Discussion
BelfastBoy said:
Could the fear be though that Ferrari, ever mindful of coming up with new ways to fleece their customers, start using the GTO badge more often? So, while I agree with your basic point, I also wouldn't be at all surprised if there's an F12 GTO in future at some point. I hope not, but who's to say it won't happen?
That's a good point, I hadn't thought of that. Ferrari have already stretched the use of the GTO name to include a road version of something being used in the XX program. I presume that the 599XX will be replaced with some sort of F12XX. If they do make a road going version, the GTO label is a likely one.I also appreciate you could hypothesise for ever and without a crystal ball, we'll never know.
When thinking about the GTOs future price trajectory there are plenty of good proxies. 360 CS, 16M, 550 barchetta, 575 superamerica to name but a few. All of them outperformed their basic model brothers in terms of depreciation and the same will be true here. I wouldn't call it investment grade, but it's a better bet than an F12.
matc said:
I disagree, I think the people who owned a GTO just because it was the latest and greatest have already moved on. I would imagine they're now in the hands of entusiasts and collectors, who can probably afford an F12 as well as a GTO if they so desired. I can't really see them ever being below £250k.
IMO a good comparison is the Murci SV - the market hasn't been flooded with cheap cars because the Aventador has been released.
i think there is a lot of truth in this, that many GTO owners are major collectors who care not for depreciation and need not move the car on. The F12 will of course be quicker than the GTO, and I am saying that with a bit of knowledge, but we are now at such a level that speed is no longer on the agenda. It is how special a car is. For some owners, they will trade a GTO for an F12, and the market will soften, but not collapse. The GTO name was a but cynical for a non race car (i know 288 GTO but it was designed to race) but the car is sufficiently different to the standard car and build in relatively low numbers (but more than people think) to maintain a kudos. If you look at relative drops in CS, Scud or 16M prices, there is every reason to think a GTO even in the weakest moment will not go sub £200k and maybe as you say more than that upto £250k then stabilise before rising as people find the new dual clutch transmissions on the F12 'too good' if you know what I mean and want greater raw appeal. However, predicting market forces has never been easy.... IMO a good comparison is the Murci SV - the market hasn't been flooded with cheap cars because the Aventador has been released.
This does raise an interesting question about whether any Ferrari would make a sound investment. It is such a well ordered and planned business that maybe the likes of the 250 GTO, in terms of investment, might not come around again?
If they do a F12 GTO or XX or Stradale etc. that would have an impact on 599 GTO values surely? They seem to be in a well thought through rhythm, with higher production volumes for all their models, even the 'special' ones.
Current 250 GTO values come from the 250 GTO being a brilliant car with a legendary racing heritage, (from a time when racing was for buccaneer teams and drivers rather than spreadsheets and sponsors), plus extremely low numbers and having a beautiful appearance.
Even then it took 30 years.
Those things just don't seem to exist anymore. The F40 could perhaps be the next really big thing (looks, performance, brilliance, racing heritage), except for the volumes of production - just too many?
The 16M is interesting, and I have thought about that one a lot being a 430 Spider owner. I suspect it is a great car. Probably not £80k more than my 430 but if the long term values held at £80k more than a 430 then why not? Trouble is, I suspect in future years a 16M will not be considered a rare and unique model because there will no doubt be a 458 version and one after that too, which means that the 16M's depreciation curve will be more normal and two thirds of the £80k difference would have disappeared in depreciation.
When the 250 GTO was made, Ferrari was still young. Perhaps the real investment cars of the next 50 years will come from 'young' manufacturers like Pagani or even Noble and the boat has already sailed as far as Ferrari are concerned?
(I'm obviously not talking about those Ferraris like the P4/5 which were mega bucks and low volume to start with).
If they do a F12 GTO or XX or Stradale etc. that would have an impact on 599 GTO values surely? They seem to be in a well thought through rhythm, with higher production volumes for all their models, even the 'special' ones.
Current 250 GTO values come from the 250 GTO being a brilliant car with a legendary racing heritage, (from a time when racing was for buccaneer teams and drivers rather than spreadsheets and sponsors), plus extremely low numbers and having a beautiful appearance.
Even then it took 30 years.
Those things just don't seem to exist anymore. The F40 could perhaps be the next really big thing (looks, performance, brilliance, racing heritage), except for the volumes of production - just too many?
