He has the 'luxury' of strong results (possibly made possible by the longer view taken by the family shareholders) to brush off the usual requests for short term performance standards (including cutting costs and the like).

But the point is that he has proved that some of these 'costs' (i.e. in his workers) are actually smart investments. Of course, that lesson will not be remember in any systematic way by investors.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

Wiedeking can get away with this because he has the backing of the Porsche family, which still holds a controlling interest.

Yes, if it was down to institutional shareholders, he'd be out of a job. Gotta watch the bottom line (and race towards the bottom).

It reminds me of CostCo in America. It's like an ehtical version of Wal-Mart and is very succesful, not just because of the relatively low prices but because a lot of its customers appreciate that plentiful well-treated staff provide a better shopping experience.

Yet two years ago they were threatened by institutional shareholders who felt that labour costs were too high compared with Wal-Mart and demanded a more aggressive policy in terms of wages and training. I think they got away from the threat, but I'm not sure how.

keep to the Fen Causeway