Last post on Apr 03, 2007 at 9:18 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
#98 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [andys120]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Sep 02, 2006 (8:28 am)
I agree. You can buy a new Jaguar on a credit card anyway....aside from a Ferrari or Bentley or maybe a fully decked out S class Benz, a dental hygienist can finance just about any car.
It's all very ironic for Jaguar because originally the car was conceived as a value automobile for the middle class in England. It was, if anything, a protest against ostentation and the absurd MSRP of cars like Rolls and Bentley.
I'm sorry the company lost its way. Former Lemans winners and makers of REAL sports cars, now the company flounders about not knowing what it is and what it is supposed to be doing. I owned many Jaguars when I was younger and I can still remember my disgust when the XJ6 came out and the E-Type went away. I realize the XJ6 did save the company but as far as I'm concerned it turned out to be a bargain with the devil for the company.
Sep 02, 2006 (9:56 am)
Don't people need dynastic wealth to keep old Jags going? The maintenance and repairs on a XJS V12 has to exceed a Ferrari.
But yeah, Jag is bourgeois even at its highest levels, not a car for the uber-rich.
Sep 02, 2006 (10:42 am)
Maybe Jaguar should just go back to its old formula....produce only 3 models....one a Panoz-like sports car (serious sports car), one a BMW-like 3 series sedan, and then the limited production obligatory big blivet-car to boost their prestige. This line-up served them well from the 40s through 1974 or so.
#101 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [andys120]
Sep 02, 2006 (10:42 am)
I agree with the understated comment, with the caveat that a lot of the people whom I know Don't drive their Jags all of the time. (incedientally my first car was a Volvo- couldn't kill that car for all my life) But Jags are understated. There are lots of old women whom drive their Jags to Denver Country Club on the weekend- some of them have last names which should be vaguely familiar. And sometimes these people have their Rolls-Royces- which are never driven. For them Jags are an understatment. My grandparent's Jag is driven (not regularly) but in leiu of a much nicer car which they own.
As far as the Kennedy's, we must have very different standards of "dynastic wealth"- people whom keep their names out fo the papers (the ultimate understatement) and have had money for a lot longer- and didn't aquire it illegally either. I have many friends (older than myself) who fit nicely into that category, are rather unassuming, and still make the Hilton's look like paupers. The other thing I notice, is that a large number of them drive SUVs on a regular basis, Yukons and the like.
As far as Jag being started as a "middle class" car company that comment has no merrit. Why not go back to the beginning? Jaguar should not exist, as it was originally a side-car company before its name was changed. It is illogical, saying that things began one way is no guarantee of a similar end. Time is the guarantor of change- and their is no logical method to differentiate time- by virtue of the fact that time is on a continuum.
Middle class...you know the Queen of England is driven around in, depending, either a Daimler (manufactured by Jag- same thing as the Super V8) or the production armoured Jag (a $400,000 car)- that is actually the most expensive Jag, BTW- it is the world's only production armored vehicle. Of course, there are national interests involved with that. Be that as it may, I really don't see how a car company that manufactured $625,000 supercars (XJ 220) can be middle class- this was even under Ford. Lately though, Jag has been cheaper which I don't like.
#102 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [cdoke]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Sep 02, 2006 (12:53 pm)
Well Jaguar did very well indeed as a middle class car, for 40+ years, before it became pretentious and forgot its origins I think. It's been middle class for as long as it has tried to be high class in other words.
I never thought of the Jaguar as unassuming, but rather too-assuming. The car tries too hard to be upper class when everyone knows that its just nouveau riche....not the same thing IMO....you can buy the BMW 325i for the same effect seems to me, and you get a lot better car for your $$$. Old money doesn't buy things that depreciate like rocks off a bridge in other words.
#103 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [Mr_Shiftright]
Sep 02, 2006 (1:26 pm)
Oh please. I will say that it must depend upon the situation. Exactly how many affluent people do you know...I'm talking in the range of net worth 250 million plus? I know quite a few. You have no reason to believe me, but I don't care. Let me give you an example..although their money is not as old as some, but they have had it for about 100 years. The Coors': when Pete Coors was pulled over for not stopping at a stop sign, he was driving their Jag with his wife Marilyn (who needs to change her hair). You don't have to believe me, but their son Scott, who I dated briefly is a homosexual (obviously: the fact that he is gay is not news), and is now dating a very nice dermatologist, Scott has an Audi A8L, an Land Rover LR3, and Mercedes SL (with a CU Boulder License plate), a Jaguar XK...I think that is it (EDIT: I forgot the most obvious of all the Ferrari Enzo). Paul, I won't say his last name, lives on the 13th green of Cherry Hills Golf Course, about a year ago he attended Stuart Marcus' (of the Neiman Marcus family) Funeral in Texas. He has a Cadillas Escalade and a oh...1992 or so XJS. Then their is Mike, probably the oldes moneyed person I know (Centuries of money), his mothers maiden name starts with an R and is a VERY respected German family. He has funnily enough, A new BMW M3 (just ordered: he couldn't wait until 2008 for the redesign), Jaguar Vandes Plas, and an old oh...60 somthing Rolls has been in his family for a long time, which he never drives it is actually the one in which he was driven to school in everyday when he was young in Michigan.
As for my Jag- it was a Christas present from my parents years ago. They actually bought their after they bought me mine.
Cars really are of the things that have a miniscule upper limit, the demographic for a Rolls Buyer is someone whose net worth is only 30 million- that is rather minscule in the grand scheme of things.
I have heard it said that the way in which some people shead the fetters of a commoner when they get money is by buying English cars, I believe this is primarily due to the conservative nature of the English and the fact they they have maintained at least in name their class system. The point is however, that conceptions of such things are rarely without some basis. I know plenty of people who are the very definition of old money who have jags, the above was a mere sampling.
#104 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [cdoke]
Sep 02, 2006 (2:17 pm)
Disguised name dropping...always amusing. Those in the know don't blab...and Colorado money might not be representative.
I am sure plenty of overly rich people with both legitimate and illegitimate fortunes (inheritance, old robber barons, etc) own Chevies and VWs too...not worth so much. Jag's primary buyer has likely never been anything more than the buyer of the average MB or BMW. That's the key here, the main demographic. I bet the average Jag buyer is worth a fraction of 30M....
#105 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [fintail]
Sep 02, 2006 (2:30 pm)
#106 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [fintail]
Sep 02, 2006 (4:02 pm)
Its rather undisguised I would say. But otherwise we would sit here and argue until the end of time about something with is rather superfluous. In any event I really haven't said anything which difficult to find out. I am sure you can look in the news to when good old Pete was cited with drunk driving and find some web source which says it was a jag. Mike in particular I have known for a long time, and would never betray his trust.
As far as the very wealthy, they display a broad range of tastes. People have varied tastes wealthy or not. There are billionaires that drive Lexus LS'. Jags demographic for the XJ is only slightly wealthier than the S class MB buyer (its actually statistically insignificant IMO) if I recall 257 for the MB and 264 for the XJ per annum. Although that may have changed given the new S is now a more expensive car to start.
The only people in that list who have "colorado money" are the Coors family. Neither Paul nor Mike are from here in fact Mike now lives in Seattle. The point of all of this is the generalization that Jaguars are the tools of the newly endowed, this is obviously not my experience.
As far as 30 M: I have never pretended or been under the illusion that a Jag is a Rolls Royce, nor shares the demographic. It Shares certain general traits with a Rolls, by virtue of being English, but that is about it.
#107 of 137 Re: Here is my ranking [cdoke]
Sep 02, 2006 (5:00 pm)
If it is such common knowledge, why hint and pose and drop part of a name but not all? Yes, a moot point...not really relevant. A simple "I know some very well-to-do people who own Jags" is a lot less pretentious and less likely to draw ire. Status seeking doesn't work very well online. If you don't want to betray trust, don't mention such details at all online...anonymity is never certain.
The crux of all this is that Jag buyers have no more "dynastic wealth" than those of other luxocar brands, personal anecdotes aside. It's always been an upper middle class brand, even with the XJ and modern cars, not just 50 years ago. Jaguar won't succeed trying to play with the S-class and 7ers not to mention the newer cheaper Bentleys, no matter that some people own both cars. The X-Type was an error I agree...but the XJ will be as high as they can go on the sedan front. I'll wager an awful lot of money the market won't accept anything higher, and if they go this route they'll have the equivalent of a VW Phaeton with a leaping cat on it.
Heck, I believe Bill Gates has an old style Lexus SC...yet his wealth could buy and sell all that previously mentioned money while he sleeps. Nobody said Jags are "tools of the newly endowed" (wow, that statement just screams trust-fundie with an entitlement mentality), just that 95%+ of their sales never went to the uber-rich. Personally, I see nothing wrong with that at all.