I suppose my thoughts on the Valkyrie are I'm not sure it's a great move for a company that's built its reputation on something other than Supercars/Hypercars.
There again, I don't really see the point in the DBX although I'm sure it'll sell in certain parts of the world.
The snag is if you've always been seen as the builder of prestige, front engined, high quality GTs, and over the years you've got that more right than wrong, when you then diversify in an effort to increase market share, rather than people buying your SUV (or Cygnet) because they want to be seen in prestigious GT manufacturer's vehicle, rather they don't buy your GTs because, hey, you're just an SUV (or city mini) manufacturer. Diversifying yet not diluting the brand is incredibly difficult to get right and I'm not convinced it'll work with a manufacturer who puts so much emphasis on its history and tradition.
As an aside having just been on the Aston website and seen their 'Q' service to bespoke your car, the fact that Aston seems to lean so heavily on its links to James Bond is funny in that James Bond didn't actually drive Aston Martins, at least he didn't in the books that the films were based on, he drove a Bentley. It was only changed to an Aston Martin by the director who wanted to change Bond's personality a bit and more of a snazzy sportscar fit that better than an old Bentley.
I suppose none of the above about the pitfalls of diversifying really helps as it's not really a solution more of a problem. Be interested if anyone had a solution though - what should Aston do?
I may be alone but I think getting back into F1 isn't a bad plan. I also note that the F1 pace car and medical car will now be Aston Martins (ok maybe the DBX has a role), again can't hurt their exposure. As long as neither breaks down of course...........
