[ZilberGrau ZHP]

Originally Posted by anotheran

I very agree with this. Sometimes I wonder why my wife bought a BMW (wondering whether it was I who steered her this direction) as she was cross shopping IS250, TLX, A4, and C Class. And what eliminated the other choices wasn't based on driving dynamics at all.

Truth

[Tag]

"Answer:
BMW has ceased to be a company designing responsive, sporting cars for enthusiasts. It has gone mainstream, which, from a shareholder's perspective, has been a good move. The brand is greatly respected, and BMW earned that respect. Most BMW buyers today pay a monthly lease and have no idea why they bought the brand, other than that it enjoys instant recognition and respect among the owner's peers. Taut ride, superb handling, sharp steering, and symphonic-quality engine sound have mostly fallen by the wayside; today's BMW customer neither notices nor cares. Front-wheel drive, minivans, small pickups—all toxic to the original owner base—are possible and will/would sell just fine."

Wow, for someone that's not a bean counter he sure sounds like one. This also explains why all their new models (with exception to M cars) don't drive/feel like a BMW anymore and gives you a pretty good indication that things will not get better. Not sure what the incentive is to buy/lease a BMW when it's just as numb as driving any other car. Interested to see if 3/4series sales continue to drop.

[SO17]

I think it was quite telling when their survey for 1 series owners showed that the vast majority didn't know that it was rear wheel drive. That told them that driving dynamics wasn't at the top of the list when it came to choosing one of their cars. Rather, the roundel on the hood was....

[N8N]

Originally Posted by tetsuo111

Lutz is one of the more respected and credible auto execs around. His accomplishments make him credible in the industry, and he is definitely a car guy, not a bean counter.

His reply succinctly captures the sentiment of driving enthusiasts with respect to modern BMWs. BMW leadership today aspires to build the brand into a global force. This means marketing and design to the mass consumer. The brand strategy reminds me of GM when the bean counters were in charge in the bad old 70s and 80s.

Ironically, GM learned, is now led by car guys (and women), and builds better enthusiast cars than BMW. Kind of sad.

At least in the US however, BMW is still perceived as an entry-level prestige brand, not a mass market brand.

They're going to have to keep some sort of unique feature to maintain that image, otherwise why *not* just buy a Chevy or Toyota?

(to be fair, my roommate has a Camry and it's actually quite nice. I could easily be OK with that as a regular driver, but at the same time, there's no comparison that the E92 - or more so, E46 - just feels better in almost every driving dynamic respect.)

[nemex12]

Originally Posted by evanevery

Increasing Sales brings in more money, but...

BMW built its image by designing high performance automobiles for car enthusiasts. Widening the design portfolio, while bringing in more sales, will also ultimately dilute the image of a sharp handling sports car as more compromises are made to luxury and/or the mass market in general.

If the brand finds this to be a huge sales success, enthusiasts lose because performance models become less important/available/focused. If the brand find this to be a huge failure, the brand may disappear altogether, if the enthusiasts change allegiances to a more focused brand.

Radio Shack used to be a very focused store. If you were into electronics, you could find almost any individual component there (transistors, capacitors, resistors, switches, etc). They also had one of the first personal computers (TRS-80). Their sales were driven by a niche market of enthusiasts. Then they diluted their brand in a hope to get more mass market share. Eventually, all you could buy at Radio Shack was Cell Phones, MP3 players, and cheap radio control cars. I expect their sales went up as they embraced the mass market, but they lost their identity, and the enthusiast customers went elsewhere (SparkFun, etc). Now they were competing in a much larger market, with many more players, and just couldn't compete on that level. So they also lost their mass market customers as well. Radio Shack ultimately failed as they lost focus and diluted their brand in hopes to appeal to a larger market, and easily lost to the Best Buy's of the world.

"New Coke" anyone?

I've said it before, but: "If you keep adding water to the Kool Aide, pretty soon all you got is water"

exactly my thoughts... if you are good at something keep your recipe

[Diver]

Well, there are always the domestic pony cars with their big V-8 motors.

[YungDro]

thread closed....

[jzmundy]

Originally Posted by evanevery

Increasing Sales brings in more money, but...

BMW built its image by designing high performance automobiles for car enthusiasts. Widening the design portfolio, while bringing in more sales, will also ultimately dilute the image of a sharp handling sports car as more compromises are made to luxury and/or the mass market in general.

If the brand finds this to be a huge sales success, enthusiasts lose because performance models become less important/available/focused. If the brand find this to be a huge failure, the brand may disappear altogether, if the enthusiasts change allegiances to a more focused brand.

Radio Shack used to be a very focused store. If you were into electronics, you could find almost any individual component there (transistors, capacitors, resistors, switches, etc). They also had one of the first personal computers (TRS-80). Their sales were driven by a niche market of enthusiasts. Then they diluted their brand in a hope to get more mass market share. Eventually, all you could buy at Radio Shack was Cell Phones, MP3 players, and cheap radio control cars. I expect their sales went up as they embraced the mass market, but they lost their identity, and the enthusiast customers went elsewhere (SparkFun, etc). Now they were competing in a much larger market, with many more players, and just couldn't compete on that level. So they also lost their mass market customers as well. Radio Shack ultimately failed as they lost focus and diluted their brand in hopes to appeal to a larger market, and easily lost to the Best Buy's of the world.

"New Coke" anyone?

I've said it before, but: "If you keep adding water to the Kool Aide, pretty soon all you got is water"

Great response.

[LuisBoston]

Originally Posted by SoManyBlueCars

The last great car they built was the e9x M3.

128i.

Light(ish), balanced, naturally aspirated, MINE.

[ORIGIN M.]

Originally Posted by SoManyBlueCars

I think you'd be alone on that island.

Nope he got on the bridge before you, it seems you are now on said Island.

[David70]

Take any luxury/sports brand that has built it's sales on a reputation for being special in some way, go after the volume or mid market consumer and short to medium term it shows in increased volume and profit. Question is if it works long term.

If there was a Sub Zero freezer, Rolex watch or Rolls Royce at the half the price of the current ones but with 80% of the content it would immediately be a success and show great profit and increased bottom line numbers. 10 years later it might turn out to be a bad idea but I guess most of the people involved with the decisions are long gone by then. Time will tell on whether they can keep their reputation/status as they try to be in most markets and keep the mainstream buyers happy.

[bd307]

People just need to get out of their mind and compare the current cars on the market TODAY instead of comparing to the "old days". I still think most BMW cars drive better than other brands of cars today.

A lot of these have to do with the media. Perhaps, BMW have not been paying their dues on time to these media outlets

[Reedomn]

Originally Posted by tuco44

It's all a matter of personal taste. I owned a 2009 E90 M3 and felt that it had the wrong engine. I suggest the current M2 is a great enthusiasts car.

I have owned them both and I agree the V8 wasn't right for the M3. M2 is pure.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by David70

Take any luxury/sports brand that has built it's sales on a reputation for being special in some way, go after the volume or mid market consumer and short to medium term it shows in increased volume and profit. Question is if it works long term.

Porsche.

yes they built the Cayenne... but have you noticed that they have remained 100% true to their core fan base? Even going as far as to create the 911R?

When BMW M build the S65 they had said there is "plenty" of room left in NA development. Had BMW cared about its core fan base it would have continued down that glorious path and continued building legendary cars.

[cwhands]

Waiting for a million more threads regarding this when they switch to Hybrid M's and ditch manuals completely.

Won't even be surprised if the F8x is the last manual.

Technology evolves and markets change. Why else would the X4 exist?

How would BMW hit such high volume if they didn't adapt to these changes?

Like any other business, they're in it to make money.

Most customers lease, they want the "prestige" of the BMW Roundel on their hood, and expect a few updates between lease cycles. They are more concerned with finding new ways to text and drive than they are with the experience of driving a BMW in the first place. These customers make up the vast majority. The lifetime value of one of these clients in BMW's eyes is higher than those of most enthusiasts. As such, BMW makes moves to meet their demands. Enthusiasts, like most of us here, are the minority by far. At that point who cares if we want hatches/shooting brakes/wagons/manuals/rwd/V8s/NAmotors/whatever.

Such is life. It will get to the point that buying the car you want in the configuration you want it will mean buying used and hoping it wasn't horribly abused because you won't even be able to order one like it new. S2000 and 135i are decent enough examples.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by bd307

People just need to get out of their mind and compare the current cars on the market TODAY instead of comparing to the "old days". I still think most BMW cars drive better than other brands of cars today.

That is how I see it, if we want to be in latest generation cars, whatever the marque.

I can only see it from a UK perspective, where the 3-series still commands its typical number one place. Why? It is the best package. As for competitors, over here in the UK it has to be the other two German brands, Audi and Mercedes. We do also have the new Jaguar after the crown. The XE is rated as a better drivers car (by some), but for many it is not there yet, even if the steering and handling may be making a march into (and succeeding) on what was BMW territory.

Users are after the complete package, it's multi faceted, right through to the infotainment interface. BMW are still highly rated. Many see the Jaguar's infotainment system as a less than ideal setup, even a deal breaker. Car buyers/users want more than a focus on driving dynamics, yes it has to drive well, but as part of the 'whole package', including the comforts and running costs, which have to be right to tick all the boxes. This is where BMW do still appear to have it right at present.

[sygazelle]

I've read the responses to this thread and I am surprised by the folks that are upset at BMW for daring to build cars a broader market and caring about trivial things like unit sales, revenue, profits, competition, survival, relevance in a global market, etc. What do those that are pissed that BMW builds softball cars to sell more units expect BMW to do? Keep its head in the sand and be a niche player of really great sport sedans and pretend its still the 1970's. If they had done what you wanted, there would be no BMW today.

Some call it bean-counter mentality. I call it brilliant. They know exactly what they are doing. Do you think they give a rat's ass about pissing off less than one half of one percent if the prize is building a highly successful global brand?

Its not like they left the enthusiast in the dust. They still build Ms. They still offer packages and options to cater to needs/wants of the few.

I cannot understand the logic that because BMW offers less sporty cars that it is somehow diluting the brand. If you have a nice M3, for example, whats the difference to the way your car drives if BMW also sells a 3er with luxury line with 17" wheels with a driver that loves ECO mode? What is really being diluted here? If you are looking for a proper state-of-the-art sports sedan, BMW sells it. You just have to pay for it. Simple reality. Whats the difference if they sell a bunch of other cars that aren't as sporty?

Here is a chart. You are in charge of the company's success. Are you really going to focus on the little blue part and ignore the big orange part?

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by evanevery

BMW built its image by designing high performance automobiles for car enthusiasts. Widening the design portfolio, while bringing in more sales, will also ultimately dilute the image of a sharp handling sports car as more compromises are made to luxury and/or the mass market in general."

But is this the whole BMW story, or just a selected part which fits the current thinking that BMW is diluting the brand?

I come from the time when BMW did make much softer models, we didn't even have sport models. SE models were the model to have.

Many bought into the brand in the UK based on excellent German engineering, yes they were good to drive, but comfortable at the same time. Most were bread and butter models, had no sport features, come to think about it didn't even have OE radio.

BMW gradually moved into the more sport optioned age for their mass market. Even my 1998 540i (over 25-years on from my introduction to BMW) had to have sport (M-tech) suspension and an M-tech steering wheel as an option, to make it 'sporty'. My neighbor still runs his 1998 535i, nothing sporty about it at all, it is a good drive, but all about comfort. In the UK many an E46 was an SE model, so comfort was the priority for many users. Yes BMW did introduce the E39 M5 and E46 M3, but they weren't the bread and butter models on which BMW were building the sales.

For me BMW was built on more than just this 'sporty driving image' which many see as the focus of BMW.

[Law]

Originally Posted by tuco44

It's all a matter of personal taste. I owned a 2009 E90 M3 and felt that it had the wrong engine. I suggest the current M2 is a great enthusiasts car.

We all know a combination of emissions, fuel economy, and an overall corporate-wide direction of genericization (cost effectiveness) and obsession with numbers that prompted BMW M to drop its naturally aspirated racing engines, which have defined BMW M from its inception until recently.

But even more so, its skewed logic such as this that continues to encourage this trend.
So i strongly disagree with your statement. In fact, I'd argue they didn't use the engine enough. A Z4 M or 1M/M2 with an S65 would've been an enthusiast's dream.

But hey BMW M realized they can take the easy way out and still receive praise.
And enthusiasts wonder how in the world they [BMW M] went from homologation race cars and high-revving, ITB, racing engines to active sound, AWD, and cost cutting

[335i classic]

I have a feeling that BMW is going back to their roots, especially with the newer engines, and newer chassis coming out. The F chassis are good but could have been better. I feel like BMW just really released these cars to just come out with something, but I think the next chassis and new engines are going back to the roots. I've driven the new 7 and it's really really really amazing (to me) lol it felt like my brothers e23 735i just with new technology.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

Here is a chart. You are in charge of the company's success. Are you really going to focus on the little blue part and ignore the big orange part?

Probably a good thing you aren't in BD as if that is the way you think, you're missing a major opportunity.

See that blue line? Those are the guys who will pay for the high margin product if you make it true-to-form and speak directly to the enthusiast. See, you use all that orange to fund the business and make profit (Cayenne). But then you market something exquisite to those who appreciate it (911R) not some half-assed fuel efficient shit (any turbo M).

Originally Posted by tuco44

It's all a matter of personal taste. I owned a 2009 E90 M3 and felt that it had the wrong engine. I suggest the current M2 is a great enthusiasts car.

I completely agree about the S65 having owned one as well. Made the car feel like an absolute boat at low speeds given the E92's enormous (too big) size and the total unwillingness of the motor to do anything until you're up in high revs breaking every speed limit. As for the M2 its..better.. I guess. But still misses the mark IMO. I might consider one CPO as a DD.

[N8N]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

I've read the responses to this thread and I am surprised by the folks that are upset at BMW for daring to build cars a broader market and caring about trivial things like unit sales, revenue, profits, competition, survival, relevance in a global market, etc. What do those that are pissed that BMW builds softball cars to sell more units expect BMW to do? Keep its head in the sand and be a niche player of really great sport sedans and pretend its still the 1970's. If they had done what you wanted, there would be no BMW today.

Some call it bean-counter mentality. I call it brilliant. They know exactly what they are doing. Do you think they give a rat's ass about pissing off less than one half of one percent if the prize is building a highly successful global brand?

Its not like they left the enthusiast in the dust. They still build Ms. They still offer packages and options to cater to needs/wants of the few.

I cannot understand the logic that because BMW offers less sporty cars that it is somehow diluting the brand. If you have a nice M3, for example, whats the difference to the way your car drives if BMW also sells a 3er with luxury line with 17" wheels with a driver that loves ECO mode? What is really being diluted here? If you are looking for a proper state-of-the-art sports sedan, BMW sells it. You just have to pay for it. Simple reality. Whats the difference if they sell a bunch of other cars that aren't as sporty?

Here is a chart. You are in charge of the company's success. Are you really going to focus on the little blue part and ignore the big orange part?

I don't really have a problem with that.

What I do hope, however, is that the cars that BMW makes in the future are such that simply by buying the "M" or "ZSP" version you get that enthusiast car, and the same basic underpinnings are just dialed back for the masses. So the great unwashed get the same car, but with the floaty-boat suspension and nice quiet exhaust, and those of us who prefer our shifts fast, hard, and with flames out the tailpipes can still get what we want.