Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I could see Apple acquiring the data side of McLaren, not the automotive part. Apple and similar companies seem to be acquiring data based companies frequently these days.

How is McLaren supposed to be a data-company that Apple should be interested in? They only make supercars that are bought by a limited amount of people. That data is not nearly as useful as the data from other car manufacturers that produce for a wider market.

In addition, a joint venture would make much more sense if they would be interested in the data only. Why would Apple want to be responsible for a car manufacturer and all its complexities if they would only want data?

Sorry, but what you are suggesting does not make a lot of sense.
 
No VW is owned by Porsche
There are two (relevant) companies with Porsche in their name. There is a Porsche holding company which is wholly owned by the Porsche and Piëch families (descendants of Ferdinand Porsche, the founder of the 'car company' Porsche and designer of the original VW Beetle among other things). And then there is the car company Porsche that designs, manufacturers and sells cars under the Porsche label. The holding company holds the majority of the VW shares with voting rights. But the VW company fully owns the Porsche 'car company'. It's the CEO of VW that is the superior of the CEO of the Porsche car company. And despite the Porsche holding owning the majority of voting shares, the German state (province) of Lower Saxony owns 20% of the voting rights and due to a special VW law this gives the state a veto right.

This structure came about after the Porsche car company (owned since its beginning by the Porsche and later Porsche and Piëch families) split itself into a holding company and an actual car company. The holding company then started to buy up shares of VW partly by borrowing huge amounts of money. But despite passing the 50% bar in terms of voting rights, the special VW law prevented it from taking control of VW and thus the cash reserves of VW. Porsche had speculated that European courts would strike down the VW law. When the courts confirmed the VW law, the Porsche holding was left with a huge debt and a stock ownership of VW that was little more than a financial investment. It then agreed to sell the Porsche car company to VW to pay off its debt.

So, yes, the Porsche holding company (and thus the Porsche and Piëch families) own a majority of the VW voting shares but to make important decisions they need to get together an 80% majority (of the voting shares). All the while the Porsche car company is a subsidiary of VW.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Orka and rjohnstone
Probably never be able to afford one but I'd love to drive a McLApple!

McApple... anyone

Stories been changed several times. I think the only right way to go about this is never believe anything until u see it with your own eyes in real life....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Teon
How is McLaren supposed to be a data-company that Apple should be interested in? They only make supercars that are bought by a limited amount of people. That data is not nearly as useful as the data from other car manufacturers that produce for a wider market.

In addition, a joint venture would make much more sense if they would be interested in the data only. Why would Apple want to be responsible for a car manufacturer and all its complexities if they would only want data?

Sorry, but what you are suggesting does not make a lot of sense.
Sorry mijnheer de Vries. I would suggest you look again at what the McLaren Technologies group actually do, supercars is only a small part of their business. Data and analytics of metrics is absolutely huge and very advanced. Now just think for a minute how much data Apple is gathering with the mobile devices for example. Furthermore McLaren advanced technologies have a lot more on the books.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0388631
Buying McLaren is a little ambitious, even for Apple.

That's cute that you think that...

Beats has a market cap of over 9.5 billion dollars.
How big is this adorable little niche car company??

It might be a SILLY move.
I would struggle to even imagine how a huge company buying a tiny one could be considered "ambitious", lol.
 
Sorry mijnheer de Vries. I would suggest you look again at what the McLaren Technologies group actually do, supercars is only a small part of their business. Data and analytics of metrics is absolutely huge and very advanced. Now just think for a minute how much data Apple is gathering with the mobile devices for example. Furthermore McLaren advanced technologies have a lot more on the books.

Sure, that is all great. But the same way that Apple didn't buy Beats for just the music platform, Apple will not buy a car manufacturer for their data and analytics capability only.

Again, it would make far more sense just to create a joint venture or to get an exclusive license to the data. Far more economic and far more sensible from a business and strategic point of view.
 
OH. I entirely misunderstood. Yes, generally, Aston's cars all look the same. Haha. No doubt. That aside, the most beautiful car ever produced (in my opinion) is the present-day Aston Martin Vanquish. What's your favorite?


Sounds tough. :( Do you own any cars currently that you're proud of? Do you have any that you'd like to buy in the semi-near future?
It’s difficult to say. Depends on the mood I’m in. I think either the Vision Mercedes-Maybach 6 or the Cadillac 16. In the real world though an AMG CLS Shooting Brake.
 
If Apple ever does release a car, it's going to be the biggest piece of FUBAR ever.
[doublepost=1474486720][/doublepost]

Actually it's very Tesla and very European. Ever been to a European car factory? Light years ahead of the US.

Actually live about 5 miles from the Toyota factory in the UK, been for a little tour but that's very Japanese in style rather than European
 
I wasn't being pedantic, your statement was just wrong. :p

I said good day sir. GOOD DAY.
[doublepost=1474624242][/doublepost]
Not sure why you felt the need to remind me McLaren said it was a bogus story? And unless you are an employee for McLaren let alone sit on the leadership team, I don't think you have any comprehension of why McLaren would never sell to Apple. You definitely fail to understand their business model? You displayed your card sir when you stated Ron Dennis would sell the company he built to a giant American mass producing mass market consumer electronics corporation....
[doublepost=1474526257][/doublepost]

VW owns all the others including Porsche.

You mean the one he already sold part of to various parties over the years? Selling a company does not have to mean ALL of it. As for the rest of your rant, Sigh. Whatever.
 
Your comment makes no sense, he sold a part of it multiple times over the years? What are you on about?

Daimler had shares which were bought back.
Gordon Murray had shares which were bought back.
He's trying to buy back Bahrain Holding Company shares
 
Daimler had shares which were bought back.
Gordon Murray had shares which were bought back.
He's trying to buy back Bahrain Holding Company shares

Gordon Murray retired ages ago though, he's more a freelance designer now from what I gather. I still stand by my comment that this story and the idea of it being daft , and don't believe for a second they would sell the brand cureently not least to a consumer electronics company.
 
SAAB is and always will be garbage. There's a reason they went out of business and were sold off for pennies.

The reason they "went out of business" is that GM ****ed up what it could, and when GM was forced to get rid / close some if its brands - due to GM's, not SAAB's, pure management - they preferred OPEL instead of SAAB. OPEL, the most boring European carmaker ever.

I own a 2010 SAAB 9-5 NG ( this one
) and it's one of the best family cars I have ever driven (easily comparable to BMW 5 series and the likes) and certainly it's one of the most charismatic cars ever made. Did you ever own a SAAB when you claim it's garbage?
 
Last edited:
The reason they "went out of business" is that GM ****ed up what it could, and when GM was forced to get rid / close some if its brands - due to GM's, not SAAB's, pure management - they preferred OPEL instead of SAAB. OPEL, the most boring European carmaker ever.

I own a 2010 SAAB 9-5 NG ( this one
) and it's one of the best family cars I have ever driven (easily comparable to BMW 5 series and the likes) and certainly it's one of the most charismatic cars ever made. Did you ever own a SAAB when you claim it's garbage?

Yes I owned a 9-5 and a 9-3x Aero. They were crappy cars with all kinds of issues. Who designs a GPS that requires you to pull into a parking lot of you want to enter an address because you must be in park? Who still used stupid number pads to enter the directions?

Saab is no longer here because people didn't buy them. They weren't aesthetically pleasing and had poor repair records. Their engines were weak and got poor mileage for being so underpowered.

I'd never compare the 9-5 to the BMW 5 Series because they aren't even close. The 2011 9-5 (the last of the Saabs) was $38,525 - $49,565. A 5-series of the same year ran $45,050 - $66,700. They aren't even in the same price category.

It's obvious that you love your car. That's great. But you're delusional about the worth of it because you're so in love with it. You can't see it for the issues they had or the facts that represent the reason not only GM sold them off but their new buyer shuttered them.
 
Yes I owned a 9-5 and a 9-3x Aero. They were crappy cars with all kinds of issues. Who designs a GPS that requires you to pull into a parking lot of you want to enter an address because you must be in park?

