It sure feels this morning like there was no way to design the electric Ferrari Luce that wouldn’t have made people mad. The company’s stock fell today in Milan as the online reaction was, if not universally negative, at least mostly grumpy. I think there was a way, though, and it’s if literally anyone else built it.
The Morning Dump doesn’t traffic in rumors, but the chatter overnight was that this design was an evolved version of the abandoned Apple Car. This rumor comes via the car design community and, as should be clear by now, car designers are all caustic, incurable gossips. I have my doubts about this, yet it does make me wonder if all this negativity would persist if any other brand in the world debuted the exact same car.
Branding is important! This is something Mazda is thinking about as it tries to reach for 500,000 annual sales. What is the Mazda brand? To that end, what is the Honda brand if it completely abandons electric cars? At least some of the original EV work might live on in the company’s hybrids.
Today seems to be about questions, and I schlepped down to the Council on Foreign Relations last week to watch a debate about the government owning shares in companies–a thing that really happened to the car industry–to see if anyone could convince me it’s a good idea.
The Ferrari Luce Is The Latest Victim Of Expectation
Like all good people of taste, I’m a big fan of the Ford 021C concept, penned by the same Marc Newsom who is partially responsible for the Ferrari Luce. While the two cars are approaching very different problems, there are aesthetic similarities and overlapping vibes. So why is it that I like the former and am bothered by the latter?
Ferrari is a luxury brand first, and carmaker second, so what a car represents is just as important as how it drives (which is probably great, since it’s a Ferrari). I shot a documentary about a prominent Ferrari owner and met a lot of other Ferrari collectors while doing work for the brand in a previous life, and I feel qualified to say that I’m not qualified to say what they’ll end up buying or liking.
I am only really capable of knowing what I like, and as a $64,000 Nissan I really like the Luce. As a $640,000 Ferrari it’s a lot harder to swallow a car that looks nothing like any other Ferrari.
The Bishop sent that to me last night, and there are versions of it all over social media with various badges. Honda. Tesla. Whatever. They all work. Now do the opposite and imagine a Nissan logo on an Amalfi. It doesn’t work, right?
What about the Apple Car? This new project is the first car from the mega design duo of iPhone designer Jony Ive and Marc Newsom. You can clearly see this in the interior, which I like, and think does a successful job of updating the Ferrari aesthetic for an EV future. While there may be some crossover with the planned Apple Car, I think most of the interior feels Italian GT in the best sort of way. The Apple Car was also reportedly supposed to be taller and more van-like, which this clearly isn’t.
Designers recycle. This is the way of the world. The guy who did the PT Cruiser went to GM and made the HHR. If someone didn’t buy Giugiaro’s design, he pretty much always peddled it somewhere else. The modern Genesis sedans and SUVs sure do look Bentley-ish, don’t they? I’m sure some ideas made it from the Apple Car to Ferrari.
The challenge is that the design is so blank slate that even the Ferrari touches are hard to separate from whatever else is going on here. This seems to be impacting the perception of the company, as Bloomberg notes:
The car looks like a “mix between a Honda Accord EV and Tesla 3,” Pierre-Olivier Essig, head of research at AIR Capital wrote in a note. “We are lost in translation with Ferrari’s new strategy.”
The launch also comes as demand for high-end electric vehicles has become harder to predict and some rivals like Lamborghini and Porsche AG have slowed their electrification plans, citing a lack of buying interest.
The share price plunge followed a presentation in Rome on Sunday that marked the final stage of a three-step reveal of the EV that began last year with the car’s core technology and later showed its interior.
The Milan-traded shares are at about 7.0% down as of writing this, while the company’s NYSE-traded shares are down about 3-4% this morning. It seems like other people are having a hard time understanding this, as well.
I think if you had Jony Ive and Marc Newsom unveiling this as a Honda people would have loved it.
What Is The Mazda Brand?
Larry Vellequette from Automotive News did a sit down with Mazda’s North American CEO Tom Donnelly, and a lot of talk was about branding. What is the Mazda brand? Is the idea of the Mazda brand in my head the same as the Mazda brand in your head? This is Donnelly’s concern:
What keeps me up at night is if you walked out of this hotel or this building and you asked 10 people, “What does Mazda stand for?” you’d get 10 different answers. That is my “keeps me up at night” thing. [At our meeting], we proceeded to try to lay out how we fix that, how we improve that situation so that we achieve the 500,000 sales, so that our dealers become more profitable, that we develop long-term, lasting, lifetime relationships with our customers. Just be a stronger, better brand.
The big thing that is at the heart of your question is that very thing: The products are the products, the people are the people, the dealers are the dealers. But if you don’t have a strong brand that people desire, you’re going to keep sliding backwards in this environment.
It’s tough. I’m a Mazda fan and have often steered people towards getting one. To me Mazda represents something that’s a little more distinct, a little better handling, and slightly more premium than what you can get from other Japanese automakers. That’s a bit diffuse, though, right?
I think the Mazda3 nicely fits in that, as does the Mazda CX-50. The new CX-5 is a bit more safety-forward and tech-forward. The CX-90 is a bit more luxury-forward. The Miata is like my Old Spice deodorant: Pure Sport.
How does one square all of that?
Honda Will Recycle Some Of The 0 Cars Into New Hybrids
People are upset we’re not getting the Honda 0 electric cars. I am not one of those people, although I recognize the wastefulness. That’s a lot of work, and I feel for the people who did that work. I also kind of like the 0 Saloon. It’s a bummer that won’t get made.
According to Hans Greimel, not all of it is going to waste:
Hybrids ”will be included across all models” with a few exceptions, such as the performance-oriented gasoline-powered Civic Type R, Managing Executive Officer Kazuhiro Takizawa said.
The hybrid focus provides political cover, offering electrification without full dependence on large-scale battery supply chains or charging infrastructure that could face policy headwinds.
Honda plans to introduce 15 hybrid models globally by fiscal 2029, separate from whatever emerges from the flexible next-generation EV-hybrid platform.
Some of the 15 upcoming hybrids will be updates to existing nameplates, while others will be new. Honda will also repurpose some of its next-generation 0 Series EV architectures and components in the upcoming gasoline-electric lineup, [CEO Toshihiro] Mibe said.
I wonder what that’ll look like.
Should The Government Own Shares In Private Companies?
I get invited to a lot of events, though this is the first time I’ve been invited to one at the Council on Foreign Relations, which is one of those think-tanks that either promotes an informed and much needed bipartisan view of America’s role in the world or upholds a deeply corporate, uncomfortably neoliberal status quote among policymakers depending on your own personal politics. I think of it as a place that was quite liberal with drinks and tacos.
Honestly, when I walked up to the gates it felt like maybe someone was playing a joke on me. The young man with the iPad greeting people didn’t have my name and I was just about ready to walk back out onto Park Avenue when a media person for CFR goes “Matt Hardigree?” and escorted me to the press section.
The reason I think I was invited was because the topic of the ongoing series “Open to Debate” was about government investment in private companies via shareholding. Obviously, governments pour huge amounts of money to corporations, albeit rarely by holding shares. The most obvious example of this happening was the government acquiring equity in both banks and automakers during the Global Financial Crisis in order to keep the economy from collapsing.
That was an emergency, and I think the government did a reasonable job of accomplishing the end goal of saving Chrysler and General Motors, albeit with mixed results for both automakers. GM was forced to cut brands somewhat randomly, and many of the valuable parts of Chrysler got sold off at what feels like unreasonably low amounts.
“Open to Debate” is actually a debate, and has two sides wrangled expertly by host John Donvan, which is refreshing. In this case, the pro-side was represented by a pair of longtime government insiders (Laura Taylor-Kale from the Biden admin and Richard Falkenrath from the second Bush Admin), and the con-side being former Fidelity President Bob Pozen and academic Yasheng Huan. It’s a little more CX than LD if you were a nerd like me in high school.
As you can see in the video above (or linked here), it was a good time. It was also an almost impossible job for the pro-side in light of the current White House, which seems extremely open to the idea of owning corporations. The pro-side tried to have the conversations outside of the bounds of whatever President Trump is doing, which is essentially impossible. It was like trying to debate the infield fly rule during a t-ball game–there are 13 infielders, the rules don’t matter!
I think Prof. Huan summed up the con-side quite clearly:
“Government, for better or worse, is a much more complex entity as compared to a company. VC has a very straightfowrard objective function, we may criticize it, but they are going in for profits and profits alone. Government cannot focus on just one objective function, they have to take care of many many other things. When you have such complex objective goals, it’s difficult to judge on a single metric. Once you have multiple metrics, you dilute the management.”
Either way, the pro-side got spanked. At one point, Taylor-Kale tried to make the point that Congressional oversight lags too late for key industries and that in certain areas, like AI, there needs to be a way for the government to get involved early enough to protect national interests. I’d buy that, but there seem to be plenty of other ways to do it that are not specifically ownership, which, as Pozen pointed out, means the government is going to pick winners and that “government bureaucrats do not have the skills necessary to pick economic winners.”
It’s a fun series and Prof. Huan had the best line in the post-debate wrap up about the direct back-and-forth when he joked “I’m used to being treated badly, I’m an academic.”
If they do one of these on the Chinese car industry maybe I can get invited to debate.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
I was introduced to the idea of “Millennial Hopecore” as a musical sub-genre that takes a lot of the enveloping sound of stomp-clamp, but either in an electronic or indie rock-adjacent direction as opposed to something more rooted in folk and bluegrass. For instance, M83’s “Midnight City” is distinctly not stomp-clamp, but it’s also not purely indie either.
The Big Qusetion
What is Mazda’s brand to you?
