Haha yeah. Trying to sum up the problems faced by an automotive company gets tiring.

To sum up my opinion, AM makes great cars if they meet your needs. But they're a niche manufacturer that's going up against strong competition. Operating alone and in a vacuum, AM would do very well. But they aren't in a vacuum. In addition to customers cross-shopping and comparing vehicles from other companies, AM has to face the various requirements imposed upon it by governments and markets from all over the world. That has a very real impact its ability to survive as a company. Making a great niche product does not guarantee survival.

 

Exactly. When you put them side by side "you can tell who's investing money in the technology and who isn't" (or equivalent).

 

A better sat nav, better transmission in the Vantage, better 0-60 time, blah blah blah will do virtually nothing for Aston Martin's sales. Maybe sell an extra car or two to an auto enthusiast. But enthusiasts who care about those things are a small minority in the exotic car market.

Marketing and brand perception is the spine of what drives sales. Luxury/exotic buyers want cars that they think everyone else perceives to be luxurious and exotic. The fact is that there is a higher perception of "wealth" associated with Bentley, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Rolls, etc than Aston Martin.

Aston Martin Lagonda would have a better ROI putting money in a better marketing strategy than a new transmission.

 

Um, I think you're totally wrong. What does F or L or even Maseratti do in marketing? Nothing. Ferrari wins the crap out of F1 and lives up to the expectation that their cars feel like race cars. Lamborghini just makes outlandish cars that scream their identity and provide the power and speed to back up the brash image. Bentley is the only lux car brand I can think of with anything like a marketing programme. And Aston's association with Bond was/is probably the best marketing exposure a lux brand can hope for. But that brings us to the problem. Last new Aston Bond drove was a DBS. Looks dated (is) and hasn't been properly replaced with the Vanquish. Why he wasn't smoking tires in a Vanquish in Skyfall is a mystery.

So while some more aggressive marketing might help, they need the product to seem newer, better, best-er.

 

Wait, you seriously think most people buy a Ferrari because they follow their F1 team? Case in point: I bought a Ferrari when I had no idea how many wins they had.

A McLaren MP4-12C is "newer, better, best-er" than a 458. So why isn't it selling as well? Because no one knows what the heck it is.

Like I said, public brand image/perception is what pushes luxury products. James Bond drove an Aston Martin because of product placement. Stark drove an R8 because of product placement. Not because one had a better transmission than another. Product placement = marketing.

 

OK, perhaps "totally wrong" was a bit of hyperbole. I think that both marketing/brand ID and performance are part of the solution. I don't know what McLaren's sales figures are but is suspect they are selling well. Why, because their "marketing" strategy was/is the car that at least equals and often exceeds Ferrari's best. The auto mags have done all of McL's marketing and advertising for them because the car is that good at what it set out to do. One very important reason the 12c doesn't sell the same or better unit volume as the 458 because of the vast difference in dealer networks. Same can be said for Aston Martin to a lesser degree.


Really, AM's low sales are probably a combination of all of these things. Remember the early 90s when Porsche sold only a couple thousand cars in the US? What turned things around? Boxter and Cayanne.


Maybe marketing is the short term answer. Take a page from Christian Aduddugijsourei (whatever his name is) and slap some vantage keys in the hands of some A list celebs. But sooner or later, they've got to produce a volume car that has some sort of stand out appeal the way the vantage first did when it showed up...10 years ago.

 

The thing is, despite all those rave reviews, McLaren still posted a $70-86m loss in 2011, and between $15-18m loss in 2012. I do agree that the dealer network is small, but I don't think that accounts for their massive depreciation (you can get a lightly used one for under $200k).

The car is virtually a technical masterpiece, but still less than stellar financial performance. I'm sure there are other factors in place, but to me it suggests that the "bells and whistles" aren't as important as most think.

 

So if Aston improved the cars to get them up to the level of their competitors it would do nothing for their sales? I disagree. And I don't think marketing, in the form of advertising, is the answer either. If Aston updated their technology, both in terms of performance and ameneties, then car reviews wouldn't sound like, "while the car is not slow, it really lags it's competitors," "it has the sat nav of a Volvo," etc. This would be the best "marketing" they could get and would provide more persuasion to potential buyers. People pay attention to reviews. Again, evo's negative impressions of the V12VS gearbox makes me think I'll pass on the car, and I'm a loyal Aston owner.

 

Well, having just leased a new 2013 V8 Vantage S after coming from a 2007 V8 Vantage (both manuals, both green) all I can say the S is an amazing sports car and better in every way than the car it replaced. I was stupefied (I like that word) by the difference in performance, handling & comfort. I can't imagine the V12 being a better car as it's heavier & thirstier and with the CF vents uglier too. I'm a happy, happy camper. This is the finest sports car I have ever owned/leased.
Former cars being: '07 V8 Vantage, '08 Audi R8, '05 Boxster S, '02 Carrera, '98 C5, '94 RX7 (nice car)... '85 MR2, '77 Lancia Scorpion, '74 Fiat X1/9 (Company Cars between '86-'94)

 

I think Aston have a great image as a brand but they aren't catering to the younger market, which I feel they should target a little more. Everyone I know associates the Aston to James Bond which is a very good thing but they need to keep running with it. Put Bond in a One77 or Vanquish, not a DBS...

Regarding the McLaren. I can only speak for myself but I decided to not get one primarily because of looks and sound. The car is kind of boring to look at in its current state and the sound just isn't there for me. The 12C Spider has helped but, for the money, the 458 has everything the 12C has plus looks and sound. McLaren need to make the car more aggressive looking. The P1 is unbelievable looking for example.

 

I think brand awareness is something AM really needs to focus on. I drive my V8V all the time, and I have people coming up to me constantly asking what it is. Very few people seem to know what an Aston Martin is. They know the name once I tell them, but they don't recognize one when they see one beside them on the road or sitting at a gas pump. Yes, I think product placement would help considerably with this. Obviously the 007/AM connection works for marketing, but it isn't enough. That's why what Racer_X said is so important:

Advertising =/= marketing. Advertising is a form of marketing, but a proper marketing program goes far beyond advertising. Car reviews go a long way in selling cars. Reviews ARE a form of marketing. When every review sounds the same and points out the same problems or shortcomings (like Racer_X said), sales will absolutely be affected. If AM is to impress in reviews, they need to pay attention to what reviewers are saying (and owners often echo the concerns in reviews) and address those problems specifically.

The V8V did a lot to revive AM. But the car is getting old and needs to be updated. What is concerning is that the transmission woes of the last Vanquish are back in the new one (although much improved, it's still the point of concern). What this is telling customers is that AM isn't learning from the past. The Vanquish, which was supposed to show that AM can keep up with its rivals, was to live up to its purpose, it would have come with a dual-clutch transmission from day one. We've all talked about the Vanq ad nauseum, but the car is an example of why AM struggles with bringing in new customers. The Vanq is AM's current flagship, yet AM's best is no better than the midlings of its rivals in many ways.

I think you nailed it about Ferrari and Lamborghini. Ferrari makes exciting cars that are look, sound, and feel like exotics. Lamborghini... well just look at one. They're scream "look at me!" like no other car around (short of a Pagani or something), which is exactly what their owners want. Ferrari does have a vast marketing program, though, mostly in the form of merchandising. You can buy Ferrari *anything* these days! Ferrari clothes, mugs, toys, watches, even laptops. Seeing Ferrari stuff everywhere is just a reminder of the brand, keeping it in your mind. When does that ever happen with AM? When you see a 007 movie poster?

Technically, Bond didn't drive a DBS. He drove a DB9 with DBS body panels because the DBS was still in development. I think Skyfall didn't feature the Vanquish because it was still too early in development.

McLaren built a $75M production facility for the MP4-12C in 2011, so the massive lost is entirely understandable. And the outlay required for a small company to bring a car to market is bound to result in losses. Not only a car (the MP4-12C), but also a variant (the Spyder) and a supercar (the P1). The MP4-12C seems to be selling extremely well. McLaren's losses aren't coming from slow sales, they're coming from heavy investment.

 

When I watched the movie Skyfall, I was amazed that the entire audience clapped when they brought out the DB5 from the garage. I wasn't there with an Aston group, just my wife and I. Aston needs to get this back! Aston is also doing well in racing and should be advertising it more.

Interesting factoid that I heard but can't 100% verify. Ferrari makes more money on apparel than car sales.

 

That's because everyone recognized the DB5 from the earlier Bond films. Does anyone think the reaction would have been the same if a new Vanq was in the film? I think the DB5 was the right choice from a cinematic point of view (Skyfall was more of a pared back, retro/introspective film) and also because it coincided (roughly) with Aston's centenary. By not using a new car do I think Aston's sales were hurt? Hmmm, not so sure about that...

 

Yes but remember when Bond pulled out the BMW Z4? That was a huge release for the car and catapulted it's first year sales. BMW has been doing it with the i series, Audi is doing it with the R8s, and Acura did it with the next gen NSX.

 

I prefer to think of it this way........If AM were to ever become super profitable and mainstream, would many of us want to continue to be associated with the marque? Personally, not likely...........double edged sword.........