[Bob Kovacs]

Why was the 968 such a hard sell when it was new? Even by Porsche standards, the 968 was a marginal seller and my understanding is that many were sold with deep discounts. Yet it is a pretty, modern, practical and fun car. Why did it bomb at dealerships when it was new? Was it the economy? Was the car perceived as just an overblown derivative of the 944? Did Porsche fall out of favor for a few years? From a sales standpoint, the Boxster is far more successful.



Any thoughts on this?



--Bob

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[sasilverbullet]

This has been discussed at length over on rennlist. The concensus is the economy at the time is what killed it...it was too expensive for the time...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

And here I thought the economy was booming in the 90's...



If it was a price issue, they should've made the lower priced CS more widely available. I would almost rather have that model instead...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ether_joe]

in the early 90's we were in the Gulf War semi-depression.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Mark]

Both my 968s stickered in the mid '50s, the Boxster was much cheaper when it came out and the economy was bouncing up.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Darryl]

I can't speak from personal experience since I wasn't in the market for a 968 in the 90's...BUT...from everything I've heard/read/seen, it was crazy expensive on two accounts. 1.) Not enough significant difference between 944 and 968 to justify the increase in expense, and 2.) Other cars from other manufacturers in the same class were also less expensive. I guess in the long run, it all comes down to price.



On the good side, we get a great car sub 20K that's still viable in today's sports car world. With the rarity, I'd hope we can see them go (back) up in value as time goes on.



- Darryl

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

price is exactly why i passed on it when it was new - at the 55k price tag of mine, i could get at least 2 cars that would outperform it, and have a spare to kick around



on top of that, americans still had a hard time getting their heads around a 4 cyl front engine porsche, and when it got to that price, it was over



at that time, 55k was a LOT of money for a car, and right or wrong, for not much more, you could get the tried and true 911



pretty serious marketing stumble, but then, porsche does that a lot



here's one for you - why the heck would they call their new monster the carrera gt? it isn't a gt at all, and they used that name way back on the 924 - did they really intend to draw that parallel?



i find myself constantly asking "what were they thinking?"

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[wjk_glynn]

When the 944 first came out, it was considered good value. Reviewers of the time often mentioned it in articles and sales volumes were very good.



Then for some reason, Porsche decided to move the price point up market in the late eighties and you saw a pretty quick escalation in list price. In turn, sales volume began to fall and the 944S2 was a pretty slow seller.



The 968 introduced some significant changes and actually sold reaonably well in the UK, but in most markets the changes weren't enough to increase the overall annual unit sales, which remained low.



The slow sales and development cost to meet the 1996 OBD-II requirements for the US was likely the preverbial straw. The same issues affected the 928 and that's why you saw Porsche change from a 3-model lineup in 1995 to just the 993 in 1996. There was simply no way Porsche could afford to do major development on 3 different engines at the same time, given its debt and cash reserves.



In parallel with all of this in the early 1990s, Porsche was undergoing a major upheaveal in how it designed and produced it models. It had to because if it didn't change, it was going to go out of business or be bought out - end of story.



The new way resulted in the 986 Boxster and 996 Carrera. People may complain that the cars felt cheap (e.g. interior plastics) and looked the same (they shared ~30% of their components), but those cost reductions are what saved the company.



Porsche has managed to pull off an amazing trick. For the most part, they are still perceived as an exclusive sports car manufacturer, yet have sales volumes larger than Jaguar and can use mass production techniques (automation, common parts usage, etc.) to control costs.



Last time I heard, Porsche was making a profit of €9K on every car coming off the line!!! That is an astounding margin in the auto industry.



So while Porsches actions sometimes leave us with our heads scratching, its clear they are very savy on the business side... and the modern cars are quite good (asthetic questions aside) - though there hasn't been a truly trouble free 911 engine since the 3.2L carrera of the late eighties...



