Aston Martin Promises To Permanent Ban Of Slot Holders If They Try To Flip Valkyrie Purchase

Just 150 road-going examples of the Valkyrie will be built, and with demand likely to outstrip supply some customers who have ordered a car could look to profit by selling their order. This practice, known as 'flipping', has become more common in the supercar market in recent years, especially with such cars being considered as investment purchases.

In a tweet responding to a query about an online advert apparently offering a Valkyrie build slot for sale, Palmer said: “I doubt they have a slot, but if they do and we identify who flipped, they lose the car. If they flip, then they never get another special”.

Read Article

MDarringer - 7/5/2017 4:09:55 PM

-2 Boost

Someone needs to buy a Valkyrie, flip it, get banned, and then sue Aston's ass off.

GeorgeD - 7/5/2017 4:34:20 PM

+2 Boost

Doesn't Aston Martin have a right to refuse service/sell to anyone they want? Now, how long one would have to wait to "flip it" with repercussion isn't discussed.

Maybe one way for Aston to control the "flipping" market is to offer a lease-to-own only option. Lease for 2-3 years with the option to buyout at the end.

MDarringer - 7/5/2017 5:57:28 PM

-1 Boost

Aston has the right to decide who can buy the vehicle because it is theirs to sell. For them to have dibs on whom a private party sells it to is not within their legal scope. To use that information punitively against customers is legally questionable. Aston should stop wearing its ass on its face and let this go.

KoruKinshi - 7/5/2017 6:06:31 PM

+4 Boost

You're hilarious. Everytime you post, M, I laugh so hard.

Ferrari has the same type of deal with it's clients. There a LaFerrari here in Newport that's the center of a legal battle like that, so don't think for a moment Aston Martin can't pull that off, especially if the buyer signs a contract.

MDarringer - 7/5/2017 6:15:29 PM

-2 Boost

Just because people AREN'T suing does not mean they don't have an actionable suit. The contract could also be easily considered coercion. It's as flimsy as a pre-nuptial agreement, many of which care easily set aside on grounds of duress. So if I want a Laugharrari and sign I was coerced.

qwertyfla - 7/5/2017 7:31:29 PM

+1 Boost

Why is this BS only permitted in the auto industry? Imagine a house developer restricting the people that buy their homes from reselling or heaven forbid making a profit on the sale of their "personal property" if said personal property should increase in value. Are these assholes going to cover my downside should the vehicle depreciate then?

Once you buy something it is yours to do whatsoever as you please unless you are Ferrari or fellow Torontonian Deadmau5. Sadly Joel caved with the Perrari sold it and moved on to a Maclaren.

I personally flipped numerous Modena's, Z8's M5's & 996TT contracts (not cars) back in the day even with no resale clauses and non-assignment clauses through trusts, shell corps and other SPV's. I also had lawyers on retainer just in case but never needed them and had a very good relationship with some big name dealers whom were very happy to sell me entire allocations at full MSRP and/or a slight market premiums. Share the wealth and everyone walks happy.