FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[spankyham]

Your opening contention

... when Ferrari are peaking in car sales they have their worse F1 spells. And when the road cars are not popular the F1 team thrives

A simple inverse correlation between sales and success. I immediately showed that since the 90's Ferrari has had steadily climbing sales irrespective of F1 success.

You pointed to the years after ontrack success as sales increasing - different metric

If you read my post I pointed to sales increases coming in the year of success as well as the years after success. Both contradict your contention.

You need to back these statements up with some facts.

"64 - 75 - This was the period of the Ferrari road car revival" - Show the sales before 64 and from 64-75 please.

Then on track success 74 - 79, car company again under pressure - Again, show the sales numbers for these years.

Post MS/Todt era - Big increase in road car sales, little ontrack success. I think we won a couple of titles and had a few close calls as well. But either way, the cars sales simply kept climbing through those years.

[spankyham]

As WB pointed out, how does Ferrari's growth compare using similar car brand's as a datum?

Sent using NCC-1701

Ferrari's growth has been solid since Luca arrived. McLaren have had a hard time of it being such a new entrant to the market. From this article you can see their sales from 12 to 13 were flat. They planned to sell 1400 units worldwide in 2013. They did predict that although flat from 12 to 13 Asia will consume 25% of sales, up from 10%. They don't say where the drop in sales is expected though.

Aston Martin didn't have such a great year in sales (although they really did well on track!). Info from this article. Scrapping the Cygnet in 13 was costly. The sales went down from over 4200 to 3800 for 2012. They are pinning a lot of hope on investment from the new Italian investors. Lemon discussed sales in China, I found that they sell 15% to Asia (<600), not sure what share of that China would be.

Here's Ferrari performance from last year:- (please excuse the caps guys, but that's how I lifted if from the PDF. - I will replace with an image later when I have time - I'm traveling again and have to take off soon)
2013 RESULTS: RECORD PROFITS, REVENUES AND NET FINANCIAL POSITION WITH FEWER CARS
REVENUES: 2.3 BILLION EURO (+ 5%)
TRADING PROFIT: 363.5 MILLION EURO (+ 8.3%)
NET PROFIT: 246 MILLION EURO (+5.4%)
INDUSTRIAL NET CASH POSITION: 1.36 BILLION EURO, THE BEST EVER
HOMOLOGATED CARS DELIVERED TO DEALERSHIPS: 6,922 (-5.4%)
RECORD DELIVERIES TO US AND UK, GOOD PERFORMANCE IN CHINA AND JAPAN
RECORD RESULTS FOR BRAND-RELATED ACTIVITIES WITH REVENUES UP TO 54
MILLION EUROS (+3,6%)

China is a very new market for Ferrari - sales were 700 and is now their 2nd biggest market.
And of course kudos to the UK market which lifted themselves to 3rd biggest for Ferrari, up to 677 cars just surpassing Germany.

[racechick]

What's their first market. Is it Italy or US?

[CookinFlat6]

A simple inverse correlation between sales and success. I immediately showed that since the 90's Ferrari has had steadily climbing sales irrespective of F1 success.

I was looking at the whole period of involvement in F1

"64 - 75 - This was the period of the Ferrari road car revival" - Show the sales before 64 and from 64-75 please.

Then on track success 74 - 79, car company again under pressure - Again, show the sales numbers for these years.

Simple facts are that the company found itself taken over by Fiat. This means the firm was in danger of not surviving before. Its common knowledge that the firm was no longer able to survive as an independent and ran into the arms of Fiat. This led to stability and rising sales, this was also followed by zero ontrack success. The first time Fiat came in and took a stake, second time the took over the whole firm bar 10%.

If you read my post I pointed to sales increases coming in the year of success as well as the years after success. Both contradict your contention.

Like I said, my metric is not a year after a win etc, instead its eras and periods, allowing a more meaningfull anaylses and correlation instead of the simplistic 'we won this year we had more sales next year' my metric is more about how corporate well being and hubris has been acompanied by little on track success

Since the MS era sales have risen, on track success hasnt, and if the firm is now crowing about being the most powerful brand, then it may not bode well for on track success in the next years of the new era

[What's Burning?]

Like I said earlier on, I think the numbers you guys have presented are more indicative of global economic periods than as a result stimulated directly by winning a racing championship.

The 90s saw the fit com economic boom and super car sales rose with it.

Anyone doubt that Ferrari sales dropped in 2008-2009 even though they'd won a championship the previous year?

Since then, the markets have doubled and high end car sales have exploded right along with it.

[CookinFlat6]

Agreed WB. Perhaps it would have been more accurate had I said, instead of car sales, corporate well being and optimism. i.e. since 1954 when the Ferrari corporation is stable and healthy on track success is not there, and the periods when they are in turmoil or in danger of going out of business they have had on track success.

I am not saying when they win a WDC sales go down, just saying there is a well acknowledged inverse correlation between on track and off track success I am sure we all heard a reference to that and its about eras not a year after a WDC etc

Right now they are in rude financial health, ergo on track success might suffer again as it has done at those periods

[bud]

I don't see a direct correlation for Ferraris road car and F1 teams success and misfortune.
Unless resources are being taken by each branch I can't see anything other than external reasons for Ferraris on track success dipping with auto sale increases.

[spankyham]

Ferrari has had 20+ years of solid sustained growth. They've had on track success and failure in that time.
Cookin, instead of vague references to eras provide years. Provide evidence of sales in those specific years.


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk

[CookinFlat6]

miss, miss, spankyham is bullying me, he keeps forcing to show my wang in the playground, and I am sure I already saw him swigging a few cans of special brew this morning

Seriously though Spanky, I have pointed out that I mean corporate well being and sales correlating to on track non success. I have provided my evidence by pointing to the years the company almost went out of business and struggled was allied with on track success, and that when Fiat injected funds and knowhow no untrack success followed

Like I said, its a known mantra in F1 that Ferrari on track and off track success are inversely correlated. Direct year on year sales figures dont paint this picture, we would have to look at sales increase as a delta to an industry bench mark. i.e Ferrari sales increased but not in line, so effectively decreased in a period of on track success.

Before MS/Todt sales were relatively positive growth, during that period they were relatively down, after that period they have been growing yet on trck success has not matched

Is this acceptable to you?

[LRW]

Someone is starting to sound like mnm.

[CookinFlat6]

Nah, if Spanks were mnm, he would not just be demanding the facts and figures, he would be calling me immoral

[LRW]

I wasnt talking about mnm.

[CookinFlat6]

You werent talking about F1 or the thread topic either, but nevermind, thanks for your input

[LRW]

Ha ha ha. You really do feel important in your own little world don't you.

[Jabberwocky]

Remember to keep it civil.

Sent using NCC-1701