[opinion] - hmmm…VW/Audi/Porsche may be in trouble…

[chun]

It has continued to stick to its "value over volume" strategy in China, although Pollich stressed that this does not mean accepting lower volumes as an end goal.

But... chinese cars deliver more value. Or he means value for the brand, not the customer?

Last time i checked, getting leather B pillars in a porsche costs a high premium extra, meanwhile it comes as standard in 30k chinese EVs.

And time was the most valuable resource last time i checked, so it's slighly more valuable to not spend that time in service with a broken porsche EV every 3 months.

The messaging from Porsche is contradictory. It shows they have no strategy.

Sponsored

 

[prj]

But... chinese cars deliver more value.

Nobody buys Porsche because of "value".
They buy it for the exclusivity and Porsche is just constantly combing the limit of how high a price they can get away with charging for it. Simple.

Taycan is objectively worse value than e-tron GT.
Macan is worse value than Q6.
So if it was about value, then not a single Macan or Taycan would be sold at all, but it's not.

 

[chun]

Nobody buys Porsche because of "value".
They buy it for the exclusivity and Porsche is just constantly combing the limit of how high a price they can get away with charging for it. Simple.

Taycan is objectively worse value than e-tron GT.
Macan is worse value than Q6.
So if it was about value, then not a single Macan or Taycan would be sold at all, but it's not.

Tell Porsche’s China representative, not me.

 

[69Mach390]

Nobody buys Porsche because of "value".
They buy it for the exclusivity and Porsche is just constantly combing the limit of how high a price they can get away with charging for it. Simple.

Taycan is objectively worse value than e-tron GT.
Macan is worse value than Q6.
So if it was about value, then not a single Macan or Taycan would be sold at all, but it's not.

Agreed.

It doesn’t mean they can ignore price altogether, but it’s a bit silly constantly comparing price to the cheapest cars on the planet. Not sure why Chinese brands and Porsche keep getting brought up in the same light.

 

[whitex]

"We believe brand desirability is not defined by delivery figures, but by the enduring strength of our heritage, the depth of our engineering, and the passion of our community,"

Wow, that is some fluid nonsense. If I understand it correctly, according to Porsche CEO , desirability of a product has nothing to do with whether anyone is buying it. So technically one could create a company making the most desirable product in the world with not a single one sold to a customer? Or is this some German translation problem?

 

[snstevens]

Wow, that is some fluid nonsense. If I understand it correctly, according to Porsche CEO , desirability of a product has nothing to do with whether anyone is buying it. So technically one could create a company making the most desirable product in the world with not a single one sold to a customer? Or is this some German translation problem?

You're of course correct.

However, I think the subtext is that they still have to sell product. While they are not yet a "Ferrari-like" company, I think his message is that they are heading in that direction.

I've always felt that Porsche was an option for "ordinary" folks ("ordinary" in the sense that it was possible to purchase a high-5, or 6 figure car), and get an absolutely stunning design AND high performance. Personally, I think any change from that model would be very sad.

 

[Tooney]

Wow, that is some fluid nonsense. If I understand it correctly, according to Porsche CEO , desirability of a product has nothing to do with whether anyone is buying it. So technically one could create a company making the most desirable product in the world with not a single one sold to a customer? Or is this some German translation problem?

1. Brand desirability = enduring strength of our heritage + depth of our engineering + passion of our community
2. Brand desirability <> delivery figures

What you see is what you get.

 

[whitex]

2. Brand desirability <> delivery figures

If the reason for low delivery figures is shortage of product, yes. If the reason for low delivery is because few are willing to pay for the product, then it does imply low desirability. Now, perhaps Porsche could make an argument that the brand is desirable but their current product offering is not - I could see that, but as the brand starts shipping undesirable products, eventually that hurts the brand desirability too. Peter Norton's PC tools some to mind, solid brand which had really good tools. Then Symantec bought them, the products went to crap, and eventually the brand along with them. Their main sales channel is to pay to install their bloatware on new PCs, hoping enough people choose to pay for the subscription rather than google how to uninstall their product.

 

[Tooney]

If the reason for low delivery figures is shortage of product, yes. If the reason for low delivery is because few are willing to pay for the product, then it does imply low desirability. Now, perhaps Porsche could make an argument that the brand is desirable but their current product offering is not - I could see that, but as the brand starts shipping undesirable products, eventually that hurts the brand desirability too. Peter Norton's PC tools some to mind, solid brand which had really good tools. Then Symantec bought them, the products went to crap, and eventually the brand along with them. Their main sales channel is to pay to install their bloatware on new PCs, hoping enough people choose to pay for the subscription rather than google how to uninstall their product.

If you're the head Porsche guy in China, what else can you say?

and- Aw, hey. I've been using Norton AV for decades.

 

[daveo4EV]

save this

If the reason for low delivery figures is shortage of product, yes. If the reason for low delivery is because few are willing to pay for the product, then it does imply low desirability. Now, perhaps Porsche could make an argument that the brand is desirable but their current product offering is not - I could see that, but as the brand starts shipping undesirable products, eventually that hurts the brand desirability too. Peter Norton's PC tools some to mind, solid brand which had really good tools. Then Symantec bought them, the products went to crap, and eventually the brand along with them. Their main sales channel is to pay to install their bloatware on new PCs, hoping enough people choose to pay for the subscription rather than google how to uninstall their product.

the only problem with Porsche right now is the price - they no longer can command their premium prices when attempting to compete with other EV's - iun the EV space Porsche has lost their ability to charge for performance and mechanical mastery since virtually anyone can match EV drive train performance/reliability - and luxury touches are more easily demonstrated and matched - they no longer have a significant technical moat to protect their pricing structure (the flat 6 in the GT3 is the most powerful ICE motor produced in terms of HP/liter/volume metrics - and it's still mostly bullet proof in terms of reliability - matching that level of mechnical mastery is virtually impossible for any competitor to enter and establish themselves at any price) - competitors can now offer similar/identical products with roughly the same feature set (real or imagined or marketed) such that it's very very difficult to justify the Porsche premium pricing…Porsche is also behind in some aspects of product feature set (software and general consumer tech)…

Porsche products are desireable, the product feature set is adequate or excellent - but the pricing is severely out of whack for very very little actual value or benefit derived from the Porsche tax…

Porsche is, and will find it increasingly difficult to to compete and operate and support their pricing structure…in the context of rapidly evolving EV tech and progress…

necessary changes to their business structure (namely price adjustments) will undermine their historical value proposition and introduce inconsistencies vs. their ICE products…they have a very very difficult road ahead - all potential solutions come with significant down sides and tangible and foreseeable outcomes that are not good for the company, investors, and customers…

the major mistake in my opinion (with hindsight) was adding EV's to the brand…the brand and it's value is inextricably tired to ICE mechnical dominance and their entire value proposition is their unrivaled mastery of high performance mass produced ICE technology, and their mechanical prowess - for which they charge significant premium because frankly no one can complete with them and there is a significant technical most for competitors to enter Porsche's market and be competitive

no such competitive moat exists for EV's…and Porsche is more equal than stand out in the EV space…

if they wanted to leverage the brand they should've spun off a new brand…

example: RimacEV by Porsche - Porsche DNA but EV future and focus…this would free them from Brand expectations and pricing, but allow more flexibility in doing what's right for EV's and attract brand loyalist - and the EV arm of would be free to compete "against" the ICE arm allowing both tos succeed independantly…

Porsche is screwed and their currents strat seems to be to doulb down in increasinly rare and exceptional mechanical products - leveraging their historical strength and competing in a market with few competors or pricing pressure - this is an obvious play to leverage their legacy and historical strengths and appeal to brand loyalists, but it's selling increasingly niche products to a shrinking market and demographic where it will eventually be irrelivant but highly profitable selling 10 cars a year at 100,000,000 each… that only a few on a select list can purchase. their offering will be unique, excellent, demonstrate mastery in ICE technology, and sell in vanishingly small numbers to those that relish mechnical superiority - much like $1,250,000 wrist watches…

on this path I see still being able to purchase a 911 in 15 years, but from a much smaller and more bespoke company that is increasingly irrelevant as a main stream auto maker but still making excellent ICE products.

my $0.02 YMMV

 

[whitex]

If you're the head Porsche guy in China, what else can you say?

Ok, off the top of my head:

Option 1: Strategic & Investor-Facing (Best for earnings calls or press releases)

"Our recent delivery volume in China underscores a critical mismatch between our current portfolio and rapidly evolving consumer preferences. Moving forward, my top strategic priority is the decisive recalibration of our product lineup for the Chinese market. We will ensure our offerings not only precisely match local demand but also seamlessly blend Porsche’s iconic heritage with our cutting-edge technological innovation."

Option 2: Action-Oriented & Visionary (Best for internal town halls or leadership memos)

"The softening of our delivery numbers in China is a clear signal that we must pivot to meet shifting market dynamics. I am personally taking ownership of realigning our Chinese product strategy. Our mission is clear: to deliver a portfolio that resonates deeply with the modern Chinese consumer while fiercely protecting and projecting the technological excellence and rich heritage that defines the Porsche brand."

Option 3: Concise & High-Impact (Best for executive summaries or LinkedIn)

"To address softened deliveries in China, we are aggressively realigning our product portfolio to match shifting local demand. My priority is to deliver a tailored, high-impact lineup that marries Porsche’s legendary heritage with the cutting-edge technology today’s Chinese consumers expect."

Wouldn't you rather hear the above, than the "our sales are tanking, but brand is stronger than ever!"?

