What?!?!?!?!

[Guest]

a bit off topic but not totally, i think porsche should make a performance sedan. whadda you think?

Panemara...

[Coventrysucks]

a bit off topic but not totally, i think porsche should make a performance sedan. whadda you think?

What, like the Pananarama?

People always criticise companies for entertaining odd ideas like Porsche, Lamborghini and Ferrari making SUVs.

Think of it this way; would you like to see these companies building a few SUVs and making huge profits that enable them to continue to build CGTs and Enzos in the future, or would you rather there was a future without these companies because they couldn't make enough money?

If the well established supercar marques struggle to get by and go under; who will replace them?

The Paganis and Koenigseggs of this world won't be able to survive if Ferrari can't...

[Vaigra]

a bit off topic but not totally, i think porsche should make a performance sedan. whadda you think?

erm...Panamera?

[jump15vc]

god i hope they dont make this

[MrKipling]

Hmm, interesting chop.

A Ferrari SUV: the only car I would consider keying.

[The_Canuck]

erm...Panamera?

lol mabye i shoulda researched it first

[pAinTrAin]

Should they built it....hell no

does it look cool....yes it does!


thats if it was true

[Cyco]

Ferrari is very unlikely to build this. They are already building 7000 cars/year and it is showing in the resale values. They know they are a luxury brand and rely on discressionary spending - if resale values start plumiting they many of their customers wont turn them over so quicly and the brands image as a whole will suffer. The profit from the accessories would then be hurt - and these are where the real profit is for them now (unless they are working to a business plan noone else knows about).

Bentley has already produced a 4wd (6 for the Brunei collection), and if you pay them enough they will make 1 next week for you.

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Nice chop

[Gal_TT]

I don't think it's a bad idea if companies like Ferrari and Lamborghini start making SUVs. Because at the moment the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S is ruling in the Fast SUV market(in its own league). So there might be 'n big market for them. That said...They better be nicer looking than the Cayenne!!!!

[Radoman]

Edit: Sorry to bring back a dead thread, I just had something I wanted to say on the matter.

What, like the Pananarama?

People always criticise companies for entertaining odd ideas like Porsche, Lamborghini and Ferrari making SUVs.

Think of it this way; would you like to see these companies building a few SUVs and making huge profits that enable them to continue to build CGTs and Enzos in the future, or would you rather there was a future without these companies because they couldn't make enough money?

If the well established supercar marques struggle to get by and go under; who will replace them?

The Paganis and Koenigseggs of this world won't be able to survive if Ferrari can't...

I'm with CoventrySucks, here. Although personally I'm not too huge a fan of SUV's in general, and I wouldn't ever bother with a Porsche Cayenne or an SUV made by Ferrari, I have to raise an eyebrow and question the sanity of some of you people.

Those that feel such discord when a reputable sports car manufacture creates such a vehicle is just plain retarded. If you love these companies so much, why don't you like the idea of them putting out some large fancy box so all the rich suburban moms will buy them and in turn bring in the money to these companies so they can build more kick ass sports cars????? Keeping them "loyal to the fans" would and/or could probably mean the demise of your beloved marque.

Hello-o, it's common sense!

I'm as much of a Porsche fan as the most devote Porsche-phile, but you have to view these things realistically: Porsche now has returned to prototype racing, has created the truly badass Carrera GT, and has widened their line-up with some nice Boxter and 911 variants. Why? Because the Cayenne has been selling like hot-cakes, that's why.

So whilst that Chop on the first page there doesn't particularly appeal to me, and though I wouldn't give two shits if I saw a Ferrari-made SUV driving down the road, there's no denying the benefits far outwiegh the detractions.

So; you lot quit yer bitchin. plzkthxbye.

[Matra et Alpine]

Edit: Sorry to bring back a dead thread, I just had something I wanted to say on the matter........
Those that feel such discord when a reputable sports car manufacture creates such a vehicle is just plain retarded.

Shame you chose to use such words in such a grand venture then wasn't it !!!

If you love these companies so much, why don't you like the idea of them putting out some large fancy box so all the rich suburban moms will buy them and in turn bring in the money to these companies so they can build more kick ass sports cars????? Keeping them "loyal to the fans" would and/or could probably mean the demise of your beloved marque.

Dead simple.
Please engage brain ...
Company X has 100 design engineers and capable of developing 1 fantastic successful car say every 2-3 years usgin that staff.
Company X decide they MIGHT want to expand markets so they devote 25 of those engineers to produce a "concept".
Company X gets positive feedback from the market so devotes 75 of their engineers to moving the concept to production.
In the meantime those 25 engineers left are the only ones able to move the mainstream products the company is remembered and renowned for.
So they can't do a very good job and have to be "derivitave" in tehir developments. So end up producing fairly obvious and no groun-breaking products and so lose part of their mistique.

Has this happened AT Porsche ?
In part -- the relase of the Boxter with "every panel different" and yet looking EXACTLY THE SAME ?
WHere they HAVE been clever has been the producitno of stripped down variants to try to retain teh performance image and I have to say htat has proven fairly successful.

What COULD Porsche be selling if they had kept those 100 engineers working on SPORTS CARS ? ( oh I mean company X .
A car that the FORD GT could never have beaten on perfromance or price ?
A car that the Z06 could never have beaten on perfromance or price ?
A car that would beat Ferrari in all areas ?
A car that woudl beat the Veyron ?
All possible if they stayed focussed.
WHICH assists the company more in the long term ??

Hello-o, it's common sense!

Problem with commonsense is it's not as common as those who claim it
Why do companies liek Prada and Giccu not produce cheap plastic high street shoes ?
Because it confuses the brand image.
So how many prospective high value sports car purchasers may not look at Porsche too closesly because of the mixed message of sportscar and soccer mom transport ?

I'm as much of a Porsche fan as the most devote Porsche-phile, but you have to view these things realistically: Porsche now has returned to prototype racing, has created the truly badass Carrera GT, and has widened their line-up with some nice Boxter and 911 variants. Why? Because the Cayenne has been selling like hot-cakes, that's why.

WHat-if's dont' work in teh real world because you can't MEASURE hte results of the alternative strategy.
IF Porsche had kept those 100 engineeers ( oh sorry company X ) on sports car developmetns then their may be a cheaper faster CGT or a better value Boxter that actually ate into teh Japanese sports car market buyers or a 911 that attracted all those Lotuse Elise buyers
Would an Elise have sold if hteire had been a 911 competitor ?
Lotus lost out ot Porsche in their years of demise into bankruptcy. Lotus werne't producing BAD cars, just Porsceh at the time were doign better
So do you REALLY have a crystal ball to know what those 100 engineers COUDL have achieved at company X ?
Two things we KNOW they have achieved ....
1) Profit for the company
2) A seperate development line that requires on-going investment in 4x4 and SUV development to retain the market and pay off the investment.

So whilst that Chop on the first page there doesn't particularly appeal to me, and though I wouldn't give two shits if I saw a Ferrari-made SUV driving down the road, there's no denying the benefits far outwiegh the detractions.

So; you lot quit yer bitchin. plzkthxbye.

if you'lls tart thinking
The "far outweigh" is because you've not considered what else the company coudl have done .... nor have you factored in the potential loss of image ( branding protection is one of THE hardest things to do and measure ).
How many Porsche are we going to see on the Le Mans grid ? How much will the "halo effect" of Le Mans move buyers to Astons and 'Vettes and TVR and Spyker and etc etc ?? Care to guess ????

[Coventrysucks]

Company X gets positive feedback from the market so devotes 75 of their engineers to moving the concept to production.
In the meantime those 25 engineers left are the only ones able to move the mainstream products the company is remembered and renowned for.

It doesn't work like that though.

The design cycle starts off with the basics - for which you don't need huge numbers of people, then as the project progresses you need more people working on it to work up all of the details.

So whilst 75% of Company X's engineers are working on the details of the Cayenne, 25% are just starting on the 997's basics.

Those 75% would more than likely be twiddling their thumbs anyway - possibly doing speculative work which isn't profitable.

Why not keep them working on something hugely profitable?

And if Company X is making so much money on the Cayenne they can employ more engineers anyway.

[Matra et Alpine]

It doesn't work like that though.

it does you know

Those 75% would more than likely be twiddling their thumbs anyway - possibly doing speculative work which isn't profitable.

ANY company with ANY engineer NOT doing something PRODUCTIVE for the future of the business will die VERY VERY quickly/

Why not keep them working on something hugely profitable?

What-ifs again, who's to say a radically improved Boxter wouldnt' ahve stopped hte Elise sales ? or het MR2 or the S2000 ?? Just getting 2% of any of those would have made a healthy product line VERY PROFITABLE.

And if Company X is making so much money on the Cayenne they can employ more engineers anyway.

Yes, so they can add 20 more engineers ? So now you have 60 working on one product line and 60 on another.
Dillution of effort !!!
If you look at successful businesses you see more and more are selling off the "additional" product areas from their portfolio so they can deliver more effectively, more profitably and increases renveues in their core by ensuring domination

[Pando]

Dead simple.

Not really, but if you want to simplify it even more:
A company not making profit is not going to be in business for long, the Product Y (Cayenne from now on) carries profit to Company X (Porsche form now on), hence it is a good idea to produce the Cayenne.

But it's not that simple. You raise some very intersting speculations about what Porsche could've produced instead. But does one idea really cancel the other out? If Porsche presents a profitable soccermom-car that ties down a certain of the engineers for a certain amount of time, does that mean they cannot "focus" on another project now or in the near future? I get the impression you feel a SUV removes more "focus" from other projects than another more enthusiast-accepted project. (Ignoring the obvious integration etc possibilities and production differences) If Porsche would start a completely new large scale project building light track cars for the private market, to compete with Radical's and Ariel's it would also slow down the development of other models.

About the brand image, I agree with you. But as you said, the real worth of the image, aswell as a loss or gain is hard to measure. Has the mainstream image really suffered? Is it worth to jeopardize the way enthusiasts view the company for profit? At what price and conditions is selling out acceptable? If the SUV/Mainstream-profits are used to build an AMAZING Roadster/SportsCoupe/SuperCar in the future is it all forgiven?

Using the Prada/Gucci comparison, it isn't really like they started making a cheap plastic high street shoe, but rather started making a brand new clothing line for extra large people = still the same quality and price, but now for wider audiences who according to some don't really fit the Prada/Gucci image. (pardon the pun's)

Another what-if could be, what if the Porsche executive's really had that crystal ball, looked into the future and saw them at the bringe of bankrupcy 20 years later unless they come up with something different to offer. No more Porsche vs a sellout-Porsche.

But it's all speculation anyway, wouldn't it be interesting to know exactly how many sales Porsche have lost on other models because of the Cayenne?