RE: Ineos Grenadier may be built in France
Discussion
Good luck to Mr Ineos. The guy isn't stupid and his immensely successful business tells us that. If it makes more commercial sense to put the factory in France, so be it. If it helps make the company a success in Europe, and Globally, thats the important thing.
Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
RacerMike said:
chelme said:
I'd be very interested to know whether the Company is HQ'd here in the UK. I have a suspicion, even the company is based abroad.
My theory is that the decision as to where to engineer the vehicle was based on the availability of skilled personel and knowledge, as it seems, was the decision as to where to assemble the vehicles.
Had the UK had a large, and importantly, a home grown vehicle manufacturing sector that proved itself over time to be innovative and able to evolve as part of a successful export led economy, I am certain the decision to engineer and assemble the vehicle in the UK would have come as second nature, despite Brexit.
The reality is that whilst the UK is the 8th largest manufacturer (in general, not just cars) in the world, a whopping 40% of that is foreign owned. The historical knowledge and experience of implementing this huge exercise has, since the 80's been eroded. We can speak of Nissan and Honda here in the UK for example, however all the conceptual thinking and implementation of how to manufacture and be efficient at this, not to mention new ideas being brought forward and to be innovative is highly likely to come from Japan and and even if great ideas came from British thinkers within the company, the owner of this knowledge is a company or person abroad.
And then there is the faith and confidence and I suspect this is lacking too for the historical reasons I merely touched on above.
Whilst in certain industries the UK may lead, this is one where we could learn a lot from others.
The question is have we, or will we? These questions have been asked for some time now going back the 80s, but I have not seen many new homegrown British brands enter the market...there is McLaren, which is good.
Its not as if I am taking pleasure in speaking of this either. However this is a recurring theme and I'd like to know why, out of interest.
Anyone who disagrees or takes a different view, I'm all for meaningful contributions.
Generally I think the 8,000 plus skilled engineers living here and working for JLR from both the UK and Abroad, the hundreds who work at Ricardo (who engineered the McLaren V8, and the 7 speed DCT for the Bugatti Veyron/Chiron), the thousands at McLaren developing world leading supercars (regardless of the companies marketing strategy), the hundreds at Crew engineer and testing Bentleys, the several hundred working at Williams Advanced Engineering as consultants to a lot of the words leading manufacturers on Vehicle Dynamics and EV/Hybrid systems, the hundreds at Lotus currently developing the Evija and the several hundred who just got fired by Dyson who were trying to find jobs again would fundamentally disagree with that statement. There's phenomenal talent in the UK for the nitty gritty and important bits that, judging by the number of Brits I encounter working throughout the European car industry in test and development, would back this up.My theory is that the decision as to where to engineer the vehicle was based on the availability of skilled personel and knowledge, as it seems, was the decision as to where to assemble the vehicles.
Had the UK had a large, and importantly, a home grown vehicle manufacturing sector that proved itself over time to be innovative and able to evolve as part of a successful export led economy, I am certain the decision to engineer and assemble the vehicle in the UK would have come as second nature, despite Brexit.
The reality is that whilst the UK is the 8th largest manufacturer (in general, not just cars) in the world, a whopping 40% of that is foreign owned. The historical knowledge and experience of implementing this huge exercise has, since the 80's been eroded. We can speak of Nissan and Honda here in the UK for example, however all the conceptual thinking and implementation of how to manufacture and be efficient at this, not to mention new ideas being brought forward and to be innovative is highly likely to come from Japan and and even if great ideas came from British thinkers within the company, the owner of this knowledge is a company or person abroad.
And then there is the faith and confidence and I suspect this is lacking too for the historical reasons I merely touched on above.
Whilst in certain industries the UK may lead, this is one where we could learn a lot from others.
The question is have we, or will we? These questions have been asked for some time now going back the 80s, but I have not seen many new homegrown British brands enter the market...there is McLaren, which is good.
Its not as if I am taking pleasure in speaking of this either. However this is a recurring theme and I'd like to know why, out of interest.
Anyone who disagrees or takes a different view, I'm all for meaningful contributions.
The UK is categorically really good engineering things well (usually against hilarious time constraints), but terrible at planning properly or managing to do things to process. It's why we're do good at making racing cars (big problems that seem almost impossible to fix but have no money constraint at all) and terrible at making reliable mass produced stuff (because everything ends up being done last minute without enough testing).
Personally, if I started a car company, it would have German's planning the whole thing, Brits doing the engineering and it would be made in Eastern Europe where people generally take pride in their work and use British or American talent to market the thing.
However, as alluded to above by another poster, there are fewer people within the industry here in the UK to draw from for a start up, than there are in say, in Germany/France.
This is partly due to engineering and related subjects being considered more prestigious on the Continent, with commensurate rewards compared to the UK, where I suspect, roles within manufacturing sector are viewed/treated as a vocation, not a profession.
Edited by chelme on Tuesday 7th July 14:21
biggles330d said:
Good luck to Mr Ineos. The guy isn't stupid and his immensely successful business tells us that. If it makes more commercial sense to put the factory in France, so be it. If it helps make the company a success in Europe, and Globally, thats the important thing.
Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
I agree to some extent but knowledge is gained by doing (and making) things. If we stop doing stuff the knowledge will stagnate and more and more nations will overtake us.Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
biggles330d said:
Good luck to Mr Ineos. The guy isn't stupid and his immensely successful business tells us that. If it makes more commercial sense to put the factory in France, so be it. If it helps make the company a success in Europe, and Globally, thats the important thing.
Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
I think you forget that Germany and Japan are quite good at building cars and do not have a low labour rates. It is down to attitude. Engineering is considered trade in the UK and not a profession. Manufacturing is considered to be dirty and not for those from Oxbridge and their really useful PPE and Classics degrees.Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
AnotherClarkey said:
I agree to some extent but knowledge is gained by doing (and making) things. If we stop doing stuff the knowledge will stagnate and more and more nations will overtake us.
But who is this "us"? Most people in this country don't manufacture anything anyway, they're not running in the race so they can't be overtaken. The idea of a homogenous nation pulling together to work towards some notion of national accomplishment is (thankfully) long dead. We live in a globalised world with globalised corporations and globalised supply chains. The competition is between companies, not countries. The latter are just the board upon which the game is played. Regardless of recent blips the general trend is clear, borders and nationalities have less and less relevance with every passing decade, and rightly so. People make stuff where it is cheapest to make well. People buy stuff from where it is cheapest and well-made. The flag on the back is no longer relevant.chelme said:
This is partly due to engineering and related subjects being considered more prestigious on the Continent, with commensurate rewards compared to the UK, where I suspect, roles within manufacturing sector are viewed/treated as a vocation, not a profession.
Yeah this is the bit I'm not sure I totally agree with you on. There's more good vehicle dynamicists in the UK than there are elsewhere. We (as a nation) seem better at doing the touchy feely bits of a car's attribute than most. There are skilled guys in the German OEMs of course, but there's a great wealth of ability here in the UK that IMO is far greater than the rest of Europe. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that's the case for pretty much all aspects of vehicle development. We just generally seem a lot better at doing stuff that's subjective than the Germans are.Lester H said:
Last week, like others, I had the impression that they were almost ready to go. Yes, the Mercedes premises, now surplus to requirements, sound plausible. However, I hope this doesn’t all sink into an “all smoke and mirrors” scenario, particularly as the Grenadier looks so desirable.
I don't think they are far along at all. A design studio model and some CGI of something trundling along a track is all we have seen. Smoke and mirrors.oilit said:
Just rename it Talbot/Matra Rancho and building it in France will make sense !!
That suggestion is insulting to Matra which used to make developed and manufactured quite a few advance cars, as well as going racing.Edited by oilit on Tuesday 7th July 12:35
Jack
Edited by Jack_and_MLE on Tuesday 7th July 14:43
A shame, but I'd still be just as interested in one. Let's face it, most cars are international efforts anyhow. BMW's built in America. Ford's built in Malaysia, Toyota's built in Britain.
I can't see that this really matters at all in the grand scheme of things. Not in regards to the vehicle anyhow.
And let's face it, we have known for ages that it will have German engines and Austrian engineering. It still has a lot of British design and vision.
I can't see that this really matters at all in the grand scheme of things. Not in regards to the vehicle anyhow.
And let's face it, we have known for ages that it will have German engines and Austrian engineering. It still has a lot of British design and vision.
Condi said:
How can he build a plant here, with no idea what if any costs are involved with shipping parts from the EU to the UK and then completed cars back again? The EU is the obvious choice and always will be because even if they agree 0 tariffs, that can change with a change of the wind.
If he hadn't been a supporter of Brexit, with all the above being blatantly obvious beforehand, I would agree with you.But he was, and it was, so my attitude is somewhat one of he helped make this bed, and he should bloody well lie in it.
300bhp/ton said:
Toyota's built in Britain.
Probably not for much longer...The point here is less about the Grenadier and more about Jim Ratcliffe, his strong support of Brexit, then his move to Monaco, tendering of engineering to Germany and now movement of production to France. Doesn't really support the claims he made that warnings of economic suicide and a reduction in UK investment were 'just scaremongering' does it?
You know....it's almost as if he maybe had an ulterior motive? Like worrying that EU transparency laws might have meant he needed to be honest about where his tax is paid? Or pay more money to the EU government for his vast wealth. But no....I'm sure that's just a coincidence and this move to France is actually just some really clever way of benefiting the UK economy. I know what it will be. All the money he makes selling the Grenadier will be given to a charitable fund to support the people of Bridgend. That's what'll be. Yup....what a noble chap.
AnotherClarkey said:
biggles330d said:
Good luck to Mr Ineos. The guy isn't stupid and his immensely successful business tells us that. If it makes more commercial sense to put the factory in France, so be it. If it helps make the company a success in Europe, and Globally, thats the important thing.
Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
I agree to some extent but knowledge is gained by doing (and making) things. If we stop doing stuff the knowledge will stagnate and more and more nations will overtake us.Too many 'patriots' would sacrifice any chance of building a long term globally successful business by insisting that things should be built here. Its a UK company and we're a knowledge based economy. Thats out strength. Clinging onto some quaint notion that we should be positioning ourselves on a global stage as a labour based manufacturing economy when others are far far more suited to that with much lower labour rates does nothing other than ensure that whatever the venture is it'll be limited in its potential for scale and will probably limp on till it's inevitable implosion as competitors out punch it.
Some businesses can sustain a UK manufacturing base as it's fundamental to their brand values and how that translates into how customers value it and what they can sell the products for. Most others are in a market where customers perceive value first and foremost (and the UK is probably amongst the worst nation for chasing value bargains when spending their money far above paying more for nationalistic reasons). Where stuff is actually built is irrellevant from a customer perspective, so long as the quality is adequate for the price point. Its also irrellevant to the manufacturer who should be focused on making the company a sustainable and long term success, not having to position itself as some domestic job creation exercise.
Without the experience of the "doing part" , the "knowledge part" does not necessarily add value. In other words, if the UK did dominate the manufacturing sectors, the source from which the knowledge economy drew its expertise would become stronger and thus in a circular fashion, assist in the development of new comoanies. The industry would grow exponentially.
I doubt BMW, VAG and Mercedes became so large, based on the ideas and thoughts of McKinsey/ Chicago/Boston Consulting Group. Not saying they are not good at what they sell, just saying that these were probably not needed for certain companies to expand, because the skills and knowledge for, for example, the planning and implementation were already there.
As regards misguided patriotism there is a lot of harm done with Nationalism and I do not consider myself to be a nationalist - far from it in fact.
I do not believe that there is harm done by a patriotic approach, if it means those who live and work in the UK benefit from, are given real opportunities to contribute to it and encouraged to be the best, whatever their individual nationalities.
Despite globalisation, we still live in countries demarcated by borders and the communities living therein, and whether the UK likes it or not, comunities (by this I mean national states and their people) in other countries including Germany, France and Italy have adopted a patriotic approach and their societies have benefitted from this.
As regard labour rates, I'd wager the average German factory worker is paid more for his role and responsibilities than the one in the UK. So this argument does not have any traction with me.
Edited by chelme on Tuesday 7th July 15:22
RacerMike said:
300bhp/ton said:
Toyota's built in Britain.
Probably not for much longer...The point here is less about the Grenadier and more about Jim Ratcliffe, his strong support of Brexit, then his move to Monaco, tendering of engineering to Germany and now movement of production to France. Doesn't really support the claims he made that warnings of economic suicide and a reduction in UK investment were 'just scaremongering' does it?
You know....it's almost as if he maybe had an ulterior motive? Like worrying that EU transparency laws might have meant he needed to be honest about where his tax is paid? Or pay more money to the EU government for his vast wealth. But no....I'm sure that's just a coincidence and this move to France is actually just some really clever way of benefiting the UK economy. I know what it will be. All the money he makes selling the Grenadier will be given to a charitable fund to support the people of Bridgend. That's what'll be. Yup....what a noble chap.
I've looked in Companies House and can confirm that Ineos Automotive and all the various parent/holding companies are based in Britain with their ultimate owner being Jim Ratcliffe. Of course he is resident in Monaco, but I can't imagine this automotive project is going to be hugely profitable so we're probably not missing out on much in the way of tax.
Clearly anyone buying one of these because they consider themselves patriotic are idiots. You might as well buy a G Wagen or X5 (I know they're not the same thing).
Clearly anyone buying one of these because they consider themselves patriotic are idiots. You might as well buy a G Wagen or X5 (I know they're not the same thing).
RacerMike said:
AnotherClarkey said:
I think is Britain is to start moving ahead again it is going to have to look forward and not backward. We should be using what engineering talent we have to develop lightweight, efficient, affordable vehicles not fritter it away on throwbacks to the 1940s and exotic, useless, toys for the ultra wealthy.
Where’s the market for that though? Arrival is a new brand that has drawn my interest just recently. They will, if successful be manufacturing commercial vehicles in Oxfordshire. They look great and I hope they succeed.
chelme said:
Everywhere! The seismic change occuring in the automotive industry a ripe moment for the UK to step in, and if there are sufficient numbers available, to join in the EV evolution.
Arrival is a new brand that has drawn my interest just recently. They will, if successful be manufacturing commercial vehicles in Oxfordshire. They look great and I hope they succeed.
The general consumer doesn't have a clue which wheels are driven on their car, least of all it's weight. If you asked 100 people in the high street whether their car weighed 900kg or 2900kg you'd likely see a normal distribution akin to flipping a coin. Given how expensive it would be to engineer a modern car that was 'lightweight' there's literally no motivation there. It would not result in greater profits for a company to make their car lightweight.Arrival is a new brand that has drawn my interest just recently. They will, if successful be manufacturing commercial vehicles in Oxfordshire. They look great and I hope they succeed.
Great example is Lotus. Renowned for lightness being their USP....and yet are you actually aware what V6 Exige weighs? And would it actually be instrumental in your decision if you were to buy one? Or would handling balance, residules and interior quality be more important?
RacerMike said:
The general consumer doesn't have a clue which wheels are driven on their car, least of all it's weight. If you asked 100 people in the high street whether their car weighed 900kg or 2900kg you'd likely see a normal distribution akin to flipping a coin. Given how expensive it would be to engineer a modern car that was 'lightweight' there's literally no motivation there. It would not result in greater profits for a company to make their car lightweight.
Great example is Lotus. Renowned for lightness being their USP....and yet are you actually aware what V6 Exige weighs? And would it actually be instrumental in your decision if you were to buy one? Or would handling balance, residules and interior quality be more important?
My original comment was focused on light weight as a means of reducing energy consumption in both manufacture and use. Electric car development seems to have gone off the rails a bit with gigantic batteries in 2.5-3 tonne SUVs. Great example is Lotus. Renowned for lightness being their USP....and yet are you actually aware what V6 Exige weighs? And would it actually be instrumental in your decision if you were to buy one? Or would handling balance, residules and interior quality be more important?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff