+1 LOL How the heck did Europe even get considered?! Reliable carriers truck with 1-800 # and US cities listed on back. Dozens of Fords in a parking lot in the background with Rich-ford.com in huge font on the roof of the dealership...
To dMarks1 remarks: I have an 06 FGT and threw my video in for a possible allocation....I think this is more about supply and demand. I have attended several car shows...more recently at Broward Lamborghini,Florida....the two NFGTs there drew considerable interest among the other exotics. You can say the same about the Speciale Aperta (eclipsed by performance and technology). Yet they are in high demand reflected by prevailing prices - albeit fewer made. I travel the world on business, car enthusiasts like that this car pays homage to the Lemans legacy. My.02$
Does anybody know if the "Florida dealer" cited in the article was the original delivering dealer or another dealer? The owner of that particular GT broke his agreement with Ford, selling it to a Florida dealer, who almost immediately consigned it with Mecum. Ford tried to stop the auction from happening, but a judge denied the request saying that the dealer who owned the car didn't sign any contract with Ford and was therefore allowed to do what he wanted.
I Can Tell You This . .....It was not the delivering dealer or a ford dealership Sent from my SM-G900V using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Not an attorney, but on so many levels it appears the judge made a wrong decision against Ford. Surprised that Ford did not appeal or request a TRO at that point.
I can also say that when you purchase a ford gt now they put a lean on the title for 2 years to make sure it won't happen again. ... Sent from my SM-G900V using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Just seem to be such ****** move by Ford. I guess their app process just can't weed out the flippers vs the drivers. Whio would have guessed. And I thought Ferrari was a jerk company.
Just found out today that there are a few who were allocated a NFGT the first time are going to get a 2nd allocation as well .....that seems a bit to much..... Sent from my SM-G900V using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Interesting comment. Less than a half dozen have flipped or attempted to flip out of around 350 to 400 delivered. That's about a 2% failure rate in their dealing with the general public. You've got some pretty high standards.
Sorry I'm a free market capitalist. If you have something others want you should be able to sell it for a profit and no one -- the government or Ford or whoever -- should stop you from doing it. Selling a Ford GT hurts no one. It's assine Ford would stop owners from doing it and I'm shocked you call this "a failure" if they try to. Ferrari does not stop owners from flipping their cars. They ask for a first right of refusal at MSRP. But you can still sell it -- just don't expect to get a new one ever again. But that's the owners choice -- not Ferrari's.
Would you be okay with a minimum mileage before you can sell it vs two year hold. Ford is treating its car like a private equity fund. In two years how many will sell with under 100 miles? Again, they are being jerks the whole way they treat this car. I'm not getting one, I don't want one and most importantly I can't afford one. But if handed the keys I would drive one.
I retired at 48 by way of free market capitalism, I get how it works. However, when Ford agreed to sell me one of these cars they were very, very clear they weren't looking for "flippers" but people who would drive, show and enjoy the car (this is why so many have been allocated to previous owners who purchased new and STILL have them). They did this in more than a few verbal conversations, it was in the application and in a written contract/agreement. I choose to not break this agreement for two reasons. First, my word was given and that has always meant something to me and quit frankly I'm amazed how many people don't understand or believe in this concept. 2nd, if I did break my written and verbal agreements to Ford and sell I'd expect to get my ass handed to me by Ford legal. Again, why this is so hard for many to comprehend is beyond me.... PS, I didn't do a video.
due to the low quantity being produced, All I can do is repeat what we were told by Ford, from lead designers, marketing executives and the President of Ford at that time when giving GT owners a tour of their design studio back in '15. They were passionate about the new cars getting into the hands of loyal Ford brand customers first and foremost due to the low quantity being produced. They believed we would drive them and show them. They were not interested in the cars being purchased by collectors and put into their private mausoleums never to be seen again. They believed this process was the best way to assure their loyal base could get one.
Sorry... "flipping" is free market capitalism. You have something someone else wants and will pay you more than you paid for it. "Flips" happen every day in Real Estate, produce, stocks, steel, energy, and any product sold. Buy low, sell high. A farmer grows an apple and harvests it for 50 cents. He sells it to the distributor for 75 cents. He sells it to a grocery store for $1. And you buy it for $1.50. AKA: FLIPPING Anything that restricts this practice is not capitalism. Its price fixing. IMO, it may even be illegal and should be challenged. Ford has no right to tell owners what they can and cannot do with the products they purchased from them. Owners should be free to do what they want with their cars, just like they were free to put down -- or not put down -- half a million for one. Ford should not interfere. Ironically, Ford made its fortune for making great products at great prices, catapulting itself over a 100 different auto makers when the Model T was introduced. You would think they of all people would appreciate how the free market benefits everyone, including some of its best customers who have bought a Ford GT.
con·tract [contract] NOUN a written or spoken agreement, especially one concerning employment, sales, or tenancy, that is intended to be enforceable by law. "both parties must sign employment contracts" · agreement · commitment · arrangement · settlement · undertaking · [more] 2. enter into a formal and legally binding agreement. "the local authority will contract with a wide range of agencies to provide services" synonyms: undertake · pledge · promise · covenant · commit oneself · engage · [more] Mayor, I've read many your posts over the last few years agreeing with some and not with others but most always enjoying. However one thing I've learned is you do enjoy the last word, for that reason and because I really can't add to what I've already posted, I'm standing down.
I really don't understand what's so difficult to comprehend about this. It's a free market world, Ford offers a product with a stipulation that you don't sell it within X amount of time. You agreed to said contract, so you honor it. If you don't think their contract is fair/smart/whatever that's fine but then you're not getting their product which they can sell anyway they choose to. It's really quite simple. Ferrari does this without a contract through their allocation BS. Ford doesn't have such a high demand/supply ratio so they use a legal contract to enforce against flippers.
OK The next House you buy or the next stock you own, have the builder of the house or the company that you bought that stock to tell you --you can't sell it for a profit. Now see how that flies with you.... Gee I really like where Apple stock is going. Too bad I can buy it but CAN'T SELL it for a profit. Why? Apple says its unfair to take a profit on my investment. Buying a stock, sitting on it for a while, and selling it for a profit is "immoral". Ford should be HONORED that it's best customers want to buy a car for $500,000 from them no questions asked. What skin is if off it's nose if the owner turns around and sells it for $2M? Isn't that good for EVERY owner? Please explain how anyone is hurt by this, including Ford. We talk about the "red mist". Some of you have "blue mist".
How I feel about something has nothing to do with whether it's free market or not. Ford didn't say never sell it for a profit like you're implying above, they simply said don't sell it for X amount of time. Once again, it's a very simple concept: if you like the car enough and are willing to keep it for 1-2 years per Ford's requirement, get it. If you don't like that, don't get it. No mist of any color. Whether or not they're hurt by this also has no effect on the fact that it's a free market choice.
I ask again... what the F'n skin is it off Ford's nose if someone wants to sell the car they sold them??? Maybe they have a financial hardship. Maybe they want to invest in a great business idea they have. Maybe they just want to retire. Maybe they don't have that much more time on this planet. If you buy a stock and it doubles overnight, why can't you sell it? This is not a $15K Ford Focus. Its $500,000 you gave to Ford. They should say thank you and move on. Its seems incredible to me that anyone can justify this action by Ford to its customers who are the only ones HURT by this. YOU say its a contract and you didn't need to enter it. SURE, and get NO CAR. But you haven't explained one good reason justifying their restriction to the PURCHASERS of the product they are selling. Who is helped here? It sure ain't the people putting down the cash.
You've written vast quantities of terribly dumb stuff on this website, but I congratulate you, as this sets a new standard. These are truly impressively bad and nonsensical analogies. Kudos.
Too bad. My comments have to do with Ford's lousy treatment of it customers when dealing with the Ford GT for forcing people to prostitute themselves for their own publicity to even have a chance to get one to forcing them to keep the car after they purchased it. Then given them to celebs like Schmee who never even owned a Ford in his life while other Ford customers were denied. If you think that's good customer values then so be it. Too bad that most people think it stinks. But I have nothing poorly to say about the car at all and never have. SO, what's your beef? Spill it. I would really like to hear you justify Ford forcing customers to not sell the car they purchased. Tell me how good it is that Schmee gets a car and someone who owned 30 Fords never got the chance. This outta be good. Ford has NO RIGHT to deny a paying customer to do anything with their purchase. Everyone should be able to agree with that. Here you guys chastise Ferrari for what they do yet you excuse Ford for doing it WORSE? And I'm the bad guy? Yah right. It's too bad you can't understand that FORD is screwing its best customers over, or refuse to admit they are doing it. Or even worse, agreeing they have that right to do it. Believe me, I say the same thing about Ferrari all the time so don't give me the BS. So I ask again... tell me what value it is for a Ford GT owner to be told you cannot sell your car for a profit. I'm waiting....
There's no need for "too bad." It was a sincere congratulations. It takes effort and persistence to so consistently be so ridiculous. Few have the stamina. There's really very little point because you do not or simply cannot retain/process new information. You will read it (maybe), ignore it (definitely), and immediately regurgitate whatever contrarian notion you're committed to arguing at that particular moment in time (guaranteed). Here, I'll allow you to do it right now: Ford "forced" nobody to do anything, and specifically did not force anyone to, ahem, "prostitute themselves." Any type of media submissions were clearly marked as "optional." This is not subject to conjecture. It is a fact. The videos you fixate on were optional. The vast majority of allocation recipients did not produce any type of publicity, video or otherwise. People here with allocations have repetitively told you this was the case with them. Not only was it not required to "even have a chance," it had virtually no impact at all. The vast majority of allocation recipients received a GT primarily on the basis of one thing: their ownership of the 2005/2006 GT. You have been repetitively told this but you ignore it. This is a fact. Let's just start with these. If you can in any way demonstrate that you aren't just going to ignore these facts that stake the heart of your endless straw man arguments, maybe I'll consider answering the rest. I'm keeping my fingers crossed! p.s. I don't care what Ferrari does. Their allocation system is fine by me. People who won't buy big time money losers to get in the queue can't get good specialty winners below market value. Makes sense to me.
