Picture Car Confidential #6: Jaguar Rebrand
One thing about the internet, it can serve up more misinformed and disinforming hot takes in a millisecond than the entire in-patient population of a hundred psych wards on a bad day.
A case in point would be the hysterical reaction to Jaguar’s Concept 00 electric show car coupe. Or, more precisely, the bile that greeted its marketing campaign. Now, I’ll freely admit the teaser videos with their multi-racial, vaguely androgynous dancers in DayGlo clothing left me cold. Not because such individuals are objectionable, but because the campaign struck me as clichéd, not so fresh in conception, yet truly classical in its meaninglessness. Nothing new there, and no car to be seen? I’m all for tradition, but didn’t United Colors of Benetton do this 30 years ago?
So, where’d all the haters come from? Change is hard, and detractors in both the U.S. and the U.K. remained strikingly on message with each other regarding this ad and subsequent concept reveal, as if there was some satellite or undersea cable connecting them. People went mental. Taking a not-great campaign and making it a hot global news item for weeks by getting so mad about it gifted Jaguar and Concept 00 a lot more attention than they might have otherwise gotten. Ditto the outcry over Jaguar’s new logo, said to be an affront to all that was great and good about the company and its old logo, the one that, lest we forget, festooned an increasingly decreasing number of Jaguars—the root cause of the reboot.
For the record, I don’t care much for the new logo, either. But the thing is, I’ve always been of the belief that good cars sell themselves while bad ones aren’t saved by good marketing campaigns or ensorcelling logos. And when you’re fading into obscurity, all press is good press. Bringing us back to Concept 00 itself, which Jaguar flew me to England to see back in November, several weeks before its official unveiling at Art Miami.
The heavily embargoed early morning Jaguar media event in Stratford-Upon-Avon featured the teaser that (little did we know) would go on to offend so many. Accompanying the film were all of Jaguar Land Rover’s top executives personally making the pitch, freighted with bold promises to be “bold” and “different,” pledges which, come to think of it, one has heard before.
On the other hand, with Jaguar announcing the effective shuttering of all car manufacture for more than a year—while readying a shared-platform, three-car, all-electric lineup comprising a four-door GT based on the two-door Concept 00, as well as a limousine and an SUV-type thingy—it is undeniably doing something different. Higher prices across the board—think $130,000 and up—will leave the mass luxury market behind, while target volumes have been trimmed by more than two-thirds from the marque’s historic highs, another difference between this and most other resets, with anticipated worldwide sales falling to 50,000 units per annum. Of course, this may still prove unrealistically high. In which case, getting the volume wrong part may be good old Jaguar, and not different. But it’s too soon to say.
Cutting to the chase, I didn’t love the 00, at first. It’s no E-Type, to be sure, but it is different (even if I see faint echoes of a couple of concept stunners from the fairly distant past: the 2003 Cadillac Sixteen and 2006 Saab Aero X). No matter how much time passes, the E-Type continues to stand as an ever-present reminder that the model, which shocked the world with its beauty in 1961, has again proven itself at once a blessing and a millstone around Jaguar’s neck. When attempting to reinterpret this classic design and its spirit, Jaguar has never come close. How could it or anyone else?
I’m not given to blanket declarations, but it seems highly unlikely there’ll ever be another E-Type. Veterans of foreign cars won’t need reminding, either, that its replacement, Jaguar’s XJ-S, the last of the company’s designs in which Jaguar’s style lord and founder Sir William Lyons participated, was pilloried upon its release because… it didn’t look as cool as an E-Type. But the XJ-S ran for 21 years, and more than 115,000 were sold, which in Jaguar terms was hardly insignificant, selling at virtually the same rate on an annualized basis as the E-Type. And while E-Type sales fell over the course of its lifetime, XJ-S sales actually grew. Ironically, the XJ-S has lately been rediscovered and cast as an icon of ‘70s fashion, one that was suitably nipped and tucked during its lifetime to further extend this rolling homage to the past’s retro-charm-sphere to the ‘80s and ‘90s.
I didn’t love 00. But, mind you, I didn’t hate it. And as time has passed and I remember, too, that the four-door production successor to 00 could well clean up some of its less appealing details—that non-grille up front, for instance—I’m starting to like it better and better. It is more imposing and striking than beautiful, yes. But it cuts an undeniably baller profile. Not unlike a Rolls-Royce Phantom, it reminds us that excess is often the fruit of success and always has been. People forget (or never knew) that Jaguars and many other of the great marques since the beginning of automotive time have been thought vulgar and even tacky in their day by large segments of the public. Meanwhile, with each generation of only slightly tweaked XJ sedan, Jaguar’s critics wondered why it didn’t try something, to coin a phrase, bold and different? Then, it happens, and, poof, they’re mad all over.
