Jimmy-D

The question now becomes- who is getting these cars; the speculators or enthusiast.???

I think/hope the Dealers are taking care of the enthusiasts and it is obvious they want to be the ones' who make the extra coin off lack of Supply.

Welcome to Capitalism.

consolidated

All this does is put speculators profit back into the hands of the dealer. Dealers are just cutting out the middleman.

hfm

I had something different. I was asked to execute a document that indicated I could not sell the GT3 to a third party for one year under the pre-text that I could be a flipper who planned to resale the car in China for $100,000 profit. The only reason I think they'd care is because I made the cashing of my deposit offer, acceptance and consideration, a contract for their sale of a GT3 to me at MSRP. Without going into the legality of your situation or my situation, with few exceptions, these kinds of added terms to a retail purchase sales contract are between buyer and dealership not buyer and manufacturer. As much as I took the term I contracted in my deposit to get the GT3 at MSRP seriously, I took the term requested by the dealership seriously as well. I executed their request because I have no intention of selling my GT3, ever, much less within one year so, it was meaningless for me and, the condition had an effective and defined termination date.

I think the dealerships attempt to score a right to speculative future appreciation from sale of an RS, without consideration, is probably not enforceable but, without looking at what was or will be drafted, you don't really know. You've not stated what the dealerships "remedy" is if you ever sell your RS to a third party, whether there are liquidated damages or some other results that impact your sale of the vehicle. The term your dealership is trying to apply appears far more restrictive on a time basis. And, not giving legal advice, you should speak with a contract attorney about the enforceablity of the term and not rely upon what people post on the forum about a contract term that they have not seen and are likely not qualified to comment upon.

I probably would not agree to the term the dealership is attempting to shove down your throat. My guess is, this is how they get customers to walk from a deposit and allocation so they can sell it at mark-up. I view that tactic dimly, especially if the condition was not disclosed at time of acceptance of deposit. If you don't mind, could you post how the dealership responds to these questions.

1. What happens if I don't want to involve the dealership with future sale of my property?

If they say, it's not your property if we don't sell it to you, their answer will tell you how the dealership intends to treat you and your deposit, and

2. Have you ever had to enforce the term in a contract with another buyer?

If they say they can't discuss sales contracts between them and other customers, the next question is, "not asking about the details of any particular prior sale or contract with any customer, has the dealership ever successfully enforced the condition?" If the answer is yes, you know they're serious about the contract and are representing they can get it enforced and, you better be prepared to deal with it or walk. If the answer is "no" or, "we can't say" then your next question is, "then it's not important enough that you wont have a problem if we exclude the term, correct?"

Please let us know what they say as I'm curious.

Dan (is not giving legal advice)

usctrojanGT3

Ok, then purchase the cars used from private parties. You'll bank it up selling your car and then if you don't have to be the first one to get the new toy you'll make out.

usctrojanGT3

Some dealers have become speculators as they have taken allocations for themselves as a money grab.

JPMD

This is 1000% what disrupts the balance the most and IMO should be considered the lowest of lows especially when they have taken deposits.

Petevb

Clearly. However it seems tough to demand that dealers don't speculate while allowing customers to do so. I won't spend a dime at any dealer marking up over MSRP, but it's OK for a customer to flip? And if it is, won't a dealer simply pretend to be a customer?

The current structure creates strong financial incentive to cheat, lie, etc, and there is little an enthusiast can do about it. It seems we should welcome any system that disincentives this. Minimizing the financial gain through a lease structure or signed agreements seems worthwhile if it's practical. Didn't Ferrari already do this with some of their halo models?

fxz

+1

sccchiii

Yes Ferrari has done this before...F50 and also Lexus did it with LF-A (they held ownership for 2 years then released title after the 2 year hold was up).

Jimmy-D

Very interesting

snabbgt3

I'm surprised at the deception and confusion this concept is causing ...

If the dealer strategy to mandate "right of first refusal to buy at MSRP" or stipulation a GT3RS owner can't resell/trade except at MSRP within a 1-2 year time-period becomes widespread, the effect on us enthusiasts will be the opposite of what some posters on this thread are postulating ...

The effect will be:
1. New owners of the 991 GT3RS will hang on to their cars longer ... reselling or trading-in later to avoid selling at significantly below market
2. The market for the new or "used" GT3RS will be tighter, with HIGHER prices ... to the detriment of those rennlisters or other enthusiasts who are trying to get into this car
3. Dealers will be able to charge yet higher prices for the few cars available
4. The speculators, which I think are generally some dealers scouring the country for owners willing to give up their allocation or their newly titled cars, will control a yet tighter supply

This is very much a strategy that benefits dealer finances, not us customers.

IMO, this is NOT what we want.

est8esq

We're talking about Porsche?! It's not exactly mass transit transportation?

I believe we should qualify original buyer vs secondary market.

For the limited edition cars, I don't think any honorable dealer is charging over MSRP (this includes my personal experience w/ Ferrari too).

Dealer's know who their good customer's are and getting allocations is the customer's reward. At MSRP, the dealer still makes money and the customer gets a car at a fair price. If we're talking about "enthusiasts", I doubt they'd be giving a car up after a year or year and half? On the other hand, should an owner give it up within that time I see absolutely NO reason why the dealer shouldn't be given the opportunity to make the money they gave up by giving their original customer MSRP? After all, dealers are in the business to buy and sell cars for profit. Profit AIN'T a bad word.

Petevb

Looking at the GT3 RS as an example, I'd suggest a Porsche owned lease strategy could:
a) Get cars directly into customer hands without introducing the 25-50k (?) average markup dealers are imposing.
b) Discourage a sizable percentage of people that are buying the car as an investment, as a 4 year period with no prospect of a return would kill ROI.
c) That discouragement would free up more slots for Rennlisters when the car's new.

I agree the used market would get significantly tighter for some time, but this seems a small price to pay for more cars sold at MSRP to people who want to own them, not flip them.

It would seem to hinge on Porsche ownership. There would be no incentive for a dealer to buy and flip a car if they know Porsche would make any financial gain, not them.

What percentage of dealers are honorable by this measure? In California it's got to be well under half. I got my GT4 at MSRP, but I needed to go out of state to do it.

The current system pits a dealer's honor againt their need to make profit (and I agree, profit is not a bad word). It's a no win decision, but there is a legal way to eliminate it and level the playing field.

mooty

as long as they take the Pete and kids away and leave me the assets I sign whatever they want

so which dealer ?


why is spending money becoming so difficult now days?

GT3RS-Fan1

Hello kyrocks,


When I bought a limited production Ferrari Speciale, I was asked to sign two documents. First a "No Export" agreement for one year from date of purchase. Second, should I decide to sell my Speciale, I have to return the car to my dealer for the cost that I paid for the car within the first year of ownership, provided the mileage is limited to 1,000 miles with no significant (i.e, structural damage), at a buy-back price of MSRP for which I paid for.


Last August, I was one of the first few customers who accepted delivery of my GT3RS here in Illinois. Once again my dealer asked me to sign a "No Export" agreement. No other documents signed after that, and I also paid the car at MSRP.


As in my experience with both dealerships, me and my family have been previous owners of both brands, and I attribute that as to why we are able to buy at MSRP, plus we are listed as "valued" customers. Historically, hard to get models were either traded in back to the dealer or sold to private parties on average two years of ownership.


Needless to say, it is all about establishing relationships with your dealers. With regard to those contracts being enforceable, some have recommended to talk to your lawyers. I am not a lawyer but keep in mind it takes money and time to sue someone or anyone. If you sign any document, it really is a binding agreement and depending how the contract was written and who the involved lawyers are, is how and where the lawsuit can and will go. Should you decide to "Flip" the car to private party, then your name will most likely be dropped by your dealer on the "Valued" customer list.


If you are an enthusiasts and you are buying the car to use and or collect, then you need not worry about the contract, but you will want your lawyer to still review the document, for your peace of mind. There will be a set time frame in that contract, and terms of the buy- back for the car among other details.


Now, as we have seen how these cars have skyrocketed in price, it is my firm belief that the dealers what a "cut" of the pie. Rightfully so, since they could have easily re-allocated your allocation to someone else for more money that they will earn besides the MSRP.


In conclusion, it really depends what you intend to do with the car. You have mentioned you are an enthusiasts, and if so you need not worry about that contract as long as you also consult your lawyer. I suggest buy the car, enjoy it as I am in firm belief if you take great care of this car even though you have used it that you are not going to take a beating when you unload the car, albeit through private party or trade-in.


Drive safe,
GT3RS-Fan1