So where is Superperformance?

[Mark Worthington]

I posted a comment in another thread that I had heard that Superperformance has decided not to build a GT40 replica. This contradicts what others have heard. I also pointed out that we haven't heard a thing about Superperformance from the horse's mouth, and that we are unlikely to hear from them in the future. This is unfortunate because I believe there are a number of potential customers who are still hanging on an old rumour that Superperformance would sell turnkey-minus monocoque chassis GT40 replicas in the US for $50,000.

I submit that we will never see a $50,000 Superperformance turnkey-minus GT40 in the US. Here's why:

I would love to see somebody prove me wrong.

 

[Hershal Byrd]

Mark,
That is something I've known for sometime about the currency. I was not happy when Andre made the $50,000 dollar announcement. To me, as I have said before, that was a low blow. If a cheaper and better GT40 could be built it would be on the street by now. There is room enough for everyone in the GT40 business if they have a good product and most of all good customer service.

Hersh /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Ron Earp]

The currency is certainly a real situation and should impact what a company can do in an overseas market. Unless, of course, margins are already so fat that almost a 100% difference in exchange rate over 1.5 years means nothing to their bottom line. If that is the case many of us involved with production need to think about moving our production businesses to SA.

The other side of the story also confused me. If one could build a high quality mono replica that was a spitting image of the real car, and one could bring it into the market at $50,000 USD, why would one want to? The market could obviously bear more given that turnkey minus replicas now, spaceframe and mono (please don't open the discussion of which is better on this thread) sell for around $60-75k. If the said replica was to be head and shoulders above the current stock of turnkey minus cars then why throw a lot of profit out the window? If it is a lot better than current stock people will pay a premium for it. That doesn't make a lot of good business sense to me.

I suppose one could make the argument that you'd sell a lot more at $50k than at $80k, but if so then the market could become flooded (relatively speaking) with GT40 replicas. Not something I hope to see, but maybe that is the business plan for the parent and distribution companies.

Ron

 

[JimmyMac]

Ron,
Maybe £50K Sterling ?
Even at that price you won't get much of a finished space-frame in the UK let alone a top notch monocoque.
I agree with Mark that there are probably buyers out there waiting for that bargain mono, I would like to believe it myself but I cannot see how this price is achievable.
If I understand it correctly from another post, D. Brown will fabricate a manually fitted, top quality chassis which is shipped from NZ to the RSA. This is then kitted out, presumably with similar quality hardware then shipped overseas for the second time to the USA or UK to a dealer who requires a levy for duty payable (maybe twice), his salaries and of course a profit for his back-up. And all for the price of a production saloon ?.
I think we would all like a true mono' roller and if they were only £30K each, a lot of us would have two.

 

[Mike Dozier]

Ron

You'll have to define the word "flooded".
If the population of running GT40 replicas doubled
or tripled overnight in the US, would anyone notice?
I kinda doubt it since I've NEVER seen one except
at Carlisle or at a SAAC Meet.

Of course I enjoy the exclusivity that brings...but it would be neat to get together 20 or 30 GT40s at a track
on a regular basis to have some fun without having to travel LONG distances.

Frankly at the rate GT40 replicas are currently being sold/completed, I suspect I'll be gone before that happens.
So if Jimmy Price wants to buy some market share,
I don't have a problem with that, even if it does
limit the value of my car.

That said, I truly sympathize with RF and others on what
the "rumors" of Superformance's content/price point
may have had on potential sales.
Hopefully the waiting and rumors will not last much
longer.

MikeD

 

[Ron Earp]

You'll notice I said flooded relatively speaking, meaning, basically take the entire market. I didn't mean you'd see them on every corner, you're right, none of us will live that long.

As for sympathy I don't think the current manufacturers need any. They make quality products and change is the bringer of evolution, I'm sure they'll make it.

I just don't see the business logic is selling something below market value. Do you? They'd get some market share at $100k per unit because they are Superformance, and that name goes a long way in the replica industry.

Ron

 

[JimmyMac]

Ron,
There is no business logic in selling anything below market value. Presumably the Company has shareholders who are in business for the maximum profit from their investment and not charitable benefactors.
I presume this car is a well dressed "monocoque" so $50k would be WAY BELOW mono' market values, let alone the cost delta between it and a space-frame.
Demographically, how many people would actually buy and run a '40 as a hobby ?. There are more cons than pros, and if there was profit in high quality/high volume GT40's then IMHO, Ford would have done it a long time ago as they need that car right now. High volumn car production also attracts stricter legislation.
You mentioned "entire market" share - how big is that in the USA and what is the benchmark?

 

[Ron Earp]

I just used entire market share as a figure of speech. I figure, heck, if someone came out with a car that was in all ways better then current offerings and was significantly cheaper, well, with no other market changes they'd own the entire market of people looking to buy turnkey minuses. Logic would dictate that the buyer purchase the best car for the best price. If any car industry has folks doing research before they buy, this is it.