In short, with two regally large asks—reliable, fully-sorted electrics and a properly luxe interior (lose the plastic ashtrays and penalty box austerity introduced during the Ford-ownership era)—I am hopeful. The new Jaguar could well be an object of desire for those with the cash. And, though it hurts to say so, the price point isn’t as expensive as it sounds in these days of $300,000 Porsches and $250,000 Range Rovers. Fact is, $130,000 is considerably less than most of the upscale competition charges and, in the end, I believe, Jaguar’s audacious extroversion will help. As long as it doesn’t feel cheap, the way too many Jaguars have of late, it will have followed the original Jaguar formula of delivering more car for the money to those who may not be the richest or spendiest, but who will not be poor.
The reset also makes Jaguar one of the very few companies to live up to its all-electric pledges of a few years back. This fact alone clearly put some critics’ noses out of joint. There’ll be a lot of folks who’ll continue to say that this proves that Jaguar’s parent organization, JLR, shepherds of the very successful Range Rover and Land Rover brands, are nuts, out of touch, or less than manly, that electric cars will never happen, that people don’t want them. What better time for the launch of another salvo in the culture war than the launch of a new Jaguar? To which I say, blah blah blah. Jaguar is to be saluted.
The present moment in automotive history is hugely consequential and clearly massive change is afoot. To cry for Jaguar’s lost heritage is to cry for that which is past, something I, admittedly, do every day even though I know it’s pointless. It’s also to overlook that Jaguar was, historically, never a volume carmaker and rarely made real money. People forget that when Lyons threw in the towel on running Jaguar as a stand-alone company, selling out to BMC in 1966 (to form the short-lived British Motor Holdings, later British Leyland) for a mere $51 million in shares and debentures, it was because Jaguar couldn’t fund its new model programs despite sales up 30 percent from the previous year. Even in this banner year, fewer than 23,000 Jaguars of all types were sold worldwide.
Will Jaguar be as polarizing in the future as it been lately? I’ll make no predictions, as who would’ve imagined the concept’s teaser campaign triggering an international culture firestorm? And who was expecting the frosty, highly politicized reception that greeted Tesla’s Cybertruck? All I’d like to know from all the people concerned about Jaguar’s new style: Where were you when so many hideous over-styled, undercooked crimes against automotive aestheticism—like 90 percent of today’s pickups and SUVs and the many automotive examplars of what Bob Lutz once called the “angry toaster” look—previously landed? Who gave the Lamborghini Urus and Toyota bZ4X a free pass?
The car business is changing rapidly. Duh. So seems to be Jaguar. I don’t know about you, but I wish it the best.
***
A man of many pursuits (rock band manager, automotive journalist, concours judge, purveyor of picture cars for film and TV), Jamie Kitman lives and breathes vintage machines. His curious taste for interesting, oddball, and under-appreciated classics—which traffic through his Nyack, New York warehouse—promises us an unending stream of delightful cars to discuss. For more Picture Car Confidential columns, click here. Follow Jamie Kitman on Instagram at @commodorehornblow; follow Octane Film Cars @octanefilmcars and at www.octanefilmcars.com.
Jaguar is finished. What a shame.
I’m with you on this one. Considering all their electrical problems they have had over the years is going fully electric the best idea. Plus there needs some inspiration in its design. This design spells out grade school designing. No soul. Past Jaguar had a soul. This one is just turning every Brits head in shame.
I agree with Jamie. There are hints here of what could, and hopefully will, become an attractive automobile. Perhaps not for everyone but still. It seems like Jaguar is teasing everyone with the 00. Almost the you have to look traffic accident. Regardless of the fact that most people almost universally hate this car they keep checking it out. If you look at it and think – not in pink, loose the gold and show me stainless, tidy up the rear and front and make it smaller, show me with a rear window and increase the side window height, etc. etc. – its almost like being involved in the design process or at least watching it evolve. Maybe Jaguar is just stringing us along, gauging public reaction while keeping us interested. Okay I’ll play.
I feel if Jaguar has nothing more to offer it may be time for them to go.
To me what they have done to this point is to delay. If they had something old they would show it or parts of it. Song, dance and generic tidbits are not doing anything to make a true car person thirst for more.
Still not convinced, though I agree that to the rich (of many countries and political persuasions) vulgarity sells.
In its homeland, Jaguar sedans were seen more as “flash for less cash” than the established luxury brands. Big grilles, leathrr interiors and a promise of performance made them a hit with those trying to impress. In the UK, they call them “pub owner cars”, here I’d suggest a middle manager trying to look above his station, a tradesman looking for respectability, or perhaps a up and coming gangsters car.
Even the E-Type, once you get past the hype and overused Enzo quote, is a bit overdone. A rolling phallic symbol at best.
From the 70s to the Ford-era, their reliability was a joke. Car magazine writers lavished praise during tests, but I wonder how many of them would spend THEIR cash on a auto with faults they could overlook in a loaned press car.
A UK friend was a company director with a chauffeured sedan. Every time I rode in it something was broken.
Even their recent SUVs have had a series if engine failures related to fuel and oil mixing issues. Out of warranty expenses for rebuilds are £13,000.
So, going back to vulgarity after its failure to build a UK BMW, shouldn’t be unexpected.
As for the all-electric pledge, I am unsure. I’m to the left politically of many around here, but in seeing “populist” candidates winning in the US and abroad, it feels like building electrics exclusively is catering to the demands of (former) politicians, rather than present customers. Who cares what the politicians demanded a few years back? They’re in no position to order anyone to buy electric cars any more.
Also, Jamie, I agree with most of what you said, but “penalty box” austerity in the Ford era? Which Jags were you speaking of? Our aughts-era XK8 and XJ8 have gleaming wood dashes filled with gauges, rich smelling leather that wears well, and every power option extant in that timeframe, except maybe dual zone HVAC (which is dubiously useful in a cabin so small)… also, I’d rate them less troublesome than my BMW of the same age.
I’m not sure what I’d have done differently to halt their sales decline, but I don’t think I’d have played the SUV game. Land Rover is the gold standard, and it’s all the same corp entity, who cares which side of the showroom sells more SUVs? There’s a lot of lament about “this xxxxx car doesn’t sell” when I find myself muttering, that yes, if all you sell are 2.0 turbo crossovers, then yes, 100% of your sales will be 2.0 turbo crossovers. Having your CEO complaining that none of your cars make the company any money seems, well, unseemly.
I’m referring to the X-Types, with their Ford underpinnings, and the S-Type with its plastic ashtrays and all the cheap plastic and lesser wood dashboards (in part in response to safety legislation) found in XJs from XJ40 on.
The problem with this car is that it doesn’t look like a car. It looks like a ’90s video game rendering of a car. It’s that undeveloped. It appears that the marketing campaign came first, then they did the minimal amount of car design to fill in the blank.
As they say in Physics, it’s not even wrong.
The problem here is that Jag has been dead for a long time. There’s a company CALLED Jaguar, but it’s not real, and it just discontinued all of its under-performing products.
So would you buy an expensive, soulless, short range electric luxo-barge something from a faceless Chinese company? It says Jaguar but you know it’s not really a Jag…. Why would you give them your money? In the end, the name Jaguar STILL belongs to the E-Type and they will never escape it.
It’s actually a faceless Indian company.
It puzzles me why the hyperbolically-praised E-Type design was essentially abandoned, or at least, relegated to an iconic benchmark, and not simply undergone a process of incremental evolution, to remain a current, state-of-the-art design, as the decades progressed.
An example of a successful contemporary of the XK-E, the nearly-seamless evolution of the “primitive” Porsche 911 design, since its 1964 model-year introduction, reveals how features of its initial attractive design (and performance) has not been lost over time, and remains desirable, with elements even applied to the 4-door Panamera.
As a side-note, it’s impossible to notice how similar the front view of this monochromatic Jag resembles the mask of Marvel’s Iron Man character.
Mikey…money is why the E-Types theme or architecture (or whatever they want to call it) was not carried forward. And British government meddling in their auto industry didn’t help either. From all accounts BL was a disaster. When you have bureaucrats running a company, there is no one around to make the kind of decision you mentioned.
I’ll throw them some shade and remind folks that no one knew where the market was heading post 1968-ish safety and environmental regs and the 1974 oil crisis.
When the XJS was being designed, the 911 was still in its first generation, the long running family you mention would not be apparent until the 1990s.
All true, JohnB; all much too true. I appreciate your wiser and wider perspective, revealing my myopic, superficial, and oversimplified evaluations.
Without a doubt, it would be an understatement to describe those years as an era of unstable and overwhelming political, social, and economic turmoil, which unfortunately are repeating similarly, contributing to the perplexing conditions we are witnessing today.
Stop putting that hideous thing in the thumbnails. Use censor pixels.
Is it really that “triggering” for you? It’s a concept car. It can’t hurt you.
We have lost Williams concept of the Jaguar Cars TATA made some bad choice affecting sales and why they thought making on SUV to compete against the Land Rover did not make sense to me going all electric is Ok but not for petrol heads I do not like the design I own a XJS and I am not going to being giving this car up the other questions just who will be buying them the younger generation won’t be able to afford them maybe I am to old and set in my ways to see a way forward for Jaguar cars time will tell just my thoughts on this subject.
Can I breathe now? Punctuation is your friend…
Let the market decide the fate of Jaguar. Regardless of our economic or social status, let our hard earned cash determine where Jaguar goes.
Thanks for the many years of beautiful autos, Jaguar, but alas, then end is here.
Jaguar has made some of the most beautiful cars ever. The company has placed much emphasis on their cars aesthetic appeal, and it has carried them for many years. A Skunk is a pretty animal, when you think about it, but it STINKS.
Jaguar must improve and refine the “Nonaesthetic” elements and lower their prices until the demand for a beautiful, well-made automobile lifts them to that level.
If it doesn’t continually leak oil, overheat, spontaneously erupt smoke from electrical components and “fail to proceed” at the most inopportune moments, it cannot claim to be a Jaguar.
Upper case J, lower case a, upper case G, upper case U, lower case a, lower case r. Boring typography, just like the 00.