A new interview with Calder

[TCMColorado]

Okay, so it is a fluff interview. It does not justify the level of vitriol in this thread. Calder has already addressed many of the concerning topics during her current media tour. Seriously, the criticism is misplaced. Let's not turn this forum into X or 4chan.

 

[carlg007]

Okay, so it is a fluff interview. It does not justify the level of vitriol in this thread. Calder has already addressed many of the concerning topics during her current media tour. Seriously, the criticism is misplaced. Let's not turn this forum into X or 4chan.

I think what you are seeing is a lot of frustrated customers with a lot of unanswered and or unresolved problems and promises! With just one small example, I can't even reset my service indicator!!!

 

[HereinDaRockies]

Okay, so it is a fluff interview. It does not justify the level of vitriol in this thread. Calder has already addressed many of the concerning topics during her current media tour. Seriously, the criticism is misplaced. Let's not turn this forum into X or 4chan.

Addressed MANY concerns? No she didn’t.. only mentioned Adas issue in passing in an earlier interview. If I missed the others, please point them out.

Then she and this cuck Brady does this cringe fluff piece of ineos’s company culture and building a safari vehicle for Jim Radcliffe as a birthday surprise.. lol what are we doing here? No one cares about the company and its people.. just build good differentiated stuff and we will give you our money. It’s purely transactional.

 

[Zimm]

I recall when Scott first put out "white papers" on truck reviews, and praised the capability of the Jeep Compass, or whatever that turd was. I gave it the "spock" hairy eyeball. But, that was over 2 decades ago. Clearly he knows 20x what he knew then. He frigging turned being an overland personality into a good living. Personally I wish I'da thought of that. I always just figured the best one could do is be the 4x4 version of a ski instructor, and die poor. Always bet against me. (PSU cost me 2g last week, I'm tellin' ya, it was a lock, man.) I'd gladly trade my world for his, Rick Steves, or Anthony Bourdain's (the version not hanging in a closet). Scott really really could give some in depth astute assessments of the weak and strong points of a truck if he wanted, he just never has. When OJ first came I posted about the lack of "negative" comments and his editor clearly stated they would only say nice things or nothing at all. I guess thats great for getting along bridge club, but dissapointing for an interview.

 

[mcdoogs]

- she feels 2025 is a year for Ineos to grow up like a mature oem and less like a start up

I really, really dislike this corporate conceit. You are a new-ish business vertical of an existing company with roughly $60B annual revenue.

Ratcliffe and the Ineos board are not angel investors, you the CEO are not seeking new rounds of funding annuallly, you are not a start up. "We are like a startup" is always just used as an excuse to cut corners and be sloppy and/or lower expectations from my experience inside massive corporations and their new business verticals.

 

[Lars]

Okay, so it is a fluff interview. It does not justify the level of vitriol in this thread. Calder has already addressed many of the concerning topics during her current media tour. Seriously, the criticism is misplaced. Let's not turn this forum into X or 4chan.

No vitriol, just observation and opinion. I think I expected more from Brady...he does have street cred. I would expect an interview more like Robert Pepper's L2SFBC YouTube channel did with the Austrailan Exec. It's possible after that Ineos PR said "Never again".

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hq6OQceIMo

 

[HereinDaRockies]

I really, really dislike this corporate conceit. You are a new-ish business vertical of an existing company with roughly $60B annual revenue.

Ratcliffe and the Ineos board are not angel investors, you the CEO are not seeking new rounds of funding annuallly, you are not a start up. "We are like a startup" is always just used as an excuse to cut corners and be sloppy and/or lower expectations from my experience inside massive corporations and their new business verticals.

But the parent company is in the oil and chemicals business. They have no clue and tons of unknown unknowns, I am sure. CEO has no automotive background either

 

[mcdoogs]

But the parent company is in the oil and chemicals business. They have no clue and tons of unknown unknowns, I am sure. CEO has no automotive background either

That's pretty irrelevant to the point though. They had the funding to hire experts in every critical role, buy a factory and the tooling needed, contract with automotive giants like Magna Steyr, build a global logistic chain including dealer network, run a worldwide marketing campaign (which btw almost certainly leveraged Ineos' existing marketing capabilities), etc.

Actual 'startup' companies do not have that kind of umbrella of safety and financial runway. Lack of in house automotive knowledge was about the easiest challenge to overcome compared to all the rest, and being a part of the Ineos corporation means it was actually feasible. They are hundreds of miles away from being a startup.

 

[Zimm]

That's pretty irrelevant to the point though. They had the funding to hire experts in every critical role, buy a factory and the tooling needed, contract with automotive giants like Magna Steyr, build a global logistic chain including dealer network, run a worldwide marketing campaign (which btw almost certainly leveraged Ineos' existing marketing capabilities), etc.

Actual 'startup' companies do not have that kind of umbrella of safety and financial runway. Lack of in house automotive knowledge was about the easiest challenge to overcome compared to all the rest, and being a part of the Ineos corporation means it was actually feasible. They are hundreds of miles away from being a startup.

They are like a startup, in that they are run as a cult of personality. The pleasing of the leader and the lack of market forces driving the design and funding may be an immediate blessing for papering over any unappealing shortcomings, but in the long run, it will be a curse as the company bullheadedly sticks to designs and applications that displeases actual customers. Besides, some tech startups had incredible funding. When Musk bought Tesla, he had a few billion. Unlike Tesla though, the US taxpayer isn't going to bail out the grift with rebates and credit sales, so Methinks this startup better start shifting gears, quickly. Just a personal conclusion.