2011 Lotus Evora, We Finance Up To 96 Months, Be Like James Bond 007!!, No Guns on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lotus sells loads more cars, earns way more money

Sports-car company Lotus has reason to be excited. It released some facts on its sales and financial performance for the 2016 and 2017 fiscal year, and it has seen some impressive improvements. According to the company, it sold nearly 60 percent more cars in mainland Europe compared with the 2015/2016 fiscal year, and it sold six times as many cars in the U.S. compared with that year. This helped it go from a loss of GBP16.3 million for the previous year in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) to a GBP2 million profit EBITDA. The fact that those numbers are given before all those extra expenses is noteworthy, though, as it means the company isn't truly profitable yet, despite major gains. The company did report numbers that only excluded tax, and those show the company still lost money. But the good news is that it lost much, much less money than the year before. Before taxes for the 2015/2016 fiscal year, the company lost GBP41.2 million, and this year, it only lost GBP11.2 million. The company expects it will be profitable before tax in the coming year. So Lotus isn't perfectly healthy yet, but this, combined with Geely's recent acquisition, shows it's well on its way to becoming fit as a fiddle. We like the cars Lotus makes, so we hope that things keep getting better, and that we'll maybe get more Lotus models in the future, beyond just the Evora road car and 3-Eleven track car. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Lotus Evora 400: First Drive View 29 Photos Image Credit: Lotus Earnings/Financials Lotus Coupe Lightweight Vehicles Performance

New Lotus SUV could be based on Volvo architecture

Last year, Chinese carmaker Geely upped its stake in Lotus to a majority, recently investing more money into the British brand. Now, talking with Automotive News, CEO Jean-Marc Gales says Geely has approved three new models: two sports cars and the third an SUV. The sports cars will be announced later this year, and they will reach production in 2020. The last time a properly new Lotus debuted was in 2009 with the Evora, so a decade later new products are certainly due. But what about that SUV? Autocar says that since Geely also owns Volvo, that makes it possible for Lotus to base the SUV onto the Volvo SPA platform, which is also used in the XC60 and XC90. The choice of platform would mean the SUV would have to be a four-cylinder model, but that's nothing new to Lotus. It could even use Volvo's "Twin Engine" hybrid setup, which would mean a power output of over 400 horsepower as stock, and that with Lotus' eagerness for lightness could be a potent combination. Autocar quotes Gales as saying, "It will go round bends like nothing else in its segment." The target weight for the approximately Porsche Macan-sized SUV is under 2,000 kilos (4,400 pounds), and the Macan weighs 4244 pounds in 400-hp Turbo guise. The Lotus SUV is projected to hit the market in "about four years," and it's very likely to be built in China instead of Britain, as the Chinese market is very enticing — especially for this class of vehicle. The vehicles will still be designed at Lotus' Hethel HQ. Related Video:

European commission investigating F1 finances and anti-competitive accusations

The Kingdom of Formula One reminds us of renaissance Florence - ruled by a singular chieftan behind a mask of representative involvement, rife with spectacularly convoluted machinations, awash in innovations that help define our world and far-flung, vindictive misery. If we found out Bernie Ecclestone's real last name was de Medici, well, it would explain a lot. Now after a bit of back-and-forth, the European Commission (EC) has taken aim at the kingdom, investigating whether F1 is anti-competitive and if the FIA has abused its antitrust agreement. The reason for EC scrutiny is that a British member of the European Parliament who represents an area in southwest England, Anneliese Dodds, has fielded complaints from engineering companies in her constituency that recent moves in F1 have put them out of business. She wrote to the EC to question why the FIA now has a stake in F1 when it signed an agreement in 2001 to be solely a governing body and abdicate any stakeholding in the sport. She also questioned the F1 Strategy Group, a group of the six top teams in F1 that makes decisions about the direction of the sport; she says that the Strategy Group not only appears to be a case of the F1 shirking its rule-making duty, it has resulted in unfair treatment of the small teams that aren't in the group. Dodds has a bit of a point. In 2001, the FIA sold F1's commercial rights to Ecclestone for 100 years for a sum of $313.7 million. That was done to placate European regulators who insisted that "the role of FIA will be limited to that of a sports regulator, with no commercial conflicts of interest." Although the rights are ultimately owned by the FIA and bring in a $10M fee every year from Formula One, those rights bring in $1.6 billion each year to Formula One Management (FOM), the company that owns F1. When Ecclestone was trying to get the new Concorde Agreement signed in 2013 that governs the running of the sport, the FIA wouldn't sign, saying it wanted F1 to share a larger slice of its revenue – the FIA has been losing money for years, see. To the get the FIA to sign, Ecclestone sold it a one-percent stake in F1 for $460,000 and gave the FIA a $5M signing 'bonus;' whenever F1 has its IPO, that stake is estimated to be worth about $120 million - not a bad return. Yet, according to the aforementioned 2001 agreement, the FIA can't have that equity stake.