Skoda has a better profit margin than Porsche! That alone would give me pause. Add to that their stubborn adherence to “technology openness” when it comes to powertrains, along with the registration figures, and I know I wouldn’t even dip a toe in here.
Porsche hasn’t really been an investment since that ill-fated attempt to take over VW… sorry, but that’s not going to make you happy. And neither will the 6% dividend, because it’ll get cut faster than your Porsche accelerates from 0 to 100.
Edit: Quickly checked the dividends here on GQ, and it’s actually awful…
1 year
Negative growth
-25.39%
3 years
Negative growth
-9.302%
5 years
Negative growth
-2.876%
10 years
Negative growth
-0.509%
Porsche hasn’t really been an investment since that ill-fated attempt to take over VW… sorry, but that’s not going to make you happy. And neither will the 6% dividend, because it’ll get cut faster than your Porsche accelerates from 0 to 100.
Edit: Quickly checked the dividends here on GQ, and it’s actually awful…
1 year
Negative growth
-25.39%
3 years
Negative growth
-9.302%
5 years
Negative growth
-2.876%
10 years
Negative growth
-0.509%
•
44
•
@Keineui Through Porsche SE, you hold stakes in both Porsche AG and VW (and thus in Skoda, etc.).
I don’t understand the point about technological openness. Porsche has bet on electric vehicles like no other company in the VW Group—and has failed spectacularly because it didn’t understand what Porsche customers want. They simply don’t want an electric Porsche; they want a classic internal combustion engine car.
The right move would have been to continue focusing on internal combustion engines and use the proceeds to finance the transition to electric Porsches. Because it’s clear (and more and more people are realizing this) that electric vehicles cannot be produced profitably in Germany. So as far as Porsche is concerned—build internal-combustion engines in Germany while simultaneously ramping up production of electric Porsches in China, the Czech Republic, etc. Because while the Porsche brand still justifies a premium, it doesn’t justify a 250% markup compared to a Xiaomi, etc.
In this case, the dividend isn’t an investment argument anyway. Porsche just isn’t a Coca-Cola or the like. But it’s a nice-to-have!
I don’t understand the point about technological openness. Porsche has bet on electric vehicles like no other company in the VW Group—and has failed spectacularly because it didn’t understand what Porsche customers want. They simply don’t want an electric Porsche; they want a classic internal combustion engine car.
The right move would have been to continue focusing on internal combustion engines and use the proceeds to finance the transition to electric Porsches. Because it’s clear (and more and more people are realizing this) that electric vehicles cannot be produced profitably in Germany. So as far as Porsche is concerned—build internal-combustion engines in Germany while simultaneously ramping up production of electric Porsches in China, the Czech Republic, etc. Because while the Porsche brand still justifies a premium, it doesn’t justify a 250% markup compared to a Xiaomi, etc.
In this case, the dividend isn’t an investment argument anyway. Porsche just isn’t a Coca-Cola or the like. But it’s a nice-to-have!
•
22
•
@Keineui Here, "Porsche SE" is used to refer to the holding company.
••