Jalopnik: "The Death Of BMW’s M Brand"

[M3PO]

Originally Posted by DiscoZ

2. Hahaha... so it's crap why? Did it make you feel angry? Please refute it, you and the 1,000 other fanbois. Don't make a broad declarative statement with no basis or premise behind your “conclusion / argument”.

1. Who gives a damn about "100hp/litre"... no one who cares about performance – otherwise you would see those who are serious about performance brag about it vs. trying to achieve it to get the most power from their cars - which is the idea, vs. the circle jerk. Race cars don't produce 100/hp+ per litre so their crews and fans can get mini chubs each time they think about it. It because they are constrained by rules and need to make the most power from what they have. This has found its way into street cars for (a) homologation, and (b) to give you that "race" feeling. I think he meant what you get for the price. BMW has done nothing to this car except come out with an overpriced GTS edition and an overpriced "track" version bolted together from its existing inventory of parts to squeeze that last bit of juice out of its fanboy followers – many of who probably consume ramen noodles for dinner to afford the next $5K exhaust from the aftermarket because it has beautiful welds or is made of Inconel, etc.

This is why I just bought a Mercedes after 5 BMWs.

(not that there are no fanbois there)

I think you need to re-read my post. I'm not a fanboi at all. This is my first BMW and I've had it less than a year. And I plan to have it only until I get a GT3RS (another year or so). Second, I don't give a fawk about 100 hp/liter (beyond the engineering challenge of it all), it was the OP of the post that I quoted that seems to think that only Porsches that cost twice as much and make north of 100 hp/liter are worth a damn. Learn to read.

[DiscoZ]

Originally Posted by siwon66

LOL, this post is getting epic.

Here are things I don't want to hear on this forum.

1. ///M for marketing?
It's people who are interested in the M brand/heritage not the other way around...

2. M5's fake sound?
Seriously, can we just drop this argument already?
So whenver youtube on the internet you automatically think all the sound it makes through the speaker is fake...?

3. ///M brand's being diluted?
Business is all about making profits and the goal is to maximize the profit. What is so wrong about this concept?

Some narrow-minded BMW enthusiasts...

Oh my, a clever one. Don’t really care about what you don't want to hear about... those are all points that are valid.

1. What?

2. We buy performance cars to hear the sound of the motor, not to hear a fake sound amplified through speakers. Your argument is invalid because it compares an experience we cannot have everyday - i.e. listen to our music live, hence the birth of the high end audiophile industry - to something we pay dearly to do on a regular basis, i.e. drive a high performance car and listen to the sound of its motor - one of the purest expressions of being an auto enthusiast/

3. Thanks Captain Obvious. Those economics and marketing classes really helped, didn't they? You see, there is a fine line between being profitable and successful and being so at the expense of the hand that feeds you. Right now it's easy to say we love BMW, let's see where we are in another 5 - 10 years of unwhelming cars. It will be no different from Audi's "S" division.

The reason why I am so vehement is because I loved BMW Motorsport. I was a fanboi for years, I've owned a few of them (not listed in my sig. is a Z3MC and an E36 M3 that belonged to my best friend who I shared a place with and we swapped cars all the time). I am hugely disappointed in where BMW Motorsport has gone. From no CSL to these overpriced, underwhelming offerings. Yes, the E92 M3 is a great all around car, but for its price, its performance is not that exciting on most tracks. Yes, I do track my cars. Guess what, the next M3 will not be a 100% M developed motor anymore. Does anyone care? Drawing a parallel to the V8 from the I6 is somewhat fair, but at least there was a reason why BMW did it (ALMS, Google the story) and the V8 was still in house, NA and not a tuned stock BMW motor.

[JC919]

Originally Posted by gary88

...most people do.

And 90% of those people have never driven one

[Reznick]

Originally Posted by bdaddylo

Do you think it was BMW's intent for the M brand to be something that is sold to the masses? The M cars is a small segment which is why is should be something special even if it comes at a loss financially because it helps promote the BMW brand. Using cost and regulations as an excuse for not being able to build a true M car for the US is a big cop out. Porsche does it and they don't have nearly the amount of revenue BMW has.

Did you read the last line of what I wrote??That was my point. M cars weren't built for the masses. and while we're at it, whats a TRUE M car? POrsche doesn't have the revenue of BMW??? Last I checked, they have VERY deep pockets

[kdbryce]

wow kind of harsh

but i kind of agree... sort of

i would say any AMG or an ISF is way more of a "poser" car than an M, though

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by siwon66

LOL, this post is getting epic.

