918 Negotiations
#61
McLaren produced around 3500 12C, pretty much half in 2012 and half in 2013. Their profit should be roughly around the same, yet in 2013 they claimed to have 4x the profit. What's the difference? The P1.
Assuming McLaren booked all 375 P1 on their bottom line, which is rumoured to be what they did. Roughly by the numbers, those extra 375 cars accounted for 3x the normal profit they made from selling ~1700 cars. Roughly 13.5x more profit per car. And the P1 only goes for roughly 3.5x the price of a 12C.
If McLaren didn't book all 375 for 2013, the multiplier is even greater.
The number shows how relatively 'cheap' a P1 can be produced, and is it worth the million+ price tag?
Assuming McLaren booked all 375 P1 on their bottom line, which is rumoured to be what they did. Roughly by the numbers, those extra 375 cars accounted for 3x the normal profit they made from selling ~1700 cars. Roughly 13.5x more profit per car. And the P1 only goes for roughly 3.5x the price of a 12C.
If McLaren didn't book all 375 for 2013, the multiplier is even greater.
The number shows how relatively 'cheap' a P1 can be produced, and is it worth the million+ price tag?
It's hard enough when one has the financials in hand. Fool's errand without.
#62
Since they are a private entity, black and white financial statements will be out of the question. But one can make educated guesses based on general rules according to GAAP. It's actually not that hard if one doesn't need precise numbers.
Like the amortization of their factory cost, they are not going to write off the whole building on the 1st year. Same for equipments inside. Plus one can deduce roughly what amount they bring in selling ~1700 cars a year.
Year to year, there isn't drastic changes on their bottom-line, they didn't purchase/construct or sell anything major, so no 1-time items. While the tooling for new models, i.e. P1 and 650S is one 'major' expense, it is quite small in $ terms as those are based off the same 12C platform. The wind tunnel cost for developing the P1 can be billed as nil, as the wind tunnel is a existing structure which has already been paid for, same for the wind tunnel personal cost, those are fixed cost whether McLaren used them to tune the P1 or not, the F1 team cannot use the tunnel full time thus there are a lot of free time.
McLaren Automotive is a separate entity outside of McLaren Racing and McLaren Applied Technologies the consulting business, the financial are reported separately, so income from one entity doesn't carry over to the others. I believe the wind tunnel is under McLaren Racing, so in theory Racing can bill Automotive for the time used, but that does not make sense as Automotive needs to show it's making money quickly to the investors and that's one part that definitely can use accounting tricks to minimize Automotive cost.
#63
Unless one likes to drive on a sheet of ice, there is no way 2 tires can handle the HP putting down by modern performance cars. AWD means traction on any surface, it's why the 918 can leave the P1 and LaFerrari in the dust from a stop.
With 2 motors front and back, one motor can do traction duty while the other do recharge. The 918 can using the front motor for traction duty while the engine drives the rear motor as a generator and putting down power at the rear wheel at the same time. Something the P1 and the LaFerrari cannot do. Those 2 can only use their motor either as a traction motor or a generator, not both.
Also, the 918 will capture more of the kinetic energy on regen braking as both axles contribute to charging, the P1 doesn't have this capability and the LaFerrari can only capture energy from the rear wheels.
#64
Since they are a private entity, black and white financial statements will be out of the question. But one can make educated guesses based on general rules according to GAAP. It's actually not that hard if one doesn't need precise numbers.
Like the amortization of their factory cost, they are not going to write off the whole building on the 1st year. Same for equipments inside. Plus one can deduce roughly what amount they bring in selling ~1700 cars a year.
Year to year, there isn't drastic changes on their bottom-line, they didn't purchase/construct or sell anything major, so no 1-time items. While the tooling for new models, i.e. P1 and 650S is one 'major' expense, it is quite small in $ terms as those are based off the same 12C platform. The wind tunnel cost for developing the P1 can be billed as nil, as the wind tunnel is a existing structure which has already been paid for, same for the wind tunnel personal cost, those are fixed cost whether McLaren used them to tune the P1 or not, the F1 team cannot use the tunnel full time thus there are a lot of free time.
