This is another reason why non-racing Ferraris should have manual gearboxes.

He was into the fastest. If he were 40 today, he would be in the latest and greatest..... and there would be paddles. He might admire the old stuff and respect it, but it would be from a bygone era.

I'm of an age where there is nothing more rewarding that a well executed heel and toe, double clutch downshift. However good I am at that, I am much faster in an F1 gearbox car, and I like it It can also be involving....... in a different way, with a different skill set. Left foot braking, balancing the car on throttle and brake, etc, etc, etc.

 

I like how everyone knows definitively what Steve McQueen would be driving today.

Time to bust out the Ouija board!

I'm guessing he would have the budget for some of both. (paddle/manual)

 

I third this, every billionaire (and I've met more than my fair share) I've meet in person has been self made.

 

This is admittedly wayyyy off topic, but to address...

I think you are taking my notion of what is typical, and applying to your personal situation / anecdotes, which really doesn't work.

Most people with money (especially big money) come from money. More so in Europe / elsewhere, true, but still the vast majority of cases here (USA) as well.

The idea of entrepreneurs (particularly younger ones) making money out of nothing is a fallacy in majority of cases. Tech industry too. Most of these start-ups that become big are founded by highly privileged individuals who had enough family money to fall back on if things failed. In other words, the money allows the risk taking, which allows the rewards (and mitigates the impact of failures).

Not in every instance, but in the majority of instances. There are very, very few true rags to riches stories once you start digging around. I know many startups and their founders, extremely well (I was tapped to run one as CFO). Every example (and I'm talking from a sample size of dozens of individuals) had family money behind them. In most cases, they tried one idea, failed, then tried another. They employed people to help, typically engineers, legal and financial specialists.

Again, I don't dispute the notion of some really, truly building from the ground up, but it's exceedingly rare. Most have the benefit of families with higher education, and higher earnings. Read a report by Levine and Rubinstein on traits of entrepreneurs, and you will see materially higher family income of the typical entrepreneur.

And that includes the "regular" entrepreneurs who open a local business. The ones founding tech startups and sinking in $50 or $100k at a young age... or with connections to VC funds... a little digging will almost always uncover a back story.

Obviously there are exceptions, and many people in the past were forced to entrepreneurial ventures as a necessity to survive, and were forced to take the risks and really had no safety nets... but when we're talking the majority of cases of where the money comes from, then you just need to look at how money makes money.

BTW, check out Forbes... I think they introduced some new index rating on people from money vs. not from money on their list. I think it's now around 1/3rd mostly inherited the money vs. 50% a few years ago. Digging deeper there, however, they draw the dividing line at a dubious point... they don't look to rich parents but rather require that the majority of the wealth is from the parents vs. individual...

E.g., Zuckerberg is highly "self made" on that scale. But the kid went to Phillips Exeter, did fencing, and received private programming tutelage from a young age. The ability to "hire" others (I won't go into whether he actually created or took someone else's idea, not my place to opine) while going to college is... not in the cards for normal people.

Let's be real, most rich people had rich parents. Particularly when you get to the mega rich categories. And my father drove a Ford Tempo...

 

Seriously, why people fights about manual gearbox. It doesn't take long to learn it.

Now, traction control and stability control is the one people need to complain about, if they want to.

People don't complain about traction control and stability control because most people need them. While they can pretend they're so skillful just because they can shift an H-pattern gearbox.

 

Was Warren Buffett "self made"?

His father had a stock brokerage and was actually quite successful. I'm a big follower of Buffett and read a couple biographies. I would not call him "Self made".

Was Bill Gates (the Third) self made?

Besides the fact that his name is a giveaway... no, he is from an upper middle class family (re: he was from a wealthy, just not "stinking rich" family)

Want to continue down the list?

Carlos Slim (considered "self made" by Forbes) parents had the equivalent of a multi-million dollar business... plus real estate... lots of it...

Koch brothers... goes back generations

Waltons... the kids are clearly happy but wouldn't call them self made

There are some true rags to riches, but you will find for the younger set (sub 40) in particular, the uber rich are mostly from money already.

