Depreciating Supercar Market

[DarkRange55]

Regarding the depreciation of supercars. I totally agree with the English commentator that cars have way too much technical complexity that "we" the buyers haven't asked for. My great-uncle bought and sold a beautiful Aston-Martin DBX two years ago because it was too technically complicated for him. He kept it for a year. He couldn't easily use the HVAC or the radio let alone all the other tech like parking assist. For the "super cars" the big manufacturers like Ferrari and Lamborghini are making too many of the under $1 million cars which don't appreciate or hold their value. Back in 1955 a new Ferrari with a V12 engine cost about $13,000. Now a new cheap Ferrari costs $3-400,000 and a V12 or "production" car $6-900,00. And there are thousands of each model being sold. As for their high end cars they sell hundreds of these in the $3-10 million range. The dollar in 1955 is worth about $12 in 2024 so a new V12 Ferrari *should* cost about $150,000. And back then Ferrari was one of handful produced so it was a rare car. Ferrari had made less than 1000 cars in total! Now Ferrari produces thousands of cars annually. I believe another aspect of rapid depreciation is that we live in an increasingly "throwaway" culture in which we see not only are "things" replaced, not repaired or valued, but people are also not valued, witness homelessness, starvation, Ukraine, Palestine, Lebanon. The horror people used to feel about death and loss when I was young seems to have become routinized because it's so common. Perhaps this is due to population growth or simply because as time goes on I have experienced more unprecedented growth of the global population accompanied by the production of "stuff" whether high tech or cheap crap sold by Temu. So much stuff or information available online is used to distract ourselves from the feelings we have about our place in the world, the meaning of our lives, the emptiness of our souls which cannot be filled by a new, shiny something. "Mere" survival is a preoccupation for 9/10s of the global population no matter where they live.

Once an object has been declared by historians and specialists (in the genre or type of object) that it is valuable, its value for those who are interested in that object will naturally increase due to the fact that as the worlds' population grows there are more potential collectors who are willing or able to pay whatever it takes IF that object becomes available. For example, Mercedes built 2 300SLR coupes back in the 1950s which were potential race cars but never raced. As time passed Mercedes presented one of the two cars to its chief engineer Rudolf Uhlenhaut who oversaw the design and construction of the unbeatable sports and Formula cars during the 1950s. One on the race cars crashed at high speed into a slower competitor's car during the 1955 24 hours of Le Mans and was catapulted into the spectators' grandstand killing 55 people. Mercedes was in the lead of the race with its other car but the Board of Directors ordered the team to withdraw from the event and went on to cancel its racing team effort for several decades. Recently one of the two Uhlenhaut coupes was sold at auction to fund an educational initiative you can read about on the Internet. The car reportedly sold for $150 million. It was at the time it was engineered and built the finest example of sports car manufacturing in the world. I visited the Mercedes Museum in Stuttgart and viewed the historic cars. Like the Mona Lisa the Uhlenhaut coupe is nearly priceless. One could argue that art works produced by artists and sculptors now dead cannot be recreated and thus are unique, whereas machines can be recreated, and thus will never be as valuable as art. However, the Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa back 1959-1960 sold for $6,000 and is now worth at last auction about $40 million. Similarly fine art work in the 1960s-1970s owned and sold back then or (lost in divorce settlements) has multiplied in value ten thousand fold because it represented prime or good work done by now near dead or dead artists like Rene Magritte, Joseph Cornell, Andy Warhol, Jasper Johns, Frank Stella, and Helen Frankenthaler who are valued by collectors and museums nowadays. One thing you must take into account is the value of a dollar over time. Inflation is a major factor when looking at future value of things. The $40 million Ferrari is today really only "worth" in 1960 purchasing power about $5 million.

The other consideration is what is stuff worth really? You must ask yourself what is really important to you in your life? Are relationships more important than earnings? The relationship you have with yourself is the most important of all. You are the most interesting person in your life. How are you nurturing that person?

TL;DR

ford model t was ~800 in 1908, which would be ~$25K in today's $.
You can get a much better car for $25K today, so more bang for your buck. Now a car is more computer than car compared to 30 years ago.

Vintage stuff tends to be built to last, and built to allow upkeep (oil ports on motors, etc.).
Newer stuff tends to be designed to not need (or need less) maintenance during its lifetime, but often with a shorter lifetime.
When my mentor was in Peru in 1969 there were still Model-A and Model-T Ford cars operating as colectivos (like a taxi, but with a fixed route)...

Colectivo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Pluto]

It's worth noting that Ferrari was a relatively new brand in the 1950s. In addition to a limited heritage, the target demographic would have been driving enthusiasts rather than wealthy posers flaunting their Veblen goods. The notion of buying these cars purely as a financial investment would likely have been unthinkable, too.

Another example of a brand shifting over time is Rolls-Royce. In the very early days (pre-Model T), RR was innovative enough that they produced the first ever V8 automobiles, albeit in tiny numbers. Contrast to modern times when the clientele is so excruciatingly conservative that Rolls-Royce was one of the last manufacturers in the industry to produce an EV, despite electrification being a perfect fit for the brand's refinement-oriented ethos.

In Australia, Toyota is starting to charge alarmingly high prices for its Landcruiser. The brand has such cachet that people are desensitised to spending a 6-figure sum for a relatively basic vehicle. VW is another brand that ironically (considering its very name) lost its roots and shifted upmarket.

As for supercars, the advanced powertrains (namely PHEV) are required to meet modern performance expectations and emissions standards, but it does make for a high level of complexity. For high-exclusivity vehicles, it's unlikely to be a problem. The MacLaren F1 Roadcar had notoriously costly servicing, yet it pales in comparison to their extraordinary appreciation.

What will tend to happen is limited-run models like the Ferrari F80 will rise substantially in value, while mass-production models will remain relatively common. Because there's such a large wealthy class nowadays, there's less exclusivity in a car merely costing a few hundred grand, affecting the supply and demand balance. In this sense, Ferrari's mistake could actually be charging too little for its cars.

 

[DarkRange55]

It's worth noting that Ferrari was a relatively new brand in the 1950s. In addition to a limited heritage, the target demographic would have been driving enthusiasts rather than wealthy posers flaunting their Veblen goods. The notion of buying these cars purely as a financial investment would likely have been unthinkable, too.

Another example of a brand shifting over time is Rolls-Royce. In the very early days (pre-Model T), RR was innovative enough that they produced the first ever V8 automobiles, albeit in tiny numbers. Contrast to modern times when the clientele is so excruciatingly conservative that Rolls-Royce was one of the last manufacturers in the industry to produce an EV, despite electrification being a perfect fit for the brand's refinement-oriented ethos.

In Australia, Toyota is starting to charge alarmingly high prices for its Landcruiser. The brand has such cachet that people are desensitised to spending a 6-figure sum for a relatively basic vehicle. VW is another brand that ironically (considering its very name) lost its roots and shifted upmarket.

As for supercars, the advanced powertrains (namely PHEV) are required to meet modern performance expectations and emissions standards, but it does make for a high level of complexity. For high-exclusivity vehicles, it's unlikely to be a problem. The MacLaren F1 Roadcar had notoriously costly servicing, yet it pales in comparison to their extraordinary appreciation.

What will tend to happen is limited-run models like the Ferrari F80 will rise substantially in value, while mass-production models will remain relatively common. Because there's such a large wealthy class nowadays, there's less exclusivity in a car merely costing a few hundred grand, affecting the supply and demand balance. In this sense, Ferrari's mistake could actually be charging too little for its cars.

Good points!
Yes, if Ferrari charged more they'd sell fewer but make more money because of employing fewer workers. Look at Koenigsegg or Pagani.

 

[Pluto]

Yes, they could have just as easily have maintained exclusivity via an all-out Veblen approach. But apparently they instead have gone down the path of getting buyers of exclusive models to jump through hoops.

The hack that gets you access to the Ferrari you actually want

Desperately want a very special Ferrari, but not sure how to get there? There may be a shortcut that could save you a few years.

www.carexpert.com.au

 

[RiverOfLife]

I'm sorry, I don't think a car should cost more than a house.

 

[Pluto]

Wait until you see what the number plates cost.

 

[DarkRange55]

Yes, they could have just as easily have maintained exclusivity via an all-out Veblen approach. But apparently they instead have gone down the path of getting buyers of exclusive models to jump through hoops.

The hack that gets you access to the Ferrari you actually want

Desperately want a very special Ferrari, but not sure how to get there? There may be a shortcut that could save you a few years.

www.carexpert.com.au

Ah, yes my great-uncle is very familiar with this. It's kind of crazy how exclusive they can be.

What about Lamborghini by comparison?

 

[Pluto]

Ah, yes my great-uncle is very familiar with this. It's kind of crazy how exclusive they can be.

What about Lamborghini by comparison?

It's a fascinating phenomenon for sure. They understandably want the exclusive cars in the hands of people who will treat them with respect.

From what I can gather, one of Lamborghini's most recent limited-edition model was the Countach LPI 800-4 of 2022. Only 112 were made. Reportedly, the majority were sold prior to launch and the company operated with 'close clients', which implies at least some sort of inner circle.

 

[DarkRange55]

It's a fascinating phenomenon for sure. They understandably want the exclusive cars in the hands of people who will treat them with respect.

From what I can gather, one of Lamborghini's most recent limited-edition model was the Countach LPI 800-4 of 2022. Only 112 were made. Reportedly, the majority were sold prior to launch and the company operated with 'close clients', which implies at least some sort of inner circle.

A friend of mine tries making the point that 1. there is simply more money in the world today (the money supply + price inflation), 2. the global population has ballooned, 3. which leads to point three that there are not only more people but also more rich people and more ways of making money today than 60's years ago.

 

[DarkRange55]

It's worth noting that Ferrari was a relatively new brand in the 1950s. In addition to a limited heritage, the target demographic would have been driving enthusiasts rather than wealthy posers flaunting their Veblen goods. The notion of buying these cars purely as a financial investment would likely have been unthinkable, too.

Another example of a brand shifting over time is Rolls-Royce. In the very early days (pre-Model T), RR was innovative enough that they produced the first ever V8 automobiles, albeit in tiny numbers. Contrast to modern times when the clientele is so excruciatingly conservative that Rolls-Royce was one of the last manufacturers in the industry to produce an EV, despite electrification being a perfect fit for the brand's refinement-oriented ethos.

In Australia, Toyota is starting to charge alarmingly high prices for its Landcruiser. The brand has such cachet that people are desensitised to spending a 6-figure sum for a relatively basic vehicle. VW is another brand that ironically (considering its very name) lost its roots and shifted upmarket.

As for supercars, the advanced powertrains (namely PHEV) are required to meet modern performance expectations and emissions standards, but it does make for a high level of complexity. For high-exclusivity vehicles, it's unlikely to be a problem. The MacLaren F1 Roadcar had notoriously costly servicing, yet it pales in comparison to their extraordinary appreciation.

What will tend to happen is limited-run models like the Ferrari F80 will rise substantially in value, while mass-production models will remain relatively common. Because there's such a large wealthy class nowadays, there's less exclusivity in a car merely costing a few hundred grand, affecting the supply and demand balance. In this sense, Ferrari's mistake could actually be charging too little for its cars.

And the people building them are often in countries where wages are lower than in the countries where products are used and repaired.

And the world's wealth grows even faster than the world's population grows.

Yes, established brands tend to become less adventurous, partly because they have more to lose and partly because they have more bureaucracy.

 

[Pluto]