McLaren Automotive is a separate entity outside of McLaren Racing and McLaren Applied Technologies the consulting business, the financial are reported separately, so income from one entity doesn't carry over to the others. I believe the wind tunnel is under McLaren Racing, so in theory Racing can bill Automotive for the time used, but that does not make sense as Automotive needs to show it's making money quickly to the investors and that's one part that definitely can use accounting tricks to minimize Automotive cost.
Like the amortization of their factory cost, they are not going to write off the whole building on the 1st year. Same for equipments inside. Plus one can deduce roughly what amount they bring in selling ~1700 cars a year.
Year to year, there isn't drastic changes on their bottom-line, they didn't purchase/construct or sell anything major, so no 1-time items. While the tooling for new models, i.e. P1 and 650S is one 'major' expense, it is quite small in $ terms as those are based off the same 12C platform. The wind tunnel cost for developing the P1 can be billed as nil, as the wind tunnel is a existing structure which has already been paid for, same for the wind tunnel personal cost, those are fixed cost whether McLaren used them to tune the P1 or not, the F1 team cannot use the tunnel full time thus there are a lot of free time.
McLaren Automotive is a separate entity outside of McLaren Racing and McLaren Applied Technologies the consulting business, the financial are reported separately, so income from one entity doesn't carry over to the others. I believe the wind tunnel is under McLaren Racing, so in theory Racing can bill Automotive for the time used, but that does not make sense as Automotive needs to show it's making money quickly to the investors and that's one part that definitely can use accounting tricks to minimize Automotive cost.
But let's start with: how did they define profit? Are they using the same definition of profit before and now? Was it truly a net profit or an operating profit? How about write downs taken in one year versus another?
Not poking at McLaren or you. I think it is near impossible to state with any kind of authority a company's financial state without... seeing their financials. The fanboys are joyful over McLaren turning a "profit" and the haters predict McLaren is going bankrupt. No different than criticizing the 918 as "unprofitable". Baseless unless you have numbers in hand. (Besides if the 918 is unprofitable then buyers are getting a great deal!)
Speculate all you want, it is the Internet!
Sorry
#65
Since they are a private entity, black and white financial statements will be out of the question. But one can make educated guesses based on general rules according to GAAP. It's actually not that hard if one doesn't need precise numbers.
Like the amortization of their factory cost, they are not going to write off the whole building on the 1st year. Same for equipments inside. Plus one can deduce roughly what amount they bring in selling ~1700 cars a year.
Year to year, there isn't drastic changes on their bottom-line, they didn't purchase/construct or sell anything major, so no 1-time items. While the tooling for new models, i.e. P1 and 650S is one 'major' expense, it is quite small in $ terms as those are based off the same 12C platform. The wind tunnel cost for developing the P1 can be billed as nil, as the wind tunnel is a existing structure which has already been paid for, same for the wind tunnel personal cost, those are fixed cost whether McLaren used them to tune the P1 or not, the F1 team cannot use the tunnel full time thus there are a lot of free time.
McLaren Automotive is a separate entity outside of McLaren Racing and McLaren Applied Technologies the consulting business, the financial are reported separately, so income from one entity doesn't carry over to the others. I believe the wind tunnel is under McLaren Racing, so in theory Racing can bill Automotive for the time used, but that does not make sense as Automotive needs to show it's making money quickly to the investors and that's one part that definitely can use accounting tricks to minimize Automotive cost.
Like the amortization of their factory cost, they are not going to write off the whole building on the 1st year. Same for equipments inside. Plus one can deduce roughly what amount they bring in selling ~1700 cars a year.
Year to year, there isn't drastic changes on their bottom-line, they didn't purchase/construct or sell anything major, so no 1-time items. While the tooling for new models, i.e. P1 and 650S is one 'major' expense, it is quite small in $ terms as those are based off the same 12C platform. The wind tunnel cost for developing the P1 can be billed as nil, as the wind tunnel is a existing structure which has already been paid for, same for the wind tunnel personal cost, those are fixed cost whether McLaren used them to tune the P1 or not, the F1 team cannot use the tunnel full time thus there are a lot of free time.
