Ferrari is going broke!

ben, lj- they are closing down saab.
What, thats the first i heard that, i thought they were doing well?

Is this the pics your thinking of?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I was 14 posts off...

 

Gotta love a car that looks like a 360 with a ricer body kit on it, with an engine bay that should contain a V10 or V12.

Just to give you a heads up, the "little porker" will have 600hp, rear-wheel drive (S option), and weigh a few hundred pounds less (S option) for the 06 model year. And, the Murcielago will be 700hp, RWD, and a few hundred pounds lighter as well. Uh oh...you'll have to come up with some other creative ways to slag Lambo's. Maybe the gold chain jokes might still work? It's worth a try. And, the 06 changes are not speculation, it was announced officially a few weeks ago.

And yet, the 430 will still look like a teenager's photshopped ricer-edition-Enzo-wannabe version of the 360, with a V8 that won't pump out any more than 500hp.

 

I read today that Ferrari have just signed a deal with Bernie Ecclestone to stay with Formula 1, that gets them $100 million "signing on fee"...so I doubt they'll be going broke anytime soon?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4199445.stm

 

And you know what, the car STILL won't sell. Nobody wants a Lambo. Hence the HUGE markdowns and dealership inventories. The Murci is a nice car, but the Gallardo looks like a fat pig. AWD sucks on a sports car, and making a car designed for AWD into a RWD car will def not work like if the car was designed as a RWD car from day one....


And as far as the Fiat Ferrari thing, I can't belive how many people still don't know that Fiat Auto and Fiat Spa are different. Also Ferrari/Maserati function on their own and are not part of any "sale".

 

I have been hearing strong rumors that F-SpA will be buying another importer within the year to control more and more. So, it will not only be FNA owned by FSpA.

 

They make a killing on Schumi caps and T shirts.......THAT's where the money is..............

Cars are just an afterthought........

 

Here's a link to the WSJ article: http://interactive.wsj.com/dividends/retrieve.cgi?id=/text/wsjie/data/SB110652643327233687.djm&d2hconverter=display-d2h&template=dividends

 

If they stopped making cars but continued to make spare parts they'd become more profitable than Porsche!

 

I understand what you are saying, but don't you think the Enzo would be a little more profitable if they could sell a couple 1000 more a year at that price? Or drop the price a slight bit and increase the amount being sold to make up the difference? Trust me, with all the technology they have in that car to include designing it, I wouldn't be suprised if they lost money to have the Enzo availible. I know you would say that Ferrari can't loose money and produce a car, but there was something I read a while back about a vehicle having to be a production vehicle to be able to race with NHRA. They did this because of Ferrari, MB, and a couple others were bringing $5 mil cars to the track that they were not producing for the public. Benz was producing some gullwing model (sorry, I forget the name of it) that costed something like $3 mil to produce, but they were selling it for almost $2 mil, just to be able to race it and be able to sell enough a year to be able to compete. I think the minimum sells was something like 12 per year. Getting back to my point, I am not sure the profit margin on the Enzo, but I am sure its not much if any at all.

 

GM taking on Fiat would be like tying the Hindenberg to the Titanic.

Ferrari probably looks fine financially before you add in $400MM plus cost (and net sponsor fees) for the F1 program.

Any big parent is inevitably going to push for higher volumes--going for the short term cash flow and killing the brand positioning in the process. Even Porsche was willing to do it without a parent!

 

"Imagine if GM owned Ferrari." Yeah, I can imagine that they could build more of the same cars, sell them for half as much, and you wouldn't have to change the freakin' timing belts every 3 years, not that I don't love my 308. ;-)

 

But the Enzo wasn't designed to be a car like the 360, 575, ect. The Enzo's purpose is to be the exotic, limited edition, "special" model.


How is Lambo doing anyways? Is the Murc. doing well?

 

I like the Gallardo, so don't get me wrong, but still that's the most extensive overhaul of any 2 year old clean-sheet design that I can think of. Maybe they can get it right the 2nd time?

As for the F430, do you really need it knock it down to feel better about the Lambo? What does that accomplish for you? Your glib little criticism is a ridiculous over simplification about the car, but if that's really what you think about it, you are quite mistaken. I think you should focus on the merits of one instead of trying to diminish the other.

 

I agree, the Enzo is to be the most exotci, but that doesn't mean that Ferrari makes money by selling it is all I am stating. They are probably loosing money on the Enzo, but making it up in other areas. Its a marketing scheme so they can be at the top of the exotic list. Make sense?

 

Extensive overhaul? So then, 360CS was an extensive overhaul? I cannot understand how continuous improvement could be considered negative. Strange. The 500hp in the V10 is mildly tuned, and if they can get more out of it, why not?

As for your advice to me, I think you should direct it to your counterpart that bad-mouthed Lambo prior to my post. My response was made tongue-in-cheek, in a manner designed to illustrate how silly it is to refer to a car as "Gay-ardo" or "little porker". So, in that sense, I figured the 430 is a "riced-out-360-Enzo-photshop". Get the idea?

I don't feel the need to knock any car, including Ferrari. It's pretty simple, I buy the cars I like, regardless of what badge they wear.

And, I am not "quite mistaken" about the 430, thank you. How is my opinion of a car a "mistake"?

 

I have a 360 and I'm waiting on a 430, but I have to say the Gallardo is a very impressive driver. On the track it felt a lot faster than both the Murcielago (!) and the Stradale. Lighter and more nimble than the first and more low end torque and better (4 wheel traction) than the latter. The Stradale takes more attention to--as it gets a bit twitchy at speed while the Gallardo hunkers down a bit better--a really easy driver. While I love the 360, from a performance perspective, the lambo has the jump. With 600 hp it will be a force to be reckoned with.

I would add that the fit and finish was solid too--one more year and a low mileage model will be a lot of car for the money...

 

The CS was a special edition, offered along side the unrevised standard model, a full 4 years into it's production cycle. Not quite the same as Ingolstadt scrambling back to the drawing board 24 months after the first one hits the pavement. Nothing wrong with constant improvement, but a clean sheet design should be able to stand on its own for a little while. Example, McLaren F1 redesigned their MP4-19 mid season last year. The new car was much better. The question is, why did they need to?

As for the 2nd issue, I said "but IF that's really what you think about it...." Your comments were tounge-in-cheek so I can leave it at that.

 

Lambo scrambling back to the drawing board? I doubt it. They put a V10 in that car for a reason. There is a lot of headroom in that motor, and even 600hp won't be fully tapped out. That's called foresight.

Yes, the Gallardo was a clean sheet design. So, again, where is the problem with adding horsepower in 2 years and offering RWD? I hardly consider that an extensive overhaul. And regarding 4 years until the 360CS arrived, there are many who believe it should have come sooner. So, who is right? In my mind, when the consumer is offered a better product than the one preceding it, that is a good situation. You make it sound like the car is junk, so they need to fix it. Hardly. The market is moving incredibly fast in the exotic realm. Consumers are demanding more and expecting more. Lamborghini is reacting. If Ferrari thinks they will be able to sit on the 430 for 5 years without doing anything, they will be doing their customers a disservice. I don't hear any unbiased car enthusiasts complaining about the improvements on the horizon at Lamborghini.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong..But I was told that Ferrari is the most profitable part of the Fiat group. It was also stated to me that Fiat is using some of Ferrari's funds to keep the Fiat car divison afloat. Obviously totaly hear-say..but for some reason there may be some truth to it.

 

This explains the two year wait on the F430, while the unsold Gallardos are stacked to the ceilings in warehouses all over the world. But hey! Those will be 600 horsepower unsold Gallardos!

 

Unbelievably wild, over-reaching statements. I won't make any statements about the Gallardo itself. Only your argument.

I wonder how CURRENT Gallardo owners felt about the massive power increase so soon after they purchased theirs?! Oh well, at least they can sell it and buy the new one. Or can they? Oh crap, looks like the news of the 600HP Gallardos just sunk the resale even further on the old ones, including the "old" new ones that never sold, or worse, sold for about 100 or so miles, and now being sold again as "used"? I hope those owners have some very, very deep pockets.

Now concerning your absolutely absurd statement that, "If Ferrari thinks they will be able to sit on the 430 for 5 years without doing anything, they will be doing their customers a disservice", unless you currently own several Ferraris, try even getting a 1st year 430. Or a 2nd year. Good luck. MAYBE you can get a 3rd year, but get ready to grab your ankles because here comes the premium. 4th and 5th year 430s will be snatched up by people who have been waiting for their special, brand-new car, spec'ed exactly how they have always wanted, since NOW. To make ANY substantial improvements to the model in the 5th year would be a disaster and a personal offense towards the owners of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th year owners. Besides the considerable drop in monetary value, they would also be faced with the feeling of having the "older" version of a car that perhaps is only a year old or less. To be a 4th year owner in that scenario...I will say no more regarding that.

HOWEVER, I do want you to know Clax that, aside from the fact that I do in fact like the Gallardo, I think it is highly disrespectful and careless to haul off and bash so thoroughly a competitors vehicle without any regard for others' opinions, and I 100% agree with you that earlier comments made regarding the Gallardo were callous and off-base. This is a Ferrari forum, however, so while NOT excusing such mean-spirited commentary, perhaps it is, at least a little bit, to be expected. Be weary not to fall into the same trap, I doubt anybody was aiming to offend you.

Lastly, please think at least a little bit about the arguments you are putting forth. Most that you have put forth to be damaging to Ferrari are nothing more than grasps in the air at something with which you can harm the ego of the F-car owner. If you are determined to pick Ferrari apart, there are a multitude of flaws that can be chosen - 360/430 sales aren't likely to be contenders among those flaws.

 

FRANKFURT, Germany -- Germany's Commerzbank has agreed to buy a 10 percent stake in automaker Fiat's Ferrari division for $223 million.
The share purchase is part of a deal last week between cash-strapped Fiat and Mediobanca, in which the Italian bank bought 34 percent of Ferarri while agreeing to sell 12.5 percent to other banks.
Commerzbank spokesman Dieter Schuetz said the bank intended to hold the stake as an investment, but couldn't say whether it intended to buy a larger stake, or how long it might hold the current one.
The sale of shares in Ferrari, which is 90-percent owned by Fiat, is part of a wider plan to slash Fiat's debt of $5.8 billion. Fiat's chief executive Paolo Cantarella resigned June 10 amid the company's difficulties and was replaced by co-CEOs Gabriele Galateri di Genola and Paolo Fresco. Ferrari remains profitable, posting $46 million net profit last year.

Ferrari is with FiatAuto but its "not involved with the transaction of GM" as said in this link. http://money.cnn.com/2000/03/13/worldbiz/gm_fiat/ (3rd paragraph under "Extra Leverage". There is a paragraph on where they quote that Ferrari pretty much keeps the FiatAuto group afloat on there part, but Fiatauto as the "whole group" is 5.8 billion in debt. I could be wrong.