The Ferrari SUV Thread

I would NEVER consider buying a Ferrari SUV.

A Ferrari SUV is to Ferrari Berlinetta or GT what a yellow gold Rolex is to a platinum Patek.

 

NEVER gonna happen.

NEVER.

 

Can I get another Amen (Amen!)

Joe

 

I think that was true. But they changed everything when they went public. And, while I was a fan of what LDM did, and thus initially skeptical of what SM's plan appeared to be, I have to admit, so far at least, its has brought results. One of the few visible flaws with LDM was the lack of F1 success for too many years at the end. I think we have to admit SM has brought them back to respectability in F1 and so far the idea to go public- and to sell Ferrari as a luxury company to the public- it has worked. I suppose we can debate if we think this will continue or not, but sitting here today, I think we have to give SM the nod. I also can see how you would say, it would have been fine before, with Fiat as the corporate backstop to Ferrari, but I think SM recognized that Fiat needed to grow. If they did not, eventually that backstop might not be what we would all hope for. It seems to me SM has made Ferrari stand more on its own, and it is standing just fine.

I think the big question was asked, earlier in the thread: where would they produce the SUV. I think someone once told me if they worked 3 shifts (24 hours a day) at the factory they could make about 12k units/ year. Currently they are making ~8.5k a year. I would imagine the idea behind a SUV would be initially 3k a year. So I think they could do it. But eventually, I think they would need to build a new factory and I'm not sure they have the room at the current location. That would be a problem. Maybe they could move some other buildings around? I don't know what they would do. The one thing I know for sure, the SUV engine must be built with the other engines. That part is critical- well, at least for my thinking. And I'm just a guy with a computer..... the pros in Maranello have the real challenge... Anyway, nice to talk with you all this morning. Fun to discuss such things.

 

Says you. I might say the same. But the question is whether or not they can find ~3000 people year who think a Ferrari SUV is amazing and worth it. Why should Ferrari let VW Group (Bentley, Lamborghini, Porsche) or BMW Group (Rolls) sell people a SUV when they can also provide such a vehicle and do it with a Ferrari spin. I know the answer as an enthusiast, but enthusiasm alone won't run a company profitably.

 

I am in the minority I guess with this. I would love to have a F suv option. I hate the FF - and everything about the way it looks, but I love the way it drives, sounds and feels. If F had an suv that looked good, and drove like a Ferrari - I'm all IN! The reality is these days, alot of us drive suvs during the week for normal driving. why not enjoy it more?

 

VW Group ruined the Bentley Image with their Q7 - Bentayga.
BMW Group has not ruined the Rolls image yet, even if they launched less expensive products lately.

Why isn't Patek, or Lange, or Vacheron, or RM, ...., selling big 44mm stainless steel wrist clocks?
Because they know who they are, what they owe their success to, and who they want to be.
They have long term visions.

Ferrari has room for revenue and profit growth simply by engineering that SUV, building the engine and drivetrain, and letting Maserati assemble and put its badge on it.
Oh well, maybe not anymore as the group's executives already ruined the Maserati image by launching lower quality than they should overpriced mass produced Ghibli or Quattroporte, and Levante.


Ferrari's strategy used to be "make a lot of money" by becoming and staying the best a sport / gt automobile can be, and becoming more and more exclusive. Montezemolo strategy.
New strategy is "make more money off the badge". Like Bentley did. Like Maserati tried to do.
Not successful long term.

Milking your past image for more money, and risking your brand credibility on short term profits is what "managers" do to meet their targets and get their bonuses, and retire with their stock options. They don't have long term vision as they don't need it. Stockholders buy it as they have no alternatives, and unsustainable long term growth visions.

 

Why are you so concerned with image? What is with your focus on people's reaction?

Porsche produces vehicles that are fully intended for enthusiasts such as the GT4, GT3, GT2, Spyder, etc. That they build SUVs is irrelvant for those who bought a porsche for the right reasons anyway.

Furthermore, your comments about buyers of suvs and sedans is extremely sexist and pretty ridiculous. Is your wife a model? Thanks for that little tidbit.

The wrong kind of buyer is what happened to porsche, not the cayenne.