The 16M is interesting, and I have thought about that one a lot being a 430 Spider owner. I suspect it is a great car. Probably not £80k more than my 430 but if the long term values held at £80k more than a 430 then why not? Trouble is, I suspect in future years a 16M will not be considered a rare and unique model because there will no doubt be a 458 version and one after that too, which means that the 16M's depreciation curve will be more normal and two thirds of the £80k difference would have disappeared in depreciation.
When the 250 GTO was made, Ferrari was still young. Perhaps the real investment cars of the next 50 years will come from 'young' manufacturers like Pagani or even Noble and the boat has already sailed as far as Ferrari are concerned?
(I'm obviously not talking about those Ferraris like the P4/5 which were mega bucks and low volume to start with).
In my view the "special" Ferraris can be divided into two buckets: the "lighter, faster, optimized" examples of standard models and then the true one-offs. In the first bucket are the CS, Scud, 16m and despite having GTO in its title, the 599 GTO. The true one-offs include the 288 GTO, F40, F50 and Enzo. I doubt that any of the cars in the first bucket will ever be true investments (where they eventually increase in value). Some of the cars in the second bucket are already there. Of course, a 599 GTO should hold its value much better than a stock 599.
I think that might be missing the point though. All the cars in the first bucket are brilliant to own and drive and a noticeable step up from the base models. Suggest more focus on enjoying them and less on what they are going to be worth in the future.
I think that might be missing the point though. All the cars in the first bucket are brilliant to own and drive and a noticeable step up from the base models. Suggest more focus on enjoying them and less on what they are going to be worth in the future.
Do you reckon that in the long term a true low production numbers car like let's say a 599 SA Aperta will be worth more than the "equivalent" (ie derived from the same platform, the 599) GTO, even though the Aperta is not inspired to a period race car but more to a built-to-pootle car like the original California?
Enrico
Enrico
LukeyLikey said:
This does raise an interesting question about whether any Ferrari would make a sound investment. It is such a well ordered and planned business that maybe the likes of the 250 GTO, in terms of investment, might not come around again?
If they do a F12 GTO or XX or Stradale etc. that would have an impact on 599 GTO values surely? They seem to be in a well thought through rhythm, with higher production volumes for all their models, even the 'special' ones.
Current 250 GTO values come from the 250 GTO being a brilliant car with a legendary racing heritage, (from a time when racing was for buccaneer teams and drivers rather than spreadsheets and sponsors), plus extremely low numbers and having a beautiful appearance.
Even then it took 30 years.
Those things just don't seem to exist anymore. The F40 could perhaps be the next really big thing (looks, performance, brilliance, racing heritage), except for the volumes of production - just too many?
The 16M is interesting, and I have thought about that one a lot being a 430 Spider owner. I suspect it is a great car. Probably not £80k more than my 430 but if the long term values held at £80k more than a 430 then why not? Trouble is, I suspect in future years a 16M will not be considered a rare and unique model because there will no doubt be a 458 version and one after that too, which means that the 16M's depreciation curve will be more normal and two thirds of the £80k difference would have disappeared in depreciation.
When the 250 GTO was made, Ferrari was still young. Perhaps the real investment cars of the next 50 years will come from 'young' manufacturers like Pagani or even Noble and the boat has already sailed as far as Ferrari are concerned?
(I'm obviously not talking about those Ferraris like the P4/5 which were mega bucks and low volume to start with).
Some great points Luke. Is the "hardcore" version going to remain as special if Ferrari keep doing it. Not certain but it is interesting seeing what happens. CS values went to about £70k then bounced back to being pretty static at £90-£100k. Scuderia has followed the same pattern. £170 down to £120 then its been static for a year and slightly up right now. 16M seems to be mirroring Scud almost exactly with the difference being kept at roughly £25k. Difficult to tell because they're all a bit newer but seems that way.It's all about volumes I suppose.If they do a F12 GTO or XX or Stradale etc. that would have an impact on 599 GTO values surely? They seem to be in a well thought through rhythm, with higher production volumes for all their models, even the 'special' ones.
Current 250 GTO values come from the 250 GTO being a brilliant car with a legendary racing heritage, (from a time when racing was for buccaneer teams and drivers rather than spreadsheets and sponsors), plus extremely low numbers and having a beautiful appearance.
Even then it took 30 years.
Those things just don't seem to exist anymore. The F40 could perhaps be the next really big thing (looks, performance, brilliance, racing heritage), except for the volumes of production - just too many?
The 16M is interesting, and I have thought about that one a lot being a 430 Spider owner. I suspect it is a great car. Probably not £80k more than my 430 but if the long term values held at £80k more than a 430 then why not? Trouble is, I suspect in future years a 16M will not be considered a rare and unique model because there will no doubt be a 458 version and one after that too, which means that the 16M's depreciation curve will be more normal and two thirds of the £80k difference would have disappeared in depreciation.
