I know. I am a liberal.

It’s one thing to be a conservative.

I appreciate your informed opinion.

Perhaps I should’ve clarified that intersection of owners where mutually exclusive clause will apply (Ferrari or McLaren) is rather small. Obviously, you might disagree with this as well.

Perhaps the sample size you are basing your opinion on is larger and/or more diverse than mine…

Good point but I have not researched that particular market to determine a. how lucrative such move would be and b. strength and R&D of existing players

From what I understand Apple’s attempt at creating a car have drawn heavily from 1957 Fiat Multipla (among others) implying Apple was looking to create a small vehicle…

“Would seem odd for him to stay on the board of Ferrari if Apple does make a move for Mclaren though.”

They might compete in same market segments nominally but a Venn Diagram intersection of target demographics for Ferrari and McLaren is rather small I believe. As long as he is kept away from sensitive information…

Not that I am attempting to change your mind but have you seen one in person?

I don’t think we will see a sedan with Ferrari badge in our lifetime.

Personally, it makes more sense to continue with “shooting break” approach which I think fits better with Ferrari’s brand perception, Italian interpretation of term “sports car” and can lean on infamous “breadvan” as spiritual predecessor as much as…

“It’s not that the designs are bad, they don’t break new ground in the way Ferrari is know for and built their reputation on.”

Breaking new ground is feasible with concepts and models in certain market segments. The segment and its target audience GTC4 competes in is hardly one of them.

“McLaren, as we know it, stands for one thing: building the most excellent super car in the world. Always has.”

It probably would’ve been better to use verb “strive” instead of “stand”. You wouldn’t want anyone to mistakenly think a McLaren product is the most excellent in the super car or any other market segment it…

Don’t forget to add to your bigger point that Ferrari has been deliberately limiting production for several years now in order to improve value of the brand and with eye on the collectors market.

I am sure McLaren’s leadership is not delusional enough to think they stand any chance to imitate Ferrari in this regard.

“In the race to bring the first fully autonomous car on the road, companies will inevitably cut corners in development.”

Tesla!

Right on. I mean square footage required is the same and you can thoroughly test the product without leaving the premises. Not to mention size and price of the product itself.

Right but in that scenario Tesla would’ve released Mobileye as they don’t need them anymore. Instead, Mobileye walked away from the deal.

I think it is just a question of time when enough critical mass will be developed to blow lid off of Tesla’s “technological developments” a la Theranos.

Now I know what to stay away from. Thank you.

“If I had to put money down on which one of them is telling the truth in any given speech or statement, I’m never choosing either Trump or a Clinton. Every damned word they say is impossible to believe.”

/fixed

Good morning :)

“So Tesla may be biased, but they are the only ones with the means to determine with 100% accuracy how many miles their vehicles have driven.”

Not enough crowd standing around to inspire such maneuver.

And what about tire pressure?

Thank you for the response. My question was mostly rhetorical in nature:

1. Data about 130M+ miles comes not from an unbiased source
2a. (Even if true) It assumes “everything else equal” clause meaning all other vehicles are equal to Model S mechanically (weight, height, powertrain, safety features, etc.) not to mention…

“Why would you ban a technology that, so far, has proven to be safer”