It doesn't really matter. But hard to deny that majority of the rich were not enabled by circumstance of birth.

 

I like having traction control. However, I also like the ability to reduce the amount of interference and control if it is on or off... I like the ability to control turn in with my right foot and to me traction is quite intuitive. Realize to many, understanding the feel and physics of a car are beyond the scope of what they set out to do.

For me, however, to be a truly good driver you should be "with" the car, not fighting it.

 

You dont have to start with rags to be self made. On that basis hardley anyone in the USa is rags these days, we are by global standards a wealthy country. Most bright people can get an education or scholarship, if not student loans, so there are very few rags by that standard. Even those that do get education very few are prepared to risk or
live in the basement while they build a company. gates dropped out of college, maybe his parents wouldnt let him starve, but it was a very risky and ballsy move, independant of his familys upper middle class lifestyle, it was probably the opposite.

Now if you want to say education or acess to education is riches, that is correct and in the USa pretty much any half brigh driven person has acess to education.. Additionaly lots of families of little means did and do sacrifice for their chilldren to have this wealth of education even for their "normal" kids..

Education is the true wealth and education is not necessarily even a formal degree. As the Wright Brothers ably proved and atested to the best education you can have is a loving supportive family with intellect. So i would say rags migth be broken or dysfunctional familes.

Personaly I had plenty of education acess. Made my real money by going into a desperate buisness that had debt that way exceed its asetts, yes it was technicaly bankrupt. I saw potential and how to turn it around. Took me 15 years and then sold it for great profit all around. in that time frame I lived in a small apartment of when we had kids moved into my folks house with them.

I didnt come from rags, am I self made? I dont know, I do know I sacrificed a lot while my educated carrear freinds lived well and moved forwards while I took big risks with my future and life, if it hadnt worked out would be living in my parents basement still with two kids.

As to the ferrari, ironicaly it was the one asett I owned(very understanding wife) bought it at age 28 before marriage with the first money I made after selling my first small buisness, many years I couldnt afford to run it. But hey I am a true blue enthusiast.
I did and still do drive it as god and enzo intended.

Since I sold my busines and started otehrs I have had the financial opportunity to buy a new ferrari. Frankly none motiivated me, and the 458 I really thought would be it. the first achingly beautuful ferrari in decades, but unless you are close to 10/10th pretty meh to drive, and you cant drive 10/10ths on the road and for track its just ruinous to run. One frind who has one, sort of regrets it, because he cant really entertain on the road without going to jail, and its just not the best option on track comapred to say his Gt3.

Now ferrari, if they want to sell 9k or 10k cars they are going to have to appeal to core enthusiasts too, build cars that people lust after to the extent they will sacrice to buy one, cars people wnat to keep forever. This means offer more derivations of existing platforms , and to me that means a stick.

Ducatri sells far more slower yet enetrtaining monsters than any of their other offerings, even though the paginale is the halo. Ducati knows how to sell modern classics as well as hypersports. In fact the whole mtorcycle indsutry has figured that out. thats why you have a BMW 1000 cc hypersprts bike nad a boxer twin sprtsbike.

To me this is a far more valid way for ferrari to go than offering an ersatz ferrari called the cali and the cali did not kill ferrari..

teh only reason they ahve not offewred a stick is its easier to get one pwertrain certified than two, (paddles lend themselvs to co2 noise etc tests) and they have been able to get away with one choice.

Porche doubled cayman sales with the manual only GT4, and now are comming out with the 991 R essentialy a dewinged manual Gt3. Ferrari are not stupid and nore id Sergio, they are going to expand the pool of custiomers off the same platfroms they have, which means more derivations.

If you fater was alwayer, as Bill aGates fater was and you make billions in a sepreate buiness you are self made.

If you go into a bankrupt buisness and turn it into 100's of millions you are self made.

People with drive, people who are prepared to really risk it, those are self made.

 

All of that is totally fine and those are all very interesting points that I appreciate and I would love to get into this in another thread.

