That article is suspicious. It claims “exclusive”. Then it claims info from an executive, but doesn't give the time, place, context or quote. Legitimate authors quote carefully and credit the speaker accordingly, especially when they have an exclusive. They don’t merely name-drop like this guy did.
Where does the data come from? The reference is glaringly absent.
Also, it jumps from “usually” to “frequently” when going from trading to another Porsche to selecting a different make and model. It can’t be both, i.e., a small minority can’t be frequent buyers, only the larger majority can. It’s self-contradicting. At best, it’s sloppy. At worse, it reveals dishonesty.
But there’s an even bigger discrepancy: He begins the piece using “Boxsters and Caymans”, but shifts to “718 twins” later on.
There is a big difference between trading a run-out 986/987 and a new 982. “Boxsters and Caymans” using nothing else refers equally to either.
If there’s any validity to this piece at all - which I seriously doubt - it seems likely the Porsche owner trading for a Wrangler would be trading in a heavily depreciated, multi-owner unit, at a value not unlike many other Wrangler buyers are trading.
And that would be surprising to no one.