Here are things I don't want to hear on this forum.

1. ///M for marketing?
It's people who are interested in the M brand/heritage not the other way around...

2. M5's fake sound?
Seriously, can we just drop this argument already?
So whenver youtube on the internet you automatically think all the sound it makes through the speaker is fake...?

3. ///M brand's being diluted?
Business is all about making profits and the goal is to maximize the profit. What is so wrong about this concept?

Some narrow-minded BMW enthusiasts...

For a brand to have value it needs an identity. Is there anything that BMW could do that would change the M brand and make it less valuable to you?

For most people there is a balance between being a slave to a narrow set of principles for a brand and whoring the brand out to the point that it no longer means anything. Differing people draw the lines in differing places.

History though is full of brands that lost the public eye and rotted away. That's pretty much covered in most basic business classes.

[Vintage]

he makes many valid points and it is clear he is concerned - so am I and I appreciate the passion for the brand. however, we need BMW financially healthy in these troubled times so every now and then they can turn out what we can all agree is a car deserving of the M badge (e.g. 1M). bottom line for me, yes the M badge has been a wee bit abused as of late but I will forgive them if every three years or so they pump out the equivalent of the 1M and make 2,500 of them instead of 800. for me, that would also be the M3 Europe only lightweight sedan with its racing seats, more extensive use of carbon, and performance exhaust. if they took that concept and applied it to the Coupe, removed the back seat, and installed a roll cage or at least made it an option - all in. alas, you shall say, "they did, the GTS" or whatever they called the 4.4 liter EUROPE ONLY car for $150k+. if we can't buy it here is the USA and it cost as much as a 911 turbo it does not count in my book

[DiscoZ]

Originally Posted by M3PO

I think you need to re-read my post. I'm not a fanboi at all. This is my first BMW and I've had it less than a year. And I plan to have it only until I get a GT3RS (another year or so). Second, I don't give a fawk about 100 hp/liter (beyond the engineering challenge of it all), it was the OP of the post that I quoted that seems to think that only Porsches that cost twice as much and make north of 100 hp/liter are worth a damn. Learn to read.

Yikes... I think you need to read too. The OP you quoted said Porsche has something extra that it offers for its editions, not a painted, parts inventory slapped on version this "Lime Rock" edition is. Boss 302 Laguna Seca anyone?

Anyway, this is a moot point and we digress from the argument at hand.

[TheRealOrosie]

Originally Posted by simianspeedster

It's easy to oversimplify the M conundrum, but brand equity is not an easy thing to manage as scale increases. Think about it: how can BMW simultaneously keep the M brand special while making enough financial return on their investment in the brand? Scope creep is inevitable, especially as brand status gets figured into the equation.

I had a 1988 E30 M3 from '88 to '91 and it was the most special car I've ever owned. Unfortunately that car is not competitive by today's standards and BMW would be mocked by many if they attempted to introduce a car as simple and pure as the E30 M3 today. Like it or not, the Toyota/Subaru FR-S/BRZ is the closest modem equivalent to an E30 M3 and it sells for under $30K.

The "simple performance car" market is basically closed to BMW because there's a lot more competition in that arena today than there was 25 years ago at much lower price points (370Z, Mustang GT, etc.) and BMW has understandably decided to play in a more expensive space to keep their brand status and profits high. At the price points where M cars sell, most buyers want everything: all the power, all the comfort, all the "look fast" bits and all the technology. And at the same time, BMW has to meet increasing regulatory demands -- safety, fuel economy, etc. As a result, the M cars try to be all things to all people and they fail as pure performance cars. But they're selling in record numbers and BMW is a business before all else. If people weren't buying them, BMW wouldn't keep building them.

Realistically, what M car can BMW reasonably and profitably produce that would please the old M guard? I would have preferred that the 1M Coupe were a 260HP naturally aspirated N52 variant that was stripped of unnecessary technology and weighed 3,200 lbs or less. That would have felt more like a real M car to me (and I would have bought one for certain), but there's no way BMW could profitably sell that car for under $45K. Even at $45K, the armchair internet racers would lambast it for being underpowered and overpriced (which would also describe almost every NA Porsche for people who don't know any better). It would be an old school success, but a new school failure.

So I'm torn -- I am firmly against the idea of M SUVs (and Porsche SUVs) and 4,200 lb. $100K M Sedans but I understand that they serve to underwrite other BMW performance models that I may want, so I begrudgingly acknowledge their purpose. As I see it, the problem is this: I don't think BMW can simultaneously keep the old guard and the new guard happy while remaining profitable, so they're catering to the new, monied customers at the expense of the old school performance enthusiasts. It's really that simple -- they're chasing the new money and it hurts to recognize that fact if you feel left out of the party. The buyers are changing and BMW is changing with them.

But before attacking BMW for their strategy, ask yourself this: what M car can BMW realistically produce today that would keep both the old guard and new guard happy while maintaining profitability? It's a much harder question to answer once you really think about it.

^^^Excellent^^^

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by P-TownM3

^^^Excellent^^^

[DiscoZ]

Originally Posted by simianspeedster

It's easy to oversimplify the M conundrum, but brand equity is not an easy thing to manage as scale increases. Think about it: how can BMW simultaneously keep the M brand special while making enough financial return on their investment in the brand? Scope creep is inevitable, especially as brand status gets figured into the equation.

I had a 1988 E30 M3 from '88 to '91 and it was the most special car I've ever owned. Unfortunately that car is not competitive by today's standards and BMW would be mocked by many if they attempted to introduce a car as simple and pure as the E30 M3 today. Like it or not, the Toyota/Subaru FR-S/BRZ is the closest modem equivalent to an E30 M3 and it sells for under $30K.

The "simple performance car" market is basically closed to BMW because there's a lot more competition in that arena today than there was 25 years ago at much lower price points (370Z, Mustang GT, etc.) and BMW has understandably decided to play in a more expensive space to keep their brand status and profits high. At the price points where M cars sell, most buyers want everything: all the power, all the comfort, all the "look fast" bits and all the technology. And at the same time, BMW has to meet increasing regulatory demands -- safety, fuel economy, etc. As a result, the M cars try to be all things to all people and they fail as pure performance cars. But they're selling in record numbers and BMW is a business before all else. If people weren't buying them, BMW wouldn't keep building them.

Realistically, what M car can BMW reasonably and profitably produce that would please the old M guard? I would have preferred that the 1M Coupe were a 260HP naturally aspirated N52 variant that was stripped of unnecessary technology and weighed 3,200 lbs or less. That would have felt more like a real M car to me (and I would have bought one for certain), but there's no way BMW could profitably sell that car for under $45K. Even at $45K, the armchair internet racers would lambast it for being underpowered and overpriced (which would also describe almost every NA Porsche for people who don't know any better). It would be an old school success, but a new school failure.

So I'm torn -- I am firmly against the idea of M SUVs (and Porsche SUVs) and 4,200 lb. $100K M Sedans but I understand that they serve to underwrite other BMW performance models that I may want, so I begrudgingly acknowledge their purpose. As I see it, the problem is this: I don't think BMW can simultaneously keep the old guard and the new guard happy while remaining profitable, so they're catering to the new, monied customers at the expense of the old school performance enthusiasts. It's really that simple -- they're chasing the new money and it hurts to recognize that fact if you feel left out of the party. The buyers are changing and BMW is changing with them.

But before attacking BMW for their strategy, ask yourself this: what M car can BMW realistically produce today that would keep both the old guard and new guard happy while maintaining profitability? It's a much harder question to answer once you really think about it.

Fine. However, BMW had competition then in the pure-play racer segment and it does now. There were always Corvettes, F-Body cars, Mustangs, Supras, MR2's, 300ZX's, 3000GT VR4's, DSMs, Integras, Preludes, GTIs etc. I think there has always been competition. BMW has simply decided to tap into the global luxury boom in conspicious consumption which is fine as a corporation. What that means is one will get more mediocre, watered down "M" badged cars. Thus, the brand will dilute to those who are more performance oriented and accrete to those who care about racer bling with luxury.

Answer to your last question: 1M and M3. However they need to be better. I don't think BMW profitability rests on M. It does increase with "halo" M branded hardware for the regular classes. Since BMW doesn't appear to report M segment vs. other automotive segment revenueI don't know if one can access its financials and analyse relative profitability and contribution across these specific segments. If I had to take a gander, I would say M has higher margins and lower absolute profitibility.

[Reznick]

Originally Posted by r53s65e90

As long as they make cars I want to drive I don't care where they slap M badges. The poser market is big. It is only understandable that they cater to it.

