When the founder of a company makes a car, and puts his name on both that car and the company, then that car is properly called by the name of the company (and the founder).
Porsche AG's being weird. Or maybe jealous.
When a company says a car (which they own) is the first ever and another car (which they don't own) was built earlier, I can see how they might come up with an explanation that makes the first car not the first and the car that's not the first, the first.
I'm thinking they couldn't figure out how to word the sign next to the car in their museum that isn't the first and that it was just easier to say that the car that isn't the first is really the first.
They're only not original once.
What a blunder and that is phrasing it mildly. Somehow the bidding on the Type 34 was " heard " and posted at $70M not the actual 17M, some bidders howled and others walked out at Sotheby's Auction. Sotheby's has lost a lot of credibility.
This whole thing was weird from beginning to end.
“It’s the first”. “No it’s not*”.
“70 million”. “My mistake, 17 million”.
The only thing that I can say for sure is “that car may (or may not*) be historically significant, but it’s as ugly as a mud fence”.
*as per Porsche AG
Stan: I've seen some pretty bad mud fences in my life...
Type 64 doesn't sell due to snafu at auction and technical difficulties, only gets a bid for 17 million, which was below the reserve.
I'm just going to take my $70M then to Vegas and let it ride on red. This was to be my grocery getter!
https://www.automobilemag.com/...35C551ABAB5A2D479E9C