Top photo: Apple/Ferrari
The Mazda brand is in a similar position to what Saab was. A small producer with a distinct sense of style and quality, who can have unusual ideas about the “right” way something should be done, for better or worse. A brand that’s different but with a sense of taste that doesn’t allow them to make “being different” the whole identity. There’s lots of potential in that but it can also be a precarious place to be.
The only thing saving them is that they are more mainstream / higher volume than Saab. And possibly a bit less idiosyncratic than the swedes…
The only Saabs I have ever driven were friend’s convertibles. I have forever associated Saabs with handling wet noodles. The Miata is definitely not a wet noodle.
The suggestion here is not that the cars themselves are all that similar, but that the companies are positioned similarly.
The 70s and 80s non-convertible sedans and hatchbacks were quite rigid and solid for their day. I test drove a 99 back in the mid-70s and the salesman had me take it on a deeply rutted dirt road. Its commitment to going wherever pointed, regardless of six-inch-deep ruts and craters was nothing short of incredible.
They seem like they actually care about making money, which is something saab never seemed too interested in.
Mazda’s sense of taste has been a variable. The late 2000s and that stupid smiling face + swooping body panels was a miss IMHO, and the newest CX-5 seems to be going in the wrong direction style-wise…
I appreciate that they’re punching above their weight, and that they’ve shown that they CAN make some of the most beautiful cars coming out of Japan (FD RX7, the Vision and the IONIC concepts) along with a slightly better driver’s experience (depending on the model, there’s only so much you can do with an affordable CUV).
I’d love to see them take their concept designs and bring them to market. Leverage their legacy products as proof that they’re still there for the driver ( affordable Next Gen NE Miata with a manual transmission please), and finally deliver on the rotary as a range extender for a premium-priced GT with all the glorious instant torque.
The Vision (a 4-door coupe style) should be brought to production, with an E_REV powertrain (rotary + generator) + ma smallish battery for ~ 80 miles range (500 combined). Add Mazda-tuned handling with a conservative up-scale interior. I think they’d have no problem selling it Vision sedan for $70,000 and up . Pic below
https://di-uploads-pod40.dealerinspire.com/kennyrossmazda/uploads/2022/01/Mazda-Vision-Coupe-concept-103-1024×495.jpg
Part of that late aughts design shift was very Ford-driven, and I suspect Fords partial ownership and control over the brand took it in a direction not that well tied to the brands history. Post Ford divorce the identity has been pretty clear and the product direction fairly clear at least. I do sincerely hope we FINALLY get some Vision two or four door RWD option available, but I understand Mazda’s limited resources makes a niche option like that hard to justify. Here’s to hoping the CX-90 RWD longitudinal engine platform can be adapted to make it happen.
Agreed-the smiling face 2nd gen 3 and weirdly hideous 2nd gen 6 were major design misses. Which is a bummer, both drive great. And this came on the tail of what feels like to me at least anecdotally a very successful brand revival in the early to mid ’00s. And imo even the 3rd gen 3 was sort of weird, granted consumers were also moving away from cars in droves at this point but I can’t help but wonder if the odd styling hurt them-especially as a freshly revitalized brand vs say Honda or Toyota which seemingly can make some of the frumpiest cars you’ve ever seen and still sell them in droves.
I think Mazda’s main problem is they got most of their attention for their design language. The thing that most set Mazda apart loses most of its impact when applied to SUVs. It’s not easy to make an SUV look elegant or pretty, but I think Mazda should have realized they were asking too much of Kodo. They should have kept Kodo for their coupes and sedans and created a different language for their SUVs that works for the entire vehicle instead of just in front of the A-Pillar.
Wholeheartedly agreed, I’ve made this same comparison. Which unfortunately is also seemingly not a good position to be in since we know what happened to Saab.
Oh man, I think you are completely correct. And as others stated, that’s not a good thing for Mazda! Saabs have so much left over love out there as I suspect Mitatas will too.
Someone said in the article on the Ferrari Luce that the comments section looked like it came from YouTube (which I’d argue is audience-dependent; Instagram’s are on average far worse). And I’d agree. Anymore it seems like the auto enthusiast community is turning into a bunch of old people shaking their fists at the sky. Someone the other day wished the laws of physics could be rewritten so aerodynamic creasing wasn’t needed. Next thing you know somebody will want a V10 that through some kind of metallurgic trickery gets 45 MPG or for someone to invent a synthetic fuel that’s somehow less expensive than gasoline and produces negligible emissions.
Guys, I get it. Vroom vroom noises stir my blood just as much as anyone’s, but let’s face facts here. We are more knowledgeable than we were in the 20th century now. We know the effects all of those “soulful” V8s/V10s/V12s and aesthetics-over-aerodynamics designs have had on not just the environment, but people’s health.
I don’t exactly love the Luce, but I don’t hate it, either. Nor do I think that Ferrari should exist in some kind of space outside of reality where only 2-door, 2 seat or 2+2 sports cars with big engines are allowed. The definition of luxury has changed since the days of the Daytona/Testarossa/456.
***
What does Mazda stand for? I’d like to know that myself. In the past, they were the “fun” alternative to Honda and Toyota; now they seem to be the brand for people who wish they could afford a Lexus but want something nicer than a Toyota. At least they think of cars as something more than an appliance for getting from point A to point B.
They remain my favorite Japanese automaker for now, but if they pull the plug on the 3 and go all crossover + Miata, I’m done.
***
Not only should governments not hold shares in private companies, but individual politicians shouldn’t be allowed to hold stock while serving in office. To me that represents a conflict of interest.
Spot on the modern car market. My only advice is put your money where your mouth is. It is the only case where these “traditional car-enthusiast cars” can hold out for a little longer.
My biggest complaint about the Luce is just how bland it is. It really does work just fine with a Nissan badge. That wouldn’t even change if you stuffed a V12 in there, I just wouldn’t feel anything about it.
It’s disappointing because there’s already a fear that EV’s will all be bland soap bars with 2 second 0-60 times, so when Ferrari of all companies falls in that same trap it’s a bit worrying. The Taycan and eTron GT look a lot better and offered some sense of low slung sex appeal like the Ferraris of old, so I would have liked to see the next step in that progression rather than a squished Nissan Leaf.
This is my exact sentiment having owned 4 Mazdas that were all just basic cars with a bit of engagement. But when I went to replace my Mazda5, they didn’t have a car in that space that was a more exciting version of the default crossover. Instead they have the luxury wannabe of the CX90 with a spotty reliability reputation.
So I put practicality above all else and bought a boring-ass Toyota Hybrid.
When I first saw this thing, my first thought was that this was probably in the realm of what the Apple Car would have looked like.
Here’s the thing bout Jony Ive. He designed the iMac, the iPhone, the iPod. He also designed the original apple pencil which stuck out of the lighting port to charge. The Magic Mouse which to this day has to be flipped upside-down to charge, the butterfly keyboard so bad it led to class action lawsuits, and year after year of thinner and thinner laptops with fewer and fewer ports.
I think his best designs were when he had Steve Jobs pushing back at his excesses to create amazing products. At some point he became JONY IVE and that started the road that led to the Luce. I think Ferarri was so enamored with Ive, and I would almost certainly bet that Ive insisted on near complete design control, that the result was the best Jony Ive design of a car ever made… and probably the worst Ferarri design since the Mondial.
Huge praise to the interior. I think he also went down his own path, but fortunately for Ferrari that path was to create a luxe tactile gorgeous cockpit.
Also, Ferrari for goodness knows whatever reason decided to finally make a sedan for the first time ever, a design that has zero design heritage or history, which certainly didn’t make this task any easier.
At least the first gen Porsche Panamera, which was pretty ungainly, still clearly looked like a Porsche.
They should have punted and made this a 1000hp EV SUV. The proportions would have worked much better, and they would have sold a bazillion of them.
This is one of the biggest design misfires to reach production in the last 40 years because Jony Ive gave them EXACTLY what Jony Ive was always going to give them.
It doesn’t feel coincidental to me that the interior is a much more successful design as it’s much closer to the space he’s worked in previously as a product designer. It feels apropos of his seeming arrogance as a designer to even land this project with no automotive design background (that I’m aware of) and plain foolishness on Ferrari’s part to apparently neither oversee him or even think this was a good idea in the first place.
Mazda tends to be the better driving choice of the mass-market options. The only reason why Mazda doesn’t appear to have as strong an identity as they should, is that they’ve been actively avoiding promoting this. Their commercials seem to be an exercise in bland vibes, an almost melancholy environment to provide the premium feel of being upper middle class. Gray skies and gray crossovers for everyone! Wear a sweater and drive through a forest!
I wish that Mazda would focus (with their marketing anyway) on driving fun and have their cars happen to be a bit more upscale feeling as a result, versus ignoring the fun and pretending to be something that they’re not.
Zoom zoom encapsulated it
Still the first thing I think of, zoom zoom.
Even a child in a suit and tie, abandoned by his family to die in the desert, knows this to be true.
Ugh, my thoughts exactly. While I’d like to believe that they somehow made the CX-50 more interesting to drive, I just don’t even want to be associated with this level of bland upper-middle-class-ism.
I dislike it and it makes me yawn, even if I know it’s probably what Mazda needs to do to survive.
Adding: Also if Mazda so desperately wants to appear premium, you might want to fix the dealers. They’re far closer to the Kia experience than the Lexus experience.
This must be very market specific. The Mazda dealer near me in Westwood, MA definitely did a nice job building an upscale seeming dealership. Even the shop is gleaming when you drive in for service.
My views might be a tad outdated as I haven’t been to a Mazda dealer in 3 years or so. But the ones I had been to the experience (aka the treatment) didn’t match the relatively nice building. The appearance of the dealer was nice. The salesperson (“I’m really animated and strike a hard bargain because I’M ITALIAN!” seriously we’re still doing this schtick in 2023?) was rough. The other dealers didn’t do much better.