As far as I know, the general rule is that the car has to stand still (manual transmissions don't have a "park" so being in park only applies to automatic transmissions). In any case, this is a (quite logical) security rule navigation units by ALL manufacturers (those built-in a car) have to comply to, so that you don't cause an accident when trying to enter an address while driving / unintentionally moving (the "logic" being that you could sue the car manufacturer if they allowed you to enter an address while driving and you would crash in the process. Of course, the person on the passenger seat could safely enter an address while driving, but the fear of being sued is apparently greater than customer's needs [especially in the US where you can sue a microwave manufacturer for not stating explicitly that it's not a good idea to try to dry a cat in a microwave ;-) ]). AFAIK you can get rid of this limitation via an unofficial firmware in the navigation unit, but this is in no way SAAB-specific.

Who still used stupid number pads to enter the directions?

No clue what you mean, mine has a touchscreen.

Saab is no longer here because people didn't buy them.

Saab is no longer here because GM decided to either kill the brand or sell it to whoever paid when the last economical crisis almost caused bankruptcy of GM as such. When the new owner (Spyker), who apparently did not have enough money to survive until the new models could actually generate enough profit, wanted to sell the brand to NEVS, GM did not allow Spyker to sell the rights to manufacture the 9-5 NG model. Otherwise SAABs would be manufactured still today. Now NEVS is preparing a new-generation (electric) car based on the SAAB Phoenix development platform, which is what they were allowed by GM to actually buy from Spyker. So, SAAB is no longer here because of GM decisions.

They weren't aesthetically pleasing and had poor repair records. Their engines were weak and got poor mileage for being so underpowered.

Aesthetics is a matter of opinion, but as far as I can tell by people's reactions, the 9-5 NG is perceived extremely positively.

As far as power is concerned, 300 HP and 0-100 km/h in 6.9 seconds (330 HP and 0-100 km/h in 6.1 seconds with the Hirsch software update) for a 2.4-tons-heavy car seems underpowered to you? Hmmmm.

I'd never compare the 9-5 to the BMW 5 Series because they aren't even close. The 2011 9-5 (the last of the Saabs) was $38,525 - $49,565. A 5-series of the same year ran $45,050 - $66,700. They aren't even in the same price category.

I have driven a few BMW 5 series, and if you don't speak about the M5 model (which is a completely different car than a normal 5 series), there was nothing superior on the BMWs. Price-wise in Europe the range was quite comparable (again I am not speaking about the M5 model) and it is the same category by size also. Moreover, I would say BMW is a bit overpriced ;-).

And yes, in a way they are not even close -- at least in many parts of Europe (not to mention less developed countries like Russia / China and the likes) 5 series and 7 series BMWs are mostly driven by "weird individuals" who earned their money in half-legal/illegal ways and need to show off their status. SAABs, on the other hand, were bought by a completely different clientele, at least in Europe (e.g. consulates). This partially addresses your point on people not buying SAABs - well, often times the new oligarchs have quite a poor taste ;-) and for a common person 50 000 EUR for a car is really a lot of money. Also, loved by masses is not equivalent to superior (often quite the opposite).

It's obvious that you love your car. That's great. But you're delusional about the worth of it because you're so in love with it. You can't see it for the issues they had or the facts that represent the reason not only GM sold them off but their new buyer shuttered them.

Yes, I like the car, but I am not being non-critical or delusional... I don't know any of the old models but the 9-5 NG is an extremely good car and had GM not killed it, it would be a commercially successful one, too. SAAB had many progressive technologies long before the competition (for instance, Apple CarPlay was announced at WWDC in 2013, Android Auto in 2014, well after IQon
by SAAB, not to mention turbo charging, head-up displays, torque-vectoring, etc.).

What I was originally trying to say was that Apple has, IMHO, no chance of building a decent hardware for a car in a reasonable time and that's why they should have bought a (not too old) platform, perhaps a progressive and currently inactive one, like the 9-5 NG platform that is laying on the shelves of GM (or rather Spyker who cannot sell it unless GM approves the buyer), instead of trying to re-invent the wheel.

Of course, there is no hope they will, as Apple is known for their rather excentric and non-sensical acquisitions (except NeXT which happened a long time ago). Just as an example, buying Beats and not buying SUN microsystems with all their advanced technology which took decades to develop (for roughly the same money) was as stupid as it gets...
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.