Prices increase update from Lotus - and stopping of reservations for V6 FE

Please be advised that, as a result of significantly increasing costs, the Lotus Emira will later this year be subject to new pricing.

Whilst a significant level of cost increase has been absorbed, with effect from 1 June 2023, the retail price will increase to £81,995 (incl VAT) for the Emira V6 First Edition, and £77,795 (incl VAT) for the Emira First Edition 4-cylinder turbocharged variant. Full pricing details can be found on our website. However, your Emira reservation will not be affected by this increase, we can confirm your reservation has been price protected.

We are fully committed to our production schedule and in the next two weeks, we will be in touch via email to update you further on the progression of your Lotus Emira.

Due to overwhelming demand, we will be closing reservations for Lotus Emira V6 First Edition. We will be sharing the exact timings soon.

 

[ADC]

This is such a frustrating situation for everybody, including Lotus. Being delayed through issues and circumstances they had no control over. Incredibly unfortunate timing trying to get a new model into production in a new facility with a new production process, what with the Covid debacle and all the problems that caused worldwide. Not being prepared for an avalanche of deposits beyond anything they've ever had before. It's all just terribly unfortunate for everyone involved.

Now we get price increases we all knew had to happen due to inflation which is hitting everything everywhere globally. The sticky issue now is what is the legal definition of an order versus a deposit, with a company that the customer can order directly from (the U.K.)? Technically a deposit is refundable, so it's not the same as a hard order which is not refundable. At least that's how it is in the U.S. I don't know how British law would rule on that. Matt's video could technically be classified as referring to actual orders versus deposits. If he had said "The price quoted for your order" instead of "Emira" it would have been clearer. Because a deposit is refundable, technically it can be viewed as a 'maybe' you'll order, but because it is refundable, it's not a guarantee you're going to place an actual order. And therein lies the issue here.

Since it wasn't possible to place a hard order on the models for which prices were quoted, does that legally bind Lotus to those prices? For PR purposes it would, but would it in a court of law? If you've made a non-refundable down payment on an agree-to-purchase hard order, that's a separate issue, and those seem to be price-protected. A deposit isn't a guarantee that you're going to go through with an actual hard order.

If all models were already in production and people had been ordering and buying them at advertised prices, it would be different, but this is really fuzzy right now. Promised models that haven't been produced yet, being advertised at price points based on pre-production prototypes, that brought in thousands of deposits as a result. It's a PR nightmare for sure, but the legalities of it are something else again. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

Haven't Lotus continually referred to "record number of orders" and such, so they clearly think that those placing deposits are placing orders.

Good point from Gizmo.

The way I had considered The Video Promise was, who could he reasonably be presumed to be addressing with a broad mailshot Youtube video, if practically nobody had placed a "hard order" (i.e. gone through the checkout process) at that point in time? I don't think it is unreasonable to say that statement was directly aimed at depositors.

I guess it means didly squat unless somebody is riled up enough to test that in court. *sigh*

 

[Eagle7]

Haven't Lotus continually referred to "record number of orders" and such, so they clearly think that those placing deposits are placing orders.

Well we know they weren't, they were deposits, which is an issue for Lotus as far as terminology. They of course wanted to present a glowing report of how things are financially, which probably was the incentive to call them 'orders', but there IS a difference between an order and a deposit. Don't know how this is going to play out in U.K. courts, as I now fully expect there will be a lawsuit from somebody, if not a class-action suit.

 

[KAR120C]

This is such a frustrating situation for everybody, including Lotus. Being delayed through issues and circumstances they had no control over. Incredibly unfortunate timing trying to get a new model into production in a new facility with a new production process, what with the Covid debacle and all the problems that caused worldwide. Not being prepared for an avalanche of deposits beyond anything they've ever had before. It's all just terribly unfortunate for everyone involved.

Now we get price increases we all knew had to happen due to inflation which is hitting everything everywhere globally. The sticky issue now is what is the legal definition of an order versus a deposit, with a company that the customer can order directly from (the U.K.)? Technically a deposit is refundable, so it's not the same as a hard order which is not refundable. At least that's how it is in the U.S. I don't know how British law would rule on that. Matt's video could technically be classified as referring to actual orders versus deposits. If he had said "The price quoted for your order" instead of "Emira" it would have been clearer. Because a deposit is refundable, technically it can be viewed as a 'maybe' you'll order, but because it is refundable, it's not a guarantee you're going to place an actual order. And therein lies the issue here.

Since it wasn't possible to place a hard order on the models for which prices were quoted, does that legally bind Lotus to those prices? For PR purposes it would, but would it in a court of law? If you've made a non-refundable down payment on an agree-to-purchase hard order, that's a separate issue, and those seem to be price-protected. A deposit isn't a guarantee that you're going to go through with an actual hard order.

If all models were already in production and people had been ordering and buying them at advertised prices, it would be different, but this is really fuzzy right now. Promised models that haven't been produced yet, being advertised at price points based on pre-production prototypes, that brought in thousands of deposits as a result. It's a PR nightmare for sure, but the legalities of it are something else again. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

It's very fuzzy. Many of us paid a non-refundable deposit which allowed us to have a named spot on the FE list, and the ability to specifically spec out the car we want built especially for us. Win or lose, you'd waste a bunch of money in court since that is very close to an actual order, if not technically one.

