Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[flemke]

RobinBanks said:

flemke said:

RobinBanks said:

Did you end up buying Madonna's Range Rover?

I looked at a Range Rover that was previously owned by the Duke of Westminster, but it was in a bad way. I know!
That was a great anecdote.

No. It would have been fine for the purpose, but I did not want anything associated with her.

I'm not a big fan of Madonna's music, but if the car was right I doubt I would be botered.

You say that you were buying it for someone else - is that a way of saying that you wouldn't think of owning a Range Rover yourself?

If I were to need that sort of thing, perhaps I would consider it. I don't need it, I doubt that Madonna needed it, and I doubt that 90% of Range Rover buyers need it.

[Storer]

Of course they will be totally separate companies, but they can bill each other for work carried out and there is nothing to stop one from 'sponsoring' the other.

I own two small companies and this is how mine operate.



Paul

[flemke]

FeelingLucky said:

Storer said:

McLaren must be in a slightly better place now they are producing the road cars. As an F1 team with no other income they would be very vulnerable to the loss of sponsorship.
I imagine there is a good deal of "cross over" between the two companies and many of the F1 team's facilities can be used for the road car development, and therefore spread costs.

However, I suspect this could only be a short term expedient and major sponsorship will be needed to go forward in the near future.

It was my understanding that they are in fact totally separate companies?
Aren't the cars manufactured by McLaren Automotive?

Yes they are totally separate companies, although a majority of the shareholder group is common to both companies. As you imply, this is why they cannot simply shift funding back and forth between the two entities.

[flemke]

flemke said:

FeelingLucky said:

Storer said:

McLaren must be in a slightly better place now they are producing the road cars. As an F1 team with no other income they would be very vulnerable to the loss of sponsorship.
I imagine there is a good deal of "cross over" between the two companies and many of the F1 team's facilities can be used for the road car development, and therefore spread costs.

However, I suspect this could only be a short term expedient and major sponsorship will be needed to go forward in the near future.

It was my understanding that they are in fact totally separate companies?
Aren't the cars manufactured by McLaren Automotive?

Yes they are totally separate companies, although a majority of the shareholder group is common to both companies. As you imply, this is why they cannot simply shift funding back and forth between the two entities.

But, as Paul says, it is easier for one entity to do mutually-beneficial deals with the other than would typically be the case between companies that are unrelated to each other.

[RobinBanks]

flemke said:

If I were to need that sort of thing, perhaps I would consider it. I don't need it, I doubt that Madonna needed it, and I doubt that 90% of Range Rover buyers need it.

Needs and desires are very separate things - that was my question really.

[anonymous-user]

Flemke dear, I know it's vulgar to talk money (and I'm not being sarcastic) but has the astonishing increase in value not tempted you to: buy a 918 or similar, several other nice cars, 250 Lusso, F40, DB4 etc. and still have several million left over? Or is it just a case of this is my car, and I love it very much? Fair enough if so, or if you are well off enough that the increase in value isn't necessarily relevant. I appreciate it if you prefer to be discrete.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 15th September 23:49

[michael243]

Days Like These said:

Flemke dear, I know it's vulgar to talk money (and I'm not being sarcastic) but has the astonishing increase in value not tempted you to: buy a 918 or similar, several other nice cars, 250 Lusso, F40, DB4 etc. and still have several million left over?

I think if I had the chance of having a 918, F40 and various other cars I'd keep the F1, because as nice as the 918 is and as legendary as the F40 is the presence of the F1 is untouched,

A couple months ago I seen my first ever McLaren F1, it just so happened to be a GTR... I was blown away by it, and that comes from seeing loads of loads of F40's, 918's etc etc

[flemke]

RobinBanks said:

flemke said:

If I were to need that sort of thing, perhaps I would consider it. I don't need it, I doubt that Madonna needed it, and I doubt that 90% of Range Rover buyers need it.

Needs and desires are very separate things - that was my question really.

I am still a bit unsure of where you were going, but in general I do not care for Range Rovers - too big and too heavy for anything except the chores for which a lorry is suited, for which an 80-grand, luxury interior Range Rover is not well suited anyhow. It is not a coincidence that RR's biggest market has become the non-driving but status-obsessed Chinese. I also think that RRs are rather anti-social: beyond the big footprint, the height of the bloody things makes it difficult for a following driver to have any clue as to what lies beyond the big silhouette in front.

The other thing that makes me anti-RR is that Range Rover's biggest, sometimes slavish booster is Autocar magazine. In light of the magazine's ceaseless drum-beating in favour of Range Rover ("world's best car", etc.), I think it is almost dishonest of them, when they publish another review in which they drool in their praise, to fail to mention that the son of Autocar's Editor-in-chief is a Range Rover employee.

[flemke]

Days Like These said:

Flemke dear, I know it's vulgar to talk money (and I'm not being sarcastic) but has the astonishing increase in value not tempted you to: buy a 918 or similar, several other nice cars, 250 Lusso, F40, DB4 etc. and still have several million left over? Or is it just a case of this is my car, and I love it very much? Fair enough if so, or if you are well off enough that the increase in value isn't necessarily relevant. I appreciate it if you prefer to be discrete.

Not tempted. If I needed the cash, then yes. If I didn't need it, you can drive only one car at a time, I'd rather drive the F1 than what you mention, and as it is I don't have enough time to drive it or other cars. I also happen to believe that, over the foreseeable future, the F1 will be a better investment than most other "collectible" cars.

[Adrian E]

michael243 said:

Good to see the car behind is giving plenty of road space.....I imagine even when cold the brakes will quite happily pull you up quicker than the reaction time of the driver behind

(although it could be a queue of course....)

[SydneyBridge]

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

I can see F1 values rising for the foreseeable future

[JonoG81]

SydneyBridge said:

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

Really? Brave call....

[mikey k]

JonoG81 said:

SydneyBridge said:

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

Really? Brave call....

It would need to more than quadruple in value to hit current P1 prices (they will probably go up)
There are less P1's around than 675LT
No doubt the 675LT will be a good investment but I think the P1 and 650S LeMans will be better

Edited by mikey k on Wednesday 16th September 09:25

[SydneyBridge]

mikey k said:

It would need to more than quadruple in value to hit current P1 prices (they will probably go up)
There are less P1's around than 675LT

Ok - fair enough, I am wrong! still think the 675 will be a cracking investment though

[RobinBanks]

flemke said:

I am still a bit unsure of where you were going, but in general I do not care for Range Rovers - too big and too heavy for anything except the chores for which a lorry is suited, for which an 80-grand, luxury interior Range Rover is not well suited anyhow. It is not a coincidence that RR's biggest market has become the non-driving but status-obsessed Chinese. I also think that RRs are rather anti-social: beyond the big footprint, the height of the bloody things makes it difficult for a following driver to have any clue as to what lies beyond the big silhouette in front.

The other thing that makes me anti-RR is that Range Rover's biggest, sometimes slavish booster is Autocar magazine. In light of the magazine's ceaseless drum-beating in favour of Range Rover ("world's best car", etc.), I think it is almost dishonest of them, when they publish another review in which they drool in their praise, to fail to mention that the son of Autocar's Editor-in-chief is a Range Rover employee.

I wasn't asking you to explain yourself!

I was asking because in the anecdote about viewing a Range Rover which was previously owned by Madonna, you seemed to be very deliberate in emphasising that you weren't buying it for yourself. As if you'd be ashamed to buy one for yourself.

I'm not too bothered either way if you like them or not - I was asking based on that anecdote.

I doubt that you need a Range Rover - few people do. I have a Discovery 4 at the moment anyway. But I'm happy to have more than my immediate needs.

If it's relevant, I tow well over two tonnes of horse box most weekends so a car like that does have a use.

[flemke]

mikey k said:

JonoG81 said:

SydneyBridge said:

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

Really? Brave call....

It would need to more than quadruple in value to hit current P1 prices (they will probably go up)
There are less P1's around than 675LT
No doubt the 675LT will be a good investment but I think the P1 and 650S LeMans will be better

You might be right about the Le Mans - markets can produce some odd results, as we have seen recently in the politics of Scotland - but the Le Mans is a normal 650S with some purely cosmetic changes. It was probably worth the £40k extra that you had to pay for those changes, but barely. The wheels, which are one of the key Le Mans features, are a major disappointment.

As for the investment potential of the 675, in part it depends on whether they make a spider version. If they do, the world will have, say, 1,000 examples of 675 stuff, which would take it outside the boundaries of rarity. A run of 500 coupes only would be much better in this respect.

