AML - Stock Market Listing

AML - Stock Market Listing

Author
Discussion

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all

I suppose there is quite a personal incentive, for him to keep AML going.
Would his major team sponsors continue their support, without the Aston Martin name ?


GreasyHands

153 posts

31 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
If I remember, AML was paying 20MM/year to sponsor winning “Aston Martin Red Bull”, now they pay 21MM to sponsor losing “Aston Martin Cognizant”.

We all know this is a fake “ works” team. All AML has really done is payed a few more dollars to support a losing team. How can this be good marketing. Aston Martin could have been associated with the winning F1 team rather than some also ran team. (full disclosure. I don’t know squat about F1 but I stayed a Red Bull fan even if I own an Aston Martin, LOL)

In a just world, the person making the decision to sponsor a losing team over a winning team for “marketing” purposes would be fired. We know who that would be,

Don’t even need to mention the myriad conflicts of interests stink to high heaven. The potential conflicts are so obvious that shareholders deserve be screwed for profligate stupidity.

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all

About 140 jobs being advertised in the AML website.

Including positions at Remshalden, Germany. 
Does anyone know what that is all about ?

'In line with our exciting future projects, we are searching for talented Engineers with previous Powertrain experience, to join our expanding team at our new facility at Remshalden, Germany. 




cardigankid

8,849 posts

212 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
Jon39 said:

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.

Do the facts that he has disclosed this transaction, and that the other directors are too chicken to call him out on it, mean that he and they immune from shareholder action? Do we not have any corporate lawyers on here or are they all in the Porsche section?

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all

Sorry Dieter , I did not make it clear.
That extract is from the 2021 Report and Accounts.

(Now that those reports are available in pdf format, we can search for all sorts of details quickly.)

Nothing untoward, but interesting to see in writing, AML's cost for the sponsorship.

If you would like to have a printed copy (might become an item of history), you can request the registrars (Equiniti) to post it to you.


Simpo Two

85,404 posts

265 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
Jon39 said:
Nothing untoward, but interesting to see in writing, AML's cost for the sponsorship.
Sponsorship to me has one of two purposes. Either you do it because it makes you more money than you spend on it, or it's a loss but you do it to build brand awareness.

Aston Martin already has more brand awareness that it can handle. And having the logo stuck on a second-rate F1 team certainly isn't boosting sales to make an extra 21M profit (how many Astons do you need to sell to get that?)

And so we come to the third reason for sponsorship - personal folly. I can't blame Stroll Sr for setting it up; he's an entrepreneur. Objectives are ego and money, I understand that. What I question and fail to understand is the motives/intelligence of the person or people who, when presented with this 'opportunity', said 'Gurr, where do I sign?'

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all

I guess it was just part of the package, which was offered at the time to rescue AML.

Shall we try to imagine the conversation? - smile

LS. "Do you want my consortium's money, my existing established close relationship with Mercedes-Benz and the ability to link Aston Martin as a works team, to the valuable thrills and excitement of Formula One racing?. Think what billions of views will do, to propel your sales to record levels. The alternative is to let boring Geeley attempt to run your famous British brand. You have declined Mahindra once already.

You know my offer makes sense and is by far the best available.
Aston Martin powers Formula One.

Aston Martin powered by Geely; James Bond powered by Mahindra. Just doesn't have an ultra-luxury association at all.

Sign here. You can read the details later."


GreasyHands

153 posts

31 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
AdamV12V said:
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.
Not to be a Donny Downer, but the 2021 Annual report has Stroll owning 22.02% which includes the 16.98% owned by Yew Tree (which I'm guessing Stroll is the Managing Partner) Unlikely Stroll owns 100% of Yew Tree, in fact, it is clear he doesn't. I don't have a number of what exactly he does own but he doesn't even have to be >50% owner to still have control of Yew Tree. Stroll could personally have as little as 5% equity interest of the shares of AML and still have the 22% voting interest.

So instead of 25p for LS and 75P for everybody else it could be close to 10p for LS and 90p everybody else.

At least he's not collecting a salary...yet....

Beckson

371 posts

51 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
How could he have such a low % ownership and have control of AML? - did he get special preferred shares or a different stock class with 10-to-1 voting rights or something ?

that's how a lot of the big tech firms manage dilution while keeping the founding team in command, basically a Class B stock or whatever with massive increase in voting power.

GreasyHands

153 posts

31 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
Yew Tree is an investor group that has voting shares in AML. Stroll has control,over that group regardless of his personal financial interest. Yes, he has a fiduciary responsibility to the other equity interests in Yew Tree but the economics can be quite skewed. ( Using US logic so caveat emptor).

GreasyHands

153 posts

31 months

Thursday 19th May 2022
quotequote all
Oh…maybe you meant why is LS’s influence greater than the 22%? IIRC, there was also a loan involved from Yew Tree coincident with the equity investment. Not sure what the other side agreements were. I’m only a casually observer here. ( I have enough problem investments in Russia and China, no need to go down some rabbit hole in the U.K.smile

cardigankid

8,849 posts

212 months

Friday 20th May 2022
quotequote all
This is a very minor point, but relates to the relevance of F1 to AML. I foolishly signed up to receive TikTok messages from the Aramco Cognizant Aston Martin F1 team, thinking this would be interesting behind the scenes stuff with insights from key personalities. In fact it is 100% teenage baseball cap Pepsi swilling drivel. Much like the rest of TikTok actually. Is this aimed at Aston Martin's target market?

Agent57

1,654 posts

154 months

Friday 20th May 2022
quotequote all
cardigankid said:
Much like the rest of TikTok actually. Is this aimed at Aston Martin's target market?
I don't use Tik Tok, but maybe AM are playing the long game to catch them when they are young so they buy in 30-40 years time?

Not sure what that does for the share price today though....

I guess AM will take money from any baseball cap wearing celebrity chav.

If it were me, I would put up a sign saying 'No riff-raff' biggrin

Edited by Agent57 on Friday 20th May 09:38


Edited by Agent57 on Friday 20th May 09:39

oilit

2,625 posts

178 months

Friday 20th May 2022
quotequote all
I think you will find - respectfully - that those of us that don’t use/like using facebook/twitter/tiktok etc and berate linkedin for allowing personal posts are yesterdays news.

The future generation have a different lens on a lot of things, and just because we think its mad, doesn't mean it is mad… (i do btw think its mad!)

Edited by oilit on Friday 20th May 13:29

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Friday 20th May 2022
quotequote all

oilit said:
I think you will find - respectfully - that those of us that don’t use/like using facebook/twitter/tiktok etc and berate linkedin for allowing personal posts are yesterdays news.

The future generation have a different lens on a lot of things, and just because we think its mad, doesn't mean it is mad… (i do btw think its mad!)

My very limited experience of 'social media', is that on this forum we are always very polite to each other.
My occasional visits elsewhere though, often soon reveal that personal attacks by contributors on each other are quite common.

A couple of restricted Facebook groups that I visit (don't know about AM groups) seem reasonable, although one is a bit 'parish council'. The person in charge of the group, keeps preaching to everyone, that they are only allowed to advertise on Fridays. After one of the great storms a few months ago, a villager offered (not a Friday) their services to help. The busybody then posted, 'Advertising is only permitted on Fridays. I will only allow the advert on this occasion, because of the special circumstances'.

smile




cardigankid

8,849 posts

212 months

Friday 20th May 2022
quotequote all
Jon39 said:

My very limited experience of 'social media', is that on this forum we are always very polite to each other.
My occasional visits elsewhere though, often soon reveal that personal attacks by contributors on each other are quite common.

smile

Anything like that on here and you would be kicked out instantly!

Jon39

Original Poster:

12,826 posts

143 months

Monday 23rd May 2022
quotequote all

I came across the IPO Prospectus again today.

'Prospective investors should be aware that an investment in the Company involves a degree of risk and that, if one or more of the risks described in the Prospectus were to occur, investors may find that their investment is materially adversely affected. Accordingly, an investment in the Shares is only suitable for investors who are knowledgeable in investment matters and who are able to bear the loss of the whole or part of their investment.'

The wording of this statement is fairly standard for such documents, but with 96% of an original investment now lost, their warning appeara almost inspired.


Thankyou4calling

10,602 posts

173 months

Monday 23rd May 2022
quotequote all
The shares closed at 672 today which is as close to an all time low as makes no difference.

They’ll fall further though I’m afraid.

12TS

1,833 posts

210 months

Tuesday 24th May 2022
quotequote all
Currently 642

oilit

2,625 posts

178 months

Tuesday 24th May 2022
quotequote all
I assume that all the execs who have been on the exit side of the revolving door must be offloading their holdings along with general market conditions and the AM performance specifically.

Is MB allowed to sell their holding at anytime - do they hold the same classification of stock as a retail investor?