RS buyers: Is your dealer making you sign a "right of first refusal buyback at MSRP"?
#32
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Doesn't Ferrari do this with most of their new car sales? Not sure how it's enforced. Maybe blacklisted against buying any future cars.
#33
Burning Brakes
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I wonder if all of a sudden the economy took a horrid turn and REALLY went into the crapper, if they'd still buy back the car at MSRP if they began trading at 30% UNDER MSRP a year from now...
Let's face it, there are absolute great safeguards here in that it does make sure the car isn't going to someone who will flip it and quickly cash in. I commend that wholeheartedly and it reminds me of Ferrari's FXX program where if you bought one, you had to commit to tracking the car and racing it and were not allowed to sell it. On the otherhand, I don't want a dealer telling me that I can't sell the car for as much as I want if I fall on hard times and can really use this as a means to possibly help keep my house if I lost my job. Yes, it probably wouldn't stand up in court, but as someone else said, it would probably ruin any relationship you have with that dealer if you didn't either sign it or abide by it if you found yourself in a position in which you needed to sell it. I do commend them for selling the car to you at MSRP, but ALL dealerships should be selling at MSRP in my humble opinion.
Let's face it, there are absolute great safeguards here in that it does make sure the car isn't going to someone who will flip it and quickly cash in. I commend that wholeheartedly and it reminds me of Ferrari's FXX program where if you bought one, you had to commit to tracking the car and racing it and were not allowed to sell it. On the otherhand, I don't want a dealer telling me that I can't sell the car for as much as I want if I fall on hard times and can really use this as a means to possibly help keep my house if I lost my job. Yes, it probably wouldn't stand up in court, but as someone else said, it would probably ruin any relationship you have with that dealer if you didn't either sign it or abide by it if you found yourself in a position in which you needed to sell it. I do commend them for selling the car to you at MSRP, but ALL dealerships should be selling at MSRP in my humble opinion.
#36
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
No, but if I elected to sell this car I would give dealer first chance to buy it back. They will offer well above MSRP for desirable cars.
#37
Three Wheelin'
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I do find it amusing how there are posts defending the dealer in this thread and if you go to a thread to where the dealers are trying to get more than MSRP for a used car they are vilified.
#38
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had to sign a doc before purchasing two new ferraris. If you don't follow the rules the dealership can blackball you from future purchases.
#39
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The advocacy in this thread for some dealer's strategy of having customers sign an agreement to sell back at MSRP will create a LOT of anger in those of us now receiving RS's ...
Having placed a deposit ($5000) on the RS in spring 2014, now fortuitously seeing a great price appreciation in the RS, to then be asked to give the dealer the car back at MSRP at sale or trade-in just wont fly ...
I have deposit on the GT2/GT2RS and 960. If a year or so from my upcoming November RS delivery I wish to trade the RS in for a GT2/GTRS am I to give the RS back at MSRP even though the market price for a well-maintained RS may still be $50,000+ above MSRP? So, many of you are advocating ALL that price appreciation should go to the dealer?!
So what happens if the RS prices plummet and the market value is less than MSRP, will the dealer take that hit?
If I'm asked to guarantee the dealer MSRP at future trade-in of my RS, will I trade the RS in for a GT2/GT2RS or 960 with that dealer? NO.
Having placed a deposit ($5000) on the RS in spring 2014, now fortuitously seeing a great price appreciation in the RS, to then be asked to give the dealer the car back at MSRP at sale or trade-in just wont fly ...
I have deposit on the GT2/GT2RS and 960. If a year or so from my upcoming November RS delivery I wish to trade the RS in for a GT2/GTRS am I to give the RS back at MSRP even though the market price for a well-maintained RS may still be $50,000+ above MSRP? So, many of you are advocating ALL that price appreciation should go to the dealer?!
So what happens if the RS prices plummet and the market value is less than MSRP, will the dealer take that hit?
If I'm asked to guarantee the dealer MSRP at future trade-in of my RS, will I trade the RS in for a GT2/GT2RS or 960 with that dealer? NO.
#40
Drifting
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
contract should state split the profit at resale then it would seem fair, but if they buy back at MSRP and the heap current market value they could still reap the $100k. Certainly needs a time out clause and I would get a lawyer to look at the contract 'just because'. This way of doing business is poor (MSRP + a heap more profit by the dealer) Porsche should control the margins and bonus's for good sales and customer service not a poor dealer writing a cheque 'just because' and probably stuffing customer relations in the process. Porsche and its dealers are doing well enough with out this shae practice... Porsche should stop it period.
Last edited by Mr. Adair; 10-04-2015 at 04:01 PM.
#41
Drifting
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I wonder if all of a sudden the economy took a horrid turn and REALLY went into the crapper, if they'd still buy back the car at MSRP if they began trading at 30% UNDER MSRP a year from now... Let's face it, there are absolute great safeguards here in that it does make sure the car isn't going to someone who will flip it and quickly cash in. I commend that wholeheartedly and it reminds me of Ferrari's FXX program where if you bought one, you had to commit to tracking the car and racing it and were not allowed to sell it. On the otherhand, I don't want a dealer telling me that I can't sell the car for as much as I want if I fall on hard times and can really use this as a means to possibly help keep my house if I lost my job. Yes, it probably wouldn't stand up in court, but as someone else said, it would probably ruin any relationship you have with that dealer if you didn't either sign it or abide by it if you found yourself in a position in which you needed to sell it. I do commend them for selling the car to you at MSRP, but ALL dealerships should be selling at MSRP in my humble opinion.
Last edited by Mr. Adair; 10-04-2015 at 02:57 PM.
#42
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Lots of discussion on Ferrari chat about these agreements. They are not enforceable.
#43
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
This is a very interesting thread. There is no wrong or right. I do not like Car Dealers- sorry if any one offended. But, if I were a Dealer and know that I could make an extra $50,000-$100,000-but at the same time you want to be loyal to your hard core Customers- I get it if they are asking this. Better than telling you to go fly a kite
#45
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I like it in theory. In practice I think it does get complex to enforce- making buyers sign a lease rather than an outright purchase is perhaps most effective.
There is no question that speculators are driving up prices: in addition to enthusiasts you've got an entire class of additional buyers with financial motivations, meaning more people competing for a fixed number of cars. This drives up prices for everyone, which in turn makes it harder to use these cars for their design purpose. There are very few of us that can justify regularly tracking a $350k+ car. Net result: more museum pieces, less enjoyment. Sounds more like Ferrari and less like Porsche, and I don't think that's a good thing. One of the main attractions to the brand is that these are cars designed to be used. Drivers, not poseurs.
Removing some of the financial motivation should help the situation, the question is how? Porsche could do it from the supply side- wash out would-be speculators by making 3 or 4 x as many cars as expected, leaving a car for every real driver and speculators with no one to sell to but themselves. Of course this means steep depreciation, which doesn't make for a happy ownership proposition either.
A four year lease at MSRP would be a middle option: the ROI for speculators would drop to the point where it's much less attractive, long term value for real owners would be maintained, cars would be more likely to be used (one hopes) and everyone would be free to act in their own financial best interest within the rules. Sure some (dealers and flippers) will complain that they don't get to make a quick buck, but perhaps they are part of the problem to begin with?
There is no question that speculators are driving up prices: in addition to enthusiasts you've got an entire class of additional buyers with financial motivations, meaning more people competing for a fixed number of cars. This drives up prices for everyone, which in turn makes it harder to use these cars for their design purpose. There are very few of us that can justify regularly tracking a $350k+ car. Net result: more museum pieces, less enjoyment. Sounds more like Ferrari and less like Porsche, and I don't think that's a good thing. One of the main attractions to the brand is that these are cars designed to be used. Drivers, not poseurs.
Removing some of the financial motivation should help the situation, the question is how? Porsche could do it from the supply side- wash out would-be speculators by making 3 or 4 x as many cars as expected, leaving a car for every real driver and speculators with no one to sell to but themselves. Of course this means steep depreciation, which doesn't make for a happy ownership proposition either.
A four year lease at MSRP would be a middle option: the ROI for speculators would drop to the point where it's much less attractive, long term value for real owners would be maintained, cars would be more likely to be used (one hopes) and everyone would be free to act in their own financial best interest within the rules. Sure some (dealers and flippers) will complain that they don't get to make a quick buck, but perhaps they are part of the problem to begin with?