Dealer issues are very much regional though.
The Bishop’s Nissan badge was spot on. I could see this as an EV GT-R successor. As a Ferrari, no. At least Enzo spinning in his grave should be able to power this for eternity.
To me I thought it looked more along the lines of a Honda EV. Nothing really looks Ferrari on it besides the taillights.
Enzo literally would not give a crap so long as it sold. He saw the road cars as a funding source for the race program.
I know that, but early Ferrari road cars did have racing pedigree and were gorgeous. Even the more brutal (and iconic) ’70s -’80s designs had a visual flair and looked purposeful, like they were going 150 mph standing still.
Ferrari stock is down 5% on the day so far
Buy the dip. Not me personally, but someone who does that kind of thing should. Guarantee Ferrari sells every one of these they make, even if they just pad some guy’s “collection” and help move someone up the queue to order the Ferrari they actually want.
Ferrari stock is not a good investment. There are easier and surer ways to gain 5%
I own a Mazda3. To me it seems like the best way to sum up modern Mazda is “affordable Japanese BMW”. It’s a nicer driving car that was once enthusiast focused and still carries some of those traits. Despite plenty of baffling product decisions, they usually feel like someone cared about getting the car right.
Yep I’ve said the same thing about Mazda being a budget BMW. I’ve owned a ’05 3S hatch and a ’89 626 Turbo and totally agree that it’s not just the zoom zoom but generally cohesive intentional car design-something lacking in most of their competitors.
Budget BMW was also Acura’s original niche.
Lol true, good point, though they also imo have been even worse than Mazda at maintaining a distinctive brand identity, and at some point turned into a price competitor for BMW or only marginally cheaper.
No doubt they lost the plot as well. It seems so many of the smaller brands have.
Mazdas are zoomy. The Miata/MX-5/Roadster was and is a halo car that really defines Mazda at its best: zippy, humble, stylish, and affordable.
Would we hate that Ferrari were it an Apple? Yes, but not immediately and not because of any styling thing, just because it’s an Apple product and has all of the baggage that carries. Increasingly scummy business practices and software, and that, like many things that the biggest companies make, reliability and durability has kinda taken a nosedive. And no headphone jack. Not that the latter matters in a car, but a loud funny Australian man shouted it into my head.
Both Ferrari and Apple are brands with large and very passionate and demanding fan bases, but I don’t think the venn diagram between iPhone launch attendees and The Tifosi has much overlap. Going that route was probably a mistake in that regard. At least they’ll get rich Hollywood celebrities to buy them. That should mitigate some damage. Not to mention the Nissan-ish looks will probably throw off the unwary Paparazzi. Or it could result in an uptick in photos of regular schlubs in Nissan Leafs.
Mazda is a conundrum for me. I’m old enough to remember the heady days of Ford and Mazda being tightly intertwined, so my brain still sort of operates in the mode of thinking of Mazda as “the fun Ford”. Even with their newer offerings, I struggle to view Mazda as a truly premium brand or a major manufacturer, though I do like what they make. So yeah, I guess I don’t have a cohesive thought on Mazda, and the “ten people give ten different answers” part seems right to me.
As for the Luce, I did think when it first unveiled that it would work great if it were the Apple car, and I can see the point about it fitting in with brands like Nissan or Honda, but I also don’t find it compelling as a Ferrari. Then again, I also can’t recall the last Ferrari I found compelling. I can say I found the 458 attractive, and I liked the 360/430, but I think the last Ferrari I daydreamed of owning was probably the F355.
Mazda wants to talk the talk of being a engaging fun to drive brand but I am not sure they walk the walk. They do make the Miata, which is great! I love the Miata, I have one, but it is up for a redesign and there seems to be conflicting rumors about what it should be. Other than that the only things to add to their sporty cred is crossovers that I guess have slightly better driving dynamics than most, but they seem to not give them the power they would need to be proper performance models. We have gotten teasers for years about supposed RX concepts but they remain concepts as they claim they will totally bring the rotary back for real this time. They killed off thier Mazdaspeed brand because it wasn’t mature enough or some other dumb reason. I’d like to see them actually commit to being the Zoom Zoom brand. They should partner with Toyota on the upcoming Supra and produce their own higher sports coupe, no need to make it rotary, a turbo I6 will do fine. Then take the same platform and do a sports sedan, something like the CTS. Lastly do what amounts to a reskin of the Miata. Change the sheet metal to something fresh but don’t mess with the core concept too much by adding weight or power. If they can’t lean at least a little more into being a sporty brand then just give up and become Subaru.
I know I’m kicking a dead horse here, but manual transmissions could help them carve out a niche.
The last time I shopped Mazda, I was looking for AWD manual transmission. Although Mazda offered a few manuals at the time (~2018), they were confined to FWD versions and often the base trim.
I know there is a cost involved in certifying any engine / trans combo, but they seem to have plenty of money to waste on Wankel daydreams.
