Porsche Sales: Good News/Bad News

Leader · 09-29-2004, 07:51 PM

The current "Autoweek" says Porsche AG's sales figures for fiscal year ended July 31 are up 15% to 76,827 cars. That's better than their predicted 75,000 units. So, that's the good news.
The bad news is 39,913 of those sales were Cayenne's - accounting for more than half of Porsche AG's total sales.
The auto experts said Porsche needed the Cayenne to succeed in order for the company to remain independent. But, yikes.

WhyDoIBother · 09-29-2004, 08:10 PM

I personally thought the Cayenne was an awful idea. I suppose it's necessary though if Porsche is going to remain independent. Is it true Ferrari is owned by Ford now? Porsche must keep its independence for the marque to retain much of its credibility as a master sports car builder. It has to be independent in the tradition of the founder Ferry Porsche and his father Ferdinand.

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

I'm pretty sure Ferrari is owned by Fiat.

Joehand1 · Joehand1's Garage

Just wait, sales of the 997 and new Boxer will be huge.

Todd Simpson · 09-30-2004, 04:57 AM

I don't buy that the Cayenne is a huge success because it sold well for a year. With all the investment Porsche made it needs to sell well for a *long* time.

mb911 · mb911's Garage

Fiat is owned by Gm so Ferrari is owned is by GM as well. Its a small world when most companys are owned by the big 2 rather then big 3 as chrysler is owned by the germans

targa911S · 09-30-2004, 05:26 AM

I was part of a focus group sponsored by Porsche and PCA about two years before they came out with the Cayanne. When they said they were contemplating an SUV we all moaned about it. However, their answer made sense. The average boxster owner at the time was under 30. The average 911 owner at the time was over 50. They were losing their client base to SUV's between the ages of 30 and 50. They needed a niche product to stay independent. Given the choice of building a stupid vehicle for the masses to fill the void and the coffers, and being bought out by Chevy or Ford, I say buil the Senseless Useless Vehicle so we can get back to racing.

Paul Franssen · Paul Franssen's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by mb911
Fiat is owned by Gm so Ferrari is owned is by GM as well. Its a small world when most companys are owned by the big 2 rather then big 3 as chrysler is owned by the germans

...until further notice, Fiat is 10% GM.
Next year, that may change (It might well turn out to be a case of "we meet in court" before full GM ownership be realized).

Ferrari owned by GM? What will happen to Corvette? Cringe, 'Vetters!

DG624 · 09-30-2004, 05:58 AM

What about going back to VW and letting them build station wagons. VW already has Lamborgi another sports car would not hurt. They could also benefit from the Audi engineering.

Leader · 09-30-2004, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Todsimpson
I don't buy that the Cayenne is a huge success because it sold well for a year. With all the investment Porsche made it needs to sell well for a *long* time.

In its introductory (fiscal) year the Cayenne sold 20,603. The 39,913 figure is the Cayenne's second year total. Sales figures for the 911 and Boxster are declining. Maybe the 997 and (forthcoming) 987 will turn those figures around.
I don't think there's much question that the Cayenne is a bigger success than Porsche predicted, which is good news for the company's future.

Wil Ferch · 06:28 AM

Holy Smokes !!!

Here we go again with the importance of "being independent" that some of us took ..hook, line and sinker !!!

Repost of what I said earlier on the topic of "independence" follows:

I never, never understood the steadfast fascination about "keeping the company independent". Lets look at this more closely. The idea of independence is to create the kind of product you ( as an independent owner) *want* to build...and not have that dictated to you by some distant corporate HQ. Lessee....in order to stay independent, Porsche is now building just such a car ( an SUV), that it would despise building if it was *forced* to build such a car at the directive of someone else. Do others see the irony here?

In contrast, poor Ferrari...no longer independent....but it has a "benevolent-dictator" in the form of giant FIAT. FIAT understands the mystique and quality of the Ferrari brand. And Ferrari, under FIAT control....was building Enzo's and F40's and F50's. My point? Independence is over-rated. Thr real criteria is whether the "parent" company is a blood-sucking entity looking only for immediate sales and ignorant of the core-company's past ( hmmm...sounds a lot like the team at the helm of a certain "independent" German sports-car company)...OR.... is the parent company a willing partner to offer funding and engineering resources...but knows how to market and build proper product for the core company it controls ??? Yep...poor Ferrari... and hooray for keeping Porsche "independent", allowing it to build products *it* wants to ( and not told to do)....like trucks and SUV's.

I wonder how much staying independent has to do with keeping the current top brass in-place at Porsche, as opposed to building what it *should* be building.

Staying independent...hrmph...gimme a break.

---Wil Ferch

Gene-o · 09-30-2004, 06:37 AM

While I'm no fan of the SUV, bear in mind that Porsche has made tractors, industrial engines, an aircraft powerplant, and an off road vehicle for the West German Army. So there is historical precedent for non-sports car vehicles.

As for independence, it's probably a good thing for Porsche but if they had to go under someone's wing, VW would have been the obvious choice. But on second thought, maybe not as VW is not the same company it was during the 60's and 70's. Moot point anyway.

Wil Ferch · 09-30-2004, 06:41 AM

My point:

Having a "proper" partner may do more for Porsche than the simple mantra of doing and building *anything* simply to stay independent. Wrong focus...

Wil

Jack Olsen · 09-30-2004, 10:41 AM

I agree with you, Will.

When a company resorts to making something other than sports cars in order to avoid a situation where it would have to make something other than sports cars...

...I just roll my eyes.

Wil Ferch · 09-30-2004, 10:46 AM

Jack:

Perfect economy of words that I couldn't find..... thanks. ( must be 'cause you're a writer....no ?)

Wil

Leader · 09-30-2004, 10:49 AM

At least Porsche is still making cars (and SUVs) of its own design with components manufactured to its own standards.
The key point in Will's statement is "proper" partner. We can all think of many potential "partners" for Porsche that would not be good for the marque.

WhyDoIBother · 02:02 PM

Good point, Leader, the biggest benefit of staying independent is a sure ability to avoid the wrong type of partner. Besides who wants to see the same 2 or 3 large companies owning all the others? Competition in its purest form between un-partnered marques is a wonderful thing.

jkarolyi · 09-30-2004, 02:46 PM

Take a look at what GM did to SAAB to see the potential of Porsche being swallowed by a conglomerate. Saturn, Opel, and Subaru clones are what you will now find at your friendly SAAB dealer. Porsche is better off independent.

chrisp · 09-30-2004, 06:03 PM

All this anti-Cayenne chit chat is weak if you ask me.

They made a great business decision. Part of this good decision is to build cars that people want to buy. To most of you that means 911's and Carrera GT's. To many other people that means the Cayenne.

My wife wants one. Several of the guys at the track have them. I see more than 10 everyday on the drive to work (under 30 miles).

Porsche isn't the brand it used to be but that's ok. As long as 911's keep getting better and the occasional CarreraGT type car comes to market then they can come out with 100 new SUV's for all I care.

Did the development or attention paid to the Cayenne jeopardize the development of the CGT or the 997? I don't know but my guess is that it didn't/hasn't.

If average invoice is $59k (guess) then they have just added $2.2billion to their top line. WOW!

I would buy one if I was in the market for a $60k SUV.

cegerer · cegerer's Garage

I had the unfortunate experience of using a Ford Explorer SUV today while my Cayenne was in for routine service. What an awful vehicle ..... perhaps a candidate for the posterchild of ill-handling, dangerous SUVs. When I got back in the Cayenne, it felt like an F1 car ......

I'm not sure if building the Cayenne was the right thing to do. But they did it. So what are we to do? Pretend it's not there? Stage some kind of stupid silent protest by not buying them? It's here, it's not going away and it's the BEST friggin' vehicle of it's kind - the S is almost in a class by itself; the Turbo IS in a class by itself; the V6? well, let's not talk about that ....... If you need all-weather performance, 5 passenger capacity, towing capability and performance that puts many sports cars/sedans to shame, this is the vehicle. Like it or not.