Jaguar’s “Bold” Rebranding. What Do You Think?

They aren’t showing any twead caps or leather jodhpurs!

I thought there'd be tatas in silhouette.

Jaguar hasn't been relevant in years. This doesn't change anything.

Jaguar was never a brand that peaked my interest in the past. Logo change is meaningless for me

Their car designs still look pretty sharp now but they are aging after 16 years with Jaguar Land Rover under Tata ownership.

But, their marketing rebrand is shaping up to be an epic disaster based on online reactions.

Jaguar had an EV XJ sedan ready to launch, tooling complete and the XJ line shut down to change over for the new car three years ago. More than a billion dollars spent, and the car was a game-changer, and gorgeous to boot. They shitcanned the entire project two weeks prior to its launch and it never again saw the light of day. Today the brand has an SUV that used to share a platform with the Range Rover Velar. They make nothing else...

I am a huge Jaguar fan, but with the new car costing in the 175k range and every other new model in the pipeline set to cost at least double of what the previous models cost, I and most devotees of the marque are long past done. They will need an entirely new customer base to survive. Jaguar execs publicly admit that 85 percent of their loyalist customers are gone, and they need a new customer base moving forward. Given the reputation of the brand's reliability history, those new customers needed are never going to show up.

It’s no mistake that they made this move AFTER Clarkson and crew have officially retired…

I would actually love to have seen the Grand Tour episode reviewing this PoS.

I was smitten with the marque after installing a phone in a pair of XJ sedans belonging to Frankie Valli. I bought my first in 1991, a 1988 XJ6. I have also had a 1992, a '96, 2001, and a 2004. The V8 cars were magnificent machines, and outside of the electrical demons of the early XJ40 cars, the only non-routine problem I had was when the '88 car tossed valve with 270k on the clock.

Sadly, unless a steal of a deal shows up on an XKR 575, or XJR 575, I won't be looking their way again.

Emlyn wrote: »

Their car designs still look pretty sharp now but they are aging after 16 years with Jaguar Land Rover under Tata ownership.

But, their marketing rebrand is shaping up to be an epic disaster based on online reactions.

Yup, pretty well said. I just saw the "copy nothing" pic, umm, well, would colorful be a good word? I've got no dog in this hunt since I could never afford any Jaguar but it should be interesting to see what happens...

nooshinjohn wrote: »

show previous quotes

jdjohn wrote: »

Jaguar/Land Rover consistently have the highest cost-of-ownership, so it is a hard sell. Ford owned them for years, but still no improvement.

That would be factually wrong… for several years Jaguar, under Ford, had better initial quality rankings than most cars out there. It was not until Ford sold them off to Tata that quality went downhill once again.

Cost of ownership and initial quality rankings are not the same thing.

Making your statement, factually wrong.

Thanks to rapid depreciation and expensive maintenance, Jaguar has always scored poorly in cost of ownership calculations.

Even when Ford owned them.

Carmax for example outright refuses to buy jaguar when it is out of warranty or gives very very low wholesale auction offers

nooshinjohn wrote: »

show previous quotes

Upstatemax wrote: »

nooshinjohn wrote: »

jdjohn wrote: »

Jaguar/Land Rover consistently have the highest cost-of-ownership, so it is a hard sell. Ford owned them for years, but still no improvement.

That would be factually wrong… for several years Jaguar, under Ford, had better initial quality rankings than most cars out there. It was not until Ford sold them off to Tata that quality went downhill once again.

Cost of ownership and initial quality rankings are not the same thing.

Making your statement, factually wrong.

Thanks to rapid depreciation and expensive maintenance, Jaguar has always scored poorly in cost of ownership calculations.

Even when Ford owned them.

With 5 of them having been in my driveway, my experience says otherwise.routine maintenance is all I ever had to do and it was no more expensive than a Cadillac in that department. A good mechanic outside the dealership groups helps.125/hr for labor vs 285/hr at dealerships makes a huge difference.

Anecdotal experience can't be applied to this.

Ranking calculations can't account for finding a good, cheaper local mechanic. They need to take an average from the manufacturers dealership network, where most of these cars will go.

It also doesn't have an impact on the rapid depreciation faced by most Jaguars.

Similar to my Volvo, that has pretty expensive dealer labor rates and not exactly cheap parts. I don't worry much as I can do a lot of maintenance myself, keeping my personal cost of ownership lower.

But if I was talking with someone that wanted a car that was cheap to maintain, I wouldn't point them to Volvo. I know most people bring their car to the dealer for most repairs and maintenance, making those costs far more important to them.