Karl.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Bob Kovacs]

I appreciate the discussion. I thought the US economy was humming along fairly well by the mid-1990s, although it's never accurate to extrapolate from my situation to the rest of the country. And I thought that a base 968 had a sticker cost of around $42k in 1992. (Cabs were more expensive, of course.) Finally, I thought that Porsche dealers were doing some serious discounting on the 968 by 1994/95... I've heard of new cars selling for $35k. (Again, that's a coupe not a cab.) I'm in pretty solid financial shape today and a new Porsche 968 in the upper $30k region just might temp me. Obviously, the discounting meant less profit for dealers and lack of interest comes hand-in-hand with that.



Was there strong competition in the early 1990s? Were the Nissan 300Z, Mazda RX7 and even BMWs offering something close to the Porsche for a better price or value?



It's just that, even by Porsche standards, the 968 was a sales disaster. Was it marketed poorly? Or should it have had an entry-level price of $38k all along?



Just some random thoughts/questions.



--Bob

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

the cars you named were even featured in a shootout test in a couple of articles - very close results, for half the money

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

"americans still had a hard time getting their heads around a 4 cyl front engine porsche"



Huh, after all the sales of the 944[?]. Sure there have always been the puriest that won't accept a water-cooled P-car. However they were given a run when they saw a hot 951 hunting them down on the track.



re: Porsche thinking; what will always be a mystery is the numbering scheme and the fact they have two models with similar names, [cayman vs cayenne] pleazze...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

[quote name='flash' date='Jul 27 2006, 08:15 PM']the cars you named were even featured in a shootout test in a couple of articles - very close results, for half the money

[right][post="24699"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



I just ordered the article of the 93 RX7 vs the 968 and one of the points that Automobile mag makes is that "Mazda is aiming at Porsche sales". since the Rx7's 1st gen they have always resembled the 924 and 944 not until 93 did they break into an original design and w/ the twin rotor twin turbo engine, I can speak from experience wen i say it was and is a lot of sports car for the money. Just keep a fire extinguisher in the car at all times <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/tongue.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />



Everythig i've read on why production was cut early and way sales had dropped off points to a slow market and a frugal consumer. Most articles praise the car but come 93 the japanese market has proved reliable as well as stylish w/ the Supra, RX7, Mitsu 3000GT, 300ZX etc all priced below 50K! Now consider the turbo versions and your quickly producing more then 240HP. Hind sight the Supra still retains more then half its value, i believe the twin cost about 43k new and a 95 in good condition would still run you about 28K.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

pete - go to a porsche car show - the prevailing attitude is still that our cars are the red headed step child, and not real porsches - that the engine is on the wrong end, and it lacks 2 cylinders



yes, they sold a fair amount of 944s, and it in fact saved the company, but the public still had a hard time with it - it was an entry level car, that many bought for the name, because they couldn't afford "the real thing"



this is not an unknown phenomenon - the ferrari 308 is treated much the same way, for very similar reasons

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

when I bought my 944 in 1985 the sticker was around $ 25k. by comparison, a far superior model, and 7 years later, priced in the mid-high 40's ( coupe ) is considered "expensive ?! not in my book.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

on the surface that seems to make sense



however, the competition was cheaper even with the 944 pricing, and it only got worse with the 968 price increase



over a 30% price increase in 7 years seems, from my recollection, to be a lot more than other prices went up



granted, the car is more refined, and better overall, mitigating some of the increase, but with the competition keeping their prices down, the gap just got wider - i think it was that gap that was the problem



it's like remodeling your house - you have to consider the houses around you for resale value, if you want to maximize your return - you can't very well double the hosue size, if the neighbors don't, and expect to sell it for what it would be worth in a neighborhood where the other houses did the same thing



i don't think porsche did a good job on their remodel, when considering the sale



had they have come up another 30hp, i think they would have done better on the 968, but probably cost them a lot of 993 sales



that being said, considering where they were headed in development, their decisions seem to make sense - sucked for the 968, but then it did provide for the exclusivity we now enjoy



so, there my friends, is the silver lining for you

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

"The real thing" is relative to the buyer. I consdier the 968 "real".



