Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ferrari Luce

ferrari.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 959 posts

Re: Ferrari Luce

#691

Post by tcp_handshaker »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #662
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a disaster for Ferrari. You buy the brand, the car and its lack of reliability is well known and the difficult handling also well known. But its La Ferrari. This is the type of car that will be seen in the hands of people buying Cybertruck or the UK chavs that now buy Rolex. The moment that happens your brand is dead. Your customers will flock away back to Buggati and Aston Martin. Massive Ferrari mistake.

IMO this is a risk worth taking. The Ferrari brand is rather stagnant and not innovative. They need to do something like this to drive more attention and sales. Even if this particular model does not sell well they can refine and make better selling EVs down the line.

>> They need to do something like this to drive more attention and sales.

The objective of a luxury brand is not volume sales.

There is the well known anecdote of somebody asking André Heiniger, then chairman/president of Rolex: "How is the watch business?" and he answering something along the lines of: "I have no idea. Rolex is not in the watch business..."

Re: Ferrari Luce

#692

Post by DeusExMachina »

Most of the reactions I am seeing on various social media are negative.

Granted, that is not the market that would buy a Ferrari, but one of the point of buying luxury cars is the status they grant. There is not much status in a car mocked by the public.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#693

Post by trippsydrippsy »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #688
ahmedfromtunis wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived through similar dynamics (though not at Ferrari, of course). The management knows that they need something new and out of their comfort zone. Someone (from within or without) suggests an idea that would never been accepted in the olden days. The management, for the sake of their company, would suppress every instinct they have built over the years, often over-correcting. This inevitably results in some questi…

honest question: is there any difference between this and the Pontiac Aztek? I guess time will answer that one... >> the Aztek was to signal a design renaissance for GM, and to "make a statement about breaking from GM's instinct for caution. One designer said that during the design process, the Aztek was made "aggressive for the sake of being aggressive." Peters, the Chief Designer said "we wanted to do a bold, in-yo…

[dead]

Re: Ferrari Luce

#694

Post by tcp_handshaker »

vablings wrote: post #679
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a disaster for Ferrari. You buy the brand, the car and its lack of reliability is well known and the difficult handling also well known. But its La Ferrari. This is the type of car that will be seen in the hands of people buying Cybertruck or the UK chavs that now buy Rolex. The moment that happens your brand is dead. Your customers will flock away back to Buggati and Aston Martin. Massive Ferrari mistake.

The clientele for the lower trim Ferrari is not the same pool as Bugatti purchasers.

The actual correctness of your statement, and that I agree with, is irrelevant to the point I was making.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#695

Post by burgreblast »

manoDev wrote: post #670

The design language is a departure from usual Ferrari design, but I actually enjoyed the "smooth pebble" aerodynamic design of the exterior. It will certainly stand out in the sea of exaggerated angular shaped designs in the road. Maybe it would have been better received if it retained some elements of Ferrari design, like the headlights – it would be more recognizable. I find the interior quite adequate for an EV, n…

It broke with "tradition" because this was originally designed for Apple. Ive just recycled his previous Apple Car ideas.

This car has nothing to do with Ferrari, except they paid him for work he already did once before.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#696

Post by tcp_handshaker »

DeusExMachina wrote: post #692

Most of the reactions I am seeing on various social media are negative. Granted, that is not the market that would buy a Ferrari, but one of the point of buying luxury cars is the status they grant. There is not much status in a car mocked by the public.

"The market has spoken: Ferrari shares fall after carmaker unveils first fully electric vehicle" - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/26/ferrari-stock-shares-luce-el...

Re: Ferrari Luce

#697

Post by AquinasCoder »

rickdeckard wrote: post #437

Makes sense from corporate perspective to hire the "Apple Designer" to craft the interior experience, it's fresh input from a very respected UX design-lead of another industry. But handing over responsibility for the exterior is quite questionable IMO. To me, the exterior has lost almost all of Ferrari's identity. It's a nice car-design, but if you'd tell me it's a Hyundai, Lexus or BYD I would believe you. I wonder…

Where is the Ferrari in this at all? I completely agree that they missed the mark in design. While the interior is 100% Jony Ive, the exterior screams "design by committee."

An electric Roma successor would have been much better received and possibly cheaper for them to develop (who knows?).

The silver lining in all this is that it means that the EV arm will not cannibalize their ICE cars.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#698

Post by turtlesdown11 »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #662
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a disaster for Ferrari. You buy the brand, the car and its lack of reliability is well known and the difficult handling also well known. But its La Ferrari. This is the type of car that will be seen in the hands of people buying Cybertruck or the UK chavs that now buy Rolex. The moment that happens your brand is dead. Your customers will flock away back to Buggati and Aston Martin. Massive Ferrari mistake.

IMO this is a risk worth taking. The Ferrari brand is rather stagnant and not innovative. They need to do something like this to drive more attention and sales. Even if this particular model does not sell well they can refine and make better selling EVs down the line.

> The Ferrari brand is rather stagnant and not innovative. They need to do something like this to drive more attention and sales.

Wild assertion. Ferrari is currently #8 largest market cap for a car manufacturer. They're valued above Mercedes, BMW, Volkswagen and every other Euro car brand.

They couldn't be more successful as a small automaker if they tried. But you think they need to do something like this to drive attention and sales?

Re: Ferrari Luce

#699

Post by davewritescode »

I don’t understand why anyone is jumping to conclusions about anything before anyone has driven it.

A Ferrari is about driving, and while it wouldn’t surprise me that the driving experience is generally the same as most EVs I’m unwilling to dismiss this based on looks alone.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#700

Post by burgreblast »

l23k4 wrote: post #485
onlypassingthru wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the Model S is no longer in production due to poor sales. How many of these $650k family sedans could Ferrari possibly move?

Bizarre comparison. Who is the customer for a Model S? What fancy full-size sedan would they otherwise buy? Certainly not the person who'd buy a BMW 7er or a Mercedes S-class. Model S does not offer the basic comforts required to compete in this segment. Perhaps the person who'd buy a BMW 5er or a Mercedes e-class? Possibly, but the Model S is still an uncomfortable, noisy and cheap feeling clunker compared to those…

Thank you for noticing that Tesla's are priced at premium levels, but they still don't know how to make actual quality that is present the models you listed above. I've owned several of these and driven all but the EQS and there's a huuuge gap between a 7er S-class and a Tesla. Huge.
Post reply on HN