RE: Government Decision On Lotus Money Due Soon
Discussion
5 USA said:
David Cameron has confirmed Nissan will receive the £20 million grant towards building electric cars (Nisan leaf) at its car plant in Sunderland.
You're kidding? funding for a car that is really nothing more than an excuse to get their CO2 levels down? At £30k a pop just how many of these are they likely to sell?Oakey said:
5 USA said:
David Cameron has confirmed Nissan will receive the £20 million grant towards building electric cars (Nisan leaf) at its car plant in Sunderland.
You're kidding? funding for a car that is really nothing more than an excuse to get their CO2 levels down? At £30k a pop just how many of these are they likely to sell?lauda said:
Giving Lotus support to do the things that Lotus does well, ie low volume sportscar production, chassis engineering consultancy, etc = good thing.
Giving Lotus money to piss away on a new model line-up which, with the best intentions in the world, hasn't got a hope in hell against the established players in the market = bad thing.
Exactly, I have just cancelled my order for a Lotus (the fourth one that I would have had) because it is clear that the new management thinks that my £45K is not enough dosh to be interesting to them.Giving Lotus money to piss away on a new model line-up which, with the best intentions in the world, hasn't got a hope in hell against the established players in the market = bad thing.
Fine, I will go and get a Caterham and they can go find sufficient customers in the £60K - £100K range who can be convinced a Lotus offers more than Jaguar, Porsche, Mercedes and AM. Good luck to them, but don't do it with taxes from me.
Proton have been sold a load of bull from the new Lotus management that has as much chance of succeeding as DeLorean had.
Well, regardless, I think that Esprit a perfect example of how a textbook mid-high end sports coupe should look today.
It's like the LF-A but without the fussy bits. Sharp and curvy at the same time. It looks like what a Gallardo sort of should have looked like.
I prefer the LF-A, but then I see that as a bigger meaner machine all round, not a mid range car of course. It's like the new Supra, but taken OTT and out of the reach of Supra fans
Are there no Euro safety design rules regarding bumper, sill, door height and what not that mean the final production car can't possibly look like that picture?
It's like the LF-A but without the fussy bits. Sharp and curvy at the same time. It looks like what a Gallardo sort of should have looked like.
I prefer the LF-A, but then I see that as a bigger meaner machine all round, not a mid range car of course. It's like the new Supra, but taken OTT and out of the reach of Supra fans
Are there no Euro safety design rules regarding bumper, sill, door height and what not that mean the final production car can't possibly look like that picture?
Edited by carl0s on Monday 28th March 02:49
This is getting more & more like a Daily Mail read every day. More & more people jumping on the bandwaggon without knowing or reading the full facts.I am completely against giving Lotus a subsidy.
1) There are already massive cuts in government expenditure, lots of places have far greater need (IMO) for even these small sums.
2) Read the article carefully "Lotus won't rule out moving part of its production to the likes of Magna or Finnish firm Valmet" so we give them money and the production goes abroad.
3) Examine the history of government subsidies to the automotive industry: BMC/BL? de Lorean?
4) Remember the announcement regarding the future Lotus product line up. I certainly don't think that Lotus are capable of producing five models, let alone make a profit if they could achieve it. I think it crazy to announce to the world and your competitors what your product range for the next five years will be, what they will (more or less look like) and expect that the competition will not be able to match or better them. Anyway, the market moves in less time than this and market segments change and develop over that period.
1) There are already massive cuts in government expenditure, lots of places have far greater need (IMO) for even these small sums.
2) Read the article carefully "Lotus won't rule out moving part of its production to the likes of Magna or Finnish firm Valmet" so we give them money and the production goes abroad.
3) Examine the history of government subsidies to the automotive industry: BMC/BL? de Lorean?
4) Remember the announcement regarding the future Lotus product line up. I certainly don't think that Lotus are capable of producing five models, let alone make a profit if they could achieve it. I think it crazy to announce to the world and your competitors what your product range for the next five years will be, what they will (more or less look like) and expect that the competition will not be able to match or better them. Anyway, the market moves in less time than this and market segments change and develop over that period.
Stimulating your economy by subsidising industry is like filling a lake by taking water from one end of it with a leaky bucket and pouring back in at the other end. The leaked water is consumed by the lobbyists, politicians and beaurocrats. In the long run it doesn't help the economy and it doesn't create real jobs; it does however transfer wealth from the poor to the elite, the connected and the corrupt.
Much as I would like Lotus to succeed with their new strategy, if they want some corporate welfare they should go elsewhere. If a business requires a subsidy it doesn't deserve it and if it deserves it, it doesn't need it.
Free market capitalism is not a perfect system but it is far more preferable to crony corporate capitalism. The difference between socialism and corporatism is that with socialism the boot stamping on your face has a national flag, but with corporatism the boot stamping on your face has a corporate logo.
The last time the UK taxpayer subsidised a Lotus venture (De Lorean in NI) it did not end well.
Much as I would like Lotus to succeed with their new strategy, if they want some corporate welfare they should go elsewhere. If a business requires a subsidy it doesn't deserve it and if it deserves it, it doesn't need it.
Free market capitalism is not a perfect system but it is far more preferable to crony corporate capitalism. The difference between socialism and corporatism is that with socialism the boot stamping on your face has a national flag, but with corporatism the boot stamping on your face has a corporate logo.
The last time the UK taxpayer subsidised a Lotus venture (De Lorean in NI) it did not end well.
Lotus 51 said:
Stimulating your economy by subsidising industry is like filling a lake by taking water from one end of it with a leaky bucket and pouring back in at the other end. The leaked water is consumed by the lobbyists, politicians and beaurocrats. In the long run it doesn't help the economy and it doesn't create real jobs; it does however transfer wealth from the poor to the elite, the connected and the corrupt.
Much as I would like Lotus to succeed with their new strategy, if they want some corporate welfare they should go elsewhere. If a business requires a subsidy it doesn't deserve it and if it deserves it, it doesn't need it.
Free market capitalism is not a perfect system but it is far more preferable to crony corporate capitalism. The difference between socialism and corporatism is that with socialism the boot stamping on your face has a national flag, but with corporatism the boot stamping on your face has a corporate logo.
The last time the UK taxpayer subsidised a Lotus venture (De Lorean in NI) it did not end well.
It all depends upon what the actual "multiplier" is for public spending and/or investment. This is much-debated. Under some models, government spending generates a positive return; under some others, it generates a negative return.Much as I would like Lotus to succeed with their new strategy, if they want some corporate welfare they should go elsewhere. If a business requires a subsidy it doesn't deserve it and if it deserves it, it doesn't need it.
Free market capitalism is not a perfect system but it is far more preferable to crony corporate capitalism. The difference between socialism and corporatism is that with socialism the boot stamping on your face has a national flag, but with corporatism the boot stamping on your face has a corporate logo.
The last time the UK taxpayer subsidised a Lotus venture (De Lorean in NI) it did not end well.
If the money stimulates Lotus to stay in the UK and buy British products in its supply chain then all is well. Similarly, if other Norfolk businesses are supported because Lotus workers are still in work, ditto. However that's not a given, and requires a lot of research - and quite a lot of guesswork - to justify.
It looks like Lotus might have been unsuccessful, they aren't included in the list of successful bidders, although Bentley, Nissan and GM are - http://www.bis.gov.uk/news/topstories/2011/Apr/reg...
andyps said:
It looks like Lotus might have been unsuccessful, they aren't included in the list of successful bidders, although Bentley, Nissan and GM are - http://www.bis.gov.uk/news/topstories/2011/Apr/reg...
Hmmmm.....
Call me a cynic, but there seems to be a lot of dots located in the red areas of the political map
Edited by The Wookie on Tuesday 12th April 15:51
BSC said:
Elise bodies are made in France in an ex Renault factory.
Now that is interesting, and quite sad. Lotus was an expert at GRP production, having developed VARI for the Eaprit et al, and then having invested heavily in production techniques for smaller panels for the FWD Elan.I'd love nothing more than to see Lotus as the undisputed genius car maker/designer that the world's manufacturers turns to when they need to design a car.
Can't help thinking that £30million invested in hiring more brilliant engineers will produce more in the long term than worrying about where some cars are actually screwed together.
Can't help thinking that £30million invested in hiring more brilliant engineers will produce more in the long term than worrying about where some cars are actually screwed together.
It will cost Lotus close to a Billion (if not more) to develop and produce the cars they revealed earlier.
Well that's if they intend them to be compariable to Ferrari/Porsche and they haven't fooled themselves into thinking people will spend 100k on a car with a Toyota engine and gearbox.
So why are they arsing around for £30 million? Someone explain it to me...
Seems to me like the new director is in it for what he can get out of it.
Borrow as much cash as he can, have a top jolly with the F1 sponsorship/hosiptality for 18 months to 2 years with his buddies that he's recruited, then when it all fails he can walk away saying the £750m of investment that he spunked wasn't enough to make a go of it, and can blame the government/whomever for lack of support.
(Classic director strategy!)
The real losers are the people who work there (and have done for many years) and can do nothing about it
Borrow as much cash as he can, have a top jolly with the F1 sponsorship/hosiptality for 18 months to 2 years with his buddies that he's recruited, then when it all fails he can walk away saying the £750m of investment that he spunked wasn't enough to make a go of it, and can blame the government/whomever for lack of support.
(Classic director strategy!)
The real losers are the people who work there (and have done for many years) and can do nothing about it
Wills2 said:
It will cost Lotus close to a Billion (if not more) to develop and produce the cars they revealed earlier.
Well that's if they intend them to be compariable to Ferrari/Porsche and they haven't fooled themselves into thinking people will spend 100k on a car with a Toyota engine and gearbox.
So why are they arsing around for £30 million? Someone explain it to me...
Because the £1bn investment is pure fantasy, whereas a £30m grant is a significant and realistic source of funds.Well that's if they intend them to be compariable to Ferrari/Porsche and they haven't fooled themselves into thinking people will spend 100k on a car with a Toyota engine and gearbox.
So why are they arsing around for £30 million? Someone explain it to me...
Olivera said:
Wills2 said:
It will cost Lotus close to a Billion (if not more) to develop and produce the cars they revealed earlier.
Well that's if they intend them to be compariable to Ferrari/Porsche and they haven't fooled themselves into thinking people will spend 100k on a car with a Toyota engine and gearbox.
So why are they arsing around for £30 million? Someone explain it to me...
Because the £1bn investment is pure fantasy,Well that's if they intend them to be compariable to Ferrari/Porsche and they haven't fooled themselves into thinking people will spend 100k on a car with a Toyota engine and gearbox.
So why are they arsing around for £30 million? Someone explain it to me...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff