AML - Stock Market Listing
Discussion
jonby said:
Jon39 said:
Yes, I too noticed that in the official announcement.
Made me wonder about the Vanquush, which AML had previously announced would have a V6 hybrid.
The Vaquish won't stay on my shortlist if it has an MB V8, when there was expectation of an AM (Cosworth) engine.
I expect Red Bull F1 will be disappointed, but am sure they must understand AML have become desperate for more cash.
Any possibility of running out of money before the start of DBX production, would have been a disaster, after so much effort had gone into the creation of DBX.
It will be very difficult to change the engine in valhalla I imagine
It was this extract from the official announcement which confused me, Jonby.
· ' Development of a fuel efficient, modular V6 engine with hybrid capabilities continues, which will support Aston Martin core cars being available as hybrid variants from the mid-2020s. '
Perhaps the correct way to read this statement is, AM V6 without hybrid for Valhalla and Vanquush in 2022, then AM V6 with hybrid for models in 2025ish.
Jon39 said:
jonby said:
Jon39 said:
Yes, I too noticed that in the official announcement.
Made me wonder about the Vanquush, which AML had previously announced would have a V6 hybrid.
The Vaquish won't stay on my shortlist if it has an MB V8, when there was expectation of an AM (Cosworth) engine.
I expect Red Bull F1 will be disappointed, but am sure they must understand AML have become desperate for more cash.
Any possibility of running out of money before the start of DBX production, would have been a disaster, after so much effort had gone into the creation of DBX.
It will be very difficult to change the engine in valhalla I imagine
It was this extract from the official announcement which confused me, Jonby.
· ' Development of a fuel efficient, modular V6 engine with hybrid capabilities continues, which will support Aston Martin core cars being available as hybrid variants from the mid-2020s. '
Perhaps the correct way to read this statement is, AM V6 without hybrid for Valhalla and Vanquush in 2022, then AM V6 with hybrid for models in 2025ish.
One could interpret the statement as meaning vantage/db11/dbx/dbs are the core models they reference. If hybrid v6 goes into valhalla in 2022 and vanquish in 2023, that potentially means going into the core models in 2024/5 which is the mid 2020s
It's actually quite sensible that way round, as selling a vantage with an engine previously featured in valhalla and vanquish is great, but selling a valhalla with an engine previously featured in vantage is not. One can see how that v6 will be used in some applications without hybrid
But I don't see how valhalla works without hybrid - it's to compete with £1M hypercars and without hybrid, it has no front wheel drive and the traction benefits thereoff, plus no torquefill benefits. The v12 from valkyrie is too expensive and the merc/aston TT v8/v12 are not going to wash with the £1M valhalla customers
valhalla is a huge income stream for the company with £500M just from the announced run of coupes, plus presumably AMR, roadster, etc. It's t feature in the Bond movie. So will be difficult to drop. Best guess is therefore a possible delay to production
RobDown said:
hornbaek said:
Good deal for AML. They have found a passionate billionaire with a vision. AML should never have been listed on the stock exchange in the first place. Lets see what the rights issue brings. I believe AML will ultimately be taken off the stock exchange as the new investor will probably not take all the minority investor along on the ride.
I tend to agreeBut just a technical detail - Stroll is going to be a minority investor in AML (aim is to eventually get to a 20% stake). Albeit the shareholder agreement with the majority owners (InvestIndustrial etc) gives him the right to be chairman and appoint another board director.
Will be interesting to see what conflicts that might produce further down the line - particularly given Strolls Racing Point involvement (what’s good for them not necessarily good for AML). It’s really crystal ball gazing but it’s easy to see one side might want to buy out the other in a few years
Maybe it end's up like the deal Enzo wanted from Ford
Control over racing but all the road cars & company matters kept under existing control.hornbaek said:
Good deal for AML. They have found a passionate billionaire with a vision. AML should never have been listed on the stock exchange in the first place. Lets see what the rights issue brings. I believe AML will ultimately be taken off the stock exchange as the new investor will probably not take all the minority investor along on the ride.
^^^what he said.I cannot see AML remaining listed during the next stage of the firm. It will go private then maybe re-list in 5 to 8 years...
JohnG1 said:
hornbaek said:
Good deal for AML. They have found a passionate billionaire with a vision. AML should never have been listed on the stock exchange in the first place. Lets see what the rights issue brings. I believe AML will ultimately be taken off the stock exchange as the new investor will probably not take all the minority investor along on the ride.
^^^what he said.I cannot see AML remaining listed during the next stage of the firm. It will go private then maybe re-list in 5 to 8 years...
Best Regards
Minglar
Edited by Minglar on Friday 31st January 20:10
SL500UK said:
ajr550 said:
GOOD DEAL.
Now about that knighthood for Palmer.
I would have thought the principal shareholders will be looking to replace him.Now about that knighthood for Palmer.
I think if you are happy to take credit for the good times you must take responsibility when they are bad.
RobDown said:
Please explain so that I’m not left with the feeling that that’s just casual racism
It's nothing to do with race, everything to do with China. I would be thrilled if Aston was sold to Tata. I could care less about race. Maybe you haven't seen what's going on in Hong Kong, maybe you don't know about the 1000's of people in Chinese internment camps, most of whom are Muslim, or China's record on human rights. So please don't lecture me on race.
Edited by AstonV on Friday 31st January 20:43
Edited by AstonV on Friday 31st January 21:11
AstonV said:
It's nothing to do with race, everything to do with China. I would be thrilled if Aston was sold to Tata. I could care less about race.
Maybe you haven't seen what's going on in Hong Kong, maybe you don't know about the 1000's of people in Chinese internment camps, most of who are Muslim, or China's record on human rights. So please don't lecture me on race.
I’d love to believe that you had the plight of the Uigars in mind when you said what you said. But given your various trolling posts on this forum over the last 18 months I don’t. Maybe you haven't seen what's going on in Hong Kong, maybe you don't know about the 1000's of people in Chinese internment camps, most of who are Muslim, or China's record on human rights. So please don't lecture me on race.
Edited by AstonV on Friday 31st January 20:43
And by the way India (Tata) has a pretty poor track record on human rights too - see the current Kashmir situation. But hey, few countries now seem to be blemish free
RobDown said:
I’d love to believe that you had the plight of the Uigars in mind when you said what you said. But given your various trolling posts on this forum over the last 18 months I don’t.
And by the way India (Tata) has a pretty poor track record on human rights too - see the current Kashmir situation. But hey, few countries now seem to be blemish free
You come across as a major A Hole too. Have a nice day!And by the way India (Tata) has a pretty poor track record on human rights too - see the current Kashmir situation. But hey, few countries now seem to be blemish free
Minglar said:
JohnG1 said:
hornbaek said:
Good deal for AML. They have found a passionate billionaire with a vision. AML should never have been listed on the stock exchange in the first place. Lets see what the rights issue brings. I believe AML will ultimately be taken off the stock exchange as the new investor will probably not take all the minority investor along on the ride.
^^^what he said.I cannot see AML remaining listed during the next stage of the firm. It will go private then maybe re-list in 5 to 8 years...
Best Regards
Minglar
Edited by Minglar on Friday 31st January 20:10
Minglar said:
My background is not in equities, so I would be interested to know how the process of reverting back to private ownership would work, should that happen.
Hopefully I am using the correct figures. This is what would happen.
The two main shareholders now own c 61% of the Company. This reduces when the new shares have been issued.
After the newly issued shares have been purchased by the Lawrence Stroll consortium, the ownership by the main shareholders will be:-
Adeem/Primewagon }
Prestige/SEIG ............}
.................................................. ______
................................................... 50.5%
Lawrence Stroll consortium = 16.7%
Following the subsequent proposed rights issue the 50.5% might change, because Adeem/Primewagon have only confirmed they will take up, 'at least 50%' of their rights.
If those main shareholders decided to 'take the Company private', they would select a share price, then make an offer to purchase the remaining shares (33.8% (100-50.5-16.7)) owned by the numerous other shareholders.
Usually the price offered would be above the market price, to ensure acceptance of the offer.
When this happened long ago, with Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group, the offer price was very generous and matched the original IPO price.
I still have that share certificate as a souvenir.
Doubt the offer would be that generous with AMLGH though.
“It’s going to change the dialogue in the boardroom,” he said. “The dialogue will change from automotive to luxury.”
The challenge there is that Stroll's credentials are in fashion brand licensing (Ralph Lauren, Hilfiger, Kors) rather than luxury brands built on intrinsic quality, craftsmanship, heritage and product performance (as would be the case with many LVMH or Richemont Group brands - the two largest luxury goods groups).
All luxury brands have to have a strong core brand proposition before they extend into other categories - and strong brands ensure they do not over-extend into categories where the core brand value is diluted or irrelevant - so you don't see Cartier branded hotels, Louis Vuitton restaurants etc.
Aston Martin has suffered from ill-judged brand extensions such as Miami apartments which do not enhance the brand proposition. Recent models have also shown a lack of confidence in the brand (name on the rear of cars rather than wings).
The focus of new models such as the DBX will be in USA and China. China is a fast developing market and is starting to get to a level of sophistication in luxury goods - a few years ago the most successful brands in China were the obvious choices of expressions of status - Rolex, Mercedes, Louis Vuitton, etc. Now we see as luxury consumers In China want to get to the next level of luxury (as they already have the obvious brands), they look for more sophisticated and less obvious, more subtle brands - Cartier, Hermes, perhaps Aston Martin?
It's a similar story in the USA, but more developed - the market for sophisticated luxury already exists, and heritage, provenance, quality and relevance are core to this market.
Aston Martin needs a "luxury dialogue" that focuses on its core brand/product values and its heritage, proud of its understated branding. It needs someone included in that dialogue who understands luxury brands which succeed in that context and has a detailed understanding of target customers, especially in China and the USA, as well as in fashion brand licensing.
The challenge there is that Stroll's credentials are in fashion brand licensing (Ralph Lauren, Hilfiger, Kors) rather than luxury brands built on intrinsic quality, craftsmanship, heritage and product performance (as would be the case with many LVMH or Richemont Group brands - the two largest luxury goods groups).
All luxury brands have to have a strong core brand proposition before they extend into other categories - and strong brands ensure they do not over-extend into categories where the core brand value is diluted or irrelevant - so you don't see Cartier branded hotels, Louis Vuitton restaurants etc.
Aston Martin has suffered from ill-judged brand extensions such as Miami apartments which do not enhance the brand proposition. Recent models have also shown a lack of confidence in the brand (name on the rear of cars rather than wings).
The focus of new models such as the DBX will be in USA and China. China is a fast developing market and is starting to get to a level of sophistication in luxury goods - a few years ago the most successful brands in China were the obvious choices of expressions of status - Rolex, Mercedes, Louis Vuitton, etc. Now we see as luxury consumers In China want to get to the next level of luxury (as they already have the obvious brands), they look for more sophisticated and less obvious, more subtle brands - Cartier, Hermes, perhaps Aston Martin?
It's a similar story in the USA, but more developed - the market for sophisticated luxury already exists, and heritage, provenance, quality and relevance are core to this market.
Aston Martin needs a "luxury dialogue" that focuses on its core brand/product values and its heritage, proud of its understated branding. It needs someone included in that dialogue who understands luxury brands which succeed in that context and has a detailed understanding of target customers, especially in China and the USA, as well as in fashion brand licensing.
Edited by Philip0 on Saturday 1st February 11:23
For those of us lucky enough to still be shareholders, it will be interesting to see what happens to us, I have not read any details of an offer or rights issue formally yet aside from press releases.
The share price is now at £5. In the absence of anything else a rights issue is dilutive therefore in principle you would expect your shares to be worth less after the issue.
Anyone have a view? I haven't done all the research yet and maybe I misunderstand.
The share price is now at £5. In the absence of anything else a rights issue is dilutive therefore in principle you would expect your shares to be worth less after the issue.
Anyone have a view? I haven't done all the research yet and maybe I misunderstand.
ReformedPistonhead said:
For those of us lucky enough to still be shareholders, it will be interesting to see what happens to us, I have not read any details of an offer or rights issue formally yet aside from press releases.
The share price is now at £5. In the absence of anything else a rights issue is dilutive therefore in principle you would expect your shares to be worth less after the issue.
Anyone have a view? I haven't done all the research yet and maybe I misunderstand.
The share price is now at £5. In the absence of anything else a rights issue is dilutive therefore in principle you would expect your shares to be worth less after the issue.
Anyone have a view? I haven't done all the research yet and maybe I misunderstand.
You are correct.
The proposed rights issue though, is not going to be announced, until after the 2019 preliminary results announcement.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff