Reports yesterday evening from Reuters suggest that Indian commercial vehicle and tractor maker Mahindra and Mahindra may win the race to buy a 50 per cent stake in Aston Martin by the end of the week. This potential deal is causing much amusement in financial circles. What would a tractor maker want with a smaller supercar maker?
There is a lovely circularity about the Mahindra deal, as is being pointed out. Aston Martin’s post-war owner David Brown (who bought the company in 1948) made his money in designing tractors. Ferruccio Lamborghini started in tractor manufacturing in 1948 and started his supercar company in 1963. Ferdinand Porsche also designed a range of tractors in the 1930s, alongside his work developing the People’s Car.
According to the Reuter’s source, the Mahindra deal could see as much as £250m being exchanged for a 50 per cent stake in the company. While Aston banked £72m in profits on around 4200 sales last time around, it is clear that it cannot go on forever tweaking the VH platform and elegantly re-cycling the styling theme established with the 2003 DB9, especially with new pollution, emissions and safety laws on the way.
Join the debate
Londonist
Looks grim
At least 99.99% of investors aren't interested in prestige, not for very long anyway; nor can the vast majority of them actually afford what is needed to enable a car company truly to develop its products rather than simply tweaking them around the edges before passing on the stock.
disco.stu
The real message here
I think that the real take-away message here is that there seems to have always been demonstrably more money in making tractors than sports cars...
www.TheCarExpert.co.uk
artill
We shouldnt forget what David
We shouldnt forget what David Brown made as well as Astons. Perhaps they need the support of a tractor maker!
Peter Cavellini
More developement cash?
Certainly hope so, been stuck with the basic shape of the DB9 for too long.
Peter Cavellini.
PhilM4000
Copy Porsche
What is for sale other than the brand? Not sure how many patents and technical elements innovation there are for sale but I bet the revenues have topped out without new investment. To get more revenue Aston needs to compete in more segments. That Cygnet disaster was an utter waste of time.
A few companies could make a real go of Aston, either Tata, VAG, BMW or maybe Mercedes. All could quickly bring to market a smaller Aston and a 4x4. Maybe releasing these rumours is just an angle to get Tata interested. I can't see a Tractor Manufacturer adding any technical know how other than electronics, gearbox and supply chain.
Londonist
Reality bites
It's been an open secret for a long time that the company is for sale - of course they all are if the money is right - and knowing this the likes of 'Tata, VAG, BMW or maybe Mercedes' have chosen not to engage. Anyone one of them could probably make a go of Lotus as well, but they don't want to do that either. It must be as simple as that, and so presumably Aston will limp on until until the next big upheaval, just as it has countless times before over the last 99 years.
gussy51
More models needed!
I think the idea that Aston Martin couldn't sell more cars a little ridiculous. In a world of 200,000 Porsches and 50,000 Maseratis being produced annually I think Aston could realistically increase sales without sacrificing too much exclusivity. The current cars are all very similar, but if the entry level model became closer in specification to the Porsche Boxster but at a premium price (F-Type???) and there was a Rapide spin off that reasonably sized adults could use i.e. longer wheelbase and raised roofline (which would sell better in China), then they could easily double if not triple sales without sacrificing their image.
Lets face it both those suggestions would be much less controversial than the Cygnet or the Lagonda SUV concept, and could use a heavily revised version of the current platform. I see the big problem being engines for Aston Martin, however a new entry level model or Aston limo could easily use retuned bought in engines (BMW straight 6 perhaps?) and I think even the top of the line models could use bought in engines if they are fettled enough to justify their price tag.
Aston Martin should strive to stand for the ultimate in design, craftsmanship and modern construction methods to remain relevent. Unlike a Ferrari owner Aston owners I would suspect are only interested in the engine if it does its job, its not the main reason for buying the car.
Maxecat
Rich mens toys
Supercar makers have always been the toys of the very rich be they individuals or company executives using their shareholders money to play.
Has any supercar manufacturer ever made money longterm out of ownership.
I suppose owning a supercar manufacturer is just like owning one of their products, a very expensive experience that gives the owner elevated bragging rights or satisfaction depending upon your point of view.
maxecat
Londonist
The trouble with that theory...
...is that whereas the products are very expensive to run the process of developing and building them is now very, very, very expensive to run. Many times more so, I would have said, than in the relatively simple 1960s when tractor tycoons could have a flutter and achieve something solid.
kcrally
Maybe they could rebrand
Maybe they could rebrand Aston Martin.
www.KOOOLcr.com
Pages
Add your comment