Why???

They are still a business and need ways to make money, especially since not that many of their cars sell (only about 4000 a year). Licensing is a great way to make a profit. I can't even begin to imagine how much money Ferrari is making from licensing their cars to Microsoft to be used in their games. There will be something like 17 Ferrari's in Microsofts Forza: Motorsports racing. And there were 14 in Project Gotham Racing 2. Supposely Ferrari charges about 10 million dollars for a license.

 

Well, I don't know how old you are, but since you're in the working world you're at least in your 20's, and judging by your question I'll guess you're older than that. That means, like me, you likely grew up as part of the generation that ushered in the modern world where everything is for sale, and shamelessly at that. You remember the days when we weren't being shilled every which way we turned. It's just the way it is. I read today where Cadillac is debuting its new line of limousines at the Presidential inauguration. With that manouver, we no longer need to bother asking ourselves 'Where does it stop?', because it isn't going to!

 

A school teacher in Burlingame, CA owns a Ferrari. Never say never. A used one can be had for less than a Toyota Corolla. A 75 308GT4 might be a good teaching tool, too (physics lab on your local track, with appropriate waivers, of course...).

 

I'm in the branding business, and I will tell you that Ferrari is devaluing their image by licensing their name to too many products which otherwise are just commodities (ie; anybodys t-shirts, Acer laptops, Lego toys). At first the idea was to be selective, but as the concept rolled out and the licensing fees came in, someone at/near the top took their eye off the 'branding ball' (my opinion). Same thing is illustrated by Polo/DKNY/Nautica et al. licensing their brands to offshore apparel mfrs., who load their sh*t into Costco and Walmart at $14.00 for Nautica 'slacks', which you might otherwise pay >$150.00 for at your soon-to-be 'history' department store. Obviously the product is different (read cheeeper), but the brand is the same. All the 'name' brands are on a not so long downhill value curve; but the current owners are certainly cashing in for now. Then later they'll sell off the brand to another conglomerate and it will eventually disappear.
All of the foregoing is not to ignore the fact that 'brands' are under serious pricing pressures across the board; and with the too-typical public companies' need for short term profit at the expense of long term value building, you see the results in Ferrari-branded baby clothes, and Ferrari-branded aftershave.

(and you thought you were ranting........)

 

this teacher has a 63 250 GTE. Everything is possible.
I love capitalism.

 

To be precise... Last finantial year Ferrari made more profit with merchandise than with cars...
This is the reason behind it all.
Ciao
Eugenio

 

I've watched this issue for many years in the racing world.....

Those cars on the track are COSTING them money.

Those trailers at the event selling all the BS to the crowd are MAKING them money....big money, I'd say.....mostly CASH..........Hmmmmmmmm.

That's just the way it works.

Of the examples given only LEGO is a good PR move....those are FUTURE CAR owners snapping them together! I only help with the difficult part! Honest!


Very good thread. I'd say the guys buying cameras and laptop know they are getting standard product, painted red..........

 

I took the Dell they gave me at work, masked it off, painted it Krylon red, and then overlaid the Dell logo with an extra horsey sticker I had laying around. 20 minutes and "presto" !
Now that I have posted it, I am sure it will cost me my place in the F430 line at the dealer, but....that $200K should go into my kids' college fund, anyway...

 

Well, I am a police officer and make about the same as most teachers in my area. I happen to have a 1978 308 GTS. I paid $28K for it back in 1997. It was a regular car payment that almost any professional can afford with a little down. Thanks for the hint for the Ferrari clothing for my kid, that is the hardest stuff for me to find. BTW, I used to buy all the Ferrari apparel I could before I could afford the actual car. Now, I just buy and item or two here and there. Also, thanks for the 411 on the laptop. Can you post some pics before I start taping mine off? Thanks.

 

I can't answer the question how you can afford a Ferrari on a teacher's salary. (But i do think teaching is a noble enterprise). I can address the Moichandise Question, though. Its advertising, paid for by the consumer, rather than the manufacturer. It's unlikely to degrade the brand, since no one associates the tackiness of a cheap T-shirt, Barbie accessory or cigarette lighter with the automotive products; in other words, the core product that is being promoted is not diminished by the logo's appearance everywhere, on everything. In fact, even where the core product is itself related to the "moichandise," as in logo T-shirts for a fancy garment brand, eg, D&G, I don't think the fact that anybody, even greatly unwashed, can afford to wear the T-shirt detracts from the cachet of the real branded good. Ferrari, like Harley, is a model citizen in the licensing business, and knows how to turn a buck and keep their image in the public eye.

 

Maybe Ferrari should check this out?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=317&item=5949574916&rd=1

 

Last time I checked, the whole point of going to college to get my degree and then to get my masters was to get the fact that businesses are in business to get a profit only. nothing more. they arent there to offer you great cars or "mistique" but they are there to make money.
That is basically what college put into your head and basically all you need to know in order to succeed.

**edit** and you have to have a little brain and a little luck

 

its not how much you make, its what you do with what you make