Porsche discontinues two iconic models and replaces them both with EVs
PORSCHE has confirmed it will axe two of its most iconic sports cars—the petrol-powered 718 Boxster and 718 Cayman—by the end of this year, paving the way for fully electric replacements.
The announcement marks a significant shift in the brand's strategy as it leans further into electric mobility.
4
4
The news was first revealed in Germany by Porsche production boss Albrecht Reimold in Automobilwoche and later confirmed by the company to Car and Driver.
Production of the mid-engine 718 twins will end in October 2025 at Porsche's facilities in Zuffenhausen and Osnabrück.
The move follows the earlier discontinuation of the models in Europe due to new cybersecurity laws.
According to Porsche, the decision isn't about poor sales. In fact, 2024 saw a 15 percent increase in deliveries, with 23,670 units sold.
However, limited parts availability and the push for electrification have forced Porsche's hand.
'We are now focused on the next chapter,' said a spokesperson.
Special editions like the Cayman GT4 RS and Boxster RS Spyder will also bow out, despite previous exemptions from EU regulations.
Replacing these fan favourites will be fully electric versions of both the Cayman and Boxster.
While details remain scarce, Reimold assured enthusiasts that the electric successors will maintain the fun-to-drive character.
'I've driven it,' he said.
'The driving experience will still be 100 percent 718.' Porsche CEO Oliver Blume added during the brand's recent annual meeting that the new EVs will be 'even more dynamic, even more powerful.'
However, fans will have to wait a bit longer for the new generation.
The EV 718s won't launch until the 'medium term', with development still ongoing.
In the meantime, Porsche is urging customers to snap up the remaining petrol-powered models while they still can.
'This may well be your last chance,' warned Car and Driver, which was among the first to report the change for global markets.
The shift has been in motion since the start of 2024, when the 718 was pulled from European markets in response to stricter cybersecurity legislation.
The regulations effectively ended sales of the internal-combustion Boxster and Cayman, along with the petrol-powered Macan, across the EU.
The U.S. and other regions were granted a temporary reprieve, but that window will now close in October.
While the 718's days are numbered, Porsche's broader EV strategy is still in flux.
CEO Oliver Blume admitted during this week's shareholder meeting that the company's previous target—having electric cars make up 80 percent of sales by 2030—is now unlikely to be met.
Despite this, Porsche says the electric lineup 'will continue to grow as planned,' including a large three-row SUV still in development.
Interestingly, Porsche is also keeping its options open when it comes to future powertrains.
The company has hinted it may reintroduce combustion engines or hybrids into models originally intended to be electric-only.
Last November, then-CFO Lutz Meschke said Porsche was 'looking at the possibility' of combining hybrid or petrol power with upcoming EVs—a sign the brand isn't closing the door on internal combustion just yet.
As Porsche moves into this new chapter, the retirement of the 718 range is more than just the end of two cars,it's the end of an era.
Since their debut, the Boxster and Cayman have become icons in their own right, offering affordable performance and precise handling.
Whether the electric versions can match that legacy remains to be seen.