 

[daveo4EV]

Porsche leans heavily on thei heritage - this heritage has brought them hard won lessons that they leverage into everyday products…

on the surface an EV is a car, so decades of experience with cars would lead some to conclude that heritage would benefit them for a car that happens to be an EV…

there is no "decades" of experience with eV's - heritage is the EV1 from GM or the original Model S from Tesla…

leverage Prosche's "heritage" for EV's is a bit like suggesting IBM should've leveraged their heritage in main frames to enter the Personal computer market…they didn't do that - they realized (or lucked into) the insight that a Personal computer wasn't going to leverage IBM's "heritage"…

I don't know if it's simply CYA and public statements, but at this point I do not think that Porsche's heritage is benefiting them in the EV space as much as they think it is…perhaps it would be better to ignore your heritage and step boldly into the future with out the constraints of the previous decades worth of "heritage"…

just a thought at 33,000 feet and 9.5 hours to go for an epic euro vacation with the wife!!

heritage may not be the best way forward in terms of new tech, new rules, and a new platform…

my $0.02 YMMV

 

[whitex]

and- Aw, hey. I've been using Norton AV for decades.

I used to use Norton AV for years, even after Symantec took over at first, until I realized it doesn't do much else than built-in Windows Defender, but it slows down the system more (original Norton AV was lean, then Symantec bloated it like a lot of software nowadays - lowest bidder programmers splicing other software rather that write what is needed). I used to love Norton Utilities, until they became bloated and useless. Norton Ghost was amazing, until Symantec took it over. I had a friend using Symantec Norton backup. It backed up reliably, until the hard drive died, so he went to try to recover and then realized the absurdity of Symantec solution. Since hard drive died, the recover software was installed on it. So he went to re-install it on a new drive, he had a DVD and activation license key. However, then it turns out that despite the activation key, a connection to the server was still required to install the software, so ok, but then the software refused to activate. So he called Symatec, they tell him this version of backup is no longer supported, so you cannot re-install it ever again (because license server will not activate it), but they will sell him a new version. So he got the new version, only to find out the new version will not read the old backup format. So he called them again, they essentially told him that he's shit-out-of-luck, there is no format conversion utility, there is absolutely nothing they can do, not even offer him a refund on the new, useless software they sold him, because he already activated it.

So yes, Symantec makes a backup solution, they just forgot to tell their customers that restore is a time limited feature, but hey, backup will continue to backup reliably. Perhaps they should sell write-only drives for their backup solution - only $100 per Petabyte - unbelievably storage deal considering the AI boom driven storage prices today!

It would take a really, really, good argument for me to ever install any Symantec software ever again. Perhaps my opinion is tainted because I saw really amazing software turn in to mediocre software, vs. other companies which have always been mediocre don't stand out as much? I hope such a thing won’t happen with Porsche.

 

[Fish Fingers]

You're of course correct.

However, I think the subtext is that they still have to sell product. While they are not yet a "Ferrari-like" company, I think his message is that they are heading in that direction.

I've always felt that Porsche was an option for "ordinary" folks ("ordinary" in the sense that it was possible to purchase a high-5, or 6 figure car), and get an absolutely stunning design AND high performance. Personally, I think any change from that model would be very sad.

Agree.
And if they want to head down the exclusive Ferarri like model - they need to immediately bin off the higher volume lower end models (Macan / Boxster / Cayman).

But they aren't going to do that are they.

So that strategy is just a pipedream.

 

[69Mach390]

Porsche leans heavily on thei heritage - this heritage has brought them hard won lessons that they leverage into everyday products…

on the surface an EV is a car, so decades of experience with cars would lead some to conclude that heritage would benefit them for a car that happens to be an EV…

there is no "decades" of experience with eV's - heritage is the EV1 from GM or the original Model S from Tesla…

leverage Prosche's "heritage" for EV's is a bit like suggesting IBM should've leveraged their heritage in main frames to enter the Personal computer market…they didn't do that - they realized (or lucked into) the insight that a Personal computer wasn't going to leverage IBM's "heritage"…

I don't know if it's simply CYA and public statements, but at this point I do not think that Porsche's heritage is benefiting them in the EV space as much as they think it is…perhaps it would be better to ignore your heritage and step boldly into the future with out the constraints of the previous decades worth of "heritage"…

just a thought at 33,000 feet and 9.5 hours to go for an epic euro vacation with the wife!!

heritage may not be the best way forward in terms of new tech, new rules, and a new platform…

my $0.02 YMMV

Interesting theory and it definitely makes sense.

Also explains why the prestige brand names don’t really apply to SUVs either.

With sports cars, luxury brands seem to be able to charge more and get away with it.

With SUVs? A loaded Chevy Tahoe can cost as much as a Porsche Cayenne or Mercedes GLS (on their low end).

People probably feel the same about luxury EVs. Especially since you can get some serious performance from an EV for cheap.

Sponsored