little ill-informed or misguided.
Aston Martin needs cash and a technology partner. This isn't so they can make rebodied this or rebadged that. It's because developing sub-systems costs an awful lot of money and it's near-impossible to recoupe the costs. This is exactly what has underpinned the survival of Bentley and Rolls-Royce.
As well as this (perhaps moreso), Aston Martin needs new leadership and has done for some time. Since the moderating influence of Ford went away, too many of the company's products have been about satisfying one man's ego rather than being commercially viable (Cygnet, anyone? No, I thought not!). Bez is touted as a 'maverick' but actually he's just a massive egotist and something of a bully. Who else but someone who wants to be taller and more important that the mortals around him would ride around the factory on a Toyota's wannabe Segway? He has lost the support of the majority of the employees but doesn't care. If anyone (employees, journalists, customers) questions him, he will spare them the time to explain why they're wrong and by how much; it's simply inconceivable that its him and not everyone else!
So a change of ownership would facilitate the evolution or replacement of the range. More importantly it would probably mean the removal of the man that history will probably remember as the most damaging leader in the company's history. The employees at Aston Martin are talented people who do so much with so little yet are so utterly unappreciated by the man at the top. They deserve to succeed under a leader who understands the very special company entrusted to his or her care.
Aston Martin needs cash and a technology partner. This isn't so they can make rebodied this or rebadged that. It's because developing sub-systems costs an awful lot of money and it's near-impossible to recoupe the costs. This is exactly what has underpinned the survival of Bentley and Rolls-Royce.
As well as this (perhaps moreso), Aston Martin needs new leadership and has done for some time. Since the moderating influence of Ford went away, too many of the company's products have been about satisfying one man's ego rather than being commercially viable (Cygnet, anyone? No, I thought not!). Bez is touted as a 'maverick' but actually he's just a massive egotist and something of a bully. Who else but someone who wants to be taller and more important that the mortals around him would ride around the factory on a Toyota's wannabe Segway? He has lost the support of the majority of the employees but doesn't care. If anyone (employees, journalists, customers) questions him, he will spare them the time to explain why they're wrong and by how much; it's simply inconceivable that its him and not everyone else!
So a change of ownership would facilitate the evolution or replacement of the range. More importantly it would probably mean the removal of the man that history will probably remember as the most damaging leader in the company's history. The employees at Aston Martin are talented people who do so much with so little yet are so utterly unappreciated by the man at the top. They deserve to succeed under a leader who understands the very special company entrusted to his or her care.
'Aston Martin needs cash and a technology partner. This isn't so they can make rebodied this or rebadged that. It's because developing sub-systems costs an awful lot of money and it's near-impossible to recoupe the costs. This is exactly what has underpinned the survival of Bentley and Rolls-Royce.'
And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
HighwayStar said:
'Aston Martin needs cash and a technology partner. This isn't so they can make rebodied this or rebadged that. It's because developing sub-systems costs an awful lot of money and it's near-impossible to recoupe the costs. This is exactly what has underpinned the survival of Bentley and Rolls-Royce.'
And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
Aston Martin didn't make rebadged cars prior to the Cygnet, unless you count the heavily-modified Singers from the company's early history. Yes, DB7 used the XJS structure and driveline. But is was a car in its own right, especially in its Vantage iteration. Even the 'two Mondeo V6s welded together' story is untrue (and offensive to the powertrain engineers who developed it); it merely shares some architecture and a handful of components.And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
When Ford was 'at the helm', it invested heavily in Aston Martin and assisted with development work (who do you think engineered on the V12?) and allowed use of their component pool, saving expensive and time consuming development work. This goes further than hoor handes and window switches; subsystems from other Ford subsidiaries were and still are used extensively. Ford's purchasing power also helped with reducing costs on mundane components (nuts and bolts soon add up). Additionally, Aston Martin had use of Ford's testing infrastructure, such as wind tunnels, proving grounds and climatic chambers. An awful lot of behind-the-scenes expense was saved under Ford but generally people don't see or understand it.
Crucially, Ford also insisted on financial justification for every program before allowing it to go ahead. Whilst this is contrary to the misty-eyed romantic view of Aston Martin, it did keep it from misty-eyed insolvency, which it experienced numerous times in the first 81 years.
The Cygnet/fuel economy myth is untrue (actually the critical figure is CO2 g/km, as CAFE only applies to North America, where Cygnet was never inteded to be sold). For Cygnet to reduce the reduce the CO2 emissions fuel economy to the required level, it would need to outsell the rest of the Aston Martin range by many to one (exactly how many would depend on the 'mix' of sports cars) and besides, the average CO2 rules only apply if the manufacturer sells more than 10,000 cars in Europe, which AM is nowhere near. Cygnet was all about 'brand extension' and satisfying Bez's ego. That's why he threatened to sack anyone he heard criticising the car.