The Sun has approached Porsche for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
EU wants free hand luggage. Here's how it could hit flight prices
With his wheelie bag in tow, Peter Bellew strode towards the gate at Munich airport to board his easyJet flight, bound for Gatwick, in the spring of this year. 'You'll need to pay to bring that onboard, Sir,' said a member of the dispatch team, pointing to the cabin luggage. The remark elicited a wry smile as the passenger handed over his credit card. Little did the airport employee realise it, but as easyJet's chief operating officer from 2019 to 2022, Bellew was the very man who introduced such fees in the first place. Baggage charges are big business for budget airlines such as easyJet. Last year, the Luton-based carrier raked in £2.5 billion in 'ancillary revenues' — just over a quarter of its overall takings. But if the EU gets its way, this vital income stream may come to an end. • I'm sick of squabbles about overhead lockers. This is how to behave Politicians in Brussels are pressing ahead with reforms to give passengers the right to travel with a cabin bag weighing up to 7kg free of charge, in addition to a smaller item that can fit under the seat. Other changes include giving under-12s, or those travelling with disabled passengers, the right to pick a seat next to their accompanying traveller, also free of charge. Last Tuesday, MEPs on the European parliament's transport and tourism committee passed the changes, voting 38-2 in favour. The European parliament now has three months to consider the new laws, after which they will be adopted, if politicians do nothing. Alternatively, they can be adopted, rejected, or amendments proposed. On the face of it, this seems good news for consumers. A cabin bag can cost from £6 to £60 on Ryanair, depending on the flight and when you buy your ticket. At easyJet, the charge is £5.99 to £48, and on Wizz Air it varies from as little as £13 to as much as £140. These fees would, in effect, be outlawed if Brussels legislators get their way — although the EU is proposing that they apply to wheelie bags with dimensions that add up to no more than 100cm, which is smaller than the maximum size allowed by all three budget carriers. For airlines, the reforms could be devastating. Cabin baggage fees have grown to become a big part of the add-ons charged by low-cost carriers — often to the chagrin of their customers. At Wizz, ancillary income represents nearly half — about 45 per cent — of total revenues. Ancillaries at Ryanair equate to 34 per cent of the top line, and 26 per cent at easyJet. The three airlines are now raking in £8.5 billion from add-ons annually. This was not always the case, however. In 1999, Ryanair customers were spending an average of €7.48 on ancillaries, compared with €23.57 (£20.15) nowadays — a threefold increase. Publicly available figures for Wizz go back to 2014: per-passenger spending on add-ons has risen from €25.40 then to €37.08 now. Charging for bags at easyJet is a newer phenomenon, brought in by Bellew in 2021, with passengers spending an average of £27.39 on ancillaries. Airlines argue that these measures have allowed them to keep headline fares down. And the numbers appear to support this. Average per-passenger fare income on Ryanair was €52.52 in 1999 and is now €46.10. Wizz fares have also fallen, from €47.39 to €46.01 between 2014 and now. This is why airlines argue that the EU reforms will backfire on travellers. • How airline fees have turned baggage into billions 'It's actually going to be more damaging for consumers,' said Yvonne Moynihan, Wizz Air's chief corporate and ESG officer. 'Fares are going to be driven up because we're going to have to price fares to include the price of the luggage.' Robert Boyle, a former British Airways executive and now an independent analyst, agreed that the main effect of the EU's proposed changes would be to drive up headline fares. But he empathised with Brussels' ambition. 'It is hard not to have some sympathy from a passenger point of view,' he said. 'It is mostly a trick to generate a low headline price with almost everyone paying for the carry-on in practice — or, to put it another way, a bait-and-switch commercial strategy. 'A few people who are willing and able to travel without cabin bags will end up being forced to pay a higher price.' However, easyJet is not convinced. It reckons 40 per cent of its customers travel only using the under-seat bag, for instance. Meanwhile, IATA, the global airlines trade body, said 'consumer research tells us that the majority of travellers want to pay the lowest price possible'. Spiralling fares are just one potential consequence of the EU reforms. Another is that flight punctuality could deteriorate as turnarounds — the change-over period when a plane lands and is prepared for its next flight — are slowed down. 'Before wheelie bags were rationed, low-cost airlines suffered chaotic turnarounds,' said Andrew Lobbenberg, transport analyst at Barclays. 'Carry-on bags were being moved at the last minute, creating slow turnarounds, delays and dissatisfied passengers. 'Turnarounds would [also] become more challenging as the aircraft do not have enough overhead bin space for all passengers to bring wheelie bags on board,' he added. Evidence from easyJet appears to corroborate this. Before the airline began charging for cabin bags in 2021, handling luggage that could not fit in overhead compartments because they were full was one of the main causes of delays. Since then, cabin baggage-related delays in offloading passengers are understood to have fallen by 94 per cent. There is also aviation's carbon footprint to consider. With all passengers empowered to bring two items of luggage on board, aircraft weights would rise, leading to additional fuel consumption and greater carbon emissions. • Hand luggage: Ryanair, easyJet and British Airways policies explained A final complexity is that Brussels' reforms, should they come into force, would not necessarily apply to all flights. The current proposals affect EU and non-EU registered airlines that fly out of the European bloc. But they would apply only to EU-registered aircraft flying into the EU. This means that the rules would not apply to domestic UK flights or to flights from the UK, for example, into the EU. Passengers would benefit from the free cabin bag rule on their return to Britain, however. It is ripe for confusion. The prospect of the changes — and the fallout from them — has raised the hackles of Willie Walsh, the former British Airways boss who now heads IATA. 'When regulators meddle in commercial or operational issues they don't understand, they usually get it wrong. If EU parliamentarians insist on regulating where regulation is not needed, they should be prepared to take responsibility for its negative consequences,' he said. The saving grace, as with so many EU reforms, is that progress on passenger air travel rights is likely to be glacially slow. The changes to baggage regulations are a late addition to a wider overhaul of passenger compensation — known as EU261 — that has been in the works since 2013. In addition, the move would contradict existing European laws that give airlines the freedom to set their own pricing. This, industry leaders say, leaves the door open to a protracted legal challenge. Furthermore, the proposals would need to be ratified by individual member states. The complexities around this were highlighted when Spain suspended its own proposals to outlaw cabin baggage fees late last Thursday. Experts are split as to why the EU proposals have not hit the share prices of major listed budget airlines. Lobbenberg said: 'The market has not reacted clearly to this issue, I think, because it is highly unclear what comes next. While consumer organisations are pushing hard to outlaw wheelie bag fees, the member states agreed to allow them.' But another senior industry executive said: 'I think that with all the geopolitical tensions, and associated increases in oil prices, these proposals have just been missed.' Whatever the reason, for now, airlines are monitoring the situation carefully — not to mention grumpily. 'What's next? Mandatory popcorn and drinks as part of your cinema ticket?' said Ourania Georgoutsakou, managing director of trade body Airlines for Europe.
Auto Blog
2 hours ago
- Auto Blog
Is 16 Old Enough to Race? Porsche Thinks So
Just three weeks after turning sixteen, Porsche puts Elia Weiss behind the wheel of a purpose-built electric race car Three weeks after you turned sixteen, what were you doing? If you're like me, maybe you were trying to figure out something about a car. More likely, you were fantasizing about your favorite cars while playing Forza or Gran Turismo. What you probably weren't doing was driving an actual Porsche race car on an actual racetrack. But that's exactly what Italian kart and Formula 4 racer Elia Weiss will be doing. 0:08 / 0:09 Meet the ultimate Audi RS 6 Avant: Only 85 are coming to the U.S. Watch More Elia Weiss Weiss kart racing Weiss will be driving a 99X Electric in the upcoming Formula E rookie test. The single-seat car, specially designed for Formula E, accelerates from zero to 100 km/h quicker than an F1 car — around two seconds, the automaker says. The rookie test is a race featuring untested, usually younger, Formula E drivers, with the goal of both exposing newcomers to Formula E and gaining valuable experience. Stuttgart is making history by choosing Weiss as their driver, with the second-youngest driver in Formula E history being chosen last year by McLaren, at 17 years old. Considering that 16 is the minimum age allowed by the DMSB, this is an accolade Weiss will hold forever. For reference, the average age of a Formula E driver hovers around 31. Although Weiss may be young, he's got a fair bit of experience making things go quickly around a racetrack. Weiss won the German karting championship title just last year and conducts sim racing tests with OEMs like Audi, BMW, and Porsche. Further padding his resume is his upcoming participation in Italian Formula 4. The rookie says he has already practiced a bit with the Formula E car in a simulator. 