AML - Stock Market Listing
Discussion
soofsayer said:
NFC 85 Vette said:
The AMR you mention, buy it, you wont regret it - they're superb, and that one's a lovely spec, and the price is a bargain for what it is 
Ok then, deposit paid.I have to admit my own Vantage is lightly used (18,000 miles in 11 years), but I do try go ensure it it goes on a 25 mile run every few weeks, to exercise all the moving parts, including air con. etc.
Having left some cars untouched for years, I have learnt to my cost, that it is not a good idea.
How do owners deal with this mechanical aspect, for a several year old car only covering 37 miles ?
I suppose if the odometer does go backwards, maybe a running on rollers in reverse might work.
oilit said:
I was talking with a main dealer yesterday and they mentioned (which of course they would) that they have been flat out since they opened, and now they are seeing people question having to wait for a new car !
That's great news.
Are we really back to the happy days of 2003, when customers were willing to wait 2 years for their new Vantage ?
I don't think we live in a world that is used to waiting..... esp generation z who I thought were the new targets ( Charlotte wasn't it?)
I guess it depends how long one has to wait - if it's longer than competitors then they run the risk of losing the sale.
I guess it depends how long one has to wait - if it's longer than competitors then they run the risk of losing the sale.
Edited by oilit on Friday 31st July 04:20
oilit said:
I don't think we live in a world that is used to waiting..... esp generation z who I thought were the new targets ( Charlotte wasn't it?)
I guess it depends how long one has to wait - if it's longer than competitors then they run the risk of losing the sale.
Millennial as much as Generation Z I expect, but as a millennial, I don't see myself as that impatient - I would think customers who are buying into the marque, appreciate that they're hand built, and the waiting time is a quirk of the buying experience. Us supposed young'uns aren't all "I want it yesterday" I guess it depends how long one has to wait - if it's longer than competitors then they run the risk of losing the sale.
I could understand if someone was switching from say Porsche or Mercedes - they might expect a car to arrive quicker, and there's a conversation to have with them to manage expectations a little bit. Those wanting cars immediately, would probably pluck for a stock example that could take away within a few days, if they were insistent on having something right away.
In regard to DBX, the boys and girls at St Athan are putting in an almighty effort to claw back lost time for the pandemic shutdown - and it's working, UK dealer demonstrators this week started arriving, and they're taking bookings for test drives beginning next week. UK customers who put deposits down for DBX when it was unveiled, and locked in a spec, will receive their cars quickly - much quicker than I expected actually, I thought the UK market had been bumped down the order due to perceived lack of interest in the car, but if a spec was locked in, it'll be in build or approaching final inspection already. At one dealer, it's taken double the number of orders that DBS took initially. So while DBX might not appeal to the inhabitants of PistonHeads, it's doing good business.
When the next quarter or half figures are released, it should look less gloomy. Remember that Bentley and McLaren have had their share of financial pain recently, so all the UK low volume car makers are feeling it.
From January 2019, the SMMT monthly new UK Registrations publication ceased to show figures for Aston Martin.
I have just stumbled across a source for those figures. It does not seem possible to access previous months, but for July this is what is shown.
For the trade as a whole, I was surprised at the high number of new cars sold, but perhaps it was July when motor dealers reopened.
The SMMT also no longer show McLaren, so here are their figures (UK only).
.................................. Aston Martin ........ McLaren
July 2019 ................. 114 ........................ 40
July 2020 .................... 77 ........................ 36
Year to July 2019 ..... 970 ...................... 322
Year to July 2020 ..... 460 ...................... 229
With both AML and McLaren struggling - should’t one look at merging them. ? On the outset it looks like a stupid idea but the model programmes are quite complimentary. Aston more GT than Sportscar and the opposite with MCL. Drop the V8 AMG engine and use the McLaren V8 and bundle resources to develop an in-house hybrid power train, which must be the most important issue facing both manufacturers. Shut one HQ, combine the manufacturing and shut down a factory, bundle dealerships and save £300m running only one F1 outfit. McAston is born !
hornbaek said:
With both AML and McLaren struggling - should’t one look at merging them. ? .........
McAston is born !
McAston is born !
I would have thought that the existing customer profiles and buying motives are (mostly) complete opposites.
Many Aston Martin owners would probably think, I don't want to be seen in a McLaren, and possibly vice-versa.
You have opened a good debate.
Jon39 said:
I would have thought that the existing customer profiles and buying motives are (mostly) complete opposites.
Many Aston Martin owners would probably think, I don't want to be seen in a McLaren, and possibly vice-versa.
You have opened a good debate.
hornbaek said:
I agree that they are opposites, but that is normally an opportunity to expand the customer base (as opposed to cannibalising it).
I recall that expanding the customer base has already been attempted, and not very long ago.
"Aimed at new younger buyers and also our existing customers."
For some reason that did not go too well, although there was a rush while 'giving them away' for £1000 per month.
hornbaek said:
With both AML and McLaren struggling - should’t one look at merging them. ? On the outset it looks like a stupid idea but the model programmes are quite complimentary. Aston more GT than Sportscar and the opposite with MCL. Drop the V8 AMG engine and use the McLaren V8 and bundle resources to develop an in-house hybrid power train, which must be the most important issue facing both manufacturers. Shut one HQ, combine the manufacturing and shut down a factory, bundle dealerships and save £300m running only one F1 outfit. McAston is born !
No, that is the worst thing imaginable from a business perspective. Probably worse than bankruptcy, frankly - it would cement both brands to history. They need a big brand to buy - but nobody wants to. If they did, they would have by now. Theres a reason MB/Daimler don't own AM outright..
VW want rid of Lamborghini remember. Too many brands competing for too few customers.
Well you have just argued that there are no strategic buyers for either McLaren or Aston (and I tend to agree) so slashing development costs and overheads seems to be the only viable option (other than pouring more money into both companies) and that could be done more effectively by combining the two. It’s not going to be pretty, but it might save them - and i don’t agree that it is worse than bankruptcy as it would keep more people in work. AML has so much debt that it would never be able to repay it without significant sacrifices.
hornbaek said:
Well you have just argued that there are no strategic buyers for either McLaren or Aston (and I tend to agree) so slashing development costs and overheads seems to be the only viable option (other than pouring more money into both companies) and that could be done more effectively by combining the two. It’s not going to be pretty, but it might save them - and i don’t agree that it is worse than bankruptcy as it would keep more people in work. AML has so much debt that it would never be able to repay it without significant sacrifices.
Don't you understand that if they merge they start competing with themselves. Seriously it would never work the costs would mount ever further, not reduce, that's what I meant by better with bankruptcy. You dont pair together two poor performing companies, if you do you make one greater mess.hornbaek said:
Well you have just argued that there are no strategic buyers for either McLaren or Aston (and I tend to agree) so slashing development costs and overheads seems to be the only viable option (other than pouring more money into both companies) and that could be done more effectively by combining the two. It’s not going to be pretty, but it might save them - and i don’t agree that it is worse than bankruptcy as it would keep more people in work. AML has so much debt that it would never be able to repay it without significant sacrifices.
I tend to agree. VW is controlling Porsche and Lamborghini and Audi - with lots of synergies.
The idea of joining McLaren and Aston Martin in one group holding looks attractive - the challenges are similar.
In such a case the dealerships would continue to operate with separate show rooms - but possibly integrated work shops?
The traditional owner of an Aston Martin is likely to own a Range Rover, but not a McLaren. Most likely he would not consider a Lamborghini. But all that is perfectly fine. What really matters is that both companies can join development resources for engines, brakes and electronics.
I really like the Merc V8 in the Vantage and DB11. But I am convinced that nobody would complain if the McLaren engine would be placed in the Vantage and DB11?
The only downside: The Valhalla and the Vanquish Vision are to be considered a cannibalization of the McLaren portfolio. That may be acceptable, for example Porsche 911 GT3 RS, Huracan and Audi R8 are also a cannibalization portfolio. But the Audi and Lamborghini shared the development cost and realized synergies to an extent that the brands could survive. This result really matters.
Downside: I cannot see it happen due to shareholder interests?
Nbgring said:
Downside: I cannot see it happen due to shareholder interests?
The two main shareholders for each have completely different interests and goals which I believe would kill any chance of even discussion on a deal. Also I don't see where you are going to be able to generate the costs savings needed to justify a deal. You really don't have any major factories you would be able to close and nor a single location where you could consolidate the majority of the operations. In addition neither company has the financial resources right now to fund a major restructuring.SSO said:
The two main shareholders for each have completely different interests and goals which I believe would kill any chance of even discussion on a deal. Also I don't see where you are going to be able to generate the costs savings needed to justify a deal. You really don't have any major factories you would be able to close and nor a single location where you could consolidate the majority of the operations. In addition neither company has the financial resources right now to fund a major restructuring.
That is not where I see the synergies: Keep the three manufacturing sites. Keep the portfolio. But the Valhalla and the Vanquish Vision have huge potential for synergies with McLaren. Assuming that the Vanquish Vision development is not finalized - it could use the carbon fibre monocage of the 720 series? Same gear box, same drive shafts? Same brake, same multi media package?
Both, the 720 series and the Vanquish Vision could be offered with the McLaren V8 and the AML TM01 V6-hybrid?
Purchase volumes for brakes increase and negotiation power also?
Replace the AMG V8 in DB11 and Vantage - and use the McLaren V8 instead?
My idea is to reduce cost without expensive restructuring, lay-off or shut down of plants.
Nbgring said:
That is not where I see the synergies: Keep the three manufacturing sites. Keep the portfolio.
But the Valhalla and the Vanquish Vision have huge potential for synergies with McLaren. Assuming that the Vanquish Vision development is not finalized - it could use the carbon fibre monocage of the 720 series? Same gear box, same drive shafts? Same brake, same multi media package?
Both, the 720 series and the Vanquish Vision could be offered with the McLaren V8 and the AML TM01 V6-hybrid?
Purchase volumes for brakes increase and negotiation power also?
Replace the AMG V8 in DB11 and Vantage - and use the McLaren V8 instead?
My idea is to reduce cost without expensive restructuring, lay-off or shut down of plants.
But the Valhalla and the Vanquish Vision have huge potential for synergies with McLaren. Assuming that the Vanquish Vision development is not finalized - it could use the carbon fibre monocage of the 720 series? Same gear box, same drive shafts? Same brake, same multi media package?
Both, the 720 series and the Vanquish Vision could be offered with the McLaren V8 and the AML TM01 V6-hybrid?
Purchase volumes for brakes increase and negotiation power also?
Replace the AMG V8 in DB11 and Vantage - and use the McLaren V8 instead?
My idea is to reduce cost without expensive restructuring, lay-off or shut down of plants.
Sounds good on the surface, but those types of cost savings do not constitute the major outgoings of either company. So would not save a significant percentage of total outgoings. Eg. Both the McLaren engine and the AM Vantage/DB11 engine are bought from outside suppliers, so buying more from a single supplier might only knock a few percent off the purchase price.
Employee costs would be just one example of the majors.
Just the annual interest on AML's debt, is now more that the biggest pre-tax profit ever reported. As we know, any annual profit at all has been a rarity.
Hopefully DBX sales can contribute towards a solution. Achieving a stronger revenue flow, might allow a chance of refinancing the nearly £1bn debt, now due for repayment in just 18 months time.
Edited by Jon39 on Tuesday 25th August 18:15
Nbgring said:
SSO said:
The two main shareholders for each have completely different interests and goals which I believe would kill any chance of even discussion on a deal. Also I don't see where you are going to be able to generate the costs savings needed to justify a deal. You really don't have any major factories you would be able to close and nor a single location where you could consolidate the majority of the operations. In addition neither company has the financial resources right now to fund a major restructuring.
That is not where I see the synergies: Keep the three manufacturing sites. Keep the portfolio. But the Valhalla and the Vanquish Vision have huge potential for synergies with McLaren. Assuming that the Vanquish Vision development is not finalized - it could use the carbon fibre monocage of the 720 series? Same gear box, same drive shafts? Same brake, same multi media package?
Both, the 720 series and the Vanquish Vision could be offered with the McLaren V8 and the AML TM01 V6-hybrid?
Purchase volumes for brakes increase and negotiation power also?
Replace the AMG V8 in DB11 and Vantage - and use the McLaren V8 instead?
My idea is to reduce cost without expensive restructuring, lay-off or shut down of plants.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff