One thing learned about Ferrari going public

Racing is really an unusual form of advertising. Different. Exciting. Dream making. Goal setting that one can see, feel, hear, touch and even taste.

No one races shoes, purses or even watches. It is a medium unto itself. It is everything every other form is not.

Ferrari MUST stay away from traditional forms of advertising and solely consentrate on F1, for if they do not, the F1 Program will be viewed as a superfluous black hole drain and be discontinued in favor of full page ads in Cosmo, Muscle and Nerd within a few short years.


Mark my words.

 

Hah, coming from you.

Sticking up for Paul? Shocker.

I didn't say anything that warranted responses that I got.

I was saying that most new buyers don't focus on the F1 part of the brand. Many don't even know their own cars stats or performance. The cars are more status symbols than anything else.

You can think otherwise, that's fine, but the obnoxious replies just amuse me more than anything else. Why some people would be so bitter or get so bent out of shape from hearing the opinions of others.

Oh, wait, that probably does typify modern society, right? Go to any online news story and it is evident reading the comments, particularly anything political, and you will see republicans and democrats tear away at each other.

And I'm the ass, sure buddy!

 

not so true. Porsche has always said "Porsche builds race cars" and that "racing improves the breed".

I also think while a certain new Porsche market segment knows little about the current race history...they do know Porsche has been successful in racing.

and I too own a porsche and all of my Porsche friends know the 911 is the most successful sports car in racing history.

I think the history for both is very important to most but certainly not all. we shall see how the chips fall.

 

I like the racing aspect of many car companies. I'd rather buy an Aston Martin as a luxury car partly based on their involvement in racing. I'm not aware of Cadillac involved in racing so don't get any extras out of that ownership experience. While Bentley "races", I'm not really impressed or excited with that aspect because their street cars don't really follow what their track cars are doing. BMW M cars seem to get it. Porsche gets it.

I like cheering and watching the "home team."

My wife cheers for Mercedes during F1 races because she owns one.

As long as Ferrari competes on some level of racing in the world as a factory, I think they are good to go and could even drop F1 and be successful - but not if they gave up all forms of racing.

Robb

 

See, this is a fair, and reasoned response. Someone who disagrees but in a civil manner, without attacking.

To this I'd respond and say that I agree Ferrari has a higher percentage of customers who follow F1. You can see the hats they wear, and jackets etc too... and the banners in their garages.

BUT, I am talking about the majority. And I would argue that the majority don't post on the online forums, and are not necessarily the people you may be exposed to. The forums are not representative of the buyers as a whole. They just aren't. If they were, they would still be making manual cars, and they would have a stripper car that is more bare bones.

I do appreciate the counter views. For the merchandise part however, I would not compare Porsche vs. Ferrari in that way. Again, different levels of luxury. Think of ralph lauren and that some of their "lower" brands are in a way, the "merchandise" arm of their true luxury labels. Ferrari, by being high luxury, has some people wanting to be associated with the brand for that luxury element alone (perfumes and colognes for example have no racing element at all, but do have that lux element to them).

 

Please excuse me if this has been answered previously; I skimmed but did not read previous info. What about Alfa & Maserati? Are they to be under Ferrari or that other F-branded Italian company?

 

Porsche has also done fine with starts / stops in their racing focus.

The brand doesn't suffer because of that.

I also own a Porsche but it wasn't the racing history that got me into the brand as a kid. It was seeing the cars on the road (and in books / magazines). Same with Ferrari. It was the car on Magnum PI and in my Road and Tracks that got me into it, and racing (as a casual follower but over many years) was entirely separate from that.

 

That's a decent point about my exposure to the relative groups of owners and whether that's representative of the whole populace of each marque's respective owners.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

You know, there's quite a few comments in here we could probably do without, not limited to:

Let's try to refrain from personally attacking each other or being unduly antagonising while we ardently disagree.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

BTW, here is an article that takes a very opposite view of my own:

Ferrari's exclusivity stems from one place - Business Insider

And I believe there is another article out there that gives an alternative view.

I disagree with the BI article, but what do I know?

 

Sergio

Years from now Ferrari enthusiasts will spit when they hear that name.

 

Johnny O'Connell would be very sad to hear you say that.

From Wikipedia:

"Johnny O'Connell (born July 24, 1962), is the most successful GM factory racing driver from the United States. He currently drives for Cadillac in the Pirelli World Challenge, winning the 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 GT driver's championship."

Not that I am planning to buy a Caddy anytime soon, but Johnny O certainly can pedal one around a track.

 

same w/andy pilgrim. and max angelli...

 

Does this mean we're not going to see a factory effort return to Sports Car racing (eg. Le Mans) anytime soon?

All my hopes and dreams lay scattered upon the garage floor!

 

Sports car racing would be a pretty great direction imho.

Would be pretty epic if Ferrari ever decided to mix it up with Porsche in LMP racing or made a factory effort for the other classes.

 

IMO a lot of ferrari buyers as others here say buy for status, a handbag etc. F1 is for some these buyers a factor, they are buying "race car" or a race car for the street made by the wingingest F1 team. Its part of the brand story.

Then there are all the branded chotchkis theme parts etc, those are all built on F1 not the street cars and apparently these are huge profit generators.. Without F1 a big part of the income stream stops.

Yes I would love to see ferrari return to sports car racing, I think it would be more relevant to making better more fun street cars than ersatz F1 experience of the current crop. But whats the payoff for ferrari?

 

Beaks.

Respectfully (Don't you just hate it when someone starts a statement with that?) Respectfully, I've been here a long time, I've spent my time in the trenches doing what you do, and my comment doesn't even come close to violating any of the rules here. And it serves a purpose and is not "unduly antagonizing."

It's not a personal attack, it's not trolling, it's nothing more than a statement of my opinion that someone, anyone who thinks racing isn't important to Ferrari, and who can't see that as critical to the heritage and future of the marque, has no grasp of that marque.

Ferrari is a more than a sum of its parts. It's not just a car, or a key fob, or a tee shirt, or a race team. It's history. Racing history, Family history, driving history and brand history. To ignore that, to belittle that, is to deny the heart of Ferrari itself, and to reduce it to nothing more than wheels, tires and motor.

And if that's where Ferrari Ownership is headed, then I weep for the day the majority of owners have no real clue about what they buy.

D

 

I am good with wheels tires and a motor provided they are superlative and of the right inspiration. The rest of the story only has meaning to me in terms of buying a car because that history implies the company knows what it is doing and has a comitment to a certain type of product.

What I buy is the car, the machine, the rest is mostly blah, other than the implication that a car devloped by a race car company with a long history may have attributes in terms of product that others lack.

But then different buyers as we see have different motivations.

Going one step further, if someone made a nut and bolt recreation of a 288 GTO, but because it was made in Iowa could not have a horsey on it, as opposed to a 1984 by "ferrari" from maarnello one it would make not one whit of difference to me. What is appealing about the 288 is what it is. i ma into the cars for the driving and the design, motor and concept.

Now the 288 orgionaly could not have come about othr than the unique circumsatances of what and where ferrari was in the early 80s, and its history, its a product design untique that company and era.. Porches approach begat the 959 an entirely different machine reflection porche and germany.

So the inspiration and design is a product of the place and era, and while the place may be the same "maranello" the era is so different now that the inspiration is more global and the product quite different, that suits some and not others. The history is therefore relevant only to the extent it inspires the product being designed or built, it attaches little no more than that, at least to me.

Where ownership of the product, or where the product is headed is an issue because the company now seeks a different customer base, in that sense losing the history is a step backwards product wise. But the history in and of itself adds little tot he product in my book, thats just walter mitty stuff..

 

how long does it stay under $10 before fiat buy it all back...................

 

Wow! FerrariChatters hold widely divergent opinions on this topic, and come to those opinions by divergent means!

Is there any way to find out, with greater certainty, the validity of our opinions?

Can someone, perhaps, survey all Ferrari owners or purchasers, or at least, enough Ferrari owners and purchasers in order to grasp, with greater certainty, the sense of the whole?

If Ferrari owners and purchasers were indeed surveyed, and the results of the survey contradicted some FerrariChat posters' opinions, would those contradicted accept the poll's validity, even if
* enough purchasers and owners were asked so as to make a representative sample
* the survey questions were clear enough and neutral enough to be representative
* the sampling error were stated?

(In sum, how do we know what we know, and how do we know that we know it?)

 

Dave,

Respectfully D), I don't think the way you worded that the first time around was very clear. Even though you didn't intend it that way, both Super_Dave and I viewed it as specific enough to him to be a bit of a jab - hence the subsequent fallout and gentle nudge.

However, your expanded point was far more eloquent and focused on the argument rather than unintentionally targeting the man.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

The CEO said they mainly wanted to increase sales/production of the Cali and FF ..so i dont think this will affect the values of other older cars too much,which seems to be a concern to many folks.

 

Ferrari's Formula One Success Little Help in Fight With Fendi - Bloomberg Business

This article talks about turning into a luxury brand. Their current non clothing range of merchandise leaves a fair bit to be desired in terms of quality.

 

Exactly.

To be a luxury brand there needs to be a heavily enforced level of quality and design across the range. Ferrari has that only in parts of their branded products. Lets see if they have it in them to rip up the current contracts to licence their name and logo to those companies making inferior products.

 

Like their paint or sticky plastic parts?