Cayman sales tidbits

[Brucelee]

"I don't think we disagree. Part of the problem is the Public ownership of companies today. Boardrooms are forced into short-term thinking and results (think quarterly) and lack the stalward longterm vision which once made many of them great to begin with."

Frankly, this statement is a bit of nonsense. You are indicting a financing/ownership model because you disagree with Porsche's current product strategy. You are also assuming Porsche WAS a great company and will not be in the future.

Big assumptions!

How would you propose to own and finance car companies? See many private or government owned car companies out there?

I admire BMW's product line and stategy. Public company. Proves nothing of course.


The fact is, Porsche has been very successful and in the pst, not so. I don't think you can indict the ownership structure, simply the management who creates the strategy, a strategy BTW that has not FAILED, yet!

[z12358]

perfectlap:
"If you complain and still pull the trigger its like not complaining at all."

I agree. Except I don't see many who have pulled the trigger and complained. On the contrary.

There's no "complaining" in capitalism. People vote with their $ -- and the market decides what's fair. I wouldn't describe the Saturn and the S2000 as ones of "similar performance" with the Box S. I know it depends on how one defines performance but by my definition (more than just 0-60, hp, etc, numbers) they don't even come close.

[Perfectlap]

I don't know about the 260 HP/Torque Forced induction Saturn yet, but as far as the S2000 its every bit the sports car of the 987 (987S different story).
There are absolutely no deficiencies in the S2000 when going up against the 986S/987 at the track or Autocross. I've seen the S2000 dozens of times take the same corners and turns as the Boxster and its in every way its equal. Maybe not an EXACT equal but they definitely live on the same block even though their price tags put them in completely different 'real estate markets'.
Now as far as prestiege and styling that's completely unrelated to performance.

If they made a supercharged S2000 or one with a bigger "motorcycle engine" (like so many spec racers) then the S2000 would be hard to beat.
Personally I didn't like the S2000 seating position vs. my Boxster with GT3 seats (no contest) but if not for that I might not have made my way into a Boxster.
Ar 9,000 RPMS and the best gear box on the planet (bar none) the Japanese have figured out how to mass produce a car that is all performance at low cost.
just wish they made it look more like a Ferrari and less like a import racer.

also, if they make a Miata or MR2 with 220 range HP(stock naturally aspirated) then I wouldn't be surprised to see forced induction versions surpassing the 987 and S2000. What I'm saying is that for $50K there are allot of ways to get a EXCELLENT handling/accelerating roadster for daily driving.

[z12358]

"What I'm saying is that for $50K there are allot of ways to get a EXCELLENT handling/accelerating roadster for daily driving."

I understood all your points. And all were good too. Related to performance or not, there is this "over-engineered" and "robust" feeling that I felt when I first sat into and drove a Porsche. It's still there each time I get into and drive off with my Box S and I don't feel it in any other brand. Getting it for $50k is a bargain... to me -- and obviously to many others who still buy the Box S over the S2000 or the Sky. Part of the attraction is marketing, branding, and image, but a big part of it is still something tangible that's really "there" and that the others just don't have -- either because it would be too expensive for them to do, or simply because they don't know how to do it even if they had the budget. Or in other words, I believe that Porsche COULD build a cheaper car in a similar price range with the others mentioned but it has simply decided not to. Until it has a market that supports it in this decision, it shall continue to do so.

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

"I don't think we disagree. Part of the problem is the Public ownership of companies today. Boardrooms are forced into short-term thinking and results (think quarterly) and lack the stalward longterm vision which once made many of them great to begin with."

Frankly, this statement is a bit of nonsense. You are indicting a financing/ownership model because you disagree with Porsche's current product strategy. You are also assuming Porsche WAS a great company and will not be in the future.

Big assumptions!

How would you propose to own and finance car companies? See many private or government owned car companies out there?

I admire BMW's product line and stategy. Public company. Proves nothing of course.


The fact is, Porsche has been very successful and in the pst, not so. I don't think you can indict the ownership structure, simply the management who creates the strategy, a strategy BTW that has not FAILED, yet!

Hi,

Assumptions if you like. But, Corporations, especially Car manufacturers in the past have often been driven by great vision. I believe (IMHO) Public Ownership, while great in many respects, also has the downside of creating near-sightedness on the Board and Managers. As an example, look at how many executive perks are based upon short-term rather than long-term goals. How R&D has shrunk because unless there's a direct link today to the closing price and earnings, budgets are pared.

Again, in the Car biz, look at Porshe's successes, and there were many, plot them against the timeline where Ferdi was driving the bus and you'll find a corrolation. Same with Ford. Old Henry took a bath the 2 years after raising the pay to $5, he expected and accepted it. But, the 10 years beyond exceeded his expectations as his own employees were able to become customers as well. A CEO trying these things today would be ********************canned after the 1st annual report or as soon as some institution dumped it's block of stock. If this didn't actually happen, the mere possibility of it can limit the risk that these managers (perhaps not even significant owners) are willing to take. Yes, it's the managers who decide the strategy, but they do so within the structure which exists and this can often be risk averse, so the status quo leads to self-preservation.

Will Porsche fail?? Inevitably, the question is when and how. That of course is speculation, and open to opinion, especially when on the outside looking in...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[BoxsterSbob]

Hi, one other point that maybe be worth factoring into the discussion...

Porsche is always sampling the competition and adjusting the product line. I can’t image that they’d leave the roadster market to BMW and Audi.

bob

[TVC15]

I must admit, I'm really surprised to read about the success of the Cayman.

When I first heard about it, I couldn't imagine why manufacture (or buy) a two-seater *without* a drop top?

I always thought the wind in your face was the whole point of a sportscar.

[MikenOH]

I have to say if I was back in the 07 Porsche market and had set a limit to spend $55K for a car, it wouldn't be the 2.7L Cayman. I like the idea of the car and there are probably lots of buyers that want a couple rather than a cab and this will work for them, but the premium on the coupe--I think--is over the top.

As others have said, for about the same money you can get a lightly optioned 987S, which I think is the better value. If you start with the base price of the Cayman add the 18" wheels and sound system + back in to make the equipment comparable, there is only about a $3K difference in price between the two cars. Myself, I'd pay the extra $3K for the S.

[MNBoxster]

Hi,

This discussion went round and round before the cayman introduction and the concensus then was that the Cayman could dilute the Product Line and lend some confusion. We may be seeing that such is the case.

At least the Panamera should be distinct enough to prevent this and hopefully strengthen the Brand...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[pecivil]

BMW may be public, but the the lions share of stock (75% or more?) is owned by the Quandt Family and has been since the end of the war. They make the decisions as to what happens at BMW.

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Hi,

This discussion went round and round before the cayman introduction and the concensus then was that the Cayman could dilute the Product Line and lend some confusion. We may be seeing that such is the case.

At least the Panamera should be distinct enough to prevent this and hopefully strengthen the Brand...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

I agree on the Pamamera. I would be interested in a Porsche version of a sports sedan. I don't think they have ever had one?

[Brucelee]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

Hi,

Assumptions if you like. But, Corporations, especially Car manufacturers in the past have often been driven by great vision. I believe (IMHO) Public Ownership, while great in many respects, also has the downside of creating near-sightedness on the Board and Managers. As an example, look at how many executive perks are based upon short-term rather than long-term goals. How R&D has shrunk because unless there's a direct link today to the closing price and earnings, budgets are pared.

Again, in the Car biz, look at Porshe's successes, and there were many, plot them against the timeline where Ferdi was driving the bus and you'll find a corrolation. Same with Ford. Old Henry took a bath the 2 years after raising the pay to $5, he expected and accepted it. But, the 10 years beyond exceeded his expectations as his own employees were able to become customers as well. A CEO trying these things today would be ********************canned after the 1st annual report or as soon as some institution dumped it's block of stock. If this didn't actually happen, the mere possibility of it can limit the risk that these managers (perhaps not even significant owners) are willing to take. Yes, it's the managers who decide the strategy, but they do so within the structure which exists and this can often be risk averse, so the status quo leads to self-preservation.

Will Porsche fail?? Inevitably, the question is when and how. That of course is speculation, and open to opinion, especially when on the outside looking in...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

Sorry Jim but the experience woudl not support your supposition. Fact is, there have been more great cars built in the last 25 yrs than in the 25 before that. Most of these great cars were built by public corporations.

It ain't the structure, it is the people.