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

951–959 of 959 posts

Re: Ferrari Luce

#951

Post by dontlaugh »

mattlondon wrote: post #573
dotancohen wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 think that is the idea. Ferrari presented a plausible EV exterior, albeit one that will not appeal to Ferrari's target market (and budget). The resulting non-sales could be used to justify the position that Ferrari's target market is not interested in EVs, s…

I thought a similar thing too. "Look, we tried to create an EV and no one bought it. So we need to retain that carve-out in the regulations that mean we do not have to electrify our entire product line or we will go out of business entirely." I'd totally buy this car if it looked like that and was from a mainstream manufacturer (i.e. priced normally), but yeah I cannot see a typical ferrari owner buying one.

There’s nothing wrong with them going out of business either, though.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#952

Post by turtlesdown11 »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #935
turtlesdown11 wrote: post #803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which has nothing to do with your (wild) statements about how Ferrari is stagnant and desperate to boost sales...

When was the last time the world talked about Ferrari like this? They've been stagnant for that long

Stagnant? Is that why their value has gone up 8x in the last decade? Does the market reward stagnant businesses?

It's very clear you don't follow the market or the auto industry. The fact that Ferrari is the most valuable European carmaker makes it clear they are not "stagnant". A "stagnant" brand wouldn't outvalue Volkswagen, etc.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#953

Post by __m »

komali2 wrote: post #499
__m wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

subset of hn commenters? The cybertruck is widely ridiculed, also in taiwan.

Yes, subset. See, the other subset: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48276310

Sure 1/1000 is still a subset

Re: Ferrari Luce

#954

Post by BrokenCogs »

turtlesdown11 wrote: post #952
BrokenCogs wrote: post #935

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time the world talked about Ferrari like this? They've been stagnant for that long

Stagnant? Is that why their value has gone up 8x in the last decade? Does the market reward stagnant businesses? It's very clear you don't follow the market or the auto industry. The fact that Ferrari is the most valuable European carmaker makes it clear they are not "stagnant". A "stagnant" brand wouldn't outvalue Volkswagen, etc.

Overall market value doesn't have anything to do with how innovative a business may be. Ferrari has a high value because it has a very large profit margin, due to their deliberate low supply and high sale prices. That doesn't mean it's innovative

Re: Ferrari Luce

#955

Post by anonym00se1 »

bombcar wrote: post #798
anonym00se1 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like a car by someone who used to design consumer electronics and spent only a cursory amount of time understanding automotive history, design, aesthetics, etc. Long live the Ivesmobile.

This is the Apple Car. Now we know what it would have looked like.

And now we know why Steve Zadesky left the Titan program and why the Titan program was ultimately shut down. Ive has no idea how to design a car.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#956

Post by somebehemoth »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #269
somebehemoth wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a lifelong fan of Ferrari, I find both the interior and exterior hideous.

Is Ferrari even known for interiors? Looking at pics they all seem to be hideous.

The inside and outside of Luce is ugly and both depart from traditional Ferrari styling. I don't know why it matters what they are known for.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#957

Post by turtlesdown11 »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #954
turtlesdown11 wrote: post #952

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stagnant? Is that why their value has gone up 8x in the last decade? Does the market reward stagnant businesses? It's very clear you don't follow the market or the auto industry. The fact that Ferrari is the most valuable European carmaker makes it clear they are not "stagnant". A "stagnant" brand wouldn't outvalue Volkswagen, etc.

Overall market value doesn't have anything to do with how innovative a business may be. Ferrari has a high value because it has a very large profit margin, due to their deliberate low supply and high sale prices. That doesn't mean it's innovative

So the company that earns more per vehicle sold isn't "innovative". How do they command their deliberate high sales prices then? Magic? Why doesn't every car maker have a similar strategy? Why doesn't Porsche, Aston Martin, etc have the same success?

Ferrari is innovative and their brand is vibrant. As evidenced by their extreme success.

If you want to argue in the alternative, try submitting facts or evidence.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#958

Post by BrokenCogs »

turtlesdown11 wrote: post #957
BrokenCogs wrote: post #954

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overall market value doesn't have anything to do with how innovative a business may be. Ferrari has a high value because it has a very large profit margin, due to their deliberate low supply and high sale prices. That doesn't mean it's innovative

So the company that earns more per vehicle sold isn't "innovative". How do they command their deliberate high sales prices then? Magic? Why doesn't every car maker have a similar strategy? Why doesn't Porsche, Aston Martin, etc have the same success? Ferrari is innovative and their brand is vibrant. As evidenced by their extreme success. If you want to argue in the alternative, try submitting facts or evidence.

There's plenty of evidence that Ferrari operates on the economics of scarcity, not innovation. Here's just one article from this year: https://medium.com/@moschovakiscapital/ferrari-at-332-the-wo...

Ferrari makes a ton of money per vehicle because there is a long line of wealthy elites waiting to buy a new tailored model. They are not known for innovation, in fact you have not provided any evidence to the contrary. They are even terrible at F1, having not one a title since 2008, despite having some of the best drivers racing for them. Yes these are different departments but the same culture.

Would you call Rolex an innovative brand? No one would, because they are a luxury watchmaker brand, who also happen to be one of the most valued brands in the industry.

Re: Ferrari Luce

#959

Post by turtlesdown11 »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #958
turtlesdown11 wrote: post #957

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the company that earns more per vehicle sold isn't "innovative". How do they command their deliberate high sales prices then? Magic? Why doesn't every car maker have a similar strategy? Why doesn't Porsche, Aston Martin, etc have the same success? Ferrari is innovative and their brand is vibrant. As evidenced by their extreme success. If you want to argue in the alternative, try submitting facts or evidence.

There's plenty of evidence that Ferrari operates on the economics of scarcity, not innovation. Here's just one article from this year: https://medium.com/@moschovakiscapital/ferrari-at-332-the-wo... Ferrari makes a ton of money per vehicle because there is a long line of wealthy elites waiting to buy a new tailored model. They are not known for innovation, in fact you have not provided any evidence to the contrary. T…

> They are even terrible at F1, having not one a title since 2008, despite having some of the best drivers racing for them

zero relevance to this discussion (but unsurprising you conflate), and if you don't understand F1 is a marketing exercise that Ferrari wins, I don't know what to tell you

> Would you call Rolex an innovative brand

Yes I would, the deep sea dweller was a stroke of genius, as was the Tudor renaissance, they are deeply connected to their customer base and innovate for their customers.

You seem unable to understand that for the market of demand that Ferrari and Rolex seek, they innovate perfectly. They innovate for the pool of customers, not for you or the public. They've been rewarded richly by creating new vehicles that their customers demand.

Again, you've provided zero evidence of your fact-free claims, no need to respond further

maybe learn the markets you're commenting on? also try learning what innovation means, it doesn't mean coming up with an imbecilic vehicle like the cyberdumpster

Post reply on HN