Ferrari trying to take over ferrari club

A little off point here but, I remember someone telling me 20 years ago or so. “ In Ferrari’s mind you never really own your car you just take care of it for them it always belongs to the company”. With some of the antics even 20 years ago that was evident to me. This doesn’t surprise me in the least.
Given the country that they come from and its political back ground what would you expect. Not meant to be a P and R statement just a thought.

 

The irony of that is actually really meaningful to a small fish like myself.

Some quick context.

Back in 2009/2010, at 24 years old, I started getting into “euro’s”. My toe dipping into Ferrari started in apprehension. I’ll be honest. I expected chest hair, gold chain, intense bravado A types in all aspects. I found the antithesis. I expected exactly what you’ve written above may be the goal of “corporate”, and that thought doesn’t sit well with me.

It sounds dumb to state a bunch of people on the internet changed your life. But in a lot of respects, this brand and the people who have surrounded it have made me who I am at 36 and it has been so fun the whole ride. Hell, I bought my current home in CT because an FChatter (now a great friend) said the neighborhood was awesome, and he’s 5 homes down. This is home!

If the brand ends up going into full on money grab and takes the “neighbor” car guy aspect out of it, then, well, they’ve really missed and deserve the negative feedback. I hope that does not happen. The cars are special, the people are special, and that is irreplaceable, however, board room and black ties, are. Give the people what they want.

 

Coincidence or not, since Elkann became president, nothing good has happened with Ferrari.

 

This has been an ongoing conflict almost a year since Ferrari sent out the updated Standard Agreement. Last I heard approx 35% of the clubs have yet to sign Ferrari’s new agreement. However the signed clubs are the smaller clubs so the figure is misleading in terms of total membership count. The American, Australian, British and most West/North Europe clubs have not signed and I do not believe they intend to sign under the current terms.

In addition to what is already mentioned the will lose the right to their name, domain, as well as logo which Ferrari is in the process of redesigning. However all costs connected to the profile redesign is to be carried by the club, which for the larger clubs is a huge cost. Ferrari demands all member data to be submitted which for many countries represents a GDPR issue, which will make signing the agreement as outlined by Ferrari a violation of their local legislation. Ferrari also wants to control the election time of a Club President, probably in case the individual doesn’t align with them. They want to professionalize the clubs to a degree that some clubs will need to take on paid staff to meet all the requirements, which is financially impossible. Ferrari will also have the final say on any club events or activities, in which they are suggesting the clubs communicate with them for approval via fax(!).

In summary, Ferrari does not care much about the parts of the Club membership base they cannot monetize. They are thus trying to squeeze these fractions out, to make the clubs a sort of ad-hoc marketing database for the dealers/importers - which they have complete control over and can at any time shut down with the push of a button.p

Edit: I am a former Board Member for several years of a club going some years back, already then Ferrari were getting more “difficult”. The information above has been passed down to me by current Board Members of several different clubs.

 

I thought that both the Australian and US clubs signed deals w/ Ferrari about a half dozen years ago - the first step in letting the camel's nose under the tent. My recollection was that the Aussie's battle was quite public and, in part, played out in the Oz section of F-chat. By contrast, my recollection of the FCA/Ferrari deal was that it was kept under wraps and aspects of it were to remain "secret". Isn't this where Ferrari starting controlling the club logos? So I agree that this Ferrari control fetish has been a long term strategy.

 

There was a new agreement and logo sent out last spring to supersede the current one. However as far as I know, the neglect of a club to sign the new agreement does not empower Ferrari to cancel their current one. Hence the many months of discussion.

 

Found some old threads - eleven, twelve and fifteen years ago . . .
https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/threads/fca-no-longer-free-from-the-godfather.312472/
https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/threads/ferrari-s-p-a-copyright-infringement-to-fca-strong-arming-or-closer-to-the-source.305386/
https://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/threads/fca-vote-no.312281/
It started as an intellectual property issue - but we are way past that now re: Sheehan's article.

 

Glory be to the BRAND. As was in the beginning is now, and shall evermore be the BRAND without end.

 

Well being the guy who brought SFC to the states for Ferrari I have to say there seems to be a concerted effort by the company to remake SFC and take it all back in house IMHO. So there may be something to this

 

Who cares, whos needs clubs, if anyone wants to get together and call themselves a Ferrari chapter, club or whatever, no big deal, do it Ferrari should keep to building cars, and trying to find F1 drivers who can win titles, and not waste time on this ******** , for Gods sakes, are you kidding me, dont they have anything better to do, how about building cars that can match the Japs in quality, good grief. Isnt there some real car guy billionaire who can buy Ferrari and run things the right way , make it a private company and send all the suits home with a foot in their asses ? I can spit out and string together a few good lines of Italian curse words to help them on their way out the door .

Thank you

 

Good luck approving all events! Whilst we have our national ones; every region has dozens a year, a large number impromptu.

But if Ferrari want to drive away members, plenty of car clubs around to fill the void!!!

 

When it became apparent that Ferrari was going to be spun off I was hoping for exactly that: A few billionaire enthusiasts and collectors working with Wall Street to take the company private and find a way forward that did not depend on “leveraging the brand” and would return the company to building elegant, engaging cars.

 

This is very concerning on a number of levels. I would be interested to know the extent that various importers in various countries are involved in the Ferrari Clubs in those particular area's because the above suggests an attempt by Spa to be more involved and leverage more control via dealers? Unless my interpretation of this is very wrong?

