On the whole the MMC would alter the trad at their peril, it has been the steady revenue earner at a time when the Aeros have drained money and sold inconsistently.
However, should they change the chassis then the Aero style chassis would not be the right way to go, it is far too expensive - anecdotally I have heard £10k whereas the exiting one is about £300. It is not particularly high-tech either being what? probably over 15 years old, and Aero dynamics are not up there with the best.
The current range seems about right to me the 3 Aeros providing the factory with the high end stuff to play with.
The Trads providing the core revenue stream.
The M3Ws providing a revenue streaam when fully debugged and valuable experience in assembly rather than production (there is a risk with them however)
My view of what the MMC should do is.
1. Focus on quality for the trads,
2. Reverse the warranty attitude, that is (IMHO) really damaging the brand, if a pattern of claims arise, they should not deny it but work with suppliers and customers to get issues fixed, spares available, customers back on the road etc.
The above 2 may increase costs, I believe that the trads could stand a £3 - £4k price increase if that transformed the MMC quality image
3. Realise that the first duty of a company is not to grow profits, but to survive, if necessary cut production volumes of the trad so that they are all built to order and not for stock.
4 Stop doing so much, focus on stuff that is realistic, The Lifecar (no matter how wonderful it was), the EVAGT the electric +8s are largely irrelevances that direct focus from core products.
Just realised that this even further thread drift and of course EVERYONE knows how to run the MMC better than they do.
BTW the risk with the M3Ws is that they take the MMC above the Low Volume Exemption Limits.
Oh and if I come across as anti-Aero, the 'Max is my all time ultra desirable car
