Fairline to loose 85 jobs

[Marsupial]

I can't see that you can compare even a fairly high end car with a high end boat. I don't know how many 5 series or A6's are made each year but I bet it's a fair few and, with the exception of the M5 and RS6, they're turned out by highly efficient factories with a fortune invested in the machinery. Process and QC are paramount but the labour has been reduced to a minimum, parts are shared across thousands of models a year with the price driven right down to clever negotiating from a position of strength, and, because of JIT, inventory is kept to a minimum. Compare that to say the Targa's below 60' and we're looking at maybe managing to use a few tricks to make things more efficient but basically it's nearly all skilled or semi-skilled labour and specialised parts. Even things like door handles tend to be produced in very small quantities and there has to be room for some customisation even at this level. The customer won't just tick the air-con box for example; he might take the default or he might even specify a particular genset and air-con. I'd have thought a huge amount of the reason cars have got comparatively cheaper whilst boats have got more expensive is down to a simple inability to utilise modern mass product manufacturing techniques.

The benneteau/jeanneau, et al group build around 15000 hulls a year (I last had accurate data in 2007 hasn't changed much (apparently)) and houses and camper vans etc etc. They use lots of common components, across all their ranges including wood mouldings, grp mouldings and hardware above and below deck. Their big competitive advantage is their joinery manufacturing techniques including their varnishing methods, and last but not least their modern mass production technique for producing hulls and decks.

Its a huge risk as they MUST produce (and of course sell) high volumes to justify the investment - but so far its working; without massive investment UK yards will find it hard to compete, its an old story - the same thing happened to the UK sporting gun industry - you might want to read about Purdey and Holland and Holland and how they succumbed to the Spanish and Italian makers.

And then there's Bavaira . . . .

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

The bit about the Aston Martin Cygnet being "to do with some emissions law" is, whilst a commonly held belief/justification, completely untrue also.

I'm afraid that is true. The Cygnet was specifically introduced by Aston in order to meet forthcoming EU regulations regarding average emissions across a manufacturers range. The reason that Ferrari and Lambo didn't have to do this is that they are part of a bigger parent co which means their emissions are averaged across the whole Fiat and VW/Audi ranges. Grossly unfair on Aston but that's the stupidity of green politics

 

[yesod]

The bit about the Aston Martin Cygnet being "to do with some emissions law" is, whilst a commonly held belief/justification, completely untrue also.

Each manufacturer gets an individual annual target based on the average mass of all its new cars registered in the EU in a given year. As of 2012, manufacturers must ensure that 65% of the new cars registered in the EU each year have average emissions that are below their respective targets. The percentage rises to 75% in 2013, 80% in 2014 and 100% in 2015.

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars/faq_en.htm

 

[ari]

As I say, a commonly held misconception!

The threshold beyond where group average emissions need to be satisfied is 10,000 cars a year. Aston Martin are way below that.

From the chief executive Ulrich Bez himself (whilst trying to defend the disastrous Cygnet):

He also rejected suggestions the Cygnet was conceived purely to help Aston Martin lower its emissions average across its range to meet strict new European targets.

"I don't need the Cygnet to make my fleet [average] go down," he says. "We have reduced our fleet [emissions] average in the past three years by 27 per cent, we are meeting our European and American requirements for small manufacturers. We have different targets to large manufacturers.

 

[yesod]

As I say, a commonly held misconception!

The threshold beyond where group average emissions need to be satisfied is 10,000 cars a year. Aston Martin are way below that.

below 10k, they have to either pool with other manufacturers, or get an individual quota (which is never going to go up, is it!).

of course they'd say its not to do with that - hardly helps marketing the car. can't find many in the industry who believe that its not related though.

 

[DAKA]

"I don't need the Cygnet to make my fleet [average] go down," he says. "We have reduced our fleet [emissions] average in the past three years by 27 per cent, we are meeting our European and American requirements for small manufacturers. We have different targets to large manufacturers.[/i]

but he didnt confirm that he knew they would meet the small producer targets at the time when he planned the cygnet.

Or perhaps I am too cynical after reading so many carefully worded forum posts

 

[ari]

The Cygnet was simply a very profitable car, had anyone been daft enough to buy it.

There was more profit in selling a Cygnet than a £90K Vantage!

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

As I say, a commonly held misconception!

The threshold beyond where group average emissions need to be satisfied is 10,000 cars a year. Aston Martin are way below that.

From the chief executive Ulrich Bez himself (whilst trying to defend the disastrous Cygnet):

He also rejected suggestions the Cygnet was conceived purely to help Aston Martin lower its emissions average across its range to meet strict new European targets.

"I don't need the Cygnet to make my fleet [average] go down," he says. "We have reduced our fleet [emissions] average in the past three years by 27 per cent, we are meeting our European and American requirements for small manufacturers. We have different targets to large manufacturers.

What, you're saying the reports in every single car magazine are wrong and you're right? Here's the man himself explaining that emissions was a major driver of the Cygnet development http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/268417/aston_martin_cygnet.html
He may well have changed his tune since then but that doesn't alter the fact that the Cygnet was developed with EU emissions targets in mind. Why else would A-M compromise it's brand with such a crappy little car?

 

[ari]

What, you're saying the reports in every single car magazine are wrong and you're right? Here's the man himself explaining that emissions was a major driver of the Cygnet development http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/268417/aston_martin_cygnet.html

At no point in that video does he mention meeting EU (or any other areas) emissions regulations. He talks about "respecting emissions and space" but that's just justification for trying to profit out of such a horrible little car. There are no "space" regulations he needs to meet, nor are there emissions regulations.

He may well have changed his tune since then but that doesn't alter the fact that the Cygnet was developed with EU emissions targets in mind. Why else would A-M compromise it's brand with such a crappy little car?

Potential profit.

 

[ari]

What, you're saying the reports in every single car magazine are wrong and you're right?

Not the informed ones...

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Commun...-Aston-Martin-Cygnet-is-wrong-by-Gavin-Green/

Then I tried to rationalise it. It wasn’t easy.

Theory one: Things are so desperate at Aston Martin that the only way to financial survival is to sell rebadged Toyotas. This is a foolish strategy but I can just imagine some Aston investor, somewhere, salivating at the juicy profits from premium pricing Toyotas and then pumping them out of Gaydon like upmarket sausages. Imagine the mark-up! But apparently not. Volumes of the Toyota Martin will be just 1000-2000 cars a year, surprisingly less than even the DB9.

Theory two: Maybe this is a clever way to boost Aston’s green government credentials, a big issue when your corporate CO2 average is about the same as Boeing’s? No, that’s not the reason, said the helpful Aston Martin PR: Aston is confident of an exemption from punitive new CO2 rules owing to its teeny size.

I’m afraid I ran out of excuses after that.

The reason for the Aston iQ (surely it should be the Aston Dolt?) is that 25-30% of Aston customers in Europe also apparently have a small car (mostly Minis, I suspect). So why not try to sell them a small Aston? By the same logic, 100% of Aston Martin owners also own toilets, so why not market a leather-handled loo brush?

Well if this is the way Aston Martin’s bosses are now going to look after the most hallowed name in English sports motoring, a brand we all know and love, then I have some advice for these customers. Instead of buying one of these preposterous overpriced Aston Cygnets, just buy a normal Toyota iQ and save £10,000. Then, unless the company sees sense, sell the Aston coupé and buy a Ferrari.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Not the informed ones...

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Commun...-Aston-Martin-Cygnet-is-wrong-by-Gavin-Green/

Nothing in there to say Theory 2 is not correct. Do you really think that A-M would badge engineer a little Toyota just to boost profits? The article even suggests that Cygnet volumes at 1000-2000 per year would be less than DB9 volumes so tell me, exactly where is the profit in that? These guys are not stupid you know. Anyway, if you want to believe Theory 1 thats absolutely fine by me, I will go with Theory 2

 

[vas]

Instead of buying one of these preposterous overpriced Aston Cygnets, just buy a normal Toyota iQ and save £10,000. Then, unless the company sees sense, sell the Aston coupé and buy a Ferrari.

and then sell the iQ and buy a decent cinque abarth
pranching horses go well with scorpions...

 

[rafiki_]

Not the informed ones...

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Commun...-Aston-Martin-Cygnet-is-wrong-by-Gavin-Green/

Then I tried to rationalise it. It wasn’t easy.

Theory one: Things are so desperate at Aston Martin that the only way to financial survival is to sell rebadged Toyotas. This is a foolish strategy but I can just imagine some Aston investor, somewhere, salivating at the juicy profits from premium pricing Toyotas and then pumping them out of Gaydon like upmarket sausages. Imagine the mark-up! But apparently not. Volumes of the Toyota Martin will be just 1000-2000 cars a year, surprisingly less than even the DB9.

Theory two: Maybe this is a clever way to boost Aston’s green government credentials, a big issue when your corporate CO2 average is about the same as Boeing’s? No, that’s not the reason, said the helpful Aston Martin PR: Aston is confident of an exemption from punitive new CO2 rules owing to its teeny size.

I’m afraid I ran out of excuses after that.

The reason for the Aston iQ (surely it should be the Aston Dolt?) is that 25-30% of Aston customers in Europe also apparently have a small car (mostly Minis, I suspect). So why not try to sell them a small Aston? By the same logic, 100% of Aston Martin owners also own toilets, so why not market a leather-handled loo brush?

Well if this is the way Aston Martin’s bosses are now going to look after the most hallowed name in English sports motoring, a brand we all know and love, then I have some advice for these customers. Instead of buying one of these preposterous overpriced Aston Cygnets, just buy a normal Toyota iQ and save £10,000. Then, unless the company sees sense, sell the Aston coupé and buy a Ferrari.

The whole profitability thing with the Cygnet has taken a huge hit with the strength of the Yen, now some 20% ish stronger than when the business case was approved. The base vehicle of course being Japanese built.

AM has struggled more than most in the wake of the GFC, as it had geared itself to sell 7000 cars a year, and has struggled to sell half of this. The Rapide has been a problem, and the only sales success has been the 177.

The VH platform is now 10 years old, and as an independent, AM will need to fund the replacement on its own. It cannot afford to do so, so is trying to keep the current product fresh. The Cygnet was a low investment story, and did a good job af retaining interest in the company. Hey, we have drifted a long way west from the OP discussing it.

 

[ari]

Nothing in there to say Theory 2 is not correct. Do you really think that A-M would badge engineer a little Toyota just to boost profits? The article even suggests that Cygnet volumes at 1000-2000 per year would be less than DB9 volumes so tell me, exactly where is the profit in that? These guys are not stupid you know. Anyway, if you want to believe Theory 1 thats absolutely fine by me, I will go with Theory 2

Well I'll believe the chief executive of Aston Martin, who's said so publicly on several occasions, and their PR department, and the fact that Aston Martin are well below the volumes where an across the board average is required, and you can believe what you read in the popular press, how about that?

 

[ari]

The whole profitability thing with the Cygnet has taken a huge hit with the strength of the Yen, now some 20% ish stronger than when the business case was approved. The base vehicle of course being Japanese built.

AM has struggled more than most in the wake of the GFC, as it had geared itself to sell 7000 cars a year, and has struggled to sell half of this. The Rapide has been a problem, and the only sales success has been the 177.

The VH platform is now 10 years old, and as an independent, AM will need to fund the replacement on its own. It cannot afford to do so, so is trying to keep the current product fresh. The Cygnet was a low investment story, and did a good job af retaining interest in the company. Hey, we have drifted a long way west from the OP discussing it.

Indeed, that makes perfect sense and I can understand totally why they did it. With such a focused product range (all their cars are just bigger/smaller slices of the same thing) I can completely understand why they would look to try and create a completely different (and very profitable) product during the challenging times we're in.

Unfortunately I fear the Cygnet, had it been a success, would have done them more harm than good in the same way that Rolex would destroy their brand cred if they decided to bling up Casio digital watches and sell them as cut price (but very profitable) Rolexes.

 

[No Regrets]

Rolex have a budget (!) brand though, Tudor!

Mercedes make Smart cars, which enable a budget brand without harming the 'marque'

Fairline could easily make smaller boats when orders of large ones dry up, enabling them to keep the staff on, and divert production to larger ones when it suits.

Surely theres some mileage in that!?

 

[AdeOlly]

Right, so, extending the AM logic to Fairline, all they have to do is buy in a basic boat, bling it up at Oundle and then flog it for 100% extra. I reckon they could do a lot worse than start this process with the Bennington 2275.
I mean, take a look at the photo; it already clearly has the measure of a Targa in the handling stakes.

So, ship to Oundle, fit underwater lights, a hi-lo swim platform, mood lights, top quality teak and fitting throughout. Give them a new name - Fairtoon. Just the ticket. They would have to be a hit.... right?

 

[No Regrets]

Not quite what I had envisaged

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Right, so, extending the AM logic to Fairline, all they have to do is buy in a basic boat, bling it up at Oundle and then flog it for 100% extra. I reckon they could do a lot worse than start this process with the Bennington 2275.

I know your post was humorous but why not? Plenty of other boatbuilders manufacture their boats in China, Taiwan, Turkey, Slovenia etc for cost reasons so why can't UK boat builders do it? It happens in many other industries; manufacturers build the labour intensive or non-structural components of their machinery in low cost countries. In fact, I'd be surprised if FairPrinSeeker have not already considered it

 

[jfm]

Must say I've properly discovered the bennington brand with this thread. That's quite some machine there in your picture Adrian. I'm finding it hard to stop laughing at it. It's like a massive industrial generator sledge with a load of American Airlines Club Class seats bought off eBay nailed on, and what looks like 275hp of YummyYammy on the back. Just needs a posse of gorgeous skimpy latino girls and you could enter it in the Rio carnival