 

100% with you. I don't get it - I can't for the life of me get that passionate about a product I buy, just as I really don't care about other product lines from the manufacturer.

For any given manufacturer I can't see why other products in the line should affect whatever product I buy. I got expensive B&W speakers - does it bother me they have lower priced products? Never give it a second thought - I just enjoy the product I have.

It's pretty simple to me: They're a business - if they believe they can make more money going the SUV route, then that's what they should do.

 

I wonder if discussion on the Ford Escape forum went something like:

"I'm opposed to Ford building the GT because it ruins the image of Ford's SUVs and sedans!"

 

I like a good watch analogy as much as the next luxury magazine editor (ahem) as they pay a substantial part of our revenues. But I'm going to have to beg to differ on this.

Richard Mille, for a start, sell most watches at 48mm - much bigger than the 44mm you quote as being 'big' and avoided by them.

Vacheron and Lange do an excellent job of marketing themselves - I just spent 348 GTB money on a Lange for my wife - but they are part of Richemont, the biggest luxury watch marketing group in the world. Many of their parts are shared, and they still source from outside the group.

Patek have become the most successful (in terms of margin) luxury watch brand in the world partly on the back of a centimillion dollar marketing campaign centred around persuading conservative middle aged rich men that they are buying something for their kids; a kind of wrist-driven next gen philanthropy marketing campaign of which a private bank would be proud (and which has obviously worked).

But there is little about any of these (largely marketing-based) brands that is analogous to Ferrari, now or then. Ferrari was/is based on the criteria of performance: speed, handling, thrill. We debate thrill, we can't deny how the cars perform objectively.

A Patek's performance (timekeeping) is patently worse than a Quartz Watch or an iPhone.

So it is valued for two elements: image (those men wanting to show each other they have a Patek) and materials. Within the latter comes the ever-decreasing circle of arcane mechanical complications that is no monopoly of Patek. The former is a construct of marketing and attendant word of mouth. Patek is a fine manufacture, but inherently no finer than Rolex (which you decry), indeed Rolex with its own foundry has a case, making its own cases, for being better.

I take money from all these brands and love them equally. But none of them are Ferrari.

Just saying.

 

Rolls SUV is coming. The whole black line? What do you think of that? Bentley SUV, I agree, it is not at all for me, but do you really think that has ruined their image? Its supposedly sold out for two years. And the reviews are effusive. I tried a Bentley years ago- it wasn't for me- and so I was not a Bentley customer before the SUV. And I'm no more or less now. (As an aside the name is really terrible!) However, I still respect Bentley. They deliver a very high quality product that most people really like! Its possible the concept of what constitutes a luxury, or maybe in this case, user-luxury, product has moved on to something new.

I really can't speak about watches as I just don't know enough. But, didn't Patek (my favorite btw) recently announce a new large face watch? Even if true- or not true- I'm not sure the analogy to watches is really the best one.

I think you are pointing out that the gaps between the low, middle, and high end are all widening, though with some niche products filling in in a few places. I have read in some of Ferrari's financial statements that making engines for Maserati and Alfa is a source of additional revenue.

I think this is partly true. I'm not disagreeing on the best sport/gt part, but as far as exclusive, they were always exclusive, but under LDM the volume increased. You might define this as losing exclusivity. I think LDM saw he could safely increase volume. He had his own vision and style and he was perfect for this era of Ferrari. Is it not possible that it became time for someone new to run Ferrari? Maybe yes, and maybe SM isn't that person, or maybe he is. Maybe some of us didn't understand his vision. But so far at least, by the only measure we can really judge: results, SM has been doing a good job. It will be a lot easier to make a judgement as more time passes.

I think Ferrari was doing this with LDM also. Look at all the merchandise they sold. I think it was not a bad idea at all, since not everyone can afford a car, but almost anyone can afford a t-shirt, or a cap. To me, the critical thing is what that badge stands for. If you lose those core brand associations, then you are in trouble. As far as I can tell, Ferrari has not. Look at their road cars, they have never been better, and whatever systems they develop are all about making the driver enjoy the experience more and more.

Yes that is what some do. But, I don't think Ferrari is doing that here. I think they are delivering world class products. You or I might not like this or that styling, etc. But the product has never been better. And it continues to improve with each iteration. This is not a company resting on its laurels. I think the primary risk of doing a SUV is if it becomes a diversion and takes precious resources from core projects. I think if Ferrari can open a theme park(s)? And sell you iPhone cases that disperse Ferrari cologne, the brand will not be hurt by sales of a few thousand SUVs/ year. That's just my opinion.

 

We Hear: Marchionne Says Ferrari Dino Will Happen

https://www.autocar.co.uk/opinion/new-cars/ferrari-dinos-revival-first-evidence-marchionnes-direction

Never say never

 

In the latest special Ferrari issue of Classic and Sports Car, Enrico Galliera, Ferrari Chief Marketing and Commercial Officer is interviewed and states "...because speed alone doesn't make a Ferrari, there has to be the sensation you only get from a genuine low-slung sports car - which is why we'll never build an SUV"

Just sayin'

 

Which in corporate world might very much mean "an suv is coming soon".

 

Watches are not purchased to give time anymore, so they are indeed no longer performance items.

Maybe a better analogy is AP doing the Offshore line vs their previous lines?

Commercial success, got lots of new clients who can buy a big recognizable expensive item (ala Rolex), which works well (AP tech)...but certainly not the AP like their used to be.
I would not buy one, and for me signed the departure of AP from "elite" to "mainstream flashier luxury".

 

Many good points.

Exclusivity and appeal are also measured when compared to the rest of the offering in the market.
Other manufacturers already went downhill with that respect (Porsche, Bentley, ...). Ferrari's pricing being what it is, exclusivity will stay, and their products remaining best in class, I have no doubt that their SUV would be a success bringing great extra money.

If they don't want to exceed the 10,000 vehicles mark a year, now they would need to replace the GTC4 line by the SUV. Actually to sell all of their SUV they probably need to do so.

I would not consider driving daily a Ferrari SUV while I do so with my FF and have a GTC4 on order. I suspect the clients purchasing a Ferrari SUV will be different from the current GT clientele, and that will also have an impact on the image of the brand. And this will have an impact on many clients who don't want to be associated with such image.

 

Excellent quote. However, what if the Ferrari "SUV" is not called an "SUV" but its something else entirely. Maybe it would be more like a slightly taller 5 door coupe/sedan... Ferrari would never make a SUV in the mold of a Jeep Cherokee, but a taller, longer, 5 door version of the GTC4... that's how it plays out in my mind anyway.

Thanks! I think they will have to exceed 10k units. I agree its another market segment and likely means they wouldn't replace the GTC4. I think you do point out a risk about association, but I know many Ferraristi who wouldn't want this or that model, and are not turned off by those who do own those models. I suppose time will tell. In the mean time we get to enjoy our cars and congratulations on the FF and soon GTC4!

Speaking for myself, a Ferrari SUV might make more sense, but the V12 in the GTC4 is mighty tempting!

 

As the holder of a pile of Ferrari stock (RACE) I have to applaud this. As the owner of a spectacular 550 I need to find my migraine meds. Sometimes it's useful being a schizophrenic.

 

As someone who is constantly searching for SUV nirvana I wouldn't go near a Ferrari SUV. Not that it's a bad product, just that high performance SUVs, ones that you actually use and not just cruise the shopping malls, tend to break and have high maintenance. I've tried them all and I can't imagine it gets any better than a cayenne turbo with a Ford raptor backup. I'm sure they'll sell quite a few anyway. Having a dealer close by will be key.

 

SM said on analyst calls this year that the 10,000 limit is toast. Why do you think they are going hybrid for all new F from 2019?

 

Of course I am and so are others concerned with image those that are honest when you pay a premium for these cars, are you fooling yourself thinking we don't care? Go get a hopped up WRX or a GTR then. Yeah my wife is a model and that's what I used to Date when I was single they are concerned about image too lol guess that bothers you go date fat ugly women then. Yes I am sexist, can't men at least manly men that know what they want have there own cars or do we have to share with women get emasculated metro cars. Yes when I see Cayennes and Panamera it's women driving them they are a car made for women.

 

Missed that. Well at least there is a chance that they retain the 2+2 v12 line.

 

I hope there is no SUV