Confessions of A Car Flipper
09-25-2017, 04:19 PM
#106
Basic Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Man, I try to stay away from these convos but my willpower is too weak. How is it not clear that these guys are just more dedicated, better planners, and more forward thinking? If they decide their business, their income, is to buy cars and flip them, why are they "pond scum" or anything less than a ticket reseller like stub-hub? Is stub-hub or ticketfly "scum"?... no, they're a business, set up by a hustler who leveraged technology to buy tickets in bulk and resell them at higher prices to those who couldn't bother to do the same. You want a last minute ticket to a concert?... you pay the broker a premium. He thought ahead. Bankers do this with stock issuances, merchants of all kinds act with concerted focus on a single product where they believe they can create scarcity or otherwise leverage their position.
Anyone here who is angry at the smart players, needs to refocus their frustrations.
1. Refocus on yourself because you weren't quick enough, smart enough, forward thinking enough to get the object you wanted.
2. Refocus on the game, the rules.. be upset with dealers or Porsche or whoever... but don't put down people who played the game, better than you, while starting with the exact same set of chances that you did.
Damn it, I don't get it, you didn't get where you were by insulting other successful people in your chosen field, how is this any different. Just grow a pair and get focused on what you want and go get it. Stop putting others down to compensate for your own failure.. in whatever area of life that may happen.
Yea, now I'll get off my soapbox... my point stands.
Anyone here who is angry at the smart players, needs to refocus their frustrations.
1. Refocus on yourself because you weren't quick enough, smart enough, forward thinking enough to get the object you wanted.
2. Refocus on the game, the rules.. be upset with dealers or Porsche or whoever... but don't put down people who played the game, better than you, while starting with the exact same set of chances that you did.
Damn it, I don't get it, you didn't get where you were by insulting other successful people in your chosen field, how is this any different. Just grow a pair and get focused on what you want and go get it. Stop putting others down to compensate for your own failure.. in whatever area of life that may happen.
Yea, now I'll get off my soapbox... my point stands.
Let me clear up a few assumptions that have been made.
First, I did not have any special access to these cars that the general buying public did not. I was 21. I just thought farther ahead than most, and was willing to do the legwork to cold call every Porsche dealer in the country asking to get on the list, and to do it before the GT3/RS was a must-have item. Same thing I had done with Range Rovers.
The game is different now, but that's how it worked when I was flipping new cars.
Second, the lawyer who posted that he was the one whom I was referencing is not. There are more than a few lawyers in FL who bought a GT3 RS, and I still have a copy of the eBay ad in my files of that particular car for sale almost immediately after delivery.
I will address two things:
Porsche did not 'get litigious'. In fact, if any litigation had come of this, they would have been the defendant in an anti-trust lawsuit. It is against federal law for a company to refuse to sell somebody an item because of their intent to resell it. This applies to Wal-Mart as much as it does to Porsche. Porsche (and its dealers) were the ones who violated contracts which were signed by both parties and which included earnest money deposits.
Second, what does the 'S' stand for in MSRP? That's right, 'suggested'. MSRP is an arbitrary number which has zero bearing on market value:
Nobody thinks it's unethical when they can buy a new Aston Martin at $75k below MSRP - nope, they want the best deal they can get, because, hey, that's market value!
But when a dealer (or anybody else) wants to charge a dime over MSRP, all of a sudden the righteous police don their hats and cry foul.
This is not a new argument, nor will anyone's mind ever be changed, as a few people have already stated. Heck, there are members here who think that dealers shouldn't even sell used cars, and that anyone who makes any money off any car at any time is immoral and unethical. I get it - we love cars and it can be an emotional thing. But despite our love for them, they are commodities, no matter how much we might want them to be otherwise.
__________________
Access our GT Vault - click below to receive our regular blog on all things manual Porsche GT product, including exclusive listings.
Vetted cars, qualified buyers. Creating the best private marketplace for Porsche GT cars in North America.
Access our GT Vault - click below to receive our regular blog on all things manual Porsche GT product, including exclusive listings.
Vetted cars, qualified buyers. Creating the best private marketplace for Porsche GT cars in North America.
09-25-2017, 05:12 PM
#107
Well put.
Let me clear up a few assumptions that have been made.
First, I did not have any special access to these cars that the general buying public did not. I was 21. I just thought farther ahead than most, and was willing to do the legwork to cold call every Porsche dealer in the country asking to get on the list, and to do it before the GT3/RS was a must-have item. Same thing I had done with Range Rovers.
The game is different now, but that's how it worked when I was flipping new cars.
Second, the lawyer who posted that he was the one whom I was referencing is not. There are more than a few lawyers in FL who bought a GT3 RS, and I still have a copy of the eBay ad in my files of that particular car for sale almost immediately after delivery.
I will address two things:
Porsche did not 'get litigious'. In fact, if any litigation had come of this, they would have been the defendant in an anti-trust lawsuit. It is against federal law for a company to refuse to sell somebody an item because of their intent to resell it. This applies to Wal-Mart as much as it does to Porsche. Porsche (and its dealers) were the ones who violated contracts which were signed by both parties and which included earnest money deposits.
Second, what does the 'S' stand for in MSRP? That's right, 'suggested'. MSRP is an arbitrary number which has zero bearing on market value:
Nobody thinks it's unethical when they can buy a new Aston Martin at $75k below MSRP - nope, they want the best deal they can get, because, hey, that's market value!
But when a dealer (or anybody else) wants to charge a dime over MSRP, all of a sudden the righteous police don their hats and cry foul.
This is not a new argument, nor will anyone's mind ever be changed, as a few people have already stated. Heck, there are members here who think that dealers shouldn't even sell used cars, and that anyone who makes any money off any car at any time is immoral and unethical. I get it - we love cars and it can be an emotional thing. But despite our love for them, they are commodities, no matter how much we might want them to be otherwise.
Let me clear up a few assumptions that have been made.
First, I did not have any special access to these cars that the general buying public did not. I was 21. I just thought farther ahead than most, and was willing to do the legwork to cold call every Porsche dealer in the country asking to get on the list, and to do it before the GT3/RS was a must-have item. Same thing I had done with Range Rovers.
The game is different now, but that's how it worked when I was flipping new cars.
Second, the lawyer who posted that he was the one whom I was referencing is not. There are more than a few lawyers in FL who bought a GT3 RS, and I still have a copy of the eBay ad in my files of that particular car for sale almost immediately after delivery.
I will address two things:
Porsche did not 'get litigious'. In fact, if any litigation had come of this, they would have been the defendant in an anti-trust lawsuit. It is against federal law for a company to refuse to sell somebody an item because of their intent to resell it. This applies to Wal-Mart as much as it does to Porsche. Porsche (and its dealers) were the ones who violated contracts which were signed by both parties and which included earnest money deposits.
Second, what does the 'S' stand for in MSRP? That's right, 'suggested'. MSRP is an arbitrary number which has zero bearing on market value:
Nobody thinks it's unethical when they can buy a new Aston Martin at $75k below MSRP - nope, they want the best deal they can get, because, hey, that's market value!
But when a dealer (or anybody else) wants to charge a dime over MSRP, all of a sudden the righteous police don their hats and cry foul.
This is not a new argument, nor will anyone's mind ever be changed, as a few people have already stated. Heck, there are members here who think that dealers shouldn't even sell used cars, and that anyone who makes any money off any car at any time is immoral and unethical. I get it - we love cars and it can be an emotional thing. But despite our love for them, they are commodities, no matter how much we might want them to be otherwise.
Personally, I really don't see the issue with what you did or are currently doing. As a car guy, this situation is frustrating but at the end of the day these are limited production cars and not everyone is going to be able to buy one at sticker, flippers or not. That's just what happens when supply can't keep up with demand.
If you ask most of the people that are pissed off that they didn't get a GT3 allocation, they will blame car flippers but what they don't tell you is they barely tried to get a slot or wouldn't play "the game" with their dealer.
09-25-2017, 05:15 PM
#108
Rennlist Member
In this case the dealers were intentionally misled by him.
Like I said, would make a video bragging about this? By doing so, you should be able to take the criticism.
Who’s reputation has the potential to suffer?? One guess, won’t be the Porsche dealers?
Crazy thing is, he’s defending the flipping game and condones it. So Porsche is the bad guy because they stepped in to curb the practice?
Like I said, would make a video bragging about this? By doing so, you should be able to take the criticism.
Who’s reputation has the potential to suffer?? One guess, won’t be the Porsche dealers?
Crazy thing is, he’s defending the flipping game and condones it. So Porsche is the bad guy because they stepped in to curb the practice?
You, me, and everyone else don't know that. Only he and the dealers knows exactly what he said with them.
Perhaps the dealers asked him to provide a kick back after the sale instead?
09-25-2017, 05:26 PM
#109
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Chicagoland Area
Posts: 26,142
Likes: 0
Received 5,388 Likes
on
2,509 Posts
I can't wait to see all the Rennlisters "flipping" 991.2 GT3s in the spring/summer of 2018.
Last edited by LexVan; 09-25-2017 at 05:38 PM. Reason: added "see"
09-25-2017, 06:49 PM
#111
Three Wheelin'
Well put.
Let me clear up a few assumptions that have been made.
First, I did not have any special access to these cars that the general buying public did not. I was 21. I just thought farther ahead than most, and was willing to do the legwork to cold call every Porsche dealer in the country asking to get on the list, and to do it before the GT3/RS was a must-have item. Same thing I had done with Range Rovers.
The game is different now, but that's how it worked when I was flipping new cars.
Second, the lawyer who posted that he was the one whom I was referencing is not. There are more than a few lawyers in FL who bought a GT3 RS, and I still have a copy of the eBay ad in my files of that particular car for sale almost immediately after delivery.
I will address two things:
Porsche did not 'get litigious'. In fact, if any litigation had come of this, they would have been the defendant in an anti-trust lawsuit. It is against federal law for a company to refuse to sell somebody an item because of their intent to resell it. This applies to Wal-Mart as much as it does to Porsche. Porsche (and its dealers) were the ones who violated contracts which were signed by both parties and which included earnest money deposits.
Second, what does the 'S' stand for in MSRP? That's right, 'suggested'. MSRP is an arbitrary number which has zero bearing on market value:
Nobody thinks it's unethical when they can buy a new Aston Martin at $75k below MSRP - nope, they want the best deal they can get, because, hey, that's market value!
But when a dealer (or anybody else) wants to charge a dime over MSRP, all of a sudden the righteous police don their hats and cry foul.
This is not a new argument, nor will anyone's mind ever be changed, as a few people have already stated. Heck, there are members here who think that dealers shouldn't even sell used cars, and that anyone who makes any money off any car at any time is immoral and unethical. I get it - we love cars and it can be an emotional thing. But despite our love for them, they are commodities, no matter how much we might want them to be otherwise.
Let me clear up a few assumptions that have been made.
First, I did not have any special access to these cars that the general buying public did not. I was 21. I just thought farther ahead than most, and was willing to do the legwork to cold call every Porsche dealer in the country asking to get on the list, and to do it before the GT3/RS was a must-have item. Same thing I had done with Range Rovers.
The game is different now, but that's how it worked when I was flipping new cars.
Second, the lawyer who posted that he was the one whom I was referencing is not. There are more than a few lawyers in FL who bought a GT3 RS, and I still have a copy of the eBay ad in my files of that particular car for sale almost immediately after delivery.
I will address two things:
Porsche did not 'get litigious'. In fact, if any litigation had come of this, they would have been the defendant in an anti-trust lawsuit. It is against federal law for a company to refuse to sell somebody an item because of their intent to resell it. This applies to Wal-Mart as much as it does to Porsche. Porsche (and its dealers) were the ones who violated contracts which were signed by both parties and which included earnest money deposits.
Second, what does the 'S' stand for in MSRP? That's right, 'suggested'. MSRP is an arbitrary number which has zero bearing on market value:
Nobody thinks it's unethical when they can buy a new Aston Martin at $75k below MSRP - nope, they want the best deal they can get, because, hey, that's market value!
But when a dealer (or anybody else) wants to charge a dime over MSRP, all of a sudden the righteous police don their hats and cry foul.
This is not a new argument, nor will anyone's mind ever be changed, as a few people have already stated. Heck, there are members here who think that dealers shouldn't even sell used cars, and that anyone who makes any money off any car at any time is immoral and unethical. I get it - we love cars and it can be an emotional thing. But despite our love for them, they are commodities, no matter how much we might want them to be otherwise.
I don't condemn you for flipping cars. I wish I could have played the market myself back then too. Whenever I see a low supply/high demand followed by a price gouge, I can't help but to point blame on the person who paid the additional markup. They're the ones who need to have it right now.
Last edited by DesmoSD; 09-25-2017 at 08:50 PM.
09-25-2017, 07:31 PM
#112
Advanced
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel the "flipping" problem is more about the massive U.S. population and therefore, all of the Porsche enthusiasts within that want these cars. There's just way too much demand for a limited car so in order to get one you must be quick and somewhat lucky.
09-25-2017, 07:33 PM
#113
Rennlist Member
Let's not confuse the meaning of want and need, they are different, no one needs a Porsche. It is the "want" that has fueled Doug's business so successfully. Doug saw an opening and jumped all over it. If you wanted to play with him, you pay. Can hardly fault him for that, I actually congratulate him.
LOL this is not Porsche "exclusive". Try buying a Panerai Bronzo watch after it was released for much less than double the list price...hahaha
LOL this is not Porsche "exclusive". Try buying a Panerai Bronzo watch after it was released for much less than double the list price...hahaha
09-25-2017, 07:42 PM
#114
Everyone wanted IPO shares of Facebook but they were all sold before everyone who wanted one, got one. When FB shot up in price, many of those shareholders sold for a profit. Does that make those who bought multiple shares PIRATES also? of course not. I mean, I would right now, like to buy more FB shares at the original IPO price, doesn't mean I can and it's not FB's fault, its just more people want it, who are willing to pay more than I am.
LOL Facebook traded at HALF the IPO price after it got listed. If you wanted to buy it at the IPO price you could have bought the whole float.
