Since I posted this morning, 100,000 views have been added to that video. His viral video is now worth way more than the car. If Porsche were my company I would give him a 918 just to shut him up, and I'm dead serious. His video's could cost Porsche millions in potential lost sales, not to mention the cost of an advertising campaign to counter his claims.

 

Evidently PCNA never got the memo concerning the potential adverse affects of negative social media/internet exposure in today's society.

 

I wouldn't get too carried away.. The public has a very short memory.. I'm pretty sure the videos of Burning GT's did a fair bit of damage as well. Major product failures (IMS issues, car fires etc) tend to stick for longer periods of time..

 

Yeah, but when you type Porsche into a search engine, Nick's video is the first thing that comes up.

 

So what was the settlement?????

 

It's unbelievable how long they toyed around with you, Nick. And now, with social media and an article, they come crawling back with their arms wide open.

Can't wait to hear what the end result is.

 

Nick, congratulations on getting this resolved. I have empathized your pain through this ordeal. Did you have problems from day 1 or after what mileage did the troubles start?

 

I wondered how long PCNA would let this go for, before doing the right thing. The video is up to 740k views. That is horrible PR. If they didn't bend over backwards to make this right, I would be surprised.

I work in computers, and know all to well that no company wants to outright replace anything, unless it is there last option. They will even go beyond what makes sense for fixing the issue, before they will replace it. And in most cases, its the smart way to do things. Your company will be loves, but broke in a heartbeat if all you did was replace things every time something went wrong.

But this issue...on a scale of 1-10 where 10 is PCNA just replacing the car...it's an easy 11. I have never seen so many issues with one car. Astonishing!

 

Audi legal came back with the same "bad gas" argument. I then produced every gas receipt for that car (I'm funny about record keeping), all showing crappy California 91 octane - but it's the game in town. About a week later they settled for the price of the car, then told us they didn't want it back and that we could keep it. It still runs with frequent mis-fires and other things (windows go up and down randomly, radio turns on and off by itself, etc.) but as it is a free car and we only use it for local errands never going five or so miles from the house. I suppose we could have sold it but I couldn't, in good conscience, even with disclosure, pass on a Lemon to someone else.

 

Just saw this on FB feed headline

https://www.6speedonline.com/article...sed-wrong-guy/

Word is def spreading.

 

Even one of Swedens largest life style sites www.feber.se has written about Nicks ordeal. Good to know that people can see right from wrong.

 

I've got to say that its disappointing that Audi didn't want the car back. If they believe in continuous improvement they should want the car to learn from it (i.e. take it apart and see what went wrong in production process). That they don't care, means they aren't committed to quality.

 

If Porsche has half a brain they will either make a big statement showing Nick with a brand new car to make it right OR they will insert gag orders into the settlement to do away with the whole ordeal.

Either way - good for you Nick !

 

Well done! I wonder whether they will require you to sign a confidentiality clause.

 

Congrats Nick. I really hope you get to enjoy your next car.