I know this will start a war but
Discussion
jakesmith said:
They are also probably not the sort of person who would find a 488 to be ‘boring’
Boring is the wrong word. It’s a lazy word.But I get the point.
I remember going to test drive an early 355 in my Countach.
After the lively drive we got out and the enthusiastic salesman asked me what I thought.
It was a great car; really elegant; it did what it did with grace; but it lacked the spirit of the Countach - its personality.
That’s why all this debate is fine; but if you want a car, you just know, and you buy it, if you can afford it.
If Mclaren are chasing 22 new models in the next 6 years and chasing turnover growth, won’t that simply mean that they will flood the market with a glut of different cars, subsequently hammering residuals in the second hand market. This in turn will provide Consumers with a wealth of choice at very reasonable prices considering what they are and how they compare with other brands possibly trading more heavily on the value of their brand rather than the superiority of their product comparatively?
In other words, for those thinking of buying a McLaren, sit tight, wait a while and you’ll have sooo much choice and the initial outlay will be relatively affordable..signs are already there.
Of course this strategy may also hurt other brands too, which of course may also be a strategy...
In other words, for those thinking of buying a McLaren, sit tight, wait a while and you’ll have sooo much choice and the initial outlay will be relatively affordable..signs are already there.
Of course this strategy may also hurt other brands too, which of course may also be a strategy...
ferdi p said:
Thats exactly the problem..they are aiming to make more and more cars (but using the same engine, gearbox, carbon tub..), and are flooding the market. They have to discount them in order to sell them, and are instantly demolishing the residuals of cars they have already sold. They have to also over engineer in order to compete (720s v 488). I think the safest way to buy is on contract hire - ownership of this brand appears to be rather risky. 15 cars in 6 years. A lot are expanding the derivatives within the range and not complete new offerings.
Gives the consumer more choice which has got to be good and the only ones worried about it are the competitors who could find their sales and residuals under threat.
If you are risk averse I suggest you don't buy any supercar.
It's taken Ferrari 70 years to build a brand and their early low volume cars are collector items and highly sought after.
There is a trend there
Gives the consumer more choice which has got to be good and the only ones worried about it are the competitors who could find their sales and residuals under threat.
If you are risk averse I suggest you don't buy any supercar.
It's taken Ferrari 70 years to build a brand and their early low volume cars are collector items and highly sought after.
There is a trend there
TP321 said:
Thats exactly the problem..they are aiming to make more and more cars (but using the same engine, gearbox, carbon tub..), and are flooding the market. They have to discount them in order to sell them, and are instantly demolishing the residuals of cars they have already sold. They have to also over engineer in order to compete (720s v 488). I think the safest way to buy is on contract hire - ownership of this brand appears to be rather risky.
Who wouldn't like that problem!?Same engine/gearbox/shape worked for Porsche with the 911 for over 50 years!
I agree that residuals could be better, they clearly need to manage supply & support the older cars but I genuinely believe that they'll improve, after all, they're only 7 years old!!
TP321 said:
Thats exactly the problem..they are aiming to make more and more cars (but using the same engine, gearbox, carbon tub..), and are flooding the market. They have to discount them in order to sell them, and are instantly demolishing the residuals of cars they have already sold. They have to also over engineer in order to compete (720s v 488). I think the safest way to buy is on contract hire - ownership of this brand appears to be rather risky.
sadly, the leasors have researched mclaren's situationi'll not name names, but the asset finance company i work with has a contract hire manufacturer blacklist of one
andrew said:
sadly, the leasors have researched mclaren's situation
i'll not name names, but the asset finance company i work with has a contract hire manufacturer blacklist of one
Suggest you speak to JBR Capital then as they understand the brand. They have no problem financing McLarens if that's what you want to doi'll not name names, but the asset finance company i work with has a contract hire manufacturer blacklist of one
ferdi p said:
Ferruccio said:
That’s what matters to the shareholders.
& to buyers too...Profitable car companies tend to make cars people want.
Would you rather they lost money by making cars nobody wants?
The perspective of shareholders and PE houses is very dependent on their time horizon for exit.
They are different sorts of people with very different motivations to Enzo Ferrari, Ferruccio Lamborghini, Bruce McLaren, etc.
I know shareholders run Ferrari and Lamborghini today but I do believe that the history and the spirit lives on in the road cars in way that it doesn’t quite when it was just done for money.
Ferruccio said:
It’s about more than that to me, which is where McLaren seem to have issues.
The perspective of shareholders and PE houses is very dependent on their time horizon for exit.
They are different sorts of people with very different motivations to Enzo Ferrari, Ferruccio Lamborghini, Bruce McLaren, etc.
I know shareholders run Ferrari and Lamborghini today but I do believe that the history and the spirit lives on in the road cars in way that it doesn’t quite when it was just done for money.
This is where you & I have to disagree. The perspective of shareholders and PE houses is very dependent on their time horizon for exit.
They are different sorts of people with very different motivations to Enzo Ferrari, Ferruccio Lamborghini, Bruce McLaren, etc.
I know shareholders run Ferrari and Lamborghini today but I do believe that the history and the spirit lives on in the road cars in way that it doesn’t quite when it was just done for money.
What you call history & spirit is really just history imo.
There are many passionate people behind Mclaren, not just shareholders.
Every car maker would love to trace their model line back to a muira or countach but obviously they dont have that romantic history.
It's quite funny watching people say how Mclaren are making a pigs ear of it. I for one believe they've done ok, they're many years behind Ferrari & Lambo, personally I'm over the moon that we call have a little more choice than the obvious 2 that we've had for years!
RamboLambo said:
It's taken Ferrari 70 years to build a brand and their early low volume cars are collector items and highly sought after.
There is a trend there
To be fair Lamborghini and Ferrari were the go-to brands of the rich and famous back in the 1960's.There is a trend there
Limited supply simply increased their cachet.
Today these rare cars are even more valuable.
It's quite straightforward really.
Ferruccio said:
.......
I know shareholders run Ferrari and Lamborghini today but I do believe that the history and the spirit lives on in the road cars in way that it doesn’t quite when it was just done for money.
I know this is a McLaren thread, but I think it's wrong to put Ferrari and Lamborghini together when looking at what 'lives-on' in their road cars. Ferrari have done a great job of managing that perception of 'heritage' under Fiat, Lamborghini however have taken the kings shilling and are now too closely linked to their VW/Audi parent company IMHO. The commonality linking the Huracan to the R8, and the Anus to the Q7 shows that whatever spirit and history there is in Sant'Agata, it has a very rich German flavour.I know shareholders run Ferrari and Lamborghini today but I do believe that the history and the spirit lives on in the road cars in way that it doesn’t quite when it was just done for money.
To me the problem with McLaren is that every time they launch a new model they almost immediately launch another version of it. It is as if they are saying that the previous model (launched 3 months ago) isn't good enough and they've just worked out how to make it better. All the McLarens (as far as I am aware) are based round the same V8 turbo engine and carbon tub.All are mid engined 2 seaters. Under these circumstances, how can you expect strong residuals? Compare and contrast with Ferrari who have a totally understandable model range - one V8 mid engined car with a spider and hardcore version being launched a bit later. Wait about 5 years and repeat. A V12 front engined GT. A 4 seater now available as V12 or V8 with 4 wheel or 2 wheel drive and a softercore V8 front engined 2+2 at the bottom of the range. Totally understandable and with a sensible time lapse between models so you don't feel yours is out of date after 6 months.
willy wombat said:
To me the problem with McLaren is that every time they launch a new model they almost immediately launch another version of it. It is as if they are saying that the previous model (launched 3 months ago) isn't good enough and they've just worked out how to make it better. All the McLarens (as far as I am aware) are based round the same V8 turbo engine and carbon tub.All are mid engined 2 seaters. Under these circumstances, how can you expect strong residuals? Compare and contrast with Ferrari who have a totally understandable model range - one V8 mid engined car with a spider and hardcore version being launched a bit later. Wait about 5 years and repeat. A V12 front engined GT. A 4 seater now available as V12 or V8 with 4 wheel or 2 wheel drive and a softercore V8 front engined 2+2 at the bottom of the range. Totally understandable and with a sensible time lapse between models so you don't feel yours is out of date after 6 months.
No much you say is wrong, however if you compare McLaren to Porsche rather than Ferrari, especially their 911 range where every year they produce a new variation (.1, .2, etc), then produce multiple versions of that version including some Carrera, Turbo, GT and RS branded versions, all based around the same 'look' and the same flat 6 rear engine arrangement, and have simply repeated that for decades, and yet they somehow have become more desirable with stronger and stronger residuals overtaking Ferrari. Everything you say about McLaren is even more true of the 911, yet under those circumstances some are commanding exceptional short-term residuals.Also, I think you have to understand a brand to understand the model line-up, I find the Ferrari models confusing but the McLaren line up quite simple. I know the McLaren Sports and Super Series cars and where they all sit, but whilst I know the 488 range including the Pista, I have no idea where the 812 sits with the F12, FF or GTC4 Lusso for example.
willy wombat said:
To me the problem with McLaren is that every time they launch a new model they almost immediately launch another version of it. It is as if they are saying that the previous model (launched 3 months ago) isn't good enough and they've just worked out how to make it better. All the McLarens (as far as I am aware) are based round the same V8 turbo engine and carbon tub.All are mid engined 2 seaters. Under these circumstances, how can you expect strong residuals? Compare and contrast with Ferrari who have a totally understandable model range - one V8 mid engined car with a spider and hardcore version being launched a bit later. Wait about 5 years and repeat. A V12 front engined GT. A 4 seater now available as V12 or V8 with 4 wheel or 2 wheel drive and a softercore V8 front engined 2+2 at the bottom of the range. Totally understandable and with a sensible time lapse between models so you don't feel yours is out of date after 6 months.
I kind of get what you are saying but there are not new models every 3 months. The mainstream volume cars are sports series followed by super series cars.
With sport series we have 3 derivatives, a coupe, GT and a spider.
With the super series we have a 720S coupe that took over from the 650S.
The 570S and 720S will probably have a model life of 4 years
In addition there is the ultimate series Senna taking over from P1 and recently announced the speedtail. These are both low volume models for the eilte.
Its a growing brand introducing new products with a rapid rate of progress as opposed to a stagnant complacent cart horse who have lost their way IMHO
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff