5 ms·

As other answers have essentially already said- because Ferrari is a brand, and past a certain price point brand names often matter more than the physical objec

As other answers have essentially already said- because Ferrari is a brand, and past a certain price point brand names often matter more than the physical object. Its the same in cars as in designer handbags. The opposite question is equally interesting; why doesn't Ferrari produce a relatively cheap car, so that they can offer the Ferrari cachet to a broader market? Presumably as to not dilute their brand. But it means we might see such a thing if the company starts having problems (e.g., finds itself competing against superior electric vehicles or similar.)

dagw 10y ago
Its the same in cars as in designer handbags. But for basically any given designer handbag I can find dozens of bags at a fraction of the price which are largely indistinguishable from the original if you're standing across the street.
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  The basic function and use of both purses are basically indistinguishable - the customer's needs are the same in both products. Sporty-looking cars that are low-to-mid priced really can't afford to handle like a sports car, since it is likely to be someone's main car - or back up when a car is in the shop. The expensive car is likely to be difficult to handle, especially in city driving and on the snow/ice. In addition, some of the cars perform poorly in city landscapes with potholes and speed bumps. If you've the money for the high-end car, those thigns are likely less of an issue. In other words, the customer's needs are different with the cars. Now, I'm not an expert, but I don't think you can get the same sort of look/feel while still making it a practical enough car for the lower end market.
  - maxander 10y ago
    Not the low-end market, no, cars require a bit more technical expertise than handbags. But I imagine you'll find that there are cars 2/3rds the price of any given Ferrari model that have roughly the same level of performance, from objective measurements. In which case you're "only" paying something like 30k to participate in the word "Ferrari."
- gaius 10y ago
  To you, but their target market can spot a fake easily from across the room.
JorgeGT 10y ago
Ferrari doesn't sell cars, Ferrari sells exclusivity. You cannot even purchase one of their top models right away, you must be invited by them to make the purchase: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/the-ferraris-so-exclusive-you-have-to-be-invited-to-buy-one-9821313.html http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-ne...
bluedino 10y ago
Invicta makes watches 'shaped' like Rolexes, but they aren't Rolexes.
steffan 10y ago
Under Ford ownership, Jaguar did the same thing with the X-Type, and in my opinion, started the decline of the brand. The X-Type was [apparently] designed to allow them to cater to a mid-market customer, but they produced an objectively inferior car with a little bit of Jaguar look, but the fit and finish of a slightly-nicer Ford. I drove one after having owned other Jaguars and the cheap switchgear, loud engine, excessive road noise, and poor performance put it in sharp contrast to the rest of their line. They could have produced a car equivalent to their full-size sedans, but they couldn't have done it for that price point. Undoubtedly part of the appeal for the corporate parent was the sharing of (IIRC) the Ford Mondeo platform, saving them the development costs of an entirely new vehicle. The problem with that approach is that people who like a brand for the brand's sake don't want the 'Cheap' version, and people who can afford the expensive version as a status symbol don't want their prestige reduced by sharing the same marque as someone with the less-expensive version. It's human psychology, and part of the reasoning behind 'Lexus' being a separate brand vs. just an expensive Toyota.
- gaius 10y ago
  Also Rolex having the Tudor brand rather than a cheaper Rolex-branded watch.
- seanp2k2 10y ago
  Mercedes also has the CLS and CLA now. LandRover did a model, the FreeLander (LR2 in NA), which was a Ford Escape with a nicer interior and different body panels. The LR2 SUV was built on a mid-size car platform, as many "compact SUVs" today are. They're very much built to American tastes of "some kind of truck thing, definitely not a minivan" while having about the same interior space as a decent sedan / hatch. Because of these tastes, we also don't get many of the hot hatches from Europe, because apparently no one except a few enthusiasts here want a small-ish vehicle with good power, great handling, good fuel economy, and enough room for a mountain bike or two in the boot. Americans want a hatchback with a lift kit, like the GLA45 AMG (since we don't get the lower, better-handling, lighter A45 AMG here) with just as little space, more weight, and much more body roll all for aesthetic reasons. It still has basically no true off-road capability.
toyg 10y ago
> we might see such a thing if the company starts having problems IIRC manufacturing numbers have gone back and forth on several lines of Ferrari more or less on this sort of need. While Enzo Ferrari was alive, Ferrari produced cars only to fund the racing team; it's probably not a coincidence that the most famous and best-selling Ferrari model ever, the Testarossa, was in production at a time when the team had no answer to the domination of Japanese turbo engines in F1. The team needed money to fight, and more and more Testarossa were made. This said, Ferrari has been substantially bankrolled by FIAT "sight unseen" since the '60s. Things might change now that they are a public company. We'll see.

dagw 10y ago

Its the same in cars as in designer handbags. But for basically any given designer handbag I can find dozens of bags at a fraction of the price which are largely indistinguishable from the original if you're standing across the street.

Broken_Hippo 10y ago
The basic function and use of both purses are basically indistinguishable - the customer's needs are the same in both products. Sporty-looking cars that are low-to-mid priced really can't afford to handle like a sports car, since it is likely to be someone's main car - or back up when a car is in the shop. The expensive car is likely to be difficult to handle, especially in city driving and on the snow/ice. In addition, some of the cars perform poorly in city landscapes with potholes and speed bumps. If you've the money for the high-end car, those thigns are likely less of an issue. In other words, the customer's needs are different with the cars. Now, I'm not an expert, but I don't think you can get the same sort of look/feel while still making it a practical enough car for the lower end market.
- maxander 10y ago
  Not the low-end market, no, cars require a bit more technical expertise than handbags. But I imagine you'll find that there are cars 2/3rds the price of any given Ferrari model that have roughly the same level of performance, from objective measurements. In which case you're "only" paying something like 30k to participate in the word "Ferrari."
gaius 10y ago
To you, but their target market can spot a fake easily from across the room.

JorgeGT 10y ago

Ferrari doesn't sell cars, Ferrari sells exclusivity. You cannot even purchase one of their top models right away, you must be invited by them to make the purchase: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-news/the-ferraris-so-exclusive-you-have-to-be-invited-to-buy-one-9821313.html http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/motoring-ne...

bluedino 10y ago

Invicta makes watches 'shaped' like Rolexes, but they aren't Rolexes.

steffan 10y ago

Under Ford ownership, Jaguar did the same thing with the X-Type, and in my opinion, started the decline of the brand. The X-Type was [apparently] designed to allow them to cater to a mid-market customer, but they produced an objectively inferior car with a little bit of Jaguar look, but the fit and finish of a slightly-nicer Ford. I drove one after having owned other Jaguars and the cheap switchgear, loud engine, excessive road noise, and poor performance put it in sharp contrast to the rest of their line. They could have produced a car equivalent to their full-size sedans, but they couldn't have done it for that price point. Undoubtedly part of the appeal for the corporate parent was the sharing of (IIRC) the Ford Mondeo platform, saving them the development costs of an entirely new vehicle. The problem with that approach is that people who like a brand for the brand's sake don't want the 'Cheap' version, and people who can afford the expensive version as a status symbol don't want their prestige reduced by sharing the same marque as someone with the less-expensive version. It's human psychology, and part of the reasoning behind 'Lexus' being a separate brand vs. just an expensive Toyota.

gaius 10y ago
Also Rolex having the Tudor brand rather than a cheaper Rolex-branded watch.
seanp2k2 10y ago
Mercedes also has the CLS and CLA now. LandRover did a model, the FreeLander (LR2 in NA), which was a Ford Escape with a nicer interior and different body panels. The LR2 SUV was built on a mid-size car platform, as many "compact SUVs" today are. They're very much built to American tastes of "some kind of truck thing, definitely not a minivan" while having about the same interior space as a decent sedan / hatch. Because of these tastes, we also don't get many of the hot hatches from Europe, because apparently no one except a few enthusiasts here want a small-ish vehicle with good power, great handling, good fuel economy, and enough room for a mountain bike or two in the boot. Americans want a hatchback with a lift kit, like the GLA45 AMG (since we don't get the lower, better-handling, lighter A45 AMG here) with just as little space, more weight, and much more body roll all for aesthetic reasons. It still has basically no true off-road capability.

toyg 10y ago

> we might see such a thing if the company starts having problems IIRC manufacturing numbers have gone back and forth on several lines of Ferrari more or less on this sort of need. While Enzo Ferrari was alive, Ferrari produced cars only to fund the racing team; it's probably not a coincidence that the most famous and best-selling Ferrari model ever, the Testarossa, was in production at a time when the team had no answer to the domination of Japanese turbo engines in F1. The team needed money to fight, and more and more Testarossa were made. This said, Ferrari has been substantially bankrolled by FIAT "sight unseen" since the '60s. Things might change now that they are a public company. We'll see.