+1 There poser market will ALWAYS be part of higher end cars .Its a fact that some people just can't deal with but its the truth.Lets face it, if you have the $$$ you have the right to buy it.I'll bet half the owners of newer M cars couldn't tell you any more about the car than what the salesman told them.Like I said before , the "masses" will buy because they want to be seen in a nice car and some of them work there way up into some REALLY nice cars without even knowing it.LOL

[DUI Elite]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. He does make some valid points.

But I notice that, in one breath, he trashed the guy who actually planned to take his car to the track, while in the next breath he trashed people for pretending to be drivers but never taking their cars to the track.

He also laid into the non-stock configuration of the ALMS or Le Mans M3 race cars, but then utterly dismisses the Grand Am series - where real stock M3s actually do compete in the GS class - citing the Kia competition.

In other words the author does demonstrate a bit of hypocrisy, at least at some level of abstraction, and seems to really enjoy ranting.

All MHO.

This!

I caught that too, and was hoping others did as well.

The guy has a few solid points, but overall seems very butt hurt about the situation. From the title, I was expecting a rant about all the different M models there are now, X5M, X6M, 1M, M235 etc. etc.

Though I'm not happy with how the brand is (hardly) handling the demand for mainly performance vehicles (instead of mainly luxury), all it takes is 30 seconds driving a non BMW to realize, they're still miles ahead of the competition. Which is exactly why I still love BMW.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by ssabripo

buy a MY2013 coupe from any of our favorite CA's here ...you still would have the same exact car (as the Limerock car) with a good $5k in pocket to boot.

Your numbers are off.
You wouldn't walk away from your deal with 5k in you pocket.

Invoice (+1k) from your favorite CA- 56,290
Options from your favorite CA 14,155

Total 70,445

In other words, they are selling the Limerock car pretty close to invoice (70,100) with no hassle.

Options: paint, competition pak, muffler,chin splitter, spoiler, steering wheel interior trim.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by simianspeedster

It's easy to oversimplify the M conundrum, but brand equity is not an easy thing to manage as scale increases. Think about it: how can BMW simultaneously keep the M brand special while making enough financial return on their investment in the brand? Scope creep is inevitable, especially as brand status gets figured into the equation.

I had a 1988 E30 M3 from '88 to '91 and it was the most special car I've ever owned. Unfortunately that car is not competitive by today's standards and BMW would be mocked by many if they attempted to introduce a car as simple and pure as the E30 M3 today. Like it or not, the Toyota/Subaru FR-S/BRZ is the closest modem equivalent to an E30 M3 and it sells for under $30K.

The "simple performance car" market is basically closed to BMW because there's a lot more competition in that arena today than there was 25 years ago at much lower price points (370Z, Mustang GT, etc.) and BMW has understandably decided to play in a more expensive space to keep their brand status and profits high. At the price points where M cars sell, most buyers want everything: all the power, all the comfort, all the "look fast" bits and all the technology. And at the same time, BMW has to meet increasing regulatory demands -- safety, fuel economy, etc. As a result, the M cars try to be all things to all people and they fail as pure performance cars. But they're selling in record numbers and BMW is a business before all else. If people weren't buying them, BMW wouldn't keep building them.

Realistically, what M car can BMW reasonably and profitably produce that would please the old M guard? I would have preferred that the 1M Coupe were a 260HP naturally aspirated N52 variant that was stripped of unnecessary technology and weighed 3,200 lbs or less. That would have felt more like a real M car to me (and I would have bought one for certain), but there's no way BMW could profitably sell that car for under $45K. Even at $45K, the armchair internet racers would lambast it for being underpowered and overpriced (which would also describe almost every NA Porsche for people who don't know any better). It would be an old school success, but a new school failure.

So I'm torn -- I am firmly against the idea of M SUVs (and Porsche SUVs) and 4,200 lb. $100K M Sedans but I understand that they serve to underwrite other BMW performance models that I may want, so I begrudgingly acknowledge their purpose. As I see it, the problem is this: I don't think BMW can simultaneously keep the old guard and the new guard happy while remaining profitable, so they're catering to the new, monied customers at the expense of the old school performance enthusiasts. It's really that simple -- they're chasing the new money and it hurts to recognize that fact if you feel left out of the party. The buyers are changing and BMW is changing with them.

But before attacking BMW for their strategy, ask yourself this: what M car can BMW realistically produce today that would keep both the old guard and new guard happy while maintaining profitability? It's a much harder question to answer once you really think about it.

Bingo, most eloquent and accurate analysis so far !!

But the end result is still the ///M getting diluted.

[palpatine_us]

For people that want a 3000 lb bare bones car with a small motor- go to lotus. You better hurry because they're teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Nobody wants a $50,000 slot car as a daily driver.

You want a tourer on the road and a beast on the track. So you want two cars- guess what- that adds weight with complex suspensions and additional engine power to move that mass around.

[bdaddylo]

Originally Posted by Reznick

Did you read the last line of what I wrote??That was my point. M cars weren't built for the masses. and while we're at it, whats a TRUE M car? POrsche doesn't have the revenue of BMW??? Last I checked, they have VERY deep pockets

Sorry, I didn't get your point the first time around. To me a true M car is a sports car and not a porky luxury GT. Porsche sold ~120k units last year and BMW sold ~1.6M. While Porsche probably has higher margins, I highly doubt Porsche's bottom line comes close to BMW's.

[mapezzul]

Originally Posted by ssabripo

which is exactly the main point of the article, IMO.

The Lime Rock "special edition" as it currently stands is not only a slap in the face (as were all these mickey mouse "special editions" that were nothing more than special coloring and some numeric badge with a serial), but robbery in terms of a anything "limited" about it.

Case in point, buy a MY2013 coupe from any of our favorite CA's here for $500-$1000 over invoice, slap the $5k for the orange paint, and $1.5k for all the CF accents, and you still would have the same exact car with a good $5k in pocket to boot.

Now, if they would have added some of the items I mentioned that actually make the car "special" (more powerful powerplant, lighter components like CRT seats, etc), and then charge a "premium", then I doubt anyone would have an issue with it.

I keep getting back to the e46 CSL everytime I think about these "special editions"...now THAT was a car that really deserved some attention, but too bad that it never made it Stateside...

You can thank the US gov't for those cars never getting here- with a million a pop to crash test and certify BMWNA would need to sell them at $100k a piece which is NOT the target market.

There will be some news on the F80 soon enough and will put peoples minds in perspective.

People also need to realize BMM M GmbH does NOT control its own fate- BMW AG does. BMW AG has final say into products and what is to be built in serial production. M designs cars that they'd like to see then the board makes adjustments or says NO- there is an entire collection of M products that never were green lighted.... M5 Performance edition anyone? Which had the 5.5l engine that was to power the BMW CS Flagship (Headed by M) that was also axed by BMW AG.

[conradb]

I own a E92 M3, but I'm building a 2012 Mustang GT 5.0 track car because I can make a real track beast easily out of it. It's just come to the point where BMW isn't making the lean race cars they should have continued to make since the early years. When a car almost 1/3 the price of the M3 can do everything it can do on the track, you've got a problem.

The M3 is now a luxury sports car. It's lost its edge. While this article is a bit over-dramatic, it still hits the mark. BMW M division, are you listening?

[Venom]

Slightly off-topic, but do you "enthusiasts" think the gt86 is a return to standards for what the ///M badge should stand for?

I am rather curious about the BMW and Toyota rumor that is going around. That joint venture might just keep enthusiasts happy.

[xspeedy]

Thank you for speaking the truth and ignoring all the fan boys out there. Management has been whoring out the BMW and M brands to the point they are becoming meaningless.

The accountants and marketers are running the shop and that is never a good thing. The passion has been missing and soon BMW will be like Honda, wondering what happened.

I know companies are in the business of making money, but this drive to become Toyota is getting out of hand. Strive to be the best, not the biggest.

[Reznick]

Originally Posted by bdaddylo

Sorry, I didn't get your point the first time around. To me a true M car is a sports car and not a porky luxury GT. Porsche sold ~120k units last year and BMW sold ~1.6M. While Porsche probably has higher margins, I highly doubt Porsche's bottom line comes close to BMW's.

Thats exactly what I'd love to see too , but by that rationale, both your 1M and my M3 aren't true M cars even though e9x M3 trounces the cars that came before it ( performance wise). No matter how much we'd like to think everyone driving and M series car around knows everything about it , the simple fact is there will always be posers.But BMW IS caught in a conundrum how to keep EVERYONE happy.They are a victim of their own success. To much leather, sound deadening and gadgets and the purists aren't happy. Take that stuff away and BMW's average buyer isn't happy.
My point about Porsche was somewhat sarcastic seeing as VW just made the final buy out to completely own them.