The sharing of databases is very, very troubling because as you say in many countries this is prohibited.

I suppose the answer really is for Ferrari Clubs to simply disappear and re launch themselves as much the same minus the usage of the Ferrari trade marks.

Lastly surely the bold would indicate that this agreement is wholly unworkable?

 

“And I have it from a good authority that” we all have to drive Rosso Maranello SuVs

 

I assume hosting an unapproved event would be in breach of the agreement…

There is already a requirement that someone from the local importer/dealer is represented in the club. This is where the article shared here mixes up information slightly. From the old agreement I read (from a CD with the “rules” of a club) during my time this was primarily to be used as a point of contact and for coordinating events. If the new agreement defines this as a board position that is something different and more intrusive than the current relationship. There have already been rules in place saying a club can’t advertise or facilitate an independent dealer or workshop. So the only place to service/sell a Ferrari a club can formally recommend is the dealer. There has also been a “no business rule” mentioned several times at the annual meeting saying a member cannot use their membership for the sole purpose of conducting business within the club or its members. This is also to monopolize the status of the dealer within a club. So as mentioned by others Ferrari wanting to control this space tightly is nothing new, but the new agreement takes this to further extremes.

Re the bold, as you have already picked up the agreement as drafted by Ferrari is in breach with local legislation in several territories making it impossible for a club to sign. I personally believe many clubs especially in smaller regions would be better off running independently. There are not a lot of benefits anymore from being affiliated with Ferrari. They most recently cut down the allocation of free factory passes for members, which was the main reason you would engage in membership besides the local social aspect. Access to the stand at motor shows was nice, but didn’t always work due to incompetent staff at the stand. Anyhow, motor shows as we know it are dead so there goes that selling point as well. You get a discount at the Ferrari store, which used to actually have a few nice items, but has turned into a ghastly street fashion gangster outlet. The paid trip (ex travel costs) for Board Members to the annual meeting is just about the only perk left, but that serves a tiny group of people. I was under the impression Ferrari wasn’t a huge fan of facilitating anything logistical for the clubs, preferring all customer experiences went through the dealer (factory tours, events, shows, etc), these developments prove my point.

 

I find this interesting when I look at who one of the sponsors is of the Ferrari Club of Great Britain.....

Its is somewhat ironic to me that there are very few examples ever of where corporates get involved in leisure clubs and that collaboration is ever a success, fundamentally the function of a club is social and leisure, the very opposite of a corporate.

 

I think enforcement of said rules has been pretty slack. Did not seem like the owners club coordination had any meaningful resources at hand, they certainly were not in the know of our sponsorship partners and agreements. At the annual meetings there was the Mr. or Ms. responsible for the clubs plus some sort of secretary that would normally been the one answering the FOC mail, then at the end of the meeting some bean counter from marketing would drop in and provide a few buzz words about the importance of clubs. Slightly unrelated but there was even an occasion where I contacted the office regarding a blatant high profile trademark infringement, which was never ever answered. We are talking about Ferrari who are known for being over-protective of their brand.

This lack of oversight and administration is perhaps what Ferrari wants to change going forward. But in return want total disposition of the customer data in attempt to more effectively create new revenue streams. They will want the member data to push the new Premium service plan, Power warranty [worthless in most countries with consumer protection], maybe there is some Classiche stuff, the Ferrari road tours, track days etc. The point of contact for these “sales” will be the appointed dealer representive in the club, thus giving the dealer (which as said, Ferrari much prefers handling customers than the club) complete control over the value chain. The incentive for the dealer to engage with the club is recruitment to events/aftersales where they can more easily fill the attendee requirement set by Ferrari and avoid the fines Ferrari issues on something called marketing levy, which in extreme cases can be a five figure amount in Euros.

 

SIX, not five.
Totally insane and completely out of this world.

Marcel Massini

 

Ridiculous honestly but then again its slightly bewildering to me that that with all this marketing there is not a stick shift Ferrari in production....I can just hear some here "not that topic AGAIN", I simply cannot believe that some who are invited to such events have not brought this topic up.

Equally its almost ironic that a large amount of control is wanted yet before Classiche, Ferrari did not seem to worry too much about the 166mm owner and whether his car was correct, of course there are commercial reasons for them to worry about this now but when I look at clubs like FCA and others of long standing, arguably they have contributed more to the enthusiasm and passion of all things Ferrari than perhaps the various importers have especially perhaps in the last 25 years or so.

 

Ferrari is about taking steps forwards, not backwards. The new car must supersede the last. They will never build a manual car. Ferrari offered manuals up until about 10 years ago, and nobody was buying them. If you read Ferrari's annual report you will also find key information about how they are going for the new targets audience. I believe it says in clear text the SF90 design was made to appease young nouveau riche Asians. Which is completely fine and understandable from a stock broker perspective.

There is a reason why they brought on new key management from the electronics/tech industry and shuffled the structure around before christmas. They are only looking forwards, not backward. The only exception will be the Icona series which in perfect case example, Daytona SP3, brings absolutely nothing new to the table except a controversial design. In fact it is less technologically advanced and far less limited (by a factor of three if I remember correctly) than it's origin, the LaF Aperta. Yet quite a bit more expensive. Pure cash cow exercise. So Ferrari will never put money into engineering a car with a manual again, proven by the "simplification" yet massive price of the Daytona SP3.

 

Image Unavailable, Please Login manual transmissions?
electric cars?