So I stand by my comments, which were based upon specific knowledge. Aston Martin needs a benefactor, a technology partner and a new leader if it is to thrive as so many of us yearn for it to.
funny that the reports suggest two bidders,and everybody - without exception has jumped on the Germans, but nobody has said a word about the prospect of the DB9 getting a curry hook (ala Land Rover).
I have to admit that in my opinion TATA have done a rather good job of what I perceive (as a distant observer) to allow JLR to get on with what they always wanted to do but couldn't (well jaguar anyway) - and if I was out looking for a new DB9 - the XK would certainly get a consideration.
Whether MM will behave the same way - (my experience of Indian led companies has been horrific in the past) would be very interesting.
FWIW - mercedes history of acquisitions/joint ventures is not great - think Chrysler, Swatch (Smart car) - esp compared to the likes of VAG.
Good luck to my favourite automotive brand whichever way this goes !
I have to admit that in my opinion TATA have done a rather good job of what I perceive (as a distant observer) to allow JLR to get on with what they always wanted to do but couldn't (well jaguar anyway) - and if I was out looking for a new DB9 - the XK would certainly get a consideration.
Whether MM will behave the same way - (my experience of Indian led companies has been horrific in the past) would be very interesting.
FWIW - mercedes history of acquisitions/joint ventures is not great - think Chrysler, Swatch (Smart car) - esp compared to the likes of VAG.
Good luck to my favourite automotive brand whichever way this goes !
Pr1964 said:
Strawman said:
Good point and Mclaren F1. Also
.
. 
Just what would be so bad about an Aston Martin with another manufacturer’s engine under the bonnet as long as the inlet manifold and exhaust were tweaked unique to AM and they had their own sound?
That would be a sensible route for a low volume manufacturer.
If the cost of new engine development would break the company then it’s not really a bad route.
It’s not as though that route has been a problem for Pagani!
The focus of attention and money should be spent on the body and interior design.
The products should be unique to look at.
Who ReallY gives a toss about who makes the engine? 1% of buyers?
It might even increase sales …. Many would rather have a Mercedes engine.
We’d soon get used to it.
Pagani is a different business and has always used third party units but Aston isn't the same. You do think of Aston as having their own engine in many regards with the last pair being courtesy of their very important benefactor Ford.
Aston as a stand alone simply cannot develop and run a world class engine. They don't appear to have the finances to extend the range into new sectors.
Aston has little value above kudos to a clear investor but has value to a manufacturer looking to raise their profile or to expand Aston's range.
To be honest, Aston need to build a saloon again and probably also an SUV. Both could be done under the Lagonda brand. But they need unit sales to survive and they aren't going to achieve the number needed by just building GTs.
Aston is an aspirational brand that is a one trick pony that alienates most potential customers. Unless you are raising dwarfs, a Jaffa, old, a battery farmer etc you don't waste your time with Aston.
An awful lot of people in major cities have a lot of money but commute by rail. They also have children. They spend most weekends going out and about by car. Many people would love an Aston but it doesn't cater for one of the largest, most prolific group of potential buyers, the normal higher earner. That is why there are so many Rangies. Even the beautiful Rapide doesn't do the job. Aston needs a big, practical car again and it probably needs a little 1 Series sized one as well.
AMG would makes sense to alleviate the development pressure and Mahindra would also be good as they clearly want to take the fight to Tata, want the prestige of a British brand and if they do as good a job as Tata then it's likely to be the best thing to ever happen to the company.
Getting state of the art technology into new AMs is certainly a good think in my view. I am more than confident that the engineers at AM can educate an AMG based engine to display proper AM virtues.
Now I'm on my second Continental GT and the reason why I at all considered buying one was that there is lots of VW/Audi tech inside which in my perception meade it both more reliable and durable. I am sure that there are more buyers like me for whom this peace of mind is important when looking at a niche brand.
I get the impression that the German technology and component allows the British engineers to focus on what they can do like few others: providing a true luxury experience to how the car feels and drives.
Now I'm on my second Continental GT and the reason why I at all considered buying one was that there is lots of VW/Audi tech inside which in my perception meade it both more reliable and durable. I am sure that there are more buyers like me for whom this peace of mind is important when looking at a niche brand.
I get the impression that the German technology and component allows the British engineers to focus on what they can do like few others: providing a true luxury experience to how the car feels and drives.
Much of what is written here is correct, Aston Martin desperately needs a technology partner to take them forward for future models and with replacements for their current engines so I can imagine AMG would be regarded as an attractive solution. Certainly it is a name which for a while has apparently been murmured within the Gaydon corridors of power. Simple financial investment is not what is needed.
I suspect the wily Dr Bez also saw Cygnet as a way to bring Aston Martin closer to Toyota and with an aim to eventual produce a technical / ownership tie up. Remember Dr Bex and Mr Toyoda meet every year and spend 24 hours together sharing a pit garage, locked in battle at the Nurburgring 24, an ideal venue to while away some time in between drives and to come up with shared collaborative ideas.