Of course, from my own industry I can speculate on reasons which may or may not be true, I'm just drawing comparisions to what I do for a living. We make specialized lifescience/pharma equipment that we sell for a tidy profit. Sellings prices are $50k and this is the norm for the industry.

For the last 12 years the industry has been populated by small (<50 people) companies that are engineering and scientist heavy building and selling this stuff. Along comes a large lifescience company. The large company buys one of the small engineering companies due to the fact the the product is synergistic with the other lines they have.

In doing this they decide to lower the price of the product that used to be $50k. In fact, they lower it below what they can produce it for and sell it to everyone, picking up the profit elsewhere in the parent company while getting their name out there.

I can still compete in the market with my offerings, but it is tough. Net result - large company is willing to change the playing field to suit its needs, profits are not necessarily the main goal, as it is mine. They get pentration, brand recognition, which will pay off later. My job is to hold on during the rough ride.

I don't think Superformance is going down this road, but this is just an example of how profits might not be the immediate goal. Heck, I don't even know if the car is going to be produced - doesn't matter a lot to me I've got mine! ;-) I'm just babysitting a sleepy 3 year old with a little time to write!

 

[Chris Martino]

We can speculate until the cows come home but to be honest, businesses come and go, whether they expected to or not. If this company has anything to say, they will when appropriate. Until then, stay focused on the builders that currently supply the market who will, with no doubt, continue to provide the GT40 community with a high quality product. Besides, with EVERYTHING considered into what it takes to start-up and prosper from this VERY specialized area of commerce, it's no wonder we can only go to a handfull to help us realise our dreams of owning a GT40 replica worthy of disscussion on this forum.

"Don't sweat the small stuff - it's all small stuff!"


Cheers.

Chris
RCR

 

James,

To my knowledge Dave Brown has never sent a chassis to South Africa. Check the "Classic Car Developments #3" thread on the builders forum for where his chassis have ended up.

Cheers, Brian.

 

[JimmyMac]

Spot on.
Who cares.
MikeD - come to England there are plenty of big 40's gatherings to see before we all snuff it.

 

[James]

If I were to entertain the thought of purchasing a mono it would be a David Brown chassis. It appears to be an accurate re-creation from all accounts. I would then be obliged to source as many original copy parts as possible and replicate a GT40 extactly. Great. Nice I'm sure. But perhaps even less impractical than a tubular chassis. So its not for me, especially since I will prang my MDA on the track - it will happen, seems to happen to everyone! I don't even want to think about having to repair a mono.

So it would appear that a proper mono really only appeals to the proper GT40 "super nuts". And there are not that many around. So there is a very limited market. However the "cudos" that the manufacturer would receive would outweigh any loss in profit. The "goodwill" or "reputation" will carry other products into the limelight. Products, which, no doubt, carry a higher profit margin.

So will Superperformance produce this chassis for $50k? I would say yes, if and only if they can absorb the losses though.

But I think they've missed the boat!

Keep up the good work David Brown.

Regards,

J.P

 

[MWGT40]

JP

If you are referring to the David Brown in NZ, as far as I am aware, he would not be in a position to handle the kind of volumes that Superperformance would need.

Martin

 

[Mike Dozier]

From what I have seen/heard/read of Jimmy Price, he appears
to be a pretty determined fellow. I find it unlikely he
would abandon this project. More likely they've run into
production cost issues.

IMHO they'll bring it to market for a short term "introductory" price, then raise the
price over a few years to meet their true costs.
I believe ERA's original price was around $ 30K,
which ramped up pretty quickly.

MikeD

 

[40 Bud]

In conversation with Pete Brock last year, I was left with no doubt that Super Performance would build their own chassis - including a steel center section. They were not expecting to be ready for production for about 18 months, which is about now. We should know before very long. The rumors I heard at the "Good Guys" get together were they have taken orders for 12 units and expect to begin deliveries in April 2005.

 

Interestingly enough, the superformance website has been down for 2 days now (http://www.superformance.com). One has to wonder whether this is purely coincidence...

Rob

 

[JimmyMac]

It sounds good I hope and if they deliver it then it will let down a lot of hot air. We should wish them well.
My David Brown connection came from one of Hersh's earlier posts.
It's bugging me now, I lost sleep last night thinking about that NZ mono.

 

[Ron Earp]

Sounds like if it comes out it'll make a big impact, and that is cool since it'll stir things up and keep things moving in the GT40 arena. 40bud, if they took 12 orders, which I believe you when you say, are any of those people members here? If so, then they should speak out and let us know what the story is. Still don't think they should sell it for $50k, seems silly, but what do I know! ;-)

 

good evening,

is it confirmed that they do not build the GT40?
I heard that they moved development and production from cape town to PE.

dominik, cape town

 

[Mike Dozier]

Those that placed the "pre production" orders may be under
agreement not to disclose...which I would respect.

Still...the lack of any update from Superformance is an odd
customer relations policy.

MikeD