However, on topic, and this may be a regional thing, in my time in owning Ferraris I don't think that anyone I know bought their Ferrari with inherited money. Now, maybe I live in a bubble (oh no, not another bubble thread) but for the "vast, vast majority" of new Ferraris to have been purchased with inherited money wouldn't I (and Dave and all of these other people) know at least a few?

Even here on Fchat, most of us long time members know what the other long time members do; to the best of my recollection, only one is a trust fund person. Everyone else has built jobs, careers, businesses.

I do agree that the typical new Ferrari buyer is very different that old Ferrari buyer but I know lots of guys with new Ferraris that owned 308s in the 70's and 80's and lots did their own service.

 

Yeah, the difference is that if someone's family has a couple million in net worth, they can take the risk to build and start a business.

The notion of it being self made will be there (they made that money) but they did not have much ultimate risk. That is the reason, no more, no less.

If you have fallback options, you can take greater risks. That's my point, in a nutshell, and it makes it far less "self made" than someone who doesn't have that.

Those exist, but are rare.

 

Look around the wealthiest areas in the US (or pockets of those): NY, Cali (san fran / LA), and pockets of oil wealth (texas). Then look at the situation there.

NY and Cali account for vast majority of new Ferrari sales. Most of those new car buyers come from wealth.

Now, back on point, the notion of people buying these cars for passion or as status symbols... it only depends a little on whether they come from wealth, or self built.

What drives it more are the attitudes of people. I have looked at some used Ferraris and based on owners' attitudes about their cars and how much they seemed to know, I'd say it was 50/50 split in terms of people just buying for show off vs. enthusiasts. I was looking at 360, 360CS, 430s and a couple 355s... I imagine (perhaps) that the Cali crowd is less enthusiast oriented (given so many are "first time new buyers")...

 

So in order to be self made - one has to do it coming only from abject poverty?

Simply coming from a upper middle class family to going to Billionaire exempts you from being self made?

If you read biographies of Buffett then you know as well as I do he didn't wait for 'daddy' to give him a job or money. As a kid he sold stuff door to door, was a newspaper boy, washed cars, bought vending machines in high school etc.

One question: How did Buffett make his first million? Did his dad give it to him? How about Carlos Slim? How did he make his first million? Did *his* dad give it to him? I don't know anybody that said the Walton kids are self made.

Why did you leave out Larry Ellison and Steve Jobs? (Both were orphans)
How about Bezos? Brin? Page? Yang? K-Shing? Ortega?

Are they not self made?

Don't take my word for it:

Fortune recently did exactly what you attempted to do anecdotally. They made a scale between 1 and 10 for the top Billionaires. 1 meant you inherited it, 10 means you were like Oprah or Soros (came from extreme poverty to becoming a billionaire.

Source:
The New Forbes 400 Self-Made Score: From Silver Spooners To Bootstrappers

What do you see?

More importantly - what is the trend? (Are more people inheriting money like you assert, or are more people coming from nothing to Billionaire?)

What's disconcerting behind your assertion is it ultimately self defeating...once you buy into the myth that the majority of rich were handed a silver spoon - you stop and no make any efforts to join them, in a sense you become fatalistic. If you were born poor, that's it - no chance to move up.

Trust me when I say most millionaires are self made.

 

On a used car its going to be more passion oreintated. A newer car more status or staus/passion mix.

On topic its interesting that in the used market which is more enthusiast passion orientated a stick 430 sells at a significant premium to paddles, whereas apaprently new its paddle demand only.

If you are really inherited wealth like say Miles Collier, then you probably have the good taste not to buy a new ferrari at all. But then neitehr does Leno. So what does that say about the corelation between wealth and class, clearly taste is not something inherited or earned, its state of being regardless of where your money came from or for that matter how much you have..

I could even turn arguements on their head and say that those that grew up with less have an advantage. Because what seperates sucess from being meerly well educated or even bright is drive hunger and ambition, growing up with less is a great motivator for some. Or put another way, my kids are brighter than me, they do better in school and are more eduacted, but they grew up secure and relativley comfortable, you cant teach drive or hunger.

Frankly most of the younger generation seems sated with electronic trinkets, so I am not sure too many of them have the drive to really push to own a 400k car etc.

 

Super_Dave,

Quick question...is this just how you feel, or have you read any bipartisan studies about how Millionaires are made in America? It's very lopsided and unanimous in their conclusions...

You actually got it all wrong, backwards actually, it's when you have 'nothing' you can take greater risks.

 

What do you say about this then?
There Are More Self-Made Billionaires In The Forbes 400 Than Ever Before

hmmm.

Zuckerberg didn't make Facebook out of nothing? (he stole it from those Twin's right?)
Brin/Sergey got Google handed over to them?
Yang/Filo really stole Yahoo from their dorm mates next door
Omidyar's dad gave him eBay?
Steve Jobs was given a trust fund when he was given up for adoption?
Ellison had a war chest when he was given up for adoption?
Gates's Dad (A lawyer) was really the guy behind Windows?
Since Elon Musk's dad was able to afford to send him to Private high school - he's not self made - really it's his dad (he came from a divorced family and was bullied to the point of blacking out) that was behind Paypal/Tesla/SpaceX...

hmm...for somebody that seems to talk with great authority about Silicon Valley - you seem to ignore that the biggest success stories (Apple, Google, eBay, Yahoo) literally started in garages/dorm rooms...

Super_Dave - name a few, it seems like we're in the same sector, yet your commentary is COUNTER to the startup culture I live and breath everyday.

It appears that you seem to argue that in order to be self made - one needs to come from abject poverty....that's fine...because:

Dude - it's 7% man...where do you get 1/3? The article's conclusion was the exact opposite of your assertion - it said the number of folks that came from abject poverty to billionaire is radically INCREASING in the last 30 YEARS!

read it again:
There Are More Self-Made Billionaires In The Forbes 400 Than Ever Before

the conclusion?

"...more and more, the richest people in the country have worked hard, in an incredibly difficult context, to earn a spot in the Forbes 400. And while it is a known fact that the wealthiest have amassed a greater proportion of the nation’s output than the rest, the self-made scores demonstrate social mobility is indeed possible."

it blows my mind how we can read the same article yet come to completely OPPOSITE conclusions.

Super_Dave, what startup were you tapped to be CFO in? Let me guess - it's in 'stealth' mode?

 

SuperDave - A member in my Ferrari club that owns a Texas oil company grew up very poor, the overwhelming majority of the folks in my club made their money through starting a business or just wise investing/saving. - but if they didn't grow up in a shack that doesn't make them self-made correct?

What really is destructive with this line of thinking is when you truly believe that there is no economic mobility in this country, you cease to try to improve your lot in life. Since the only way to become rich is if you had a rich daddy...why try? Since it's 'rare' and impossible to become rich, there is no point in trying, or even attempting to better yourself.

Very self-defeating and ultimately why I think many people fail.

I grew up with a father as a Janitor and an absent mother. Ford Tempo Super_Dave? my dad drove a used Pinto (yes literally)

I live a few block away from Zuckerberg Super_Dave, I know exactly the subject matter you are so confidently posting about...please tell me more.

 

Funny that you so blatantly misread and misinterpreted an article and had the nerve to say I misread it?

You should copy/paste what criteria they have for "1s" and "10s" on the list and see who falls into those categories (hint, Donald Trump would not... and neither would any of the Kardashians, nor Paris Hilton, etc...) Your 7% is entirely a bogus number as it essentially is limited to people who have fortunes and have done nothing whatsoever to increase those fortunes (i.e., my dad gives me $10mm and I put in the bank and spend it... that's it... not even running or managing a business, not investing it, nothing... just sucking the piggy bank dry or giving the money away) Nothing wrong with that, but that is clearly a small subset.

Here is from the article itself. Note again that their criteria for "self made" includes people with significant personal / family wealth support behind them:

"This year, we gave each member of The Forbes 400 a score on a scale from 1 to 10 — a 1 indicating the fortune was completely inherited, while a 10 was for a Horatio Alger-esque journey. We also did the analysis for every 10 years going back to 1984. Looking at the numbers over time, the data lead us to an interesting insight: in 1984, less than half of people on The Forbes 400 were self-made; today, 69% of the 400 created their own fortunes."

As for your other critiques... your failure at logic in the above (you saying I misread it) means I really have no reason to debate anything back to you. Not sure why I touched such a nerve with you.

 

Look, there is some economic mobility, but not nearly the way that some might try to portray. It often takes generations to achieve.

I am friends with multiple billionaires. My parents didn't know anyone worth more than perhaps a million dollars growing up (inflation-adjusted million...)

My kids will have that benefit. I have multiple ivy league graduate degrees. My parents didn't finish high school. My kids will have the benefit that I contribute thousands to my alma mater.

They will be one of those people who "inherited" that flexibility and ability to take greater risks. I'm in a better position than many because my parents supported the idea of pursuing education. But if they know they have my funds to ultimately fall back on, that will allow them greater flexibility to pursue riskier ventures, and all the more power to them.

Another example is movie stars... and hollywood legacies. There are actually lots of actors out there with family in the business, certainly VASTLY disproportionate to the number of professional actors.

Even if you ignore family actors, if you ever spent time in NYC or LA you would know of kids that live in the city, funded by family money and "living off" minimum wage as they pursue their acting dreams. That is all fantastic, but if they hit it big, they did so and had the ability to live in the city and take those risks, because they didn't need to actually pay for their apartment, or pursue a more "normal" career path.

There are many who work their ways up from nothing and live out of vans, but I'm just being realistic in the assessment of how people really can pursue risky ventures.

This is incredibly off topic, but ignorance doesn't change facts.

 

Super_Dave - let's just take 8, 9, and 10s then....has it gone up or down? By how much?

But you don't count the 8's right? Because if you come from a middle class family and become a Billionaire that doesn't count according to your definition of self-made.

Take 10's then.

Super_Dave, your assertion in the last 5,6 posts is it's nearly impossible/rare to be self made in America. You then post that Fortune magazine article that is contrary to even your strict definition of having to come from poverty as supporting proof. You then make the assertion only the "uber rich" that inherited their money (and didn't really work for it) can afford a Ferrari.

Finally you make claims about Startups and the tech sector about how founders don't really make things from scratch, they were pretty much handed their business....this is counter to what I've experienced in the last 3 cycles.

You touched a nerve in me because everything you've been posting is a complete 180 from my reality.

If I said the sky is green, the ocean is orange, and the grass is purple - I would expect some interesting replies

 

I love manuals. To me they signify sportiness and performance... Unfortunately, in the real world, they are a negative.

Came to that realization when I started doing track time...

I can never shift as well as the computer... Can't do it as fast... Can't do it as safely... Can't do it mid-turn... Can't rev-match as accuartely... Can't even get the same gas mileage...

Manuals are cool... in the way an old calligraphy pen is cool... Or using the arrow keys rather than a mouse is cool... Or using a ceiling fan and not an aircondiitoner... Or shooting a musket is neater than a semiauto...

Its cool, because it requires skill... But, it isn't better. Not any more...

99% of folks don't drive stick... That number will only get worse...

 

I couldn't tell if this post was being facetious, but I'll take it at face value.

I have met many billionaires, but I am not fortunate enough to be friends with them...even Zuck. Can you tell me a few of these Billionaire pals you have?

Furthermore, what are some of these Ivy League schools and degrees you have. Perhaps you attended Harvard as I have? Would love to know what your thoughts were on the experience...Interesting to know what a few of your graduate degrees are. For somebody that has posted much of what I consider almost adolescent musings - I find it interesting that a grown man with children and donates thousands of dollars to his University had a hard time understanding the concept of collecting cars here:

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/ferrari-discussion-not-model-specific-sponsored-algar-ferrari/501177-why-so-many-low-mileage-ferraris-out-there.html

 

Nice work Paul.

 

I found school fine, thanks.

Some clearly bright people, some clearly connected people. The best thing I can say about upward mobility in this country is that the schools make a small effort to support it.

Small effort, because (as you know attending Harvard) for the best programs it is about 50% merit and 50% "monied". There is a reason those applications for grad school (at Harvard) have a line asking about family that attended / graduated.

I've written a number of recommendations (yes, for HBS) and have a good "hit rate" -- 100%. That said, many of my recs have been for people that likely would have been accepted without a rec at all...

The thing I tell people considering any elite business school is that the greatest value is the people you meet. For the rich, and for the "poor". Inheriting money and security is one thing, inheriting connections is another. For those that don't inherit connections and can still make it into a great school, that can be extraordinarily valuable.

Do You Need a Wealthy Background to Be a Successful Entrepreneur? | Inc.com

 

Super_Dave,

You didn't answer a single question of my last post.

Just in case you forgot

1) Which Billionaires are your friends?
2) What startup were you going to be CFO of?
3) What Ivy League Schools did you graduate from and what were the degrees?

I know this is pretentious of me, so I apologize for my candor. The reason for my query is you seem to talk a lot with authority about subjects of wealth, education, business (especially the tech/startup sector) that strangely is completely counter to my experiences. Just curious what life path you may have taken that so largely diverges from my own.

To be fair I shall answer the same questions

1) I have no billionaire friends, but have met and had conversations with:

The late Steve Jobs (self made) - met at Apple Conference
Meg Whitman (self made) - Met at my friends house in Atherton, was their next door neighbor
Pierre Omidyar (self made) - My wife worked with him
Charles Schwab (self made) - I worked at Charles Schwab for 5 years
John Chambers (self made) - I worked at Cisco and met him at a Sharks game
Mark Pincus (self made) - Worked at his wife's startup
John Arrillaga (self made) - met him at a opening ceremony at my local park
John Sobrato (self made) - Has his car fixed at a mutual friends body shop
Sheryl Sandberg (self made) - her kids go same school as my kids
Gordon Moore - I actually didn't meet up - but I did party at his house in Woodside

I have too many friends that are multi-millionaires to list. It's actually not a big deal here in Silicon Valley. I don't consider myself rich...yet could retire comfortably anywhere else in the nation (outside major metro locations like LA/NY)...everything is relative. I don't say this to brag, it's not a big deal when you live in Menlo Park. I mention all of this to provide direct proof in contradistinction to your assertions that most affluent people got there by inheritance.

You talk a lot about how wealth is created (or should I say 'inherited') yet - the overwhelming majority of my affluent friends/acquaintances did not inherit their money. I admit, I find it painful that your notion my friends didn't work hard to get where they were and were simply afforded their success due to their middle class "hand up" truly mind-boggling. Never mind I myself grew up with Cockroaches as pets...I see the similar situations with the overwhelming majority of Ferrari owners in my bi-weekly meetups.

Are there folks that were trust fund babies? Of course..what really boggles my mind however is how you wouldn't consider somebody like Steve Jobs self made because he had a roof over his head and had 3 squares. It seems like only if you were a George Soros or Oprah are you really self made....that blows my mind man.

2) Lived and breathed Silicon Valley for the last 20 years.

3) UCR CS&E/Harvard Masters Digital Media (I grew up dirt poor, I had no senator's req..)

BTW, feel free to challenge any of my claims - I can easily substantiate all of them

Finally, I've been thinking what is the 'root' of what irks me about your assertions.

Your point is this: The overwhelming majority of affluent people (read: can afford a Ferrari) are not 'self made' (even somebody like Zuckerberg according to you) - if one of those folks bought a Ferrari, they did not 'earn' it themselves...since they got a handout from their parents, school, or Merlin the wizard

Do you not see how this can be a rather controversial assertion on a Ferrari chat board?

What say you?

 

Don't take this the wrong way based on what you wrote, but just a typical situation i see an experience everyday.

Rich guy at the office shows up with a new ferrari, lambo every year and brags about it and yes, having ridden with him he can't drive worth a damn. Prior to F1 cars he basically never had a sports car because he can't drive manual well. Now that he can really show off with an automatic Ferrari he is in heaven.

Second rich guy who only drives lambos to show off doesn't even like cars. He leaves them outside in the rain, snow, never cleans them once for the duration of the lease.

Based on this, I do respect the three pedal miata driver a LOT more.