2016 GT3RS allocations the truth please read.
#211
Originally Posted by carz80am
Same thing happened to me. I eventually found one but I had to pay over msrp. I'm already ready to sell for what I have into it.
#212
Remember, not everybody's "work" pays the same and it's a helluva lot easier and a lot less pain paying 50k over when you have the money to do so. Also, many people around here won't pay over on principle. I never begrudge anyone for how they come by their money but I do judge them on how they act when they have it.
I'll go back to work now...
#213
Big effing deal. Remember not everybody's "work" pays the same and it's a helluva lot easier and a lot less pain paying 50k over when you have the money to do so. Also, many people around here won't pay over on principle. I never begrudge anyone for how they come by their money but I do judge them on how they act when they have it. I'm going back to work now..
#214
delete
Last edited by Mr. Adair; 06-29-2016 at 01:32 AM.
#215
I havent seen any used ones at "close to MSRP"
#216
Maintenance is nothing as ferrari has free maintenance for 7 years on new cars. There are some dealers that make you buy stuff like California's in order to get the 488 or make you buy a used car from them over msrp to get you in. All depends on the dealer. Just like everything else, If you have patience you can usually get around this. I already have a 488 and have only owned 1 Ferrari in the past and will have a 488 spider before the end of the year at msrp.
#217
If I owned PAG I would sell all allocations of low-production cars via monthly global public auctions just like Govt bills/notes/bonds are sold. After the first few auctions where all sorts of flippers, traders, speculators, and "collectors" fall over themselves to pay $2MM per RS allocation, then get their a$$es carried out by only being able to sell them for $1MM to the second tier of speculators, the market would probably reach a proper equilibrium where dealers would bid in these auctions at levels 10-15% below where they expect to sell them to people who actually want them.
But PAG doesn't want this. It wants to use the GT/RS cars as Birkin bags to manufacture drool and to twist enough panties of people with egos (masochists, mostly) in a bunch. It must have estimated that it can make more money from its brand this way. Just the way I see it.
But PAG doesn't want this. It wants to use the GT/RS cars as Birkin bags to manufacture drool and to twist enough panties of people with egos (masochists, mostly) in a bunch. It must have estimated that it can make more money from its brand this way. Just the way I see it.
#218
I'm drawn to reading this thread every couple of days and don't really know why. I've come to think of it as the TMZ of the car world.
So, after reading 15 pages of posts, I have a question for those that feel passionately about this subject:
For purposes of my question, let's assume the average MSRP of a new RS at $200,000 and the average asking price of that same car, either as an allocation from a dealer or with delivery(ish) miles in the public marketplace is $250,000, or $50,000 over MSRP. The consensus opinion here is "I won't pay over MSRP".
Consider for a moment how Porsche, or any other company selling a product to the public, establishes their prices - it is cost, plus their targeted profit margin, adjusted downward due to certain competitive pressures or upward based upon what the market will bear (generally scarcity and exclusivity). The question then is this:
What if Porsche had priced the RS so that the average MSRP was $250,000 and not $200,000? Would you have gladly paid the same $250,000 that today will buy you your choice of cars?
I think you would have. I think that the consensus opinion of not paying over MSRP is as arbitrary a position as the pricing Porsche has set. Nobody here is debating the actual value of the car itself, just market pricing in relation to MSRP. Nobody here is saying it's worth $150,000; $200,000; $300,000; just that it's worth MSRP.
In conclusion, and to answer my own slightly rhetorical question, I think if the MSRP was $250,000 and cars were available, you would all gladly have one. But you're psyched out by the market.
***Disclaimer: I don't own a RS and I don't want to, so I have no vested interest in where this all lands.
So, after reading 15 pages of posts, I have a question for those that feel passionately about this subject:
For purposes of my question, let's assume the average MSRP of a new RS at $200,000 and the average asking price of that same car, either as an allocation from a dealer or with delivery(ish) miles in the public marketplace is $250,000, or $50,000 over MSRP. The consensus opinion here is "I won't pay over MSRP".
Consider for a moment how Porsche, or any other company selling a product to the public, establishes their prices - it is cost, plus their targeted profit margin, adjusted downward due to certain competitive pressures or upward based upon what the market will bear (generally scarcity and exclusivity). The question then is this:
What if Porsche had priced the RS so that the average MSRP was $250,000 and not $200,000? Would you have gladly paid the same $250,000 that today will buy you your choice of cars?
I think you would have. I think that the consensus opinion of not paying over MSRP is as arbitrary a position as the pricing Porsche has set. Nobody here is debating the actual value of the car itself, just market pricing in relation to MSRP. Nobody here is saying it's worth $150,000; $200,000; $300,000; just that it's worth MSRP.
In conclusion, and to answer my own slightly rhetorical question, I think if the MSRP was $250,000 and cars were available, you would all gladly have one. But you're psyched out by the market.
***Disclaimer: I don't own a RS and I don't want to, so I have no vested interest in where this all lands.
#219
^ nope. Not interested in a msrp $250k RS. That puts it into a price territory not reasonable for me to track the car. This is why the RS is now rarely seen on the track. They are now shamelessly relegated to garage and C&C duty. It's a travesty because the car was made for the track but has instead become the object of hand wringing speculator's fantasies.
#223
PCNA knows about this. In fact, in many ways, they are very pleased about it.
PCNA now uses RS allocations as a back-door way to provide "trunk money" -- which never shows up as a line-item on the balance sheet. Good for corporate profits. Good for dealers because they now get the trunk money they need to sell those 2016 Panameras.
PCNA cannot do anything to dealers that charge markups. At least not in the US. Against franchise laws. And good luck showing, much less proving, collusion amongst dealers.
Loyalty means nothing. For Porsche. Or you (and I'm using "you" figuratively). You buy Porsches because they make good cars. We all do. Porsche stops making good cars, you stop buying. As well as you should. That's not loyalty. That's being smart. Porsche knows this. Which is why loyalty is about as important to them as the last buyer that bought a car.
Spend your time more constructively.
PCNA now uses RS allocations as a back-door way to provide "trunk money" -- which never shows up as a line-item on the balance sheet. Good for corporate profits. Good for dealers because they now get the trunk money they need to sell those 2016 Panameras.
PCNA cannot do anything to dealers that charge markups. At least not in the US. Against franchise laws. And good luck showing, much less proving, collusion amongst dealers.
Loyalty means nothing. For Porsche. Or you (and I'm using "you" figuratively). You buy Porsches because they make good cars. We all do. Porsche stops making good cars, you stop buying. As well as you should. That's not loyalty. That's being smart. Porsche knows this. Which is why loyalty is about as important to them as the last buyer that bought a car.
Spend your time more constructively.
#224