 

[EM12AAM]

Haven't Lotus continually referred to "record number of orders" and such, so they clearly think that those placing deposits are placing orders.

Yes but I'm afraid that legally the order isn't placed until you pay your third deposit, as others have said. I'm sure it could be argued that the first deposit constitutes an order but I'd strongly suspect that the Lotus small print covers them and is pretty water tight.

I will admit that I am very tilted by this. If they've known for some time that this was inevitable and have been absorbing the extra cost then they should have put the price up for new orders at that point and honoured the quoted price for those who had already paid deposits.

In honesty it's the way we've been treated that irks me as much as the extra £££.

 

[912Matt]

My first selfish thoughts too

Yes, appreciate now that was a little insensitive of me

 

[FlashingBlade]

What makes this worse is the volume of cars that have been delivered that have already been flipped whilst other customers sit by waiting for a car they're planning on keeping. I know this is out of the hands of Lotus to a large extent but there must be something close to 10-15% of delivered cars being flipped.

 

[idleuser]

California would like to have a word with Lotus.

12024.6. No person, firm, corporation, or association shall advertise, solicit, or represent by any means, a
product for sale or purchase if it is intended to entice a consumer into a transaction different from that
originally represented.

If Lotus USA decides to raise prices, I certainly won't make it easy for them to just wave their finger at me and say "pay up or shut up". We have been patiently waiting for the last 2+ years, with many of us selling our cars and or passing up on being on another brand with the promise of getting our Emira with the quoted price for FEs and Base Editions.

According to the time lines, the production date for the FE has been shifted from Jan 2023 to April 2023 which puts the first "delivered" on schedule for July/Aug 2023 delivery which is outside of the price protection.

Furthermore, Lotus is slated to deliver 700 FEs to North America by the end of the year and are announcing Base V6 info in Q3 2023. Base edition according to the time line is slated for Q1 or Q2 delivery in 2024.

 

[KAR120C]

California would like to have a word with Lotus.

12024.6. No person, firm, corporation, or association shall advertise, solicit, or represent by any means, a
product for sale or purchase if it is intended to entice a consumer into a transaction different from that
originally represented.

If Lotus USA decides to raise prices, I certainly won't make it easy for them to just wave their finger at me and say "pay up or shut up". We have been patiently waiting for the last 2+ years, with many of us selling our cars and or passing up on being on another brand with the promise of getting our Emira with the quoted price for FEs and Base Editions.

According to the time lines, the production date for the FE has been shifted from Jan 2023 to April 2023 which puts the first "delivered" on schedule for July/Aug 2023 delivery which is outside of the price protection.

Furthermore, Lotus is slated to deliver 700 FEs to North America by the end of the year and are announcing Base V6 info in Q3 2023. Base edition according to the time line is slated for Q1 or Q2 delivery in 2024.

I think Lotus could definitively say they did not do any of this to entice a person into a bait and switch situation. You're seeing black helicopters if you think this whole situation is a set up to deceive buyers. Not saying it's a good situation, just not a bait and switch.

 

[idleuser]

I think Lotus could definitively say they did not do any of this to entice a person into a bait and switch situation. You're seeing black helicopters if you think this whole situation is a set up to deceive buyers. Not saying it's a good situation, just not a bait and switch.

You're thinking this is bait and switch which I never once said it was. These are California consumer protection laws.

 

[Nova]

This is such a frustrating situation for everybody, including Lotus. Being delayed through issues and circumstances they had no control over. Incredibly unfortunate timing trying to get a new model into production in a new facility with a new production process, what with the Covid debacle and all the problems that caused worldwide. Not being prepared for an avalanche of deposits beyond anything they've ever had before. It's all just terribly unfortunate for everyone involved.

Now we get price increases we all knew had to happen due to inflation which is hitting everything everywhere globally. The sticky issue now is what is the legal definition of an order versus a deposit, with a company that the customer can order directly from (the U.K.)? Technically a deposit is refundable, so it's not the same as a hard order which is not refundable. At least that's how it is in the U.S. I don't know how British law would rule on that. Matt's video could technically be classified as referring to actual orders versus deposits. If he had said "The price quoted for your order" instead of "Emira" it would have been clearer. Because a deposit is refundable, technically it can be viewed as a 'maybe' you'll order, but because it is refundable, it's not a guarantee you're going to place an actual order. And therein lies the issue here.

Since it wasn't possible to place a hard order on the models for which prices were quoted, does that legally bind Lotus to those prices? For PR purposes it would, but would it in a court of law? If you've made a non-refundable down payment on an agree-to-purchase hard order, that's a separate issue, and those seem to be price-protected. A deposit isn't a guarantee that you're going to go through with an actual hard order.

If all models were already in production and people had been ordering and buying them at advertised prices, it would be different, but this is really fuzzy right now. Promised models that haven't been produced yet, being advertised at price points based on pre-production prototypes, that brought in thousands of deposits as a result. It's a PR nightmare for sure, but the legalities of it are something else again. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

Lotus does not sell cars directly to end customers in the US. Their agreement is with the individual dealers. Lotus only sets the MSRP, and that is a suggestion - dealers are free to set their own selling price. Many dealers have written agreements that they will honor the "MSRP" price for deposits/orders, so whatever price changes Lotus applies to the MSRP, will be passed through to the buyers.

 

[912Matt]

I'm sat here thinking 'is the emira really a £85k car for a manual V6 with 400bhp? I know you can say, 'thats just the price of cars these days' but it really does start to push it towards another bracket.

I think when you read above that someone is considering an M4 for the same money then yes it is

 

[Nova]

Haven't Lotus continually referred to "record number of orders" and such, so they clearly think that those placing deposits are placing orders.

Yes, and we have to keep in mind, that while it's been a frustrating 2+ years for many of us, there is no shortage of customers for whom this is a recent 2-3 month experience so they are still fresh with excitement and react to this price increase with a shrug. So long as there are newcomers to keep the order books full, Lotus can do as they please. For each cancellation, there will be plenty of orders to take its place.

 

[Nova]

I think when you read above that someone is considering an M4 for the same money then yes it is

I was at a newly opened Chinese food place - it's so popular that people wait for 3-4 hours in line just to get in. Some young and hip early-20s kids were there, with a late model M4. And that's one of the reasons why regardless of how good that car is, I'm not interested in one.

 

[Twin Cam]

I know it’s just a car, but it is starting to feel like I am in an abusive relationship, just need to make sure I don’t end up with Stockholm Syndrome to boot

 

[FlashingBlade]

I think when you read above that someone is considering an M4 for the same money then yes it is

That was also me

I have three potential alternatives if I decide to call it a day:

1) BMW M4 AWD ultimate spec (wing back carbons seats etc)
2) Keep saving and get a 2 year old R8 V10 Carbon Black and go to a single car owner i.e. daily it.
3) Save 15-20k and get an Evora GT410 as the summer and weekend toy that the Emira was going to be

 

[KAR120C]

You're thinking this is bait and switch which I never once said it was. These are California consumer protection laws.

The definition you quoted is the bait and switch tactics, which involves intentional deceit.

 

[New to Lotus]

I think a lot of people already have it?

 

[idleuser]

The definition you quoted is the bait and switch tactics, which involves intentional deceit.

Let see if the judge agrees with you or California consumer protection law. For the small price of 100 dollars, I want to see Lotus defend themselves in small claims court. If they don't show up, I automatically win a judgement against them and they will have to honor the quoted price back in 2021/2022. This is a low hanging fruit and a EZ win.

 

[Eagle7]

California would like to have a word with Lotus.

12024.6. No person, firm, corporation, or association shall advertise, solicit, or represent by any means, a
product for sale or purchase if it is intended to entice a consumer into a transaction different from that
originally represented.

If Lotus USA decides to raise prices, I certainly won't make it easy for them to just wave their finger at me and say "pay up or shut up". We have been patiently waiting for the last 2+ years, with many of us selling our cars and or passing up on being on another brand with the promise of getting our Emira with the quoted price for FEs and Base Editions.

According to the time lines, the production date for the FE has been shifted from Jan 2023 to April 2023 which puts the first "delivered" on schedule for July/Aug 2023 delivery which is outside of the price protection.

Furthermore, Lotus is slated to deliver 700 FEs to North America by the end of the year and are announcing Base V6 info in Q3 2023. Base edition according to the time line is slated for Q1 or Q2 delivery in 2024.

Yes but the rub there is "...if it is intended to entice a consumer into a transaction different from that originally represented." I don't think that can be proven in court, because there is a raft of extenuating circumstances involved here which can easily be pointed to as the cause of the change in price.

I'm waiting to hear from my dealer or Lotus as to what the situation is going to be here in the U.S. My deposit was converted into a hard order and accepted by the factory in April of last year, so I'm hoping I'm price-protected. If I'm not, and there's an 8% increase, then I'll cancel and deal with the legal issues with the dealership. With an 8% increase, with destination charge (I'm guessing at least $2,000), sales tax, all associated fees including have it delivered to me (I'm 500 miles away from the closest dealer) the cost of the car gets upward towards $115,000, and that's without the cost of ppf which I want to get for it. That would put it closer to $120k. That's simply more than I want to pay. It's a beautiful car and I certainly would love to have one, but I don't need it. I wasn't looking for a car to begin with when I first saw the Emira. It was simply a want car, not a need car.

I'll just have to wait and see, but then that's been this journey the whole time anyway, so nothing new there.

 

[KAR120C]

Let see if the judge agrees with you or California consumer protection law. For the small price of 100 dollars, I want to see Lotus defend themselves in small claims court. If they don't show up, I automatically win a judgement against them and they will have to honor the quoted price back in 2021/2022. This is a low hanging fruit and a EZ win.

Go for it. Please report back in with your judgement.