Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)

[thegreenhell]

It's almost enough to make you want to go and buy a new Ferrari instead. Oh wait...

[andyps]

Whilst none of those points about McLaren build numbers and promises are good, and definitely could be classed as unethical, the last point about refurbishing and selling the prototypes seems to me to be the worst point. They are clearly P1 road cars taking the total number of customer road cars available to over the 375 limit McLaren themselves imposed. Definitely not honourable in the way McLaren traditionally have been. Are these the carbon black ones which were discussed here previously?

[SydneyBridge]

so in effect, these additional P1's are new - I imagine they have all done a fair few miles so could not be sold without being 'made as new' so to speak.
I understood they were destroying the 675 prototypes, are they still doing that?

[flemke]

andyps said:

Whilst none of those points about McLaren build numbers and promises are good, and definitely could be classed as unethical, the last point about refurbishing and selling the prototypes seems to me to be the worst point. They are clearly P1 road cars taking the total number of customer road cars available to over the 375 limit McLaren themselves imposed. Definitely not honourable in the way McLaren traditionally have been. Are these the carbon black ones which were discussed here previously?

I totally agree that the last point, although involving the fewest cars, was the worst breach: a blatant violation of their undertaking to P1 customers.

I was told that the first 5 were in "bare" carbon. I don't know about subsequent chassis.

[flemke]

SydneyBridge said:

so in effect, these additional P1's are new - I imagine they have all done a fair few miles so could not be sold without being 'made as new' so to speak.
I understood they were destroying the 675 prototypes, are they still doing that?

Yes, although even with a lot of miles already on them they would still be adding to the number of customer chassis in circulation. The mileage would not be a real distinction: after all, many of the other 375 have also been driven since they left the production line.

I have no idea about whether they are destroying the 675 prototypes. I don't suppose that McLaren would mind destroying them, having apparently hit upon a much more prolific means of expanding the build-run.

[epom]

That is pretty shoddy customer care alright isnt i? Its all fair enough for the rich Arabs etc who will just see it as an opportunity to buy another one. But for customers such as yourself who assumed they were buying something not only special but also rare it is a fair kick in the balls. Will be an interesting conversation should they call you up inquiring as to whether you will want to purchase their next, limited super dooper car.

[Mastiff]

That seems like a very strange business practice - especially when your customer base is relatively limited.

Why would you simply lie to such a small collective of hardcore, loyal clients, who are surely the mainstay of your business model?

[waremark]

flemke said:

Have I answered your question, sir?

Fully and persuasively, thanks.

I am trying to decide whether their mistake was making those promises in the first place - which at the time they may have thought they needed to do to sell a viable number of cars - or breaking the promises under the temptation of a short term profit opportunity.

Notable that the other two hybrid hypercars also sold out with higher announced production numbers and that P1's and 675's are both trading at a premium.

Bit what is the logic of a spider version of a lighter track focused version of a fantastic car (650s)? If you don't want it track focused wouldn't the 650 be a better choice?

[isaldiri]

flemke said:

SydneyBridge said:

I understood they were destroying the 675 prototypes, are they still doing that?

I have no idea about whether they are destroying the 675 prototypes. I don't suppose that McLaren would mind destroying them, having apparently hit upon a much more prolific means of expanding the build-run.

My understanding is that the 675 XP cars have indeed been agreed to be sold to customers post their press duties and will be refit like the XP P1s. 8-10 of the XP 675s I think....

[Joe911]

waremark said:

Bit what is the logic of a spider version of a lighter track focused version of a fantastic car (650s)? If you don't want it track focused wouldn't the 650 be a better choice?

I didn't think they were 'track-focused' - more 'driving-focused' - supposed to be a much more rewarding driving experience. We shall soon see.

[ManFromDelmonte]

What have McLaren said when you have (I'm assuming you have) spoken to them about these broken promises?

[R11ysf]

flemke said:

Lots of interesting stuff

Have I answered your question, sir?

Flemke I think you have a great deal to be aggrieved about and quite rightly so, especially as you are (or maybe were) a supporter of the brand and an 'early adopter'.

Just one thing; did it specifically mention anywhere in the P1 contract that there would only be 375 models produced and if so have any of the owners considered legal action over the final 10 prototype chassis??

This isn't about compunsayshun, but more about a broken contractual promise. The GTR is harder as they can claim it is a different model in essence but the extra 10 prototype chassis would piss me off no end.

[Pistachio]

andyps said:

Whilst none of those points about McLaren build numbers and promises are good, and definitely could be classed as unethical, the last point about refurbishing and selling the prototypes seems to me to be the worst point. They are clearly P1 road cars taking the total number of customer road cars available to over the 375 limit McLaren themselves imposed. Definitely not honourable in the way McLaren traditionally have been. Are these the carbon black ones which were discussed here previously?

McLaren are a business like any other, so if there is demand then build them and sell them, It is isn't a club. Also if they are not making the money from the premiums being paid for previously owned examples why not build a few more.
Also if you have one of the first 375 chassis numbers then these have a cache.

[Joe911]

Pistachio said:

McLaren are a business like any other, so if there is demand then build them and sell them, It is isn't a club. Also if they are not making the money from the premiums being paid for previously owned examples why not build a few more.
Also if you have one of the first 375 chassis numbers then these have a cache.

