It’s not a crime. Too much hate about the brand around here because it is more flashy or edgy or SOME but definitely not all of the owners. I have 2 and you can’t ignore the sound and thrill. Way better sound than the turboed comparables. Interior appointments are more spartan. Compared to Ferrari luxury leather but goes with the package and exterior. Good on you.
No doubt Vigna is a very competent CEO who will make shareholders very happy. But I don't think that's the question being debated here. The question is whether that will that come into conflict with making great cars that appeal to Ferrari's core clients and fans. So far, no. They're still making amazing cars. There are trends that worry me though. Introduction of the PS. Minimal investment in V12s. Massive investment in EVs. Rising production numbers. These are all sound business decisions, but it's starting to change the meaning of Ferrari. (In my eyes, I know it means something different to all of us, and that's ok.) LdM was a capable set of hands too. Shareholders probably wouldn't have loved him. But Ferrarista did.
I think we are all seeing the writing on the wall(of course our lying eyes cannot be trusted) Ferrari has changed- it is still profit driven but for shareholders-the old core Ferrari client or heritage clients- we will be thrown a bone every now and then until we die off. The new clients won’t care if the car is a FEV(Ferrari EV), a CF (no not carbon fiber, it’s a Chinese made Ferrari- yeah, mark my words, it’s coming), or a rebodied piece of metal as long as it has the prancing horse. As China becomes a major market for Ferrari, the China will then say “ Oh, so sorry, if you want to sell those cars here you’ll have to partner with XYZ Company in Beijing and build them here and train our workers to design and build your cars” I will hopefully be long gone when that happens but the world is accelerating at a dizzying pace Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat
We'll see. If the Ferrari brass is entirely profit motivated with few other considerations in mind (probably more true than not thanks to Marchionne), they need to tap into brand the brand's value in ways LdM would not have contemplated (exhibit A: the PS). But they can't go too far or they risk eroding their pricing power. I'd imagine it's a delicate balance to access these new markets without discarding their brand value. Porsche seems to be striking that balance well. Ferrari is further up market, however; they may need to tread more carefully. Time will tell.
My view is that the model strategy is not just to create more volume for the same amount of models. But for an increased number of markets being served by an increased number of models. Roma, Purosangue, Icona range, even more upscale XX models like the the 499M, etc. My guess (I would add that this is a confirmatory biased guess), is that more new model types will be announced that are different for different markets.And some of them may have their own customer priority tree. If you buy in that product tree, it could be easier to get the next model in that product tree. Similar to needing an SF90 to get the SF90 XX. This being regardless of if you bought a lot of models in everything but SF90. So I can see a better situation for customers who prefer a specific type of model. So perhaps you wouldn’t need to be a big buyer of all models. The good news is that this will also create non-dilutive brand extension and more volume. Most people (including myself) thought that an SUV would be brand negative. The result seems to be the opposite. It seems to have expanded the brand into a market and not affected the brand in its current markets. Whether these are new customers is unknown to me. I am guessing these are the same customers based on the statements that the order book was filled right away. My dealer told me they filled the order book in 1 morning through 1 set of calls. I wonder if the next model of Purosangue will have a more ..price accessible powertrain. At least Ferrari will be able to prove that there was demand for the high end config. Otherwise the company wouldn’t have been able to fill order books in its usual product-markets. The EV car could also be the same. The EV 2025/2026 car could be a trial balloon to see if there is a real market for new volume. Also, for new customers. So this “increased amount of markets” strategy appears to be working well. At least based on the incredible performance financially. Which are numbers that far outstrip anyone’s projections. When even Koenigsegg is increasing volume by offering a much cheaper version of the Gemera called the Gemera SE, increased volume via product expansion is probably a winning strategy. thanks to all for adding to my comments.
Agree @gzachary, good point. There are clear parallels with Porsche's strategy. They've added SUVs, sedans, EVs, but continue to invest in their sports cars and allow them to stand in their own two feet. They still make genuinely good cars. I think this depends on how you define "brand positive" and who you ask. In terms of profit maximization and attracting new markets, clearly a positive. I don't think that is too surprising. In terms of the core clientele, I have been surprised by how positively the PS has been recieved. Nevermind not being bothered by it, the majority seem to like it. For me personally, I'm in the minority for which it has been brand negative. Its existence makes me a little less proud to be a Ferrari owner. Still, I don't care much. As long as they make cars I love, I'll buy them and won't worry if there are other cars in the lineup that don't speak to me. And if Ferrari doesn't hold that against me - only looking at my participation in a particular branch of the family tree as you suggest, not across the whole range - I'll really have nothing to complain about, other than my cantankerous philosophal objections. Perhaps this is the path for shareholders to have their cake and clients to eat it too.
Haha I love how you guys can only respond to my opinions on a manufacturer’s lineup with extreme limited run models as counter examples. Why not post a pic of the Solus GT for your rebuttal? lol. Pathetic really. And yes, even the interior of the McLaren P1 straight up sucks just like every McLaren. I know McLarens can handle. But name me one McLaren past or present with a sticker price for under $1-million that has a truly great exterior design, where the design of the car alone made you lust after one.
I think the 675LT and the 765LT are examples of “truly great design”. Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to my eye, both cars are aging quite well.
All brands have their winners and losers, strengths and weaknesses. I’m not a Ferrari guy or a McLaren guy. I just like cars.
Below are two recent pictures of the 12 C coupé without any camouflage. The car in the first picture with the alternative rims seen from this angle, looks quite acceptable. However, the car in the second picture with other rims and seen from a higher angle, conveys the impression that it is very square. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
‘Quite acceptable’ is not enough to part with such a lot of money. Sounds to me you’re not the right customer for one of these. I’d leave alone if I were you and stop trying to persuade yourself.
Image Unavailable, Please Login The car is new. And we have to discover the correct way to show her! I love this view
I don't know if you've realized this, but nowadays a very substantial part of the right Ferrari customers do not need to be persuaded or persuade themselves. I presume that for many of them the "lot of money" you mentioned is something unimportant, which is why they buy the 12 C simply because they want to have the latest Ferrari V12. Until a new V12 appears that I fall in love with without having to be persuaded or persuade myself, I remain simply the right customer of my Ferrari V12 whose design and configuration I really like.
There are very few of these fictitious “don’t care about money” wealthy people in my experience. In fact, I don’t know any. The second part of your response is exactly my point.
