Connect with us

Business

How Bentley’s brand is creating business advantage in disruptive times 

Published

on



When Bentley unveiled its recent Supersports model and announced it was postponing its first full EV launch, it was interesting to see how many were quick to paint the move as “anti-woke” – a two-fingers up salute to the EV revolution.  

But from the perspective of an outsider looking in, the Supersports launch isn’t a rejection of EVs per se (Bentley has plans for the world’s first all-electric luxury urban SUV). Rather, it’s a loud and proud reminder of Bentley’s legacy, executed at a pivotal moment in automotive history. Think of it not as Bentley trying to reinvent itself but Bentley doubling down on what the brand’s all about: performance, luxury and the emotive thrill of driving.  

It also talks to a much broader narrative around the future of supercars in an electric era – an era that threatens to reduce or eradicate everything that makes a luxury sports car so desirable. 

Why EVs represent an existential threat to supercars

In the luxury space of high-performance supercars, people want a statement and an experience. Something outrageous and non-conformist. Typically, that was rooted in power – best brought to life by exhilarating acceleration and blistering speed. 

But the new EV era has upended all this. When the lights turn green, a mid-priced family EV sedan can give the fastest supercar a run for its money. The supercar’s most famous point of difference – speed – has disappeared; they’re being bested at what made them ‘super’ in the first place.   

So what’s a supercar brand to do? They could go electric, but evidence suggests even with impeccable performance credentials, they’d struggle. 

Reframing brand relevance: looking back to move forward  

The opportunity for supercars is rooted in the intrinsic nature of the EV driving experience. While it may be fast, near silent and perfectly smooth, it’s also, in the vein of many modern experiences, physically and emotionally frictionless, sanitised.  

What cars at the sporty end need to do is go back to their roots and reinforce what made them famous in the first place: the supercar experience. Which is both psychological and physical: a feeling of transgression, outrageousness and wilful norm defying, a leaning into the sensoriality of the experience. It’s the acutely unconventional looks and styling, the throaty purr unleashed into a roar, the jolt of acceleration and kick of gear shifts. The vibration, the noise, the spectacle. And the best way to currently deliver all that is with petrol power.  

This is what the new Bentley Supersports is built to deliver. It embraces the visceral, multi-sensory, theatrical experience of driving – unapologetically loud, powerful and immersive in a way no EV can match. With its launch, Bentley has pulled the ace from its sleeve: delivering an emotional, sensory driving experience that its customers are looking for. 

Why smart branding creates business advantage in disruptive times  

The broader takeaway for brands: first, always have a clear idea of why people buy you. For Bentley, brand heritage and the product story both play a part. But it also knows that its audience of Supersports enthusiasts craves the thrill of the drive as much as the high-spec interiors. Every business should know what real need it fulfils, beyond basic product utility – and, crucially, what this experience looks like. 

Second: remember what made you famous, and don’t be afraid to lean into that legacy to stay relevant. Markets and technologies will evolve, but, as Bentley has shown, reinterpreting your heritage is more powerful than discarding it. This new Supersports takes the brand’s 100-year-old performance ethos and reimagines it in a slick, no-holds-barred Bentley package. It feels contemporary and exclusive, but unmistakably Bentley. And guaranteed to cast a halo over the rest of its motoring portfolio. 

Rather than a two-fingers-up to EVs, Bentley’s car launch is a masterclass in using brand to navigate disruption. It’s turned its legacy into a competitive asset for the EV era, reinforcing why customers fell in love with its cars to begin with.  

In the context of automotive disruption, it chose to amplify its core essence instead of downplaying it. And far from being left behind, it demonstrates that in the race towards an electric future, a confident brand position may prove the strongest advantage of all. 

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Epstein files fight in court heats up as congressmen accuse DOJ of ‘serious misconduct’

Published

on



Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor said Friday that a judge lacks the authority to appoint a neutral expert to oversee the public release of documents in the sex trafficking probe of financier Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer was told in a letter signed by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton that he must reject a request this week by the congressional cosponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act to appoint a neutral expert.

U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, and Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, say they have “urgent and grave concerns” about the slow release of only a small number of millions of documents that began last month.

In a filing to the judge they said they believed “criminal violations have taken place” in the release process.

Clayton, though, said Khanna and Massie do not have standing with the court that would allow them to seek the “extraordinary” relief of the appointment of a special master and independent monitor.

Engelmayer “lacks the authority” to grant such a request, he said, particularly because the congressional representatives who made the request are not parties to the criminal case that led to Maxwell’s December 2021 sex trafficking conviction and subsequent 20-year prison sentence for recruiting girls and women for Epstein to abuse and aiding the abuse.

Khanna said Clayton’s response “misconstrued” the intent of their request.

“We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna said in a statement.

“Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law,” he added.

Epstein died in a federal jail in New York City in August 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. The death was ruled a suicide.

The Justice Department expects to update the court “again shortly” regarding its progress in turning over documents from the Epstein and Maxwell investigative files, Clayton said in the letter.

The Justice Department has said the files’ release was slowed by redactions required to protect the identities of abuse victims.

In their letter, Khanna and Massie wrote that the Department of Justice’s release of only 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million documents being reviewed was a “flagrant violation” of the law’s release requirements and had caused “ serious trauma to survivors.”

“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” the congressmen said as they asked for the appointment of an independent monitor to ensure all documents and electronically stored information are immediately made public.

They also recommended that a court-appointed monitor be given authority to prepare reports about the true nature and extent of the document production and whether improper redactions or conduct have taken place.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

See the face of ICE’s crackdown on normal Americans: a 21-year-old college student permanently blind in one eye

Published

on



A 21-year-old college student who said he was blinded in one eye by a projectile fired by a federal officer during a Southern California protest said he faces a drastically different life now.

Kaden Rummler said in an interview that he was in agonizing pain and underwent an extensive six-hour surgery to his left eye after he was injured at a Jan. 9 protest over the fatal shooting of a woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis. Rummler said he has no depth perception and can no longer drive. Shards of metal and a nickel-sized piece of plastic remain lodged in his skull, his attorney said, and he is considering suing.

“It’s going to affect every aspect of my life,” said Rummler, who hopes to pursue a career in forestry.

A second demonstrator at the same protest outside a federal immigration building in Orange County told the Los Angeles Times he was also blinded in one eye by a projectile fired by federal agents. Britain Rodriguez, 31, said he was standing on steps outside the immigration building when he was struck in the face.

“I remember hitting the ground and feeling like my eye exploded in my head,” Rodriguez told the newspaper.

The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to questions from The Associated Press about what type of projectile was used. Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for the agency, said in an emailed statement this week that the protesters were violent and that two officers were injured but didn’t specify the extent of their injuries. DHS said one demonstrator was taken to the hospital with a cut. McLaughlin confirmed to the Times that was a reference to Rummler and called his injury claims “absurd.”

Rummler has been charged with a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct. One of his fellow protesters was jailed for several days and has been charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding a federal officer.

Rummler’s attorney John Washington said doctors want to know whether the materials in the projectile could be toxic but have been unable to get answers from DHS. Washington said based on their preliminary investigation they believe it was a capsule made from metal and plastic containing pepper spray.

The injuries in California are the latest in a growing number of violent encounters between federal agents and community members during protests over the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

Federal immigration agents deployed to Minneapolis have used aggressive crowd-control tactics that have become a dominant concern after the deadly shooting of Renee Good.

In Santa Ana, California, hundreds of people marched in the streets on Jan. 9 to protest Good’s killing. A smaller group later congregated outside the federal immigration building, shouting expletives through megaphones about ICE, according to video taken by OC Hawk, a group that films breaking news in Orange County.

The video shows a handful of officers in riot gear standing guard and urging demonstrators to move back. An orange cone is later seen rolling onto a plaza outside the building, and authorities begin firing crowd-control projectiles as they walk toward the crowd.

In the video, an officer is seen grabbing a protester by the arm and Rummler and a few others are seen stepping forward shouting in response. An officer then fires a crowd-control weapon, striking Rummler from several feet away. Rummler grabs his face and falls to the ground, and an officer grabs him by the shirt and drags him backward across the ground toward the building, the video shows. Later, video appears to show him face down on the ground being handcuffed.

Rummler said he joined the protest against immigration authorities because he can’t stand seeing families torn from their homes. Despite his injuries, he said he would do it again.

“I refuse to sit around idly and watch that happen, and in 50 years, I would absolutely regret not trying to make a change,” he said.

Washington, a civil rights lawyer, said his client could have been killed.

“Any officers with just the most basic training would know you don’t shoot someone ever in the face with this, but let alone at point-blank range, and that’s because it is a lethal weapon when used like that, and it very nearly was,” Washington said.

Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology and criminal justice at University of South Carolina, said a thorough investigation is needed into the reason for using a high level of force in that situation.

“I don’t know of any projectile where you train to shoot at that close range,” Alpert said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Fortune Article | Fortune

Published

on



The eight European countries targeted by U.S. President Donald Trump for a 10% tariff for opposing American control of Greenland blasted the move Sunday, warning that the American leader’s threats “undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral.”

In an unusual and very strong joint statement coming from major U.S. allies, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland on Sunday said troops sent to Greenland for the Danish military training exercise “Arctic Endurance” pose “no threat to anyone.”

Trump’s Saturday announcement sets up a potentially dangerous test of U.S. partnerships in Europe. The Republican president appeared to indicate that he was using the tariffs as leverage to force talks over the status of Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark that he regards as critical to U.S. national security.

“We stand in full solidarity with the Kingdom of Denmark and the people of Greenland,” the group said. “Building on the process begun last week, we stand ready to engage in a dialogue based on the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity that we stand firmly behind. Tariff threats undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral.”

There are immediate questions about how the White House could try to implement the tariffs because the EU is a single economic zone in terms of trading. It was unclear, too, how Trump could act under U.S. law, though he could cite emergency economic powers that are currently subject to a U.S. Supreme Court challenge.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said China and Russia will benefit from the divisions between the U.S. and Europe. She added in a post on social media: “If Greenland’s security is at risk, we can address this inside NATO. Tariffs risk making Europe and the United States poorer and undermine our shared prosperity.”

Trump’s move was also panned domestically.

U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly, a former U.S. Navy pilot and Democrat who represents Arizona, posted that Trump’s threatened tariffs on U.S. allies would make Americans “pay more to try to get territory we don’t need.”

“Troops from European countries are arriving in Greenland to defend the territory from us. Let that sink in,” he wrote on social media. “The damage this President is doing to our reputation and our relationships is growing, making us less safe. If something doesn’t change we will be on our own with adversaries and enemies in every direction.”

‘These tariffs will hurt us’

Six of the countries targeted are part of the 27-member EU, which operates as a single economic zone in terms of trading. It was not immediately clear if Trump’s tariffs would impact the entire bloc. EU envoys scheduled emergency talks for Sunday evening to determine a potential response.

The tariff announcement even drew blowback from Trump’s populist allies in Europe.

Italy’s right-wing premier, Giorgia Meloni, considered one of Trump’s closest allies on the continent, said Sunday she had spoken to him about the tariffs, which she described as “a mistake.”

The deployment to Greenland of small numbers of troops by some European countries was misunderstood by Washington, Meloni told reporters. She said the deployment was not a move against the U.S. but aimed to provide security against “other actors” that she didn’t name.

French President Emmanuel Macron wrote on social media that “no intimidation or threats will influence us, whether in Ukraine, Greenland or anywhere else in the world when we are faced with such situations.” He added that “tariff threats are unacceptable and have no place in this context.”

Jordan Bardella, president of Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally party in France and also a European Parliament lawmaker, posted that the EU should suspend last year’s tariff deal with the U.S., describing Trump’s threats as “commercial blackmail.”

Trump also achieved the rare feat of uniting Britain’s main political parties — including the hard-right Reform UK party — all of whom criticized the tariff threat.

“We don’t always agree with the U.S. government and in this case we certainly don’t. These tariffs will hurt us,” Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, a longtime champion and ally of Trump, wrote on social media. He stopped short of criticizing Trump’s designs on Greenland.

Meanwhile, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who leads the center-left Labour Party, said the tariffs announcement was “completely wrong” and his government would “be pursuing this directly with the U.S. administration.”

The foreign ministers of Denmark and Norway are also expected to address the crisis Sunday in Oslo during a news conference.

__

Leicester reported from Paris and Cook from Brussels. Associated Press writers Jill Lawless in London, Barry Hatton in Lisbon, Portugal, Aamer Madhani in Washington and Josh Boak in West Palm Beach, Florida, contributed to this report.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.