'I was able to get to know the systems, felt right at home there, and got on really well with the engineers. Other than that, I'm preparing myself as best I can.' He goes on to drive home the importance of fitness and strength when piloting the rapidly accelerating Formula E cars. Porsche's decision has left critics a bit puzzled. What does Weiss offer? You aren't alone if you're wondering how Weiss got a gig like this. According to The Race, a few Porsche bigwigs noticed Weiss two years ago at the Karting World Cup finals. The publication raises some solid questions, though: most other Formula E rookie test programs are utilizing older drivers, and certainly racers with a few more competitions under their belts. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. The answer, perhaps, is hidden in comments made by Florian Modlinger, Director of Factory Motorsport Formula E. 'The energy management [of Formula E cars] is complex, which means that the mental challenges in particular are incredibly tough in Formula E. This reduces the pool of potential drivers.' Thinking about regen and energy usage, according to Modlinger, isn't a skill every racer has. 'While he was a guest in our simulator, we were particularly impressed by how he interacted with the engineers,' he says of Weiss. He goes on to say that the 16-year-old 'comes across as a much more mature racing driver.' Final thoughts Experience is just one component of victory on the track. Especially in a budding motorsport like Formula E, there are other variables OEMs and teams need to account for when choosing drivers. All eyes will definitely be on Weiss come the July rookie test, especially with rival teams placing older and more experienced drivers in the same position. About the Author Steven Paul View Profile
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘He left us with nothing': the British investors swindled by a German property firm
'He took everything, left us with absolutely nothing,' says David Middleton, one of thousands of British and Irish investors who racked up huge losses from the collapse of a German property ponzi scheme. The 72-year-old pensioner from Northern Ireland is referring to Charles Smethurst, the German-British businessman who set up Dolphin Capital in 2008, later renamed Dolphin Trust, then German Property Group (GPG), with 200 affiliated companies. In July 2020, the business filed for insolvency, owing more than €1bn to up to 25,000 investors around the world. Smethurst was convicted this month of 'serious fraud' and sentenced to six years and 11 months in prison by a regional court in Hildesheim, in northern Germany. As part of a plea bargain, he admitted to four of 27 counts of commercial fraud, filed against him by the Hanover public prosecutor's office last October, for total damages of €56m. The other charges were dropped in return for his confession to speed up the trial, which was due to run into August. Dolphin's glossy brochures promised readers double-digit returns for investing their money in a scheme that pledged to restore historic buildings across Germany – including the ruins of castle Dwasieden on the Baltic Sea island of Rügen – and turn them into luxury apartments. However, few were ever restored. Investors were mainly from the UK, Ireland, France, Singapore and South Korea and included financial institutions and individuals, many of whom lost their pension pots or other savings after regular interest payments dried up in 2019. Smethurst's fraud conviction related to €60m in investments made by the French fund manager Horizon AM, including €30m in the Pariser Strasse project in Berlin. The court heard that the building was never bought, but the funds were used by Smethurst's company to meet other obligations. He served a prison sentence for fraud between 2000 and 2003 in an unrelated case. Horizon said it was 'led to believe we were partnering with an experienced and reputable real estate developer' as Dolphin provided the firm with 'highly detailed due diligence documents' and sent regular reports wrongly suggesting projects were 'progressing as planned'. The investor was not aware of Smethurst's previous fraud conviction. 'According to findings from the insolvency administrator and the criminal investigation, a significant portion of the funds was diverted abroad to jurisdictions with strict banking secrecy, notably the British Virgin Islands and possibly the Cayman Islands,' Horizon said. 'These jurisdictions do not cooperate with European authorities, which means that the money trail goes cold. This illustrates the systemic failure of cross-border cooperation in cases of fraud, and why victims like us are left without meaningful recourse. 'We are still wondering where the money went, what remains, and whether it is still possible to recover anything to compensate Horizon and its investors.' UK individual investors told the Guardian they are angry, and fear that Smethurst will be released early for good conduct and recover the hidden funds for himself. Middleton and his wife, Janet, invested in Dolphin in 2015: his pension lump sum of £100,000 and her inheritance of £120,000. Their financial adviser, the late Alastair Hooks, told them it was low-risk and supported by the German government, Janet Middleton recalls. 'To be honest, I was nervous about it and strongly stated that as pensioners we could not afford to lose this amount of money, but again we were assured there was no risk.' After Dolphin filed for insolvency, Hooks did not return their calls, and the couple discovered he had unregistered from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in 2012. She says they have explored every avenue – even as they dealt with David being diagnosed with bowel cancer – but have not recovered any of their investment. Janet says Smethurst's sentence 'seems very lenient to me … Smethurst may well serve his sentence and even get early release for good behaviour while other people like David and I now serve a sentence in our retirement economically'. A former NHS nurse, she says the couple had been looking forward to a comfortable retirement but have had to budget their outgoings; they have not had a holiday in years and both drive 20-year-old cars. The Hildesheim court said it did not order Smethurst to make any payments to investors because it could not establish that he had personally siphoned off any funds. Justus von Buchwaldt, of the law firm BBL, the insolvency administrator who testified in June, subsequently said: 'I fear that this is only the tip of the iceberg. It is still unclear if other people were involved in this large-scale fraud and where most of the investments ended up.' Of an estimated €1.3bn of investments received by the property company, about €800m is missing. The Hanover prosecutor's office said it had investigated other company officials but could not find evidence of any wrongdoing. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion It is one of Germany's biggest investment scandals since the second world war, and the German authorities have been criticised for being slow to intervene, even though the property company stopped filing financial accounts in 2015. Alison Moncrieff-Kelly, 63, a freelance musician from Kent and former director of the Rye arts festival, was a Dolphin investor. She said: 'This seems a pathetically small price for Smethurst to pay for such heinous and convoluted levels of crime. Where's the money gone is the big question … and six years 11 months doesn't touch the sides.' Most of the listed buildings acquired by GPG were never redeveloped and left derelict. Von Buchwaldt at BBL has sold 20 of 75 properties so far, for more than €87m, and has yet to distribute the proceeds to investors. Those sold include castle Dwasieden, a listed former brewery in Bad Aibling in Bavaria and a period villa in Fürstenberg/Havel in Brandenburg. The property sales are expected to take years as the legal situation is often complex. Almost 8,000 creditors have filed claims with BBL against the collapsed property group, out of an estimated 15,000 to 25,000 investors globally. Von Buchwaldt has said BBL would work with the UK's FCA, Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS). Debbie Kay Randles, 67, invested £25,000 in Dolphin in 2015 and, like others, has also lost money in other investment schemes. She paid £6,000 to a financial claims company in an attempt to recover her Dolphin investment, but 'they just disappeared'. She even enlisted a private detective to track down the claims firm. 'It's just been an absolute ongoing nightmare,' she says. 'I've not got a lot left, so I'll just keep working, probably until I'm 75, and then retire.' A former TSB employee, she now works for a window blinds business and lives in York. Moncrieff-Kelly says the trial 'doesn't address this issue of how incredibly badly regulated financial affairs are in the UK … I don't know if it's happening so much in any other country in the world.' She points to the 'middlemen' – financial advisers who are typically paid commission of 20% to 30% and 'kept that money' despite 'selling a fraud'. She invested in Dolphin after her financial adviser suggested it. Moncrieff-Kelly has recovered about half her £80,000 investment – money she inherited from her late mother – from the FSCS, with the help of a claims company that took the other half as payment. The FSCS says it has paid compensation to more than 1,900 customers in relation to Dolphin/GPG investment products, and a further 150 people have open claims. Compensation may have been triggered in relation to unsuitable financial advice that customers were given. It says it cannot put a figure on the compensation paid because it includes payouts for other investment losses. The SFO declined to comment while the FCA said it could not comment on individual firms. 'People don't understand the trauma and the damage that [fraud] has done,' says David Middleton. 'People think [with] white collar crime, slick City crime, there's no victim. There is a victim.'
