I don't understand Kin?

Gerwyn says they haven't got a big enough development budget, fair point, but you are complaining that the price is too high? You can't satisfy both those aspects without a much bigger production run; much much bigger than capacity ever can be. So without sounding rude which one do you want?

Simons point, as I read it, was that customers expectations at a higher price point go up; so it is their expectations that should be addressed. That was in response to my comment that I don't think it is possible to attain high quality (read better QC) at tht price point with a small production run. Expectations and of course how these 'issues' are dealt with.

As I said in an email to Simon:

"Low volume + reasonable price (read not extortionate) + fantastic thorough development/top QC is unachievable"

Perm any two from the above IMHO.

Unless of course you believe the profitability of MMC is innordinately large orvthat they are considerably ineffecient which is a completely different argument.

And as for Weismann isn't the coupe in the order of £185k?? Working from memory so prepared to be corrected

You read it as I meant it. MMC are constantly working to improve quality; however, as per your comments, the development budget is considerably less than main stream car makers (Porsche make circa 30,000 911s a year and even Aston were aiming for 10,000 AMV8s per annum) and therefore, this should be taken into consideration when judging the product; and this, is where education, customer service comes into play.

Sorry if I've caused confusion, i guess my post was rather too simplied.

I completely understood what G was talking about regarding limited development budget.

I mis-interpreted Simon's post when he said " I believe it is similar to my own about the constant upward trend of the Aero-range pricing." I thought he meant the ever widening price gap between the Trad and the Aero models, so I complained about the lack of 50-70k price range where I belong

Now, what I am about to say now would make me petty unpopular, or I am being ignorant about it whichever way you see fit?

Yes I do believe MMC is operating on the basis of small production with HUGH profit principle, obvious example is the 50k price difference between Aero8 and SS(both basically the same car albeit one with a different rear end treatment) why? Because they can, they only need to find couple of hundred buyers. TBH I don't blame them and I would do the same as well.

As for the Weismann, I believe it was around £125k mark at the time the SS price was released, I am also working from my fading memory so prepared to be corrected.

All IMHO of course ... where is my flame suit smilie?

A very interesting thread as it is bringing many issues to the surface, to say nothing of the emails that are winging their way behind the scenes, and it also shows the somewhat bipolar nature of the client base of Morgan.

Firstly Gerwyn's post, which I think was made as a genuine concern about the strategic direction of the Morgan marque that he obviously feels passionate about.

There is little doubt that the Aero's increased in quality between the first ones and the Series III's, and after a bit of fettling the early ones give reliable service with only one or two major issues, such as the power steering failure (Series I's), rectified by fitting the later system.

The Series IV, and the concomitant AeroMax, have experienced in some cases difficult electrical problems and consequently, quality really took a step backwards though not it all cases; my Aero for instance has been totally reliable, but then it was probably pampered by the works, even if driven hard by the motoring press.


I have no issues about getting my car 'fettled' at the works, it gives a reason for a pleasant drive up there and the people in the works are a pleasure to deal with and do a very good job. However, if I lived in Scotland or Italy, or even New Zealand, I am not sure that I would have the same tolerance. Launching the new car at Pebble Beach shows the focus for the new EvaGT's target market and as such, MMC cannot afford to get it wrong. Simon's post adequately covers this point I feel, even if it does not touch on the geography issue.

I found the following post also interesting, as I have felt for some time that if it were my business, at worst I would have Aero and its siblings. including the LIFEcar in a SBU, and the Trads in another one; very different businesses in my view even if they share a heritage.

One of the Dealer's told me a story in Geneva, probably apocryphal, about one of his Trad customers asking if he had any 'second-hand engine oil' as he wanted to change the oil in his car! No offence intended Easter, I also own a 4/4 Sport!
MMC build a new botoxed showroom for the upper end of their range and leave the Trads with the traditional Dealer network. It was noticeable that the first Aero SS delivered went to Dick Lovett in Swindon before any of the main Dealers.
Is this the beginning of the split between Dealers in Morgan Trads, and Dealers in Morgan Aero (and siblings)?
Easter's question is very relevant imho and if Morgan take this route, can their quality match the aspirations of new owners coming from Porsche, Ferrari, Maserati and BMW customers, sometimes from the same Dealership? I don't know the answer, but it is a very relevant question?

Lastly, if Morgan are going to continue to play the limited run/edition marketing ploy they have to be honest with their customers. The initial run for the AeroMax was 100-cars and they stuck to it, thus gaining credibility and ensuring robust re-sale values. For the Aero SuperSport I have seen quantities from an initial run of 125-cars to as high as 250-cars, and several figures in between. Nobody currently seems to know how many cars they will produce out of this limited run; how many cars is a limited run?
Now they say for the EvaGT - "The first 100 cars of a limited run are planned", now without wishing to be pedantic what exactly does this mean? Is the limited run 100, or more likely is it the first 100 out of a limited run of, say 1000-cars?
Maybe the lawyers amongst us can explain the meaning, as it will effect the re-sale value of the car and they have a responsibility to their customers and clarity is part of this responsibility.

Sorry for my rather long 2p-worth, but just having watched the England match I am probably feeling somewhat liverish!

Ok first we are going a bit o/t as this topic was specifically about the new EvaGT. Though all points raised are valid and maybe need a separate thread?

So, with regards to the EvaGT and as it is a valid fiscal comparison can we use the Aero 8 as an indicator?

I am not really intending to justify anything, though as you all know I have a great affection for the marque and for those that produce our cars at MMC.

What I am saying, and which nobody has profferred any suggestions though Gerwyn alluded to in a different context, is this:

Is what we all wish for possible? A £60k to £80k car built in low numbers with some design flair (which I think we all admit it looks like this car has in buckets?) with complete reliability?

Like my recent discussion with my MiL on clairvoyants show me proof, where it is done, and I will be more likely to call for a similar result.

IMO older trads were more likely to have less go wrong from the outset as they were far simpler. This is changing I guess with the newer Roadsters and is certainly not the case with all the modern accoutrements that the present Aero and EvaGT will require.

I apprecaited and acknowledge that The SS is a different kettle of fish as it's price point is higher still. However that was 'justified' to me by the additional costs of producngvthe moulds for the new superformed shape? Whilst I have no idea how accurate that is, ie how much of the £50k increase in cost over the S4 is attributable thus? BUT it does go to show the problems faced by a small manufacturer these days.

Now Gerwyn also mentioned or alluded to inefficiency etc and of course that is always an area that can be improved upon and obviously utilizes costs that could go into improving the product. I'm sure it exists (as it would anywhere) but no idea as to the extent. My brief amateur insight would say definitely room for improvement but nothing drastic? I am of course only referring to production and manufacturing here as I think we all acknowledge marketing and communication could improve and whilst this will of course improve reliability etc it will be more longer term (including the very valid expectations that Simon referred to) and not as drastic a change as if it were manufacturing or developments.

So what next?

Put a cheque for £5k in an envelope to MMC and order one Boshers

I will be doing just that (small discussion with mrs_t to have first I should think though, but given the potential space in the back I don't think I'll have too many issues there..)

Only thing that concerns me is the potential for the SuperSports replacement to arrive and be a firebreathing monster with the TT V8 from BMW which would probably make me drop all family friendly plans and pine enormously for that instead..

I think MMC need to think through their marketing strategy - with not all the SuperSports sold, announcing this will make some folk hang on rather than invest now - not the best move in my books..

I still want to know more about the way they are going to keep the weight down...

certainly tempted, looks lovely. Will. Depend on price and ease of ingress and egress

Playing the devil's advocate, it is hard to tell this from a CAD generated profile - which to my mind looks like a LIFECar / Aero amalgam; therefore, I cannot admit that it has 'design flair in buckets.'

Personally, I hope it deviates from the AM Rapide school of design - take a car (in that case the DB9) and stretch it. While Morgan will follow, and rightly so, the Aero design language, I hope they move it on. Imho the SS has done little to do this and my hope is with the EvaGT, we will see the next generation of Morgan. They have a talented designer and a lot of heritage to work with.



Based on the above, how likely is it that the EvaGT will be less than the SS? For the reason you state above, and while I would love to see an Aero 8 S4 price point, I believe it will be challenging for the company to achieve this. They have the chassis to work with but it isn't inconceivable to imagine that most of the body panels will be new. That, before you even take into account the development of seals, glass, etc, will be a massive investment. The upside is that the ROI on the SS needs to be achieved in a limited production run - investment divided by circa 250. In the case of the EvaGT, with some luck, they can spread the investment over considerably more units.

As a comparison, it would be interesting to know what the Lotus Evora 2+2 production numbers per annum are and what level of investment LC Ltd made. The Evora, is probably the closest comparable to the hypothetical question that BtG posed.

Comes on guys as fans of MMC we should be rejoicing the fact that they are not letting the grass grow under them and are trying to move the company along.

I for one would like to see and everyday Morgan at the £50-60k mark, but that would mean becoming a volume producer. ( Well at least in MMC terms)

The problem may be one that has been touched on in earlier comments if every 2 years we are going to see a new model then people may wait to see what is next.

The chances of MMC achieving what they did with the Aeromax are in my mind very remote, so maybe the route should be to have one standard chassis set up on what the platform as this is where external developments costs will be incurred, but offer this with a range of body options, soft-top, targa, hard top but with 5 year production run to justify these costs.