Clearly if they want to do that - it's totally fine - but just don't tell loyal customers (who are likely at least in part making buying decisions based on the likely difference in value of a rare thing vs. a more common thing) that it's a limited run.

[andyps]

Pistachio said:

andyps said:

Whilst none of those points about McLaren build numbers and promises are good, and definitely could be classed as unethical, the last point about refurbishing and selling the prototypes seems to me to be the worst point. They are clearly P1 road cars taking the total number of customer road cars available to over the 375 limit McLaren themselves imposed. Definitely not honourable in the way McLaren traditionally have been. Are these the carbon black ones which were discussed here previously?

McLaren are a business like any other, so if there is demand then build them and sell them, It is isn't a club. Also if they are not making the money from the premiums being paid for previously owned examples why not build a few more.
Also if you have one of the first 375 chassis numbers then these have a cache.

As a business they stated they would make 375 examples of the car, I remember reading that they were limiting production to that figure to ensure some exclusivity and help maintain future values. That was a very public statement, presumably reiterated to those who were purchasing the cars. To then go back on that commitment is wrong. Yes, they are a business like any other, but they have to think long term, not just short term as this could be seen to be. Sure, the income has probably just increased by about £10m by selling an extra 10 P1s, but next time they make an Ultimate model and are looking for buyers some may be put off ordering as whatever number is stated as the maximum production may not be the actual, reducing confidence and possibly future income.

It probably wouldn't have stopped people buying the P1 had McLaren said there would be 385 road cars and 50 GTR versions initially, but they would have been fully aware and able to make a decision based on that. It is the promise broken which I can understand and is not good business practice.

[ralphrj]

waremark said:

I am trying to decide whether their mistake was making those promises in the first place - which at the time they may have thought they needed to do to sell a viable number of cars - or breaking the promises under the temptation of a short term profit opportunity.

I think it was probably forced upon them by their less than brilliant financial position. I know that they release upbeat statements every year about how well they are doing but, speaking as someone who can read a set of financial statements, I'm not buying it.

[flemke]

R11ysf said:

Flemke I think you have a great deal to be aggrieved about and quite rightly so, especially as you are (or maybe were) a supporter of the brand and an 'early adopter'.

Just one thing; did it specifically mention anywhere in the P1 contract that there would only be 375 models produced and if so have any of the owners considered legal action over the final 10 prototype chassis??

This isn't about compunsayshun, but more about a broken contractual promise. The GTR is harder as they can claim it is a different model in essence but the extra 10 prototype chassis would piss me off no end.

I don't recall whether it was written in the contract, but they made so many public statements about the size of the build-run, and oral representations (which in many circumstances are themselves binding), that their stated intent to make no more than 375 could not have been clearer.

Regardless of whether it was written in the contract, one is reminded of what McLaren's Martin Whitmarsh said in 2006 after Raikkonen had made an oral commitment to McLaren but then signed with Ferrari: "I deal with people on the basis of trust. If someone tells me something, I believe him."

[flemke]

andyps said:

Pistachio said:

andyps said:

Whilst none of those points about McLaren build numbers and promises are good, and definitely could be classed as unethical, the last point about refurbishing and selling the prototypes seems to me to be the worst point. They are clearly P1 road cars taking the total number of customer road cars available to over the 375 limit McLaren themselves imposed. Definitely not honourable in the way McLaren traditionally have been. Are these the carbon black ones which were discussed here previously?

McLaren are a business like any other, so if there is demand then build them and sell them, It is isn't a club. Also if they are not making the money from the premiums being paid for previously owned examples why not build a few more.
Also if you have one of the first 375 chassis numbers then these have a cache.

As a business they stated they would make 375 examples of the car, I remember reading that they were limiting production to that figure to ensure some exclusivity and help maintain future values. That was a very public statement, presumably reiterated to those who were purchasing the cars. To then go back on that commitment is wrong. Yes, they are a business like any other, but they have to think long term, not just short term as this could be seen to be. Sure, the income has probably just increased by about £10m by selling an extra 10 P1s, but next time they make an Ultimate model and are looking for buyers some may be put off ordering as whatever number is stated as the maximum production may not be the actual, reducing confidence and possibly future income.

It probably wouldn't have stopped people buying the P1 had McLaren said there would be 385 road cars and 50 GTR versions initially, but they would have been fully aware and able to make a decision based on that. It is the promise broken which I can understand and is not good business practice.

If they had told us about the GTR at the same time as the road car, some of us certainly would have enquired, for example, if they could put the GTR rear wing or seats in the road car. We would have asked how much of the GTR's weight savings could be applied to the road car. I don't care for the GTR's steering wheel, but I am sure some P1 owners would have preferred it to the standard version.

[flemke]

ManFromDelmonte said:

What have McLaren said when you have (I'm assuming you have) spoken to them about these broken promises?

I have, but the people with whom I have spoken have agreed with me!
I shall soon be going to a senior level.

[ralphrj]

flemke said:

Regardless of whether it was written in the contract, one is reminded of what McLaren's Martin Whitmarsh said in 2006 after Raikkonen had made an oral commitment to McLaren but then signed with Ferrari: "I deal with people on the basis of trust. If someone tells me something, I believe him."

To be fair to Raikkonen he had a contract to drive for McLaren in 2007 but McLaren chose to release him from it because they didn't want to pay the huge salary (allegedly $50m) they had previously agreed to pay him.