Bad news: AM continues with SUV!

[AWV12]

.........and it will be a Mercedes!

See here the sad news: http://www.insideline.com/aston-martin/aston-marti...

[mikey k]

I know AM want to jump on the emerging markets
But a G class donor
That platform makes VH look like science fiction

[George H]

As long as it looks nothing like that it could be ok. If it's released under the Langonda brand I think that will be a good thing too, and hopefully they will change the Cygnet to be under that too! Leaving AM just to make what it does best - big, sporty GTs.

I've never tried the Merc G Class but if the ML is anything to go buy it should be a pretty good platform. I wonder if this is the start of a relationship with Mercedes... maybe a future engine supplier?

[Slarti]

It looks like an Evoque, only not as good.

[StephenP]

Ignore the concept design (which is hideous), since the article suggests it is being substantially reworked.

Regardless of what we might think, this car seems to be a must-have in the range for the Chineses market. If it sells well there and allows Aston Martin to continue building the sort of cars we love, so be it .... the alternative is something I doubt any of us want.

As for the G-Class ... I reckon that's an error in the article. The original car was rumoured to be based on the new version of the GL-Class, which is a totally different (and very capable) luxury beast of a 4x4 ......

2013 GL-Class:

Edited by StephenP on Monday 9th July 23:40

[yeti]

StephenP said:

If it sells well there and allows Aston Martin to continue building the sort of cars we love, so be it .... the alternative is something I doubt any of us want.

Quite. Whatever they need to do to survive is fine by me, as long as they keep making the cars we want!

[EBruce]

yeti said:

Quite. Whatever they need to do to survive is fine by me, as long as they keep making the cars we want!

Could not agree more. Look at what the Cayanne did for Porsches bottom line.

[Neil1300R]

EBruce said:

yeti said:

Quite. Whatever they need to do to survive is fine by me, as long as they keep making the cars we want!

Could not agree more. Look at what the Cayanne did for Porsches bottom line.

Couldnt agree more. Aston hurry up get it made, start selling it and re-invest profits into the sports cars

[AWV12]

EBruce said:

Could not agree more. Look at what the Cayanne did for Porsches bottom line.

The difference is that the Cayman/Boxster is a better car than the "already 45 years the same" 911 (the architecture of the engine, etc is way better in the Cayman because of the mid-mounted engine, if it had the same power as a 911, a Cayman would drive circles around it!).

Better compare it with the Cayenne: a hideous car...........like the Panamera, but both cars saved Porsche (these days Porsche sells much more non-sportcars than sport-cars like the 911 and Cayman).

Edit: Oops, I just see I misread the post of Ebruce so early in the morning.....sorry, I agree......

Edited by AWV12 on Tuesday 10th July 21:11

[Murph7355]

I'm getting bored of Aston's "we have to do <insert st idea here> to survive" stance every time they come up with a half arsed scheme.

What you actually need to do to survive is stop aiming for your cars to be one step behind the premium brand competition in pretty much every area apart from looks and, maybe, price.

Improve your core (there is a lot of room for it) and stop focussing on silly distractions and money wasting opportunities that mean nothing. Learn from your experience on the Cygnet (I'd struggle to believe that made a profit, and regardless the FUD spread around its launch was risable) and even, to an extent, the Rapide (a car I actually quite like but which appears to have missed the target). Also learn about managing your residuals - even if you released the best product ever you don't seem capable of managing residuals which fundamentally ends up making your cars look cheap...not ideal in this sector.

[steveatesh]

Murph7355 said:

I'm getting bored of Aston's "we have to do <insert st idea here> to survive" stance every time they come up with a half arsed scheme.

What you actually need to do to survive is stop aiming for your cars to be one step behind the premium brand competition in pretty much every area apart from looks and, maybe, price.

Improve your core (there is a lot of room for it) and stop focussing on silly distractions and money wasting opportunities that mean nothing. Learn from your experience on the Cygnet (I'd struggle to believe that made a profit, and regardless the FUD spread around its launch was risable) and even, to an extent, the Rapide (a car I actually quite like but which appears to have missed the target). Also learn about managing your residuals - even if you released the best product ever you don't seem capable of managing residuals which fundamentally ends up making your cars look cheap...not ideal in this sector.

All valid points but I am curious as to exactly how they will do all this without a massive injection of funding, especially over a long term? They are an independent car maker without the support of a massive parent company such as VW and their R and D fund is equal to others tea fund money.
The changing face of the world economy indicate that China and other BRIC countries are going to the the next growth areas for luxury cars. Therefore, if AM want to sell cars there, then they have to suit that market. Big SUVs sem to be popular therefore designing and selling such a car would appear to be a good strategic move. If it works then increased profits will ( I hope) be put back into developing the sports cars. Everyone's a winner.

I say go for it, Merc is a good partner, and best of luck

[Jockman]

steveatesh said:

.....Big SUVs sem to be popular therefore designing and selling such a car would appear to be a good strategic move. If it works then increased profits will ( I hope) be put back into developing the sports cars. Everyone's a winner.....

And if it doesn't work Steve ??

Toyota was theoretically a good partner for a small city car. Partnering does mitigate the risk when a company steps out of its core competencies but it is by no means a guarantee of success.

If it doesn't work then everyone's a loser, as much needed resources are drained from other areas.

[steveatesh]

Jockman said:

And if it doesn't work Steve ??

Toyota was theoretically a good partner for a small city car. Partnering does mitigate the risk when a company steps out of its core competencies but it is by no means a guarantee of success.

If it doesn't work then everyone's a loser, as much needed resources are drained from other areas.

I agree totally which is where the business analysis comes in and the development of a good strategy. And of course that is not a black and white thing, it relies on good judgement to a large extent but everything in business is a risk isn't it. Without taking risks you remain where you are, which as we all know means moving backward because others are taking those risks. The fact remains, as has been commented on here many times, that AM needs a strategic partner to continue developing the sports cars to be competitive OR another source of profit. If this type of car is where much of the future money is in then it's probably less of a risk than developing a new sports car for a very competitive, mature ( but fading?) market. In my opinion of course, others are equally as valid.

[Murph7355]

The Chinese Iike riding bikes too. Is Aston going to release a cheap city bike with a rickshaw attachment to tap into the market?

They are finding money to sink into the 4x4, so why not use that money on improving core product? Or improving the Rapide so it hits the spot in China (if that has to be a priority in this way).

Aston are not a big player. They need to start being realistic about volume expectations. How many SUVs are they planning on selling? It would be very interesting to see what their business plans were for the current line up, and how well they did against those projections (not just units, but revenue, cost and profit per unit).

Aston still, more or less, have the brand cachet to compete with Ferrari (the thinking man's alternative perhaps). But they do not have the core product. People will cite the backing of Fiat, but I'm not convinced. I am pretty sure their road car division is in rude health without the need for selling SUVs to China etc. I'd much sooner see Aston aim for that sort of business model thank sink to the Porsche one.

[George H]

Murph7355 said:

The Chinese Iike riding bikes too. Is Aston going to release a cheap city bike with a rickshaw attachment to tap into the market?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[Jockman]

steveatesh said:

I agree totally which is where the business analysis comes in and the development of a good strategy. And of course that is not a black and white thing, it relies on good judgement to a large extent but everything in business is a risk isn't it. Without taking risks you remain where you are, which as we all know means moving backward because others are taking those risks. The fact remains, as has been commented on here many times, that AM needs a strategic partner to continue developing the sports cars to be competitive OR another source of profit. If this type of car is where much of the future money is in then it's probably less of a risk than developing a new sports car for a very competitive, mature ( but fading?) market. In my opinion of course, others are equally as valid.

Yup, I'm with you on many points Steve.

Will AM really be standing still if it does not proceed with this project or are there other ones in the pipeline ??

From what I see of the finances, turnover and profitability are much healthier since the bad old days. The Company must be prudent in spending these revenues

[steveatesh]

Murph7355 said:

They are finding money to sink into the 4x4, so why not use that money on improving core product? Or improving the Rapide so it hits the spot in China (if that has to be a priority in this way).

Aston are not a big player.

Presumably because the Board think that developing an SUV for a different market will be less risk and more profitable than using those resources on improving current models. I think they are in between a rock and a hard place. If they release a "new model" they are criticised for it not being new enough and too similar to existing models. How long do they carry on improving core models before people say its about time they introduced a brand new one?

I'm not disagreeing with you,I just think they are taking the view that they can make more profit this way which they can then put into new sports cars, whereas people with money to invest in the current set up are not forming long queues.

[Zod]

If Aston Martin can release an SUV that looks good and drives well at a price point at which it brings in sufficient profit (don't know whether that means Cayenne level or ugly Bentley SUV level), then it can only be good for the cars we love.

[mikey k]

steveatesh said:

Murph7355 said:

They are finding money to sink into the 4x4, so why not use that money on improving core product? Or improving the Rapide so it hits the spot in China (if that has to be a priority in this way).

Aston are not a big player.

Presumably because the Board think that developing an SUV for a different market will be less risk and more profitable than using those resources on improving current models. I think they are in between a rock and a hard place. If they release a "new model" they are criticised for it not being new enough and too similar to existing models. How long do they carry on improving core models before people say its about time they introduced a brand new one?

I'm not disagreeing with you,I just think they are taking the view that they can make more profit this way which they can then put into new sports cars, whereas people with money to invest in the current set up are not forming long queues.

This
But;
1) who knows if it will work
2) are the SUV, luxury sedan or high end city car markets sustainable?
3) will Dr Bez put any of the profit back in to R&D & production of AM core products (I doubt it)

ATEOD AM's driver is to provide return on the owners investments, unfortunately it seems at the price of brand integrity
I suspect there are many first time owners who will not become regular customers because of these factors

[Murph7355]

I suppose we'll see, as ever. But their recent track record doesn't give warm feelings.