The unconscious assumption that technological advancement creates greater desirability.
Written by Lex Pedersen, CEO of CHROME TEMPLE
Ferrari, arguably the world's benchmark for automotive aspiration and engineering excellence, has recently set the internet ablaze with two technological announcements.
The first was the Luce, Ferrari's long-awaited electric vehicle.
The second, unveiled just this week, was the 12Cilindri Manuale, a remarkable piece of engineering that recreates the experience of a traditional manual gearbox without actually being one.
On paper, both represent technological progress. Yet the reaction from enthusiasts has been almost unanimously hostile.
Social media flooded with memes, criticism and one surprisingly consistent question: "Why not just build a real manual for the 12Cilindri?" And for the Luce, some even likened it to building a computer mouse on wheels.
That response fascinated me. Not because it criticises Ferrari, but because it exposes something much larger. It suggests we may have reached a point where the industry's definition of progress has diverged from what passionate drivers actually value.
For generations, manufacturers have competed by making cars objectively "better". Faster. Safer. More efficient. More digital. Somewhere along the way, I began wondering whether we had unconsciously started expecting our performance cars to evolve in exactly the same way.
For some time now I have coined this The iPhone Complex: the assumption that technological advancement necessarily creates “better”.
Or perhaps more simply: Why have we started building iPhones with wheels? Just because we can? Ironically, Sir Jony Ive's design influence on the Luce compelled me to pen this piece.
Unlike a smartphone, however, a great driver's car is judged as much by what it makes us feel as by what it can do.
Every technological layer added in pursuit of measurable improvement can simultaneously remove a layer of mechanical intimacy. Hydraulic steering becomes electric. Cable throttles become software. Naturally aspirated engines become turbocharged and hybridised. Manual gearboxes become dual-clutch transmissions. Mechanical handbrakes become switches. Buttons become haptic panels.
Every one of these improvements made perfect engineering sense. Yet collectively they may have removed precisely the imperfections that made driving engaging and memorable.
What if the automotive industry has spent the last twenty years solving problems enthusiasts never wanted solved?
In many respects, the industry appears to have adopted the philosophy behind Moore's Law—an expectation that relentless technological advancement is inherently desirable. But what if that assumption only applies to computers?
I acknowledge the enormous influence of emissions legislation. Much of this innovation has been necessary. But somewhere along the way we transitioned from cars we drove and engaged with... to cars that drive us.
This is not nostalgia. It is recognition that progress is not always linear when the product is designed to evoke emotion.
We have mistaken technological superiority for collectability before.
Quartz technology made watches objectively more accurate and affordable than mechanical movements. Yet collectors still prize the mechanical watch.
Digital photography surpassed film in convenience and quality. Yet analogue film enjoys a revival because many photographers value the process as much as the image.
Streaming placed almost every song ever recorded in our pockets. Yet vinyl records continue to thrive because ritual, ownership and physical connection still matter.
In each case, technology won the mass market. Emotion won the collector market. Perhaps automobiles are following exactly the same path.
For investors, this distinction matters. Collectible markets reward scarcity, provenance, cultural significance and emotional resonance, not simply technological superiority.
Perhaps Ferrari's recent announcements are not evidence that the company has lost its way. They may instead reveal that manufacturers are faithfully responding to decades of technological momentum while enthusiast demand has shifted beneath them.
The enthusiast remains the minority. Most buyers still want the newest technology and the largest touchscreen. But collectible markets have never been determined by majority opinion. They are determined by scarcity, cultural significance and the passions of a committed minority.
The automotive industry is still competing against tomorrow.
Collectors have started competing for yesterday. We are witnessing one of the most important structural shifts the collector car market has experienced in decades.
If we continue to evaluate these machines through the lens of consumer electronics, we risk overlooking what they have become: Finite works of Automotive Art.
---------
CHROME TEMPLE Investments Pty Ltd ACN 640 888 026 is a corporate authorised representative (number 001284056) of SILC Fiduciary Solutions Pty Ltd ACN 638 984 602 (AFS license number 522145), who is limited to general advice and deal by arranging services to wholesale clients relating to the Mach 1 Fund only. Investment in the Mach 1 Fund is only available to wholesale clients. Prospective investors should carefully review the Mach 1 Fund’s information memorandum (IM) in full and seek professional advice prior to making any investment decision.
This is general information only and doesn’t take into account your personal objectives, financial situation, or needs. Any one thinking about making a vehicle investment should carefully review their options and seek professional advice prior to making any investment decision or vehicle purchase. No reliance may be placed on this article for any purpose. Information in this article has been prepared without taking into account the objectives, circumstances, financial situation or needs of any person, and may differ to information obtained elsewhere.
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance and the expected returns of the Fund or the asset class may not occur as expected or at all. An investor’s balance in the Fund or asset class may decrease as well as increase in value. Target returns are not guaranteed and total returns may be above or below the target range.
This article reflects the author's opinions on a particular subject matter. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the performance of the Mach 1 Fund (the “Fund”) nor reflect the opinions of the Fund’s Trustee (Specialised Investment and Lending Corporation Ltd) or their affiliates.
The use of this site is governed by a Terms of Use Disclaimer. By using this site you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use Disclaimer and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof. Review the full Disclaimer.