They just developed what seems to be a great I6, but you can only get it wrapped in a three row SUV and tied to an automatic. If you even wanted to zoom zoom, baby strollers and juice boxes would fly dangerously around the interior.
I don’t even think it has to be manuals, but just something you could actually call a performance trim. There isn’t a Mazda 3 equivalent of a Civic Si. The dynamics are usually praised but if it is mostly in segments where that doesn’t matter who cares. I’m a car, presumably like most of us here, and I honestly don’t care that the CX-90 handles better than the Toyota Highlander, it does not mater, not unless they decide they want to square up against the Explorer ST or Durango SRT. They are a brand that wants asperational. I do think there is a place for them but they either need to actually lean into being a enthusiast brand or do something that your average consumer will care more about.
I feel like Mazda has generally abandoned the enthusiasts.
Their SUVs seem to have slightly better driving dynamics than some of the others, but I’m not sure that’s a selling point in that segment (as you mentioned).
The number one thing they could do to get me in their showroom would be a manual transmission. I’m not a typical buyer, but I do buy a new car every five years or so.
Midnight City is one of my favorite songs of all time and is in my Spotify Top 5 every year. It’s so widely known as NSane’s song that my friends will send me videos of it playing in random places. Why? Honestly, I don’t really know. Outside of the spectacular sax solo there really isn’t anything all that interesting about the song. As is usually the case with M83 the lyrics are vague. The synth noises don’t necessarily stand out and are more or less par for the course for that era of electronic music.
At its core it’s one of the most basic chord progressions there is as well. But for some reason it just scratches a highly specific itch for me. I think it’s mostly nostalgia driven, because that era was a more innocent time for me. I was in college, I still felt hopeful, etc. I suppose it was in the background during a lot of parties and such. But unlike a lot of other stuff I was listening to back then I’ve never moved on from it.
I still love it every time I hear it. It’s just a perfect encapsulation of the zeitgeist back then and it’s aged approximately a billion times better than the stomp clap hey shit that you mentioned. Late 2000s/early 2010s indiepop really gave us some S tier mainstream songs with a lot of staying power. Pumped Up Kicks is another great example from this era. God that song is amazing.
At risk of being called unc I really just don’t think they make pop/pop adjacent music like that anymore and I always come back to this era. I have an expansive indie playlist on Spotify that I’m updating constantly…but M83, Foster The People, Phoenix, etc. have been on it for nearly 15 years at this point and they’re not going anywhere.
I’m also partial–mostly inexplicably, as a GenX grunge/metal guy for whom all this is waaaay outside the norm–to “Young Blood” by Naked and Famous.
Great song that absolutely fits in this category
I would have agreed with your last paragraph 100% if not for Tame Impala’s new album. That release really gave me hope that good pop/pop adjacent music is still possible.
I remember the first time I heard this song. I was driving to work at 4am to serve the early shift on Black Friday, so it was still dark outside. Almost no other traffic on the road. There was a long hill with a big intersection at the top. I had the light to make the left hand turn, but had to stop to let an ambulance on full code (lights+siren). A surreal moment made even more so by the fact that usually worked afternoon/evening shifts and was still 3/4 asleep.
To this day, whenever that song comes on, I can’t help but hear sirens in my mind’s ear.
Nsane, have you checked out almost monday (yes, it’s supposed to be all lowercase)? They have some good pop adjacent songs. I discovered them on SiriusXM’s Alt Nation, which is a gold mine for that kind of stuff.
Agreed, I too am pretty stuck in this era. Midnight City is one of those sit in the car til it ends songs. The whole ablum is solid.
This is literally the only M83 song I’ve ever heard. I don’t really listen to this kind of music (with the exception of the slightly adjacent The Postal Service), but that intriguing synth melody is simultaneously hopeful and sad, a musical juxtaposition I love. It’s kinda like a newer “Enjoy The Silence” in a way
Oh yeah, cars. Ferrari certainly did a “hold my beer” moment in revealing this…this….thing immediately after Mercedes showed their latest abomination. I guess modern car design is now actively trying to murder my eyeballs. So far, so good.
The future’s so bleak I gotta wear shades.
Hurry Up We’re Dreaming is goated. Junk (his follow up) is very underrated too. I like early M83 as well though that’s probably more of an acquired taste.
Go! is a fantastic song and includes an absolutely wild Steve Vai guitar solo that’s actually a mashup of multiple takes he sent over. I’ve been meaning to learn it, maybe that’ll be my weekend hobby project.
I’m not upset at the Luce per se, but it feels cynical for Ferrari to slap a Ferrari badge and a Ferrari price tag on something this generic. The fact that we can even have a discussion about whether this car would be upsetting with a different badge says a lot. A Ferrari should be immediately recognizable without a badge announcing what it is. If nothing else, something this expensive should at least be recognizable as something special. This car simply isn’t.
Also, if this is the best a high-end supercar manufacturer can do, that doesn’t bode well for the car hobby going forward. Is there going to be any reason to be a car enthusiast if a Ferrari looks like just another appliance? There is a reason there is no equivalent of The Autopian for dishwashers.
Overall, the Luce feels very much akin to the Cygnet, but at least Aston Martin acted like they were in on the joke. The Luce just seems like a half-assed attempt to part fools with their money. I doubt even fools will be fooled, though.
As for TBQ, my opinion about Mazda might be unpopular, but I’ll say it anyway because I’m like that. Honestly, I don’t care about Mazda. Mazda is nothing to me. The Miata is cool, but it is too small for someone my size to drive comfortably. The rest of their products are unremarkable. The only Mazda I have any interest in owning is the B-series, and that is both long gone and a badge-engineered Ford. Mazda might be zoom-zoom for some, but it is zzzzz-zzzzz for me. It is great if other people like Mazda, though.
Ferrari is a company that leans heavily into branding, even more than a lot of luxury brands, and they typically deliver performance, too. Almost any EV will give you EV 1-60 in 3 seconds, so why not work harder on the exotic appearance? Even the Pininfarina Battista looked more like a Ferrari than the Luce, and that’s the important part.
Yeah, the performance issue is going to be a massive problem going forward.
Ferraris are a luxury item as you say, but a big part of what made Ferraris appealing in the first place (and thus a luxury item) was performance. If a Model 3 (which is essentially an economy sedan) can go 0-60 in under 3 seconds and handles well, how is Ferrari even going to differentiate itself?
Plus, with EVs, Ferrari looses out on its sound advantage. Cars like the Ferrari sound(ed?) very cool. So far, almost all attempts at making EVs aurally engaging have ended up sounding contrived at best. If Ferrari no longer wins on soundtrack or performance, their cars are going to have to look very special to have any appeal at all.
I think this is why Lamborghini cancelled their EV plans. I’m sure they rationally concluded they couldn’t build an EV that was special enough to be a Lamborghini based on styling alone.
I honestly don’t know what the future is for companies like Ferrari. It may be there is simply no reason for Ferrari to exist in the future. I’m not a big Ferrari fan, but that sucks.
Is there a future where Ferrari and Lamborghini basically pull a Kodak? Kodak made money every time someone pressed a shutter button and every time someone processed a photo. They were never going to make money in digital, so they went gently into that good night. Do gas supercar makers basically do the same thing? Ride burning dinosaurs to the end, then either become a shell of themselves or cease to exist?
I suspect what happens to Ferrari and Lamborghini depends heavily on government regulation. It countries want to ban all ICE vehicles, I think ceasing to exist (at least in any recognizable form) is the most likely outcome. Hopefully governments will be reasonable and allow some exception to EV bans – a few thousand supercars driven a few hundred miles per year will not have any effect on climate change.
Cynical is the right word. I presume Ferrari knows this car is a little bit of a stinker. However between their brand and requiring a history of purchases to buy more desirable models, and the number of people with too much money, they also know they will sell every one they make.
“requiring a history of purchases to buy more desirable models”
Very good point – I had forgotten about that. This makes the Luce seem even more cynical. I wonder how many Luce buyers will actually want a Luce? I’m sure it will help sales that Ferrari has leverage over its customers.
Kodak pivoted to digital photography and held on OK (though that was a much more competitive market than film manufacturing).
What killed Kodak was camera phones wiping out the digital camera market. So their market got wiped out twice in a row.
(Fuji found other applications for their film manufacturing technology.)
“equivalent of The Autopian for dishwashers.”
I’d say DT’s old dishwasher that he used to clean automotive parts was Autopian branded…now I want one. Hey! That’s a great idea…The Autopian should sell branded dishwashers for cleaning auto parts
Ha ha
I loved my Mazda Mazda6 (call back to last weeks double naming strategy) whenI got it, then the infotainment ghost touch occurred and Mazda DGAF. Beyond that there were a lot of cosmetic issues that soured me on the brand. My general feeling is Mazda doesn’t stand behind their vehicles and I wanted nothing to do with them when I purchased a new car this year. I still have the 2012 MX-5 (aka Miata) but the local Mazda dealer refuses work on cars older than 10 years.
I feel you, I looked at once buying a used gen-1 Mazda6. I drove a friend’s Mazda3 extensively on a vacation and it was enjoyable. I also rented a newer Mazda6 in 2018 or so. I liked how it drove and it seemed on the surface as nice and equipped as my Acura TSX. But then I noticed little things like poor paint on the door jambs and a love it or hate it infotainmant system. Plus Mazda seem to rust faster than most other cars in my region. I still want a Miata though.
The door jambs are actually intentional. In order to get the fancy paint tech they use down to reasonable prices, they minmaxed the crap out of their paint and found out the number of coats on the door jamb wasn’t very important. I agree it doesn’t look great but also it makes very little difference to the car experience.
I know Luce is Italian for “light” but in my head it’s short for Lettuce and that’s what I’ll be calling this car from now on.
