Because the revenues figure are being misquoted/conflated as the "profit" figures in the media, so pointing out the difference.Not sure why revenue is relevant when talking profit. (i assume you mean 2024 reported in 2025?)
Because the revenues figure are being misquoted/conflated as the "profit" figures in the media, so pointing out the difference.Not sure why revenue is relevant when talking profit. (i assume you mean 2024 reported in 2025?)
Yea you can see it by looking at the value of their shares. It has been flat for years. Absolute non-event and most likely it will tank once the wokemobile fails to sell.
A company doesn't cut jobs when they are making lots of profit. Either it's spin or they are miss-reporting it (which will come back to bite later if they are).
Positive increases in share price is very rarely directly related to profitability, unpredictability tends to change the share price more than anything. Intact stability suggests that the market is broadly ok with what JLR are doing.
As for job cuts it can be down to loads of different things. Preparing for restructuring or international movements, changes in focus, cutting dead wood internally to drive further growth, and even driving up profits to keep up with historic growth.
A year on year increase in profit is only good if you can keep it up, and in lots of cases keep up the rate of increase.
right. But also using 2025 numbers when 2025 hasn’t finished yet ?Because the revenues figure are being misquoted/conflated as the "profit" figures in the media, so pointing out the difference.
There are no such thing as JLR shares, imagine commenting on their movement. Pure comedy.
Mind you this is the same guy saying Renault shares are a good buy right now and nvidea wouldn’t go over 140
Definitely a cult.
Should we be discussing MOTs instead or something ? Or is it wrong to correct miss information. Did VW cut jobs due to Porsche sales ?I’d rather not, I reckon they could send a glass eye to sleep.
Thanks. We got there in the endFair enough, I thought it was about Jaguar itself, not JLR. I'll happily admit that.
Which kind of undermines my whole argument.
Point stands though, if JLR are posting record profits and Jaguar isn't producing anything, could profitability from Jaguar have prevented these voluntary redundancies?
My other discussion point also stands, this might just be the tip of the iceberg. It might also be fluff for clicks. We won't find out for a while yet.
JLR and Jaguar must have some shared resources especially in the delayed electification domain (they're not terrorist cells), so any right-sizing by one of the twins can be caused by other
Would’ve thought this was his biggest involvement..arguably Mardell's biggest involvement has been his role in Jaguar's controversial 'woke' rebrand
And sounds like he just wants to retire.By the last fiscal year, Mardell has successfully coordinated a meteoric turnaround for the business, with JLR posting its strongest pre-tax profit result in a decade for the year ending 31 March 2025.
indeed. I am utterly fed up with the quality of headlines in the "news" these days.. Even if ultimately the story is accurate if you read it so many people just see a headline and make a conclusion - which in an ideal world, whilst not the best thing to do, it should not be outrageous to think a headline would be a fair abstract of the article which followed.Great example of headlines vs story
Although I sound like I’m in a cult for being balanced apparently
lol i didnt know that!. i shall keep that in mind (i only read the odd thing on there when it pops up on my news feed and as it has its own domain name i didnt twig. i genuinely thought it was a proper financial source!.I hate to break it to you but ‘This Is Money’ is a subsection of the daily fail and shouldn’t be considered reliable.