Skip to main content

Porsche’s EV Misfire: When Legacy Confuses Itself for a Trend

Porsche AG just reported nearly $1 billion in losses, driven by an EV pullback and global tariffs. The market reads it as bad luck; tariffs, demand slump, global EV fatigue. But the deeper signal is cultural: Porsche tried to race in the wrong lane.

To the public, petrol Porsches are heritage objects. They are roaring pieces of art, forever linked to the romance of motion and the lineage of engineering mastery. To the company, however, the latest news shows a brand trying to reinvent itself as a tech player, shifting its soul toward battery packs and software dashboards. It is as if Rolex decided it must become the Apple Watch. In doing so, Porsche risks losing what made it an institution — a heritage brand.

In 19 Consultin's Institutional Value Index framework, Porsche traditionally scores high on Legacy (9.3/10) and Cultural Depth (8.8/10), but only moderately on Adaptability (6.5/10) and Tech Integration (5.9/10). This means its market power is not derived from innovation speed. It is derived from symbolic permanence. Its customers do not buy Porsche for the next software update; they buy it for what it represents: mastery, craftsmanship, continuity. When a legacy brand treats itself as a commodity, it loses its “institutional gravity”, the unseen weight that makes it untouchable in volatile markets.

Porsche should not compete with EV startups. It should compete above them. The right move isn’t to electrify its identity but to electrify its mystique. Continue EV development, but release it as concepts of philosophy, not mere products. As limited editions, auto show prototypes, rolling design statements that test sentiment and signal evolution without disowning tradition.

The brand’s strength lies in curated permanence, not mass transition. The moment Porsche learns that its petrol engines are its “Rolex line” and its EVs are its “Apple experiments,” it regains narrative control. And in the age of narrative economics, that’s where institutional value truly compounds.

 - For legacy companies: stop trying to become the future. Define it.

 - For consultants and innovators: measure not just market fit, but institutional value.

Labels:

Popular

how to add map on blogs

Im working on another blog of a friend about her restaurant  and found a need to put a map So, I went to Google for assistance. Lo and behold, it assisted. Now, let me share to you how it goes.(pics to follow) open  maps.google.com search for the location click the gear at the bottom right corner click "Share and embed map" click "Embed map" tab choose the size copy the html code paste it to you blog
Read more

Contextual Stratification - Chapter 13: Boundaries

  Where Things Get Interesting We've built a complete picture: Fields (F) define domains with specific rules. Scales (λ) determine context within those domains. Quanta (Q) are what appears when you observe a field at a scale. Measurability (M) constrains what can appear. The equation Q=Fλ, Q⊆M generates valid frameworks. And this stratification continues infinitely; no ground floor, no ultimate emergence, scales within scales forever. But if reality is structured this way, the most important question becomes: where do the boundaries lie? Boundaries are where one field gives way to another. Where one scale regime transitions to a different regime. Where the measurable space changes. Where frameworks that worked perfectly well suddenly break down. Boundaries are where theories fail, where paradoxes emerge, where the most interesting phenomena occur. Understanding boundaries is understanding the architecture of reality itself. This chapter shows you how to recognize them, what happens...
Read more

AI, Languages and Neuro-Kernels

“A radical rethinking of OS architecture for the age of AI: from legacy kernels to self-optimizing neuro-kernels powered by contextual intelligence.” I believe that the future will ditch Linux and Windows because AI will create it's own kernel that's ready to be fused with AI model to become neuro-kernel. Why? Because they were not created for AI. They were created several decades ago when LLM wasn’t even a phrase. They were born out of necessity, not intention — a way to make silicon respond to keyboards, screens, and human commands. Over time, they adapted: adding graphical user interfaces like Window User Interface and desktop environments of Linux, supporting mobile devices such as Android and iOS, and surviving by bolting on complexity, you get the gist. But at their core, they are still human-first operating systems, not built for real-time machine reasoning, context shifts, or model-to-model communication. Now Let's Talk Inefficiencies The inefficiencies are baked in...
Read more