Very true about the 30 more HP. Sales of the more expensive models may have been affected. Chevy faced a similar issue with the Z28 vs the Corvett. On the later Z28's, the buyer could order the car with the same powerplant that the was used in the Vett. Guess which one the public bought for $20K less...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

don't get me wrong - i think of the 968 as the real thing too - remember, i wasn't looking for a porsche, because i don't like rear engine cars - i was looking for a 2 seat ragtop, wih AC, front engine and rear drive - it happened to be a porsche - for me, there is no subsititute



and you are bang on on the z28/vette thing - that is why chevy didn't sell the z28 in ragtop form with both the manual tranny and the big motor combined

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Royal Tiger]

Car & Driver did a comparo in 1994 I think with the 3000GT, the 968, the Vette, the 300ZX, the Supra, and the RX-7. I think there was one more. The 968 was next to last. Price was thier biggest complaint.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Bob Kovacs]

[quote name='Royal Tiger' date='Jul 30 2006, 12:45 PM']Car & Driver did a comparo in 1994 I think with the 3000GT, the 968, the Vette, the 300ZX, the Supra, and the RX-7.  I think there was one more.  The 968 was next to last.  Price was thier biggest complaint.

[right][post="24788"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Too bad that Porsche's response was to abandon the line and bring out the Boxster, although the Boxster must have already been in development at the time. If Porsche had aggressively priced the 968 -- say at a base price of $32K for a coupe and $40 for a cab -- it might have been sold in volumes high enough to reduce manufacturing costs. But then we'd see a lot more 968s on the road and I like having a car that's not as ubiquitous as a Miata.



My neighbor has a 2001 'Vette and it is a nice car. Despite the big V8 in the 'Vette and the four-banger in the Porsche, the 968 feels more like a sports car to me. It feels like I'm more in touch with the car and the road in the 968 than in the 'Vette. No doubt about it though, the 'Vette gives a lot of bang for the buck.



--Bob

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[TheMirror]

[quote name='Royal Tiger' date='Jul 30 2006, 09:45 AM']Car & Driver did a comparo in 1994 I think with the 3000GT, the 968, the Vette, the 300ZX, the Supra, and the RX-7.  I think there was one more.  The 968 was next to last.  Price was thier biggest complaint.

[right][post="24788"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]



Yep, that road test



At the end of the day, the 968 selling in small numbers really was a combination of all of the aforementioned factors. The very high price certainly hurt. Back then, there were still a lot of 944s on the road, and the 968s styling roots weren't removed enough from the 944 for buyers to easily see it as a "new" model. There was also the flood of very capable Japanese competitors featuring more power, i.e. Supra Turbo, 300ZX Turbo, RX-7, and the 3000GT. Mazda actually rushed the RX-7 to the party too early, paying the price with dire reliability problems with the 1993 and 1994 models. This was the early 90's, when the US economy was not banging along like it did 5 years later, so that added to it as well.



Interesting to look back on it now. The Supra Turbo has a huge following, those cars trade at a residual premium these days unmatched by any other U.S. Spec Japanese car. The enormous amounts of power you can get from the 2JZ-GTE and the solid chassis will have that car last for the ages. They are heavy little piggies at nearly 3500lbs. though, which precludes them from being desireable road course warriors.



The 300ZX Turbo still has a solid following as well, but many of those cars have disappeared from the roads. Excellent engines and chassis, but the interiors and styling haven't held up terribly well over time and forget trying to convert a N/A car to a Turbo version. Cost prohibitive. I always thought the N/A cars would have made for a great one-make series. The Turbos are also very heavy at 3500lbs.



The RX-7 finally came right in 1995, but disappeared from the US that year....sadly. It continued on for several years in Japan, even gaining a 4wd system I think! Someone please verify that. Painfully beautiful, but have fun with the 70+ vacuum hoses the twin turbo setup in that car uses.



The 3000GT was described to me by a former Mitsubishi gearhead as "junk", and it appears that is exactly where most of those 3800lb freakmobiles ended up.



Fun comparison here:



http://www.kbb.com/kb/ki.dll/kw.kc.sbs?kbb...rnc&usedcarstab



The 968 though, soldiers on. Some are racking up huge mileages, the styling has aged very well, and its very much a match for current Porsche Boxtster offerings. Pretty cool stuff, we all own modern day classics....in my humble opinion.



-Mirror

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.