AML - Stock Market Listing
Discussion
kevinon said:
Jon39 said:
SSO said:
Per AMLs 2021 Annual report, AML is paying AMR £21 million.
Thank you SSO.
That is disgraceful.
The way LS talks about his new F1 sponsorship, it is possible that the money put into AML by LS, might now be less than the extra sponsorship (as a consequence of using the Aston Martin name) obtained by his private racing team.
I am not saying there is anything untoward, but surely LS ought to be paying to use the Aston Martin name, not receiving £21 million each year from AML.
All this twaddle about the benefit to AML, with billions of F1 viewers (the live and TV viewers of one race, multiplied by all races), eager to buy Aston Martins.
What the big brands are getting is a chance to bankroll an F1 vanity project for a rich father / son combo. Poor AM shareholders.
It doesn’t matter much what customers think, but I dare say that anyone AM approaches for more money will have a view on it.
I think that's why Stroll made such a song and dance about the F1 value in the most recent analysts Q&A.
He knows it's going to be a problem, if not already.
Paying £21m per year to sponsor a team he destroyed.
When AML sales really start dropping, people will realise how much BS Stroll fed them.
£21m to sponsor a shambles, and car sales still dropped.
He knows it's going to be a problem, if not already.
Paying £21m per year to sponsor a team he destroyed.
When AML sales really start dropping, people will realise how much BS Stroll fed them.
£21m to sponsor a shambles, and car sales still dropped.
Jon39 said:
SSO said:
Per AMLs 2021 Annual report, AML is paying AMR £21 million.
Thank you SSO.
That is disgraceful.
The way LS talks about his new F1 sponsorship, it is possible that the money put into AML by LS, might now be less than the extra sponsorship (as a consequence of using the Aston Martin name) obtained by his private racing team.
I am not saying there is anything untoward, but surely LS ought to be paying to use the Aston Martin name, not receiving £21 million each year from AML.
All this twaddle about the benefit to AML, with billions of F1 viewers (the live and TV viewers of one race, multiplied by all races), eager to buy Aston Martins.
Has he ever owned a manufacturing business before?
Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
Edited by oilit on Thursday 12th May 18:45
Stroll was never the brand owner of Hilfiger, Michel Kors etc. He was merely the Canadian importer of the brands to his native country. When Michael Kors was listed on the US Stock Exchange Stroll made his fortune selling some stock that he held. He is an importer and distributor but not a brand owner. With AML he has clearly taken on a challenge that will test his resolve and talent.
hornbaek said:
Stroll was never the brand owner of Hilfiger, Michel Kors etc. He was merely the Canadian importer of the brands to his native country. When Michael Kors was listed on the US Stock Exchange Stroll made his fortune selling some stock that he held. He is an importer and distributor but not a brand owner. With AML he has clearly taken on a challenge that will test his resolve and talent.
Ah thanks, didn't realise that!oilit said:
Has he ever owned a manufacturing business before?
Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
I trust you mean “Morale”Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
Edited by oilit on Thursday 12th May 18:45
I don’t wanna know about the workers dire morals!
Jon39 said:
SSO said:
Per AMLs 2021 Annual report, AML is paying AMR £21 million.
Thank you SSO. That is disgraceful. <clip> Thankyou4calling said:
oilit said:
Has he ever owned a manufacturing business before?
Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
I trust you mean “Morale”Wasn’t ‘Hilfinger’’ fancy branding of a cheap off shore sweat shop product?
If so, then he only cares for the brand, and if you listen that is what he talks about. If he could sub contract the design and manufacture i am sure he would.
This story doesn’t get any better with age.
I feel so sorry for all the workforce who seemed so happy when I did my last tour of the factory, it must be a dire place moral wise.
Edited by oilit on Thursday 12th May 18:45
I don’t wanna know about the workers dire morals!
RichB said:
But right or wrong, that the way sponsorship works Jon. Oracle pay millions to Red Bull, Marlborough would have paid millions to Ferrari and that why AML pays AMR to be headline sponsor of their F1 car.
True Richard, but I thought there might be some differences involved in this instance.
1. - The Racing Point team, now portrays itself as a 'Works' Aston Martin racing team, not headline sponsor basis (as per the previous Red Bull arrangement).
2. - Having the use of the prestigious AM brand name, was clearly the key for Racing Point to obtain many new sponsors.
3. - The worlds most valuable listed company, did not sponsor Racing Point, but they are now sponsoring Aston Martin.
I know money transfer is all electronic these days, but that spoils this joke.
Picture:- Chairman AML writing the (reportedly) £21 million cheque to AMR.
Walks around the desk, changes hat to Owner AMR and fills out the bank paying-in book for (reportedly) £21 million.
Retires to the pub, to celebrate a good days work. -
Jon39 said:
RichB said:
But right or wrong, that the way sponsorship works Jon. Oracle pay millions to Red Bull, Marlborough would have paid millions to Ferrari and that why AML pays AMR to be headline sponsor of their F1 car.
True Richard, but I thought there might be some differences involved in this instance.
1. - The Racing Point team, now portrays itself as a 'Works' Aston Martin racing team, not headline sponsor basis (as per the previous Red Bull arrangement).
2. - Having the use of the prestigious AM brand name, was clearly the key for Racing Point to obtain many new sponsors.
3. - The worlds most valuable listed company, did not sponsor Racing Point, but they are now sponsoring Aston Martin.
I know money transfer is all electronic these days, but that spoils this joke.
Picture:- Chairman AML writing the (reportedly) £21 million cheque to AMR.
Walks around the desk, changes hat to Owner AMR and fills out the bank paying-in book for (reportedly) £21 million.
Retires to the pub, to celebrate a good days work. -
Petrus1983 said:
I don’t agree with it either tbh. Basically - how much do Ferrari road cars pass across to Ferrari F1 per year? That’s a lot closer than mentioning Oracle, INEOS etc. Mercedes’ and Merc F1 seem different again - but each side makes a healthy profit.
There is a fairly big difference... AFAIK Ferrari own all of their F1 team (well Fiat I guess ultimately), so any money they pass between their two companies is simply an internal transfer to where the funds make the most sense.LS owns 25% of AM cars and 100% of AM F1. So he signs the chq to pays the F1 team £1 and it costs himself 25p and everyone else 75p.
Also Ferrari cars makes a healthy profit so can afford to invest in an F1 team, which is well known for being a rich man's folly.
AdamV12V said:
There is a fairly big difference... AFAIK Ferrari own all of their F1 team (well Fiat I guess ultimately), so any money they pass between their two companies is simply an internal transfer to where the funds make the most sense.
LS owns 25% of AM cars and 100% of AM F1. So he signs the chq to pays the F1 team £1 and it costs himself 25p and everyone else 75p.
Also Ferrari cars makes a healthy profit so can afford to invest in an F1 team, which is well known for being a rich man's folly.
Yes - passing money between 2 money making machines held by a single ‘contact’ point makes perfect sense for taxation and revenue streams - but passing £20m+ from a loss making company to a profit making one (which your son drives for) absolutely stinks. I’m surprised the shareholder have been so forgiving. LS owns 25% of AM cars and 100% of AM F1. So he signs the chq to pays the F1 team £1 and it costs himself 25p and everyone else 75p.
Also Ferrari cars makes a healthy profit so can afford to invest in an F1 team, which is well known for being a rich man's folly.
AdamV12V said:
There is a fairly big difference... AFAIK Ferrari own all of their F1 team (well Fiat I guess ultimately), so any money they pass between their two companies is simply an internal transfer to where the funds make the most sense.
LS owns 25% of AM cars and 100% of AM F1. So he signs the chq to pays the F1 team £1 and it costs himself 25p and everyone else 75p.
Also Ferrari cars makes a healthy profit, so can afford to invest in an F1 team, which is well known for being a rich man's folly.
LS owns 25% of AM cars and 100% of AM F1. So he signs the chq to pays the F1 team £1 and it costs himself 25p and everyone else 75p.
Also Ferrari cars makes a healthy profit, so can afford to invest in an F1 team, which is well known for being a rich man's folly.
I have stirred a few people by raising this subject again. We discussed it a long time ago, but now that the amount involved has been disclosed (far higher than we thought), there has been more reaction here.
Ferrari are now independent. I don't know whether Fiat retained a shareholding, but the Fiat group is now part of Stellantis (Peugeot etc.)
Apart from Ferrari (a car business with a race team), the only F1 team that I can remember floating is Williams. The way money is spent in the sport, a listing is not attractive for investors. During 10 years the William's share price went down, but they were then purchased by (I think) a financial firm.
EDIT - LS leads a consortium of investors in AML, so we don't know how much of his personal money is involved.
Edited by Jon39 on Friday 13th May 17:07
Surely there must be something in the Companies Acts which would prevent LS using the funds of a PLC to fund a Formula One Team where his son is one of the two drivers?
It does suggest to me that if AML did not have the £1bn debt to service and the questionable contribution to the F1 team they might actually be a viable concern, albeit one needing constant financial and technological investment.
It does suggest to me that if AML did not have the £1bn debt to service and the questionable contribution to the F1 team they might actually be a viable concern, albeit one needing constant financial and technological investment.
Is this of interest ?
TRANSACTIONS WITH DIRECTORS
During the year ended 31 December 2021, a net marketing expense amounting to £21.5m of sponsorship has been incurred in the normal course of business with AMR GP Limited, an entity indirectly controlled by a member of the Group’s Key Management Personnel. AMR GP and its legal structure is separate to that of the Group and the Group does not have control or significant influence over AMR GP or its affiliates. £0.1m remains due from AMR GP Limited at the balance sheet date. Under the terms of the sponsorship agreement the Group is required to provide one fleet vehicle to the two AMR GP racing drivers free of charge. This arrangement is expected to continue for the life of the contract and is not expected to materially affect the financial position and performance of the Group. One of the racing drivers is an immediate family member of one of the Group’s Key Management Personnel.
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff