Suppose Jim Glickenhaus really did run Ferrari...

He's already CEO of his own automotive company answering only to himself. I don't think he'd want to be head of Ferrari at this stage.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

"Make parts, as Mercedes-Benz does, for EVERY Ferrari ever made."

That's the biggest improvement he could make.

 

Why not build to demand? Porsche does it and they are most profitable car company in world for many years now

 

They need to vastly improve the replacement parts they "do" make for starters. Big room for improvement.

With an SUV accounting for much of it. Bought four of them so far and sticking with the 2006 TTS indefinitely. Bulletproof, best SUV ever made IMO.

 

Some interesting ideas- here are some reactions:

1. I disagree with Jim on F1. I would throw everything including the kitchen sink at F1 and I would start with getting F1 to allow testing and get back to NA motors and NA V12 would be my priority.

2. I would not build supercar to demand. My guess is LDM had a pretty good feel for what the demand is and how to manage it. However, my guess is they could have built some more LF and this would have insured exclusivity but also not upset so many worthy candidates who did not get an LF. Even some who were invited to see the LF preview did not get the car. I think that was not well done.

3. I would make manual transmission an available option for a "reasonable" cost.

4. I would consider eliminating the GT side of Ferrari's product matrix. That means axing the FF and California. Let Maserati build those cars.

5. Limited edition Spider F12 has been done and they have been very careful about V12 convertibles. I would stick to the game plan LDM established here.

6. His SCG is a cool car, but it doesn't look like a Ferrari. I'd keep the 488 as it is- BUT- I would look to do more racing like Jim says. I think Ferrari should be at LeMans. If Ford can go with a V6, Ferrari should be there with a V8 or V12. I don't know all the ins and outs but if possible, I say do it with a V12- my guess is too heavy and too fuel inefficient.

7. I definitely agree with Jim's "Welcome fans into Ferrari's world, even if they only aspire to but can't afford one yet. No more $2K rubber-chicken hospitality tents."

8. No more $3K cupholders. Agreed! (just bury this in the base price)

9. Make parts, as Mercedes-Benz does, for EVERY Ferrari ever made. Good idea.

10. Open factory tours to non-owners. Not so sure, I think some of this is the perk of owning a car/ being in the family.

11. Make infotainment systems MUCH more user-friendly. Sure.

12. Get rid of 50 badges and prancing horses per car. I agree it would be a good idea to cut it down a bit. However, my thing would be to forbid the SF shield to be made in anything except the standard livery. No more CF shields.

13. Bring Pininfarina into the Ferrari tent. My guess is this came with a lot of baggage and little upsides. I would have liked to see it though. Why should someone else now own part of the heritage that is so linked to Ferrari. I think they made a mistake by letting PF go somewhere else.

 

I coudn't see Ferrari being run by an american guy in my worst nightmare.

 

Disagree with canning the FF, definitely disagree with any of his F1 ideas.

Rest is all good.

 

Racing doesn't sell cars, WINNING races (at any level) sells cars. His ideas would position Ferrari to have much greater ability to win. Especially at LeMans, P1, P2, etc and take some of the pressure off the F1 program which ironically could result in more success and relevance to the brand, especially with less robotic drivers.