Investment prospects of P1 and 675 depend a lot on what comes from McLaren in next 5 years. I have said that I think the 675 is what I hoped the P1 would be, for less than 1/3 the money. On that basis, at least, one might expect the 675 to have more investment potential, but it will depend on ultimate production numbers.

[flemke]

RobinBanks said:

I wasn't asking you to explain yourself!

I was asking because in the anecdote about viewing a Range Rover which was previously owned by Madonna, you seemed to be very deliberate in emphasising that you weren't buying it for yourself. As if you'd be ashamed to buy one for yourself.

I'm not too bothered either way if you like them or not - I was asking based on that anecdote.

I doubt that you need a Range Rover - few people do. I have a Discovery 4 at the moment anyway. But I'm happy to have more than my immediate needs.

If it's relevant, I tow well over two tonnes of horse box most weekends so a car like that does have a use.

If you have a need, as you do, that's a different story. If one had a towing need, also a need for long distance driving, and could have only one car, then the Range Rover could be ideal.
I would guess that less than 1% of Range Rover owners have that need; for them the car is a fashion statement.
I took note when someone told me that she liked driving a Range Rover in town, "because the other cars are scared of me". Said a lot, I thought.

[mikey k]

flemke said:

mikey k said:

JonoG81 said:

SydneyBridge said:

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

Really? Brave call....

It would need to more than quadruple in value to hit current P1 prices (they will probably go up)
There are less P1's around than 675LT
No doubt the 675LT will be a good investment but I think the P1 and 650S LeMans will be better

You might be right about the Le Mans - markets can produce some odd results, as we have seen recently in the politics of Scotland - but the Le Mans is a normal 650S with some purely cosmetic changes. It was probably worth the £40k extra that you had to pay for those changes, but barely. The wheels, which are one of the key Le Mans features, are a major disappointment.

As for the investment potential of the 675, in part it depends on whether they make a spider version. If they do, the world will have, say, 1,000 examples of 675 stuff, which would take it outside the boundaries of rarity. A run of 500 coupes only would be much better in this respect.

Investment prospects of P1 and 675 depend a lot on what comes from McLaren in next 5 years. I have said that I think the 675 is what I hoped the P1 would be, for less than 1/3 the money. On that basis, at least, one might expect the 675 to have more investment potential, but it will depend on ultimate production numbers.

I'd very surprised if we don't see a 675PS spider in limited numbers, I'd be even more surprised if it is called an LT maybe a 50th celebration Can Am
I don't think that would detract from 675LT values as it is very different

[flemke]

mikey k said:

flemke said:

mikey k said:

JonoG81 said:

SydneyBridge said:

I think the 675LT will prove to be the best investment of the current McLarens and I think it will be worth more than the P1 in a few years.

Really? Brave call....

It would need to more than quadruple in value to hit current P1 prices (they will probably go up)
There are less P1's around than 675LT
No doubt the 675LT will be a good investment but I think the P1 and 650S LeMans will be better

You might be right about the Le Mans - markets can produce some odd results, as we have seen recently in the politics of Scotland - but the Le Mans is a normal 650S with some purely cosmetic changes. It was probably worth the £40k extra that you had to pay for those changes, but barely. The wheels, which are one of the key Le Mans features, are a major disappointment.

As for the investment potential of the 675, in part it depends on whether they make a spider version. If they do, the world will have, say, 1,000 examples of 675 stuff, which would take it outside the boundaries of rarity. A run of 500 coupes only would be much better in this respect.

Investment prospects of P1 and 675 depend a lot on what comes from McLaren in next 5 years. I have said that I think the 675 is what I hoped the P1 would be, for less than 1/3 the money. On that basis, at least, one might expect the 675 to have more investment potential, but it will depend on ultimate production numbers.

I'd very surprised if we don't see a 675PS spider in limited numbers, I'd be even more surprised if it is called an LT maybe a 50th celebration Can Am
I don't think that would detract from 675LT values as it is very different

How about a 675 roadster version, called "Can-Am"? That would be different from almost everything else out there, whilst more consistent with the original racing cars.

[Animal]

flemke said:

How about a 675 roadster version, called "Can-Am"? That would be different from almost everything else out there, whilst more consistent with the original racing cars.

Wasn't there a Ltd. Ed. 12C CanAm version?