Instead of the “Loo-Chay” (Luce) I will now be calling it the “Le-Too-Chay” (Lettuce, but Italian)
“Loo-Chay, I’m home!”
Don’t you dare slander the Mitsubishi Minica Lettuce like that.
Lettuce drive you to the mall
As a Mazda owner, and in a family with many Mazda’s as of the past 6 years, it’s an interesting question. Mazda to me is a brand of being against the grain, one being off-beat enough to offer something more than the sum of it’s parts, but not so much so that there are unacceptable compromises. I think it’s portfolio exemplifies this incredibly clearly. I’ll go bottom to top to spell it out.
Miata: The last mainstream affordable tiny roadster, dedicated to lightweight thrills and mechanical simplicity. Nothing with a drop top comes close anymore, and it’s closest competitors are the BRZ/86 and are larger and stuck with an Subaru engine.
3 sedan/hatch: Smaller and slightly more compromised visibility than a Civic, but more premium, distinct style, with AWD and a 320 lb-ft Turbo option that gives you a lot of boogie for not a lot of money, and very reliable.
CX-30: See 3, but with a lift and some cladding (I have a CX-30 Turbo, and imo it knocks every single sub-compact crossover out of the water. Corolla Cross, HRV, Kicks, etc. All no contest) Slightly worse packaging, but offering a ton more in the process.
CX-5: A more premium and nicer driving alternative to the standard CRV/Rav4 options
CX-50: Ditto but with even more style and an outdoorsy bent for those (like me) who wouldn’t be caught dead in a Subaru, now with Toyota Hybrid goodness
CX-90/70: An X5/GLE competitor for 30% off. Put another way, a much more pleasant alternative to a Grand Highlander or a Pilot for not much more money, and with PHEV and I6 options to keep things intriguing.
All of them share a common trait save the Miata, a more luxurious and very intentionally styled experience for mainstream money. So long as you aren’t desperate for every last spec of interior volume, you get a much more fun to drive, luxuriously appointed and attractively styled vehicle for your dollar, and without any of the pitfalls of ze German car ownership. Mazda is a brand that has done a lot for it’s relatively small size, and it focuses on the details to be different, but not unreliably.
Shame I can only give you one like…
Late last year, I was casually researching what the new generation upgrades would be to my 3 year old hybrid RAV4. Although I had not paid attention to Mazda CX-50 hybrid, I became quite impressed that it had the Toyota drivetrain. In my car rental years, Mazda was always my clear preference. Within days, an extensive test drive reminded my what a joy it was to drive the Mazda. The Mazda tune of the Toyota hybrid drivetrain was much different and clearly performance inspired. The interior was beautiful. The console operation of the infotainment suited me much better as I now have muscle memory that is always done without needing to look at the controls.
I traded the RAV4 and bought the hybrid CX-50. The trade-in value after 3 years had only cost me $90 per month.
These days, I look forward to every task that allows me to drive my Mazda. In the RAV4 past, driving events seemed like chores. It’s difficult to describe the subconscious clear preference, but for me I’m happy it’s there.
Should have just called the new Ferrari the “BYD Gumdrop”.
There’s also really only one thing that could make the car better. Bring back Microsoft’s CLIPPY for the UI. /s
In the article the other day on the Luce, I said if it was the reboot of the Kia Stinger, I’d probably be thrilled.
And TBQ: Mazda means zoom-zoom in every category. Zippy fun, whether it’s a sports car (Miata), sedan (Mazda6), small car (Mazda3), or even a minivan (Mazda5).
What defines Mazda?
So where does that leave the current form of Mazda? Well…. umm….
Mazda are cars made for people who like driving by people who like driving.
I recently test drove a CX-30 2.5 Skyactiv-G with the six speed manual (was in the market for a 3 with the same drivetrain). Just within the first few hundred meters you could feel it.
People should buy more Mazdas.
Governments should absolutely not own corporations (or parts of them) for a wide variety of reasons. Number one is corruption. If they want to help a certain industry, make incentives available (i.e. grants, rebates, there’s a bunch of ways).
Re: the Luce-$640,000 for a not really special car? It’s a homogenized “product” not an object of desire. Put whatever badge you want on it, that’s a hard no from me.
We would think the Luce was the Wolf’s Teat if it were The Apple Car.
It’s probably a perfectly great car, and it’s an OK design. It just does not look special in the way that a Ferrari should be. The side profile is incredibly close to the new Nissan Leaf; it’s (nearly) objectively not what a sports car should look like. I wish that I could embed pictures
Also absolutely not at this price point. there are better looking Huawei cars for a 10th of the price.
The Bishop’s Nissan badge was spot on. I could see this as an EV GT-R successor. As a Ferrari, no. At least Enzo spinning in his grave should be able to power this for eternity.
Well all I know about the Apple Car prototypes is that at least 1 did exist and had conventional stabilizer bars
We clearly need you to push Adrian for a piece on the new Ferrari. Please tell him to hurry, the masses are hungry.