When the 250 GTO was made, Ferrari was still young. Perhaps the real investment cars of the next 50 years will come from 'young' manufacturers like Pagani or even Noble and the boat has already sailed as far as Ferrari are concerned?
(I'm obviously not talking about those Ferraris like the P4/5 which were mega bucks and low volume to start with).
Not surprisingly its very similar to Porsche GT3 and GT3RS models. Older ones made bundles eventually but the recent ones follow a "structure". Rarer RS's hold at certain price levels and each generation remains a little above. Depreciation goes so far then hits a level and stays where it is.
But, these aren't appreciators their just good solid price holders. Finding the "investment" is tougher. Needs to be more special. 288gto, F Cars (All of em tbh)that's the market.
- Just a point though Luke, F40 has absolutely no racing pedigree.
Dblue said:
F40 has absolutely no racing pedigree.
What do you define as "pedigree"? The F40 raced in GT series worldwide between roughly 89-96, after all. People more knowledgeable than me can determine whether it was a successful racer, but I think it's fair to say it saw a lot more track action than the 288GTO ever did!BelfastBoy said:
Dblue said:
F40 has absolutely no racing pedigree.
What do you define as "pedigree"? The F40 raced in GT series worldwide between roughly 89-96, after all. People more knowledgeable than me can determine whether it was a successful racer, but I think it's fair to say it saw a lot more track action than the 288GTO ever did!The contemporary 959 at least competed in Paris-Dakar.
Now if F40s were subsequently used in GT racing I profess to be pretty ignorant of that. As far as I can recall the 348/355 Challenge racers fulfilled that purpose in the early 90s.
Dblue said:
Well the 288GTO was a genuine Homologation special. It's targeted category disappeared certainly but it was conceived on that basis. F40 had no such pedigree even if it is a much more hardcore road car in every way.
The contemporary 959 at least competed in Paris-Dakar.
Now if F40s were subsequently used in GT racing I profess to be pretty ignorant of that. As far as I can recall the 348/355 Challenge racers fulfilled that purpose in the early 90s.
F40 was never intended to race was used in anger in IMSA which spawned a LM version via Michelotto and was used in many national GT series. I recall seeing the 93 championship with Jolly Club run cars. The comp cars are valued at double road car levels.The contemporary 959 at least competed in Paris-Dakar.
Now if F40s were subsequently used in GT racing I profess to be pretty ignorant of that. As far as I can recall the 348/355 Challenge racers fulfilled that purpose in the early 90s.
Dblue said:
Well the 288GTO was a genuine Homologation special. It's targeted category disappeared certainly but it was conceived on that basis. F40 had no such pedigree even if it is a much more hardcore road car in every way.
The contemporary 959 at least competed in Paris-Dakar.
Now if F40s were subsequently used in GT racing I profess to be pretty ignorant of that. As far as I can recall the 348/355 Challenge racers fulfilled that purpose in the early 90s.
Wrong(ish). The story goes something like this:The contemporary 959 at least competed in Paris-Dakar.
Now if F40s were subsequently used in GT racing I profess to be pretty ignorant of that. As far as I can recall the 348/355 Challenge racers fulfilled that purpose in the early 90s.
- 288 GTO designed to homologate for Group B racing, just like the 959 was. Series killed off and left the car with no where to race. Project scrapped. None raced.
F40 was not designed for a particular race series, but privateers soon realised it made a handy race car. Many were thus converted and raced in various forms of racing with the LM cars converted by Michelotto being the most highly coveted today. Of all the Special series modern Ferraris, the F40 has the best racing heritage.
F50- not designed to any race spec and to my knowledge only one has ever raced competing in the UK Ferrari Challenge. A handful of GT1 prototypes were built (3?) but never raced competitively. These cars are in the hands of collectors and command a huge price premium over the regular production cars
- Enzo - as per F50 but with even less race history. Spawned the FXX cynical marketing exercise cars but nothing more. Actually that's not true- was turned into the masserratti MC12 and raced quite successfully in GT. unfortunately banned for being too fast.
As for 348 and 355 challenge cars- these raced in the amateur challenge series and nothing more. You can see that all of the Ferrari special series cars have achieved far more than this, albeit indirectly in the case of the Enzo and without official Factory support in the case of the F40.
Edited by subirg on Saturday 23 June 07:57
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff