More niches in body styles, actually fewer niches in engine (the core of performance), which is troubling.
People are mistaking profitability (margin) vs actual profit dollars. Porsche is actually a more profitable company (margins) vs. BMW, but a much smaller size and they are providing niches in both body styles and engines (e.g. having one of the last normally aspirated ones in performance cars) while winning every category they're in comparison tests. From the enthusiast perspective, it's not achieving profitability as the sole determinant of winning, but how you achieve that profitability.
And as far as advertising, so all the comparos that BMW used to win were actually because they spent more ad dollars, and now beginning in 2012, they aren't spending, so they're not winning anymore?
Originally Posted by Never Convicted
That's a false premise to begin with. You see a review by a magazine into which GM pours advertising money that says the ATS is a better car than a 3, and you say it like it's Gospel. BMW is profitable because they continually innovate and incorporate technology, which has ALWAYS been their mission. So now they expand their model line into niches, and you say they're alienating their core? Why is that? Do you have to own one of every model they have? Truth be told, BMW sells performance at a discount to the super high line brands, and much better than price competitors. They're profitable BECAUSE they do this. If an ATS is better than a 335i, you prove out. If you think a 5GT is fugly, I concur. Horses for courses. Resting on their laurels? That's a joke.