When Ford was 'at the helm', it invested heavily in Aston Martin and assisted with development work (who do you think engineered on the V12?) and allowed use of their component pool, saving expensive and time consuming development work. This goes further than hoor handes and window switches; subsystems from other Ford subsidiaries were and still are used extensively. Ford's purchasing power also helped with reducing costs on mundane components (nuts and bolts soon add up). Additionally, Aston Martin had use of Ford's testing infrastructure, such as wind tunnels, proving grounds and climatic chambers. An awful lot of behind-the-scenes expense was saved under Ford but generally people don't see or understand it.
Crucially, Ford also insisted on financial justification for every program before allowing it to go ahead. Whilst this is contrary to the misty-eyed romantic view of Aston Martin, it did keep it from misty-eyed insolvency, which it experienced numerous times in the first 81 years.
The Cygnet/fuel economy myth is untrue (actually the critical figure is CO2 g/km, as CAFE only applies to North America, where Cygnet was never inteded to be sold). For Cygnet to reduce the reduce the CO2 emissions fuel economy to the required level, it would need to outsell the rest of the Aston Martin range by many to one (exactly how many would depend on the 'mix' of sports cars) and besides, the average CO2 rules only apply if the manufacturer sells more than 10,000 cars in Europe, which AM is nowhere near. Cygnet was all about 'brand extension' and satisfying Bez's ego. That's why he threatened to sack anyone he heard criticising the car.
So I stand by my comments, which were based upon specific knowledge. Aston Martin needs a benefactor, a technology partner and a new leader if it is to thrive as so many of us yearn for it to.
I suspect the wily Dr Bez also saw Cygnet as a way to bring Aston Martin closer to Toyota and with an aim to eventual produce a technical / ownership tie up. Remember Dr Bex and Mr Toyoda meet every year and spend 24 hours together sharing a pit garage, locked in battle at the Nurburgring 24, an ideal venue to while away some time in between drives and to come up with shared collaborative ideas.
SeenTheStrings said:
HighwayStar said:
'Aston Martin needs cash and a technology partner. This isn't so they can make rebodied this or rebadged that. It's because developing sub-systems costs an awful lot of money and it's near-impossible to recoupe the costs. This is exactly what has underpinned the survival of Bentley and Rolls-Royce.'
And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
Aston Martin didn't make rebadged cars prior to the Cygnet, unless you count the heavily-modified Singers from the company's early history. Yes, DB7 used the XJS structure and driveline. But is was a car in its own right, especially in its Vantage iteration. Even the 'two Mondeo V6s welded together' story is untrue (and offensive to the powertrain engineers who developed it); it merely shares some architecture and a handful of components.And this is exactly what never happened when Ford were at the helm. The Cygnet was just brought in to raise the company fuel consumption average. Ferrari have Fiat to do that.
We'll find out soon enough whether Aston go somewhere or no where.
When Ford was 'at the helm', it invested heavily in Aston Martin and assisted with development work (who do you think engineered on the V12?) and allowed use of their component pool, saving expensive and time consuming development work. This goes further than hoor handes and window switches; subsystems from other Ford subsidiaries were and still are used extensively. Ford's purchasing power also helped with reducing costs on mundane components (nuts and bolts soon add up). Additionally, Aston Martin had use of Ford's testing infrastructure, such as wind tunnels, proving grounds and climatic chambers. An awful lot of behind-the-scenes expense was saved under Ford but generally people don't see or understand it.
Crucially, Ford also insisted on financial justification for every program before allowing it to go ahead. Whilst this is contrary to the misty-eyed romantic view of Aston Martin, it did keep it from misty-eyed insolvency, which it experienced numerous times in the first 81 years.
The Cygnet/fuel economy myth is untrue (actually the critical figure is CO2 g/km, as CAFE only applies to North America, where Cygnet was never inteded to be sold). For Cygnet to reduce the reduce the CO2 emissions fuel economy to the required level, it would need to outsell the rest of the Aston Martin range by many to one (exactly how many would depend on the 'mix' of sports cars) and besides, the average CO2 rules only apply if the manufacturer sells more than 10,000 cars in Europe, which AM is nowhere near. Cygnet was all about 'brand extension' and satisfying Bez's ego. That's why he threatened to sack anyone he heard criticising the car.
So I stand by my comments, which were based upon specific knowledge. Aston Martin needs a benefactor, a technology partner and a new leader if it is to thrive as so many of us yearn for it to.
Yeloperil said:
I suspect the wily Dr Bez also saw Cygnet as a way to bring Aston Martin closer to Toyota and with an aim to eventual produce a technical / ownership tie up. Remember Dr Bex and Mr Toyoda meet every year and spend 24 hours together sharing a pit garage, locked in battle at the Nurburgring 24, an ideal venue to while away some time in between drives and to come up with shared collaborative ideas.
Lexus possibly have suitable engines in the V10 from the LF-A and the V8 from the IS-F........ 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff