AML - Stock Market Listing

[Jon39]

JohnG1 said:

hornbaek said:

...I think that it will eventually be taken off the stock exchange in some debt / equity swap once AML defaults on its debt repayments. It is clearly too highly geared...

+1, spot on...

It is all very puzzling.

Could it be that InvestIndustrial (private equity funds) vetoed any fund raising during the IPO, because it would have diluted their holding ? Fund raising in that way would not have required any interest payments.

Even though the debt (bond issues) has always seemed gigantic, we now see even more bond debt being taken on, this time at 12%. A rights issue now is probably impossible because of the share price decline.

In 2017, when the previous major debt was refinanced it worked well, because the interest rate was reduced (to 6.5%). The major date when all three bonds are repayable, is 15th April 2022. Hopefully by then the DBX will be a big winner.

The market value is now not far above the total debt figure.

Edited by Jon39 on Thursday 10th October 10:34

[cardigankid]

But what fantastic cars, and that is where it has to start. Anyway, it appears they are not making money now either.

[hornbaek]

Jon39 said:

"It is all very puzzling.

Could it be that InvestIndustrial (private equity funds) vetoed any fund raising during the IPO, because it would have diluted their holding ? Fund raising in that way would not have required any interest payments."

It is always a trade off between issuing new shares or selling existing ones as the market can only absorb a certain amount in total. So the answer to your question is not whether the vetoed anything (they didn't need to as they own the business) but they negotiated with the banks how much they could sell at a given price. The bank is arbitartor of a succesfull stock market flotation and a healthy aftermarket. Since InvestIndustrial had more shares to sell subsequently one would have thought that they would have cared more about the aftermarket. Now they are in a catch 22 position. They have cashed in initially, but since they still remain shareholder they are suffering with their remaining shares and booking a heafty loss with nowwhere to go. Its unlikely that they will pour new money into the company so they will either do a heavy dilluted new share issue but even dilluted to almost zero it would not fly, or just wait until the debtholders will eventually move if AML does not keep up with interest payments. The Board are the biggest culprits in this shamefull exercise and they should all go.

Edited by Jon39 on Thursday 10th October 10:34

[mrobin33]

cardigankid said:

The day of the cottage industry supercar is over.

Disagree. Small scale design and manufacture is becoming increasingly viable with CNC, carbon fiber and even 3D printing, and sourcing ‘commodity’ performance parts is easy. I’ve said it before but I strongly believe the brand can support much higher prices for rarer niche products - as proven in the success of its special editions. The One-77 was not made in Gaydon?

Look at Koenigsegg and Pagani and other emerging supercar makers.

I personally would pay twice current list prices for more individual bespoke cars made in the 100’s not 1000’s.

[GingerMunky]

It does look like a share dilution will be the inevitable result in 2022 when the bonds are due, the size of which will be dictated by the DBX success. So much was riding on the success of the DBX already, unfortunately this dependency just seem to be increasing

[cardigankid]

mrobin33 said:

cardigankid said:

The day of the cottage industry supercar is over.

Disagree. Small scale design and manufacture is becoming increasingly viable with CNC, carbon fiber and even 3D printing, and sourcing ‘commodity’ performance parts is easy. I’ve said it before but I strongly believe the brand can support much higher prices for rarer niche products - as proven in the success of its special editions. The One-77 was not made in Gaydon?

Look at Koenigsegg and Pagani and other emerging supercar makers.

I personally would pay twice current list prices for more individual bespoke cars made in the 100’s not 1000’s.

I'm delighted to hear it if it is true, but given the complexity of the systems in a modern motor vehicle, safety testing etc. I have my doubts. I can see it in Ariel Atom, indeed, its on my list, though it is almost a kit car. Do I have the same expection of safety standards in an Ariel Atom, or say a Morgan, that I do in an Aston Martin or a McLaren? No. And would I buy a Koenigsegg? I'm not sure what it would give me over a McLaren 600LT. In other words, it may be very rare, it may be very powerful, but is it really any good? What does Koenigasegg know that BMW doesn't? Not a lot I suspect. I hardly think that they are emerging either - Pagani and Koenigsegg have been around for a long time. And where are they going?

If it were true though, surely then the way forward is for Aston Martin to shed all unnecessary staff and focus on the core people they need to produce the cars. What do they need a gigantic fk-off headquarters at Gaydon for? Do they really need a load of directors, accountants, corporate image specialists and marketing wonks to service a small number of enthusiastic customers? Do they need Andy Palmer? I'm guessing no.

[pschlute]

cardigankid said:

But what fantastic cars, and that is where it has to start. Anyway, it appears they are not making money now either.

That has always been pencilled in on their tombstone.

[DickyC]

pschlute said:

cardigankid said:

But what fantastic cars, and that is where it has to start. Anyway, it appears they are not making money now either.

That has always been pencilled in on their tombstone.

Stop me if you've heard it but a pal of David Brown asked if he could have a car at cost price. David Brown said yes. The car was built and delivered and the chap was charged more than retail price.

[Ken Figenus]

GingerMunky said:

It does look like a share dilution will be the inevitable result in 2022 when the bonds are due, the size of which will be dictated by the DBX success. So much was riding on the success of the DBX already, unfortunately this dependency just seem to be increasing

The Vantage too should be making them good money as its the highest volume 'entry level' seller in the range historically. Does anyone have any sales figures?

[Jon39]

Ken Figenus said:

The Vantage too should be making them good money as its the highest volume 'entry level' seller in the range historically. Does anyone have any sales figures?

Yes, a very important model, for the reasons you have given.
I was reprimanded by other PHers for posting new Vantage UK sales figures.
If you want to though, anyone can see them on a DVLA webpage, split between each model.

It is therefore best only to say, there is a significant difference in the initial UK sales of Vantage gen 1 and Vantage gen 2.

[Ken Figenus]

?

[Jon39]

I have just entered the first half year UK figures into my spreadsheet, for the initial full production year, Vantage gen 1 & gen 2.
Also DB9 & DB11 (third full year of production).

Do you want to know?

Edited by Jon39 on Saturday 12th October 21:28

[DickyC]

Jon39 said:

I have just entered the first half year UK figures into my spreadsheet, for the initial full production year, Vantage gen 1 & gen 2.
Also DB9 & DB11 (third full year of production).

Do you want to know?

Should be standing on the ledge with the phone wire round my neck?

[Venturist]

Jon39 said:

I have just entered the first half year UK figures into my spreadsheet, for the initial full production year, Vantage gen 1 & gen 2.
Also DB9 & DB11 (third full year of production).

Do you want to know?

Do enlighten us, it would be very interesting to hear either it’s all rosy despite naysayers on here, OR that it’s all doom and gloom. Facts are interesting!
Could perhaps also include reference data from competitor products in the same sector for comparison?

Edited by Jon39 on Saturday 12th October 21:28

[Cheib]

Haven’t really been following this closely.....like many I thought the IPO pricing was ludicrous. I can’t really see this ending anything but badly now....debt is rated CCC “triple hooks” which implies something like a 50% chance of it defaulting. It’s last chance saloon as fas as credit ratings go...the next is D. Not many companies come back from where their balance sheet is now. They have little or no wiggle room so cannot afford any mistakes and unfortunately are totally at the whim of the market and as we all know the car market is in a bad way.

I think the real problem is that the only manufacturer that could buy them is Daimler AG....they clearly supply a large part of the current cars engineering and I am sure that supply agreement has a Change of Control clause (almost certain I would think) so no other manufacturer could easily buy them. Someone else could of course but maybe Daimler are just playing the long game and waiting to buy them on the cheap....they could pretty much name their price in bankruptcy as I think the receiver would be under heavy pressure to keep people in jobs and they are the only company that guarantee that.

[Ken Figenus]

Jon39 said:

I have just entered the first half year UK figures into my spreadsheet, for the initial full production year, Vantage gen 1 & gen 2.
Also DB9 & DB11 (third full year of production).

Do you want to know?

You are making us suffer with
an
ti
ci
pa
ti
on

Facts speak for themselves... Go Jon!

[Jon39]

Sorry for the delay. I find the forum entertaining, but life is always busy.
Here goes then. Tin hats on, stand by for flak.

I get the figures from the DVLA quarterly publications. They may, or may not be correct.
DVLA list one Aston Martin model as 'Missing', with 33 new cars, so goodness knows what that means !

The figures are new registrations for the first two quarters of 2019. Would presumably therefore include dealer demonstrators, AML staff cars, press cars etc.


Vantage (gen 2) - 2019 Q1 = 181
Vantage (gen 2) - 2019 Q2 = 103

DB11 - 2019 Q1 = 148
DB11 - 2019 Q2 = 107


I have been criticised for drawing a comparison with the two previous models of these cars.
Quite rightly the sports car market has changed (eg McLaren are competitors), but AP has said his business plan aims to resolve the boom and bust problems of the past.
As two of the present three core models, the Vantage is positioned as the volume seller and the DB11 the luxurious GT.
In the Ford and Dr Bez era, it was exactly the same with Vantage and DB9, so I think a comparison with previous success is still a fair thing to do. What is your opinion?

The gen 2 Vantage is now in its first full year of production.
The DB11 is now in its third year of production.
Looking back at exactly the same periods of production the figures are;


Vantage (gen 1) - 2006 Q1 = 434
Vantage (gen 1) - 2006 Q2 = 336

DB9 - 2007 Q1 = 293
DB9 - 2007 Q2 = 236


Please always remember this is UK only, which is roughly 20% of production.

[Venturist]

Interesting, a good comparison would be Bentley Continental GT old vs new, to give some perspective on the market as a whole?

[anonymous-user]

Interesting jon.

Would anyone here be able to comment on the % of total production utilization for both periods? For me the view is that AML were at capacity for the early life of the 1st gen vantage, very different story now? In a capital intensive sector this must be critical to achieve any reasonable ROI?

[Dewi 2]

Venturist said:

Interesting, a good comparison would be Bentley Continental GT old vs new, to give some perspective on the market as a whole?

You can easily obtain the answer to your question.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-set...
The data set to download is VEH0160