McLaren Automotive is a separate entity outside of McLaren Racing and McLaren Applied Technologies the consulting business, the financial are reported separately, so income from one entity doesn't carry over to the others. I believe the wind tunnel is under McLaren Racing, so in theory Racing can bill Automotive for the time used, but that does not make sense as Automotive needs to show it's making money quickly to the investors and that's one part that definitely can use accounting tricks to minimize Automotive cost.
http://media.mclarenautomotive.com/release/254/
Excerpt:
Profit before tax - £4.5m
Operating profit - £12.4m
Turnover - £285.4m (up from £266.6m)
Investment in future models - £70.6m (up from £68.1m)
Turnover and profit both expected to grow in 2014
Operating profit - £12.4m
Turnover - £285.4m (up from £266.6m)
Investment in future models - £70.6m (up from £68.1m)
Turnover and profit both expected to grow in 2014
#66
And McLaren sold less 12C in 2013 than 2012.
They sold 400 in 2011, 1587 in 2012, and 1359 in 2013. Total: 3346.
They delivered 36 P1 also. These 36 more than accounted for the 200 less 12C and more in profit just by the numbers.
Some other tidbits, McLaren initially had 2 dealerships in China, then added 2 more, and now they are up to 9, and there should be another 3 coming. They had given 10 franchises in one go last year, basically whoever can pay the franchise fee will get one. But the new franchises were only given 12C to sell, they didn't get any 650S, so in other words those 10 new ones were the clearing house for last of the 12Cs.
All of US only gets 14 dealerships, plus the 2 in Canada. Is China as big a market as the North American market? Eventually it will be, but not now. Some of the 12 dealerships in China may not survive.
My source of info is largely from the financial circle, not from the automotive circle, those guys see things from a different perspective.
They sold 400 in 2011, 1587 in 2012, and 1359 in 2013. Total: 3346.
They delivered 36 P1 also. These 36 more than accounted for the 200 less 12C and more in profit just by the numbers.
Some other tidbits, McLaren initially had 2 dealerships in China, then added 2 more, and now they are up to 9, and there should be another 3 coming. They had given 10 franchises in one go last year, basically whoever can pay the franchise fee will get one. But the new franchises were only given 12C to sell, they didn't get any 650S, so in other words those 10 new ones were the clearing house for last of the 12Cs.
All of US only gets 14 dealerships, plus the 2 in Canada. Is China as big a market as the North American market? Eventually it will be, but not now. Some of the 12 dealerships in China may not survive.
My source of info is largely from the financial circle, not from the automotive circle, those guys see things from a different perspective.
#67
And McLaren sold less 12C in 2013 than 2012.
They sold 400 in 2011, 1587 in 2012, and 1359 in 2013. Total: 3346.
They delivered 36 P1 also. These 36 more than accounted for the 200 less 12C and more in profit just by the numbers.
Some other tidbits, McLaren initially had 2 dealerships in China, then added 2 more, and now they are up to 9, and there should be another 3 coming. They had given 10 franchises in one go last year, basically whoever can pay the franchise fee will get one. But the new franchises were only given 12C to sell, they didn't get any 650S, so in other words those 10 new ones were the clearing house for last of the 12Cs.
All of US only gets 14 dealerships, plus the 2 in Canada. Is China as big a market as the North American market? Eventually it will be, but not now. Some of the 12 dealerships in China may not survive.
My source of info is largely from the financial circle, not from the automotive circle, those guys see things from a different perspective.
They sold 400 in 2011, 1587 in 2012, and 1359 in 2013. Total: 3346.
They delivered 36 P1 also. These 36 more than accounted for the 200 less 12C and more in profit just by the numbers.
Some other tidbits, McLaren initially had 2 dealerships in China, then added 2 more, and now they are up to 9, and there should be another 3 coming. They had given 10 franchises in one go last year, basically whoever can pay the franchise fee will get one. But the new franchises were only given 12C to sell, they didn't get any 650S, so in other words those 10 new ones were the clearing house for last of the 12Cs.
All of US only gets 14 dealerships, plus the 2 in Canada. Is China as big a market as the North American market? Eventually it will be, but not now. Some of the 12 dealerships in China may not survive.
My source of info is largely from the financial circle, not from the automotive circle, those guys see things from a different perspective.