McLaren Automotive denies reports of Apple buyout talks

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2016
After rumors swirled of a potential Apple buy of boutique sports car vendor McLaren Automotive, the car manufacturer has denied that it is having investment talks with Apple at this time.




The earlier claims initially published by the Financial Times and independently backed up by The New York Times claimed that Apple started negotiations to purchase McLaren for between ?1 billion and ?1.5 billion ($1.3 billion to $2 billion) several months ago, around the time that rumors were circulating about Apple buying McLaren's racing team.

McLaren has since issued a statement, declaring that the company "is not in discussion with Apple in respect of any potential investment" at this time. Apple has declined comment on the matter.

Apple's "Project Titan" was discovered in early 2015. AppleInsider discovered the automotive project was being run out of a top-secret facility in Sunnyvale, Calif. in early 2015.

Project Titan allegedly involved more than 1,000 employees, including existing Apple engineers extracted from other divisions, incorporated with auto industry specialists hired away from other car companies.

In early September, Apple was said to have laid off dozens of workers from the as-yet unannounced Apple Car project. The layoffs were said to be because of a shift away from a bumper-to-bumper plan, with the future Project Titan focus homing in on automotive software like self-driving cars.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    irelandireland Posts: 17,547member
    Who's the source and what were their motives? Also, if you are in acquisition talks they are not investment talks—different. If you are buying a company you're not investing in it per se.
    edited September 2016 cintosyojimbo007brian green
  • Reply 2 of 29
    Which is corporate-speak for "even if we were (and we probably are) we wouldn't admit it."
    volcanbuckalecbrian greenpscooter63
  • Reply 3 of 29
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,288member
    Which is corporate-speak for "even if we were (and we probably are) we wouldn't admit it."
    Why comment at all if it's not true? No, I suspect that there's been some confusion about Apple, F1 racing, and what Apple's interest might be. 
    mdriftmeyer
  • Reply 4 of 29
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,007member
    From NYT article:
    "Apple has been talking with McLaren, the automaker known for its Formula One racecars, about an investment in the company, according to two people briefed on the talks who asked to remain anonymous because the discussions were confidential."

    It never ceases to amaze me how many people break the law, both corporate and governmental, simply to get a story. I hope McLaren seeks out the "anonymous" persons and tars and feathers them. There's no such thing about freedom of speech when it comes to corporate discussions, whether they are confidential or not. As for the NYT and Financial Times publishing these rumors, I hope McLaren goes after them because they received and probably paid for confidential information, which was stolen because these anonymous persons didn't have permission to disclose them so they were in effect stealing the information from McLaren. It's time people are held accountable for all this theft of confidential information.

    McLaren Automotive Limited is a private company.
    edited September 2016 jasenj1
  • Reply 5 of 29
    Which is corporate-speak for "even if we were (and we probably are) we wouldn't admit it."
    Of course not. Project Titan isn't even supposed to exist according to Apple since they do not comment on speculation. Therefore, even if they actually were in talks, Apple wouldn't let them speak about it.
    cintosirelandbrian green
  • Reply 6 of 29
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    Damn rumors!!

    A rumor will run around the world while truth is tying it's shoes.
    jasenj1
  • Reply 7 of 29
    After rumors swirled of a potential Apple buy of boutique sports car vendor McLaren Automotive, the car manufacturer has denied that it is having investment talks with Apple at this time.
    ...because talks are with McLaren Technology, not McLaren Automotive.
    A gal can hope can't she?
    squareback
  • Reply 8 of 29
    Which is corporate-speak for "even if we were (and we probably are) we wouldn't admit it."
    Actually, it could be a tad more complicated: under UK takeover rules (for public companies), if a potential acquirer or target denies the rumor of an acquisition, no offer can be made or accepted between the two for six months following the denial. I am not sure if it applies to private companies. Just saying that they have to be very careful and precise about what they say.
    palominebrian green
  • Reply 9 of 29

    rob53 said:
    As for the NYT and Financial Times publishing these rumors, I hope McLaren goes after them because they received and probably paid for confidential information...
    That's not going to happen; it's a non-starter. And neither the FT nor the NYT is in the habit of paying for stories. Period
    tmayhmm
  • Reply 10 of 29
    irelandireland Posts: 17,547member
    Which is corporate-speak for "even if we were (and we probably are) we wouldn't admit it."
    Actually, it could be a tad more complicated: under UK takeover rules (for public companies), if a potential acquirer or target denies the rumor of an acquisition, no offer can be made or accepted between the two for six months following the denial. I am not sure if it applies to private companies. Just saying that they have to be very careful and precise about what they say.
    I'd hazard a guess it's a different set of rules for private companies.
    edited September 2016 brian green
  • Reply 11 of 29
    ireland said:
    Who's the source and what were their motives? Also, if you are in acquisition talks they are not investment talks—different. If you are buying a company you're not investing in it per se.
    That's a good point but only time will tell if Apple is actually buy McLaren.

    In any case I am now reading a new rumor about Apple buying Lit Motors.
    I think that would be even cooler and a lot less expensive than McLaren.



    brian greennolamacguy
  • Reply 12 of 29
    Notice how they said they specifically said weren't in "investment" talk with Apple, but didn't say anything about being bought out completely... 
    brian greentdknox
  • Reply 13 of 29
    Interesting. 

    so... Apple would only spend upwards of 2 billion on a supercar company with all the crazy engineering talent and facilities required to make cars like that possible...

    yet it paid 3.2 billion for a crappy headphone company with a crappy app. 

    That seriously adds some perspective. 
    brian greenrogifan_new
  • Reply 14 of 29
    ireland said:
    Who's the source and what were their motives? Also, if you are in acquisition talks they are not investment talks—different. If you are buying a company you're not investing in it per se.
    i was just about to say that... lol they denied in estement not buyout ..! and the price tag, to me is, perplexing.. 1.5 million for the most hightech, kick ass supecar makers and one of the most Famous F1 names 3 billion for Beats ....
    brian green
  • Reply 15 of 29
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,524member
    Interesting. 

    so... Apple would only spend upwards of 2 billion on a supercar company with all the crazy engineering talent and facilities required to make cars like that possible...

    yet it paid 3.2 billion for a crappy headphone company with a crappy app. 

    That seriously adds some perspective. 
    Complete troll BS.  With continued success of Apple Music and the growth in Beats headphone revenue, and Beats wireless line now using the W1 chip, the acquisition of Beats looks better all the time.
    nolamacguytmayfastasleep
  • Reply 16 of 29
    Interesting. 

    so... Apple would only spend upwards of 2 billion on a supercar company with all the crazy engineering talent and facilities required to make cars like that possible...

    yet it paid 3.2 billion for a crappy headphone company with a crappy app. 

    That seriously adds some perspective. 
    Beats was a very profitable company and about to become a lot more profitable with a well known brand name.
    McLaren can't touch that although they are just what Apple needs because they have very little baggage.

    nolamacguytmayfastasleep
  • Reply 17 of 29
    ireland said:
    Who's the source and what were their motives? Also, if you are in acquisition talks they are not investment talks—different. If you are buying a company you're not investing in it per se.
    i was just about to say that... lol they denied in estement not buyout ..! and the price tag, to me is, perplexing.. 1.5 million for the most hightech, kick ass supecar makers and one of the most Famous F1 names 3 billion for Beats ....
    Value doesn't depend on whether you think something is cool or not... some basic, perhaps even boring, stuff like cash flows, growth, and risk are pretty much the factors that matter.

    Unless you want to say something about the cash flows, growth prospects, and risks of Beats versus McLaren, you should probably move along.
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 18 of 29
    McLaren is the Apple of the automotive world.  It's probably become clear that they need help on chassis, engine side of things.  Makes more sense to me than Tesla
    tmaymonstrosity
  • Reply 19 of 29
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,567member
    Financial Times writer stands by story;

  • Reply 20 of 29
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,007member
    tmay said:
    Financial Times writer stands by story;

    Good, now they can reveal their informants and prove it.
Sign In or Register to comment.