Quote:
Originally Posted by wtfbrah
I don't get this whole idea of a "true" M car. As if BMW has to stick to the exact blueprint they started with in the M division. It's an M car if they call it an M car. That's like saying my iPhone isn't a "true iPhone" because it doesn't have the large bulky appearance of the 3GS, the slow processor of the iPhone 2, or the square edges of the 4S. Things change. The X5 M is truly an incredible car.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF
It's not. But that's opinion. And no it's not. It's like saying an iPad is an I phone. But honestly I don't care. As a marketing guy I appreciate the exercise
|
Both of you are missing the point somewhat. This is about branding, and about the perception that the branding represents vs. what the brand actually means because of its pedigree.
"Real" M cars are developed by BMW M GmbH, which is a wholly-owned but operationally independent subsidiary of BMW AG. It does its own R&D and manufactures many its own parts for use in M models built by the parent company.
The subsidiary has been so successful that BMW "leverages" the branding to produced model variants with, for lack of a better term, "M spice". This includes M Sport, M Performance, and models with the "M" designation before a full model number/name (i.e., M235i). Mercedes does the same thing with AMG variants, and Audi does a combination of both with its "S" variants ("S" parts are still developed by the parent company, not an independent subsidiary).
Why do these companies do this? Because it enhances the sale-ability of the cars, both new and used -- and because ///M, AMG, and S variants ALL have higher demand than their regular counterparts. It adds value to the cars, at every level. Value means profit. Period.
Does BMW have the right to leverage ///M in non-M cars? Of course. Does it have the right to change definitions over time? Absolutely. But - as this discussion plainly demonstrates - there comes a point where leveraging a brand that means a certain something (tangibly and intangibly) to enhance something else weakens the brand, both in the eyes of consumers and in real currency.
Perfect case study: Is the M2 a 'weaker' M car than the M4? Some say yes, some say no -- and both are correct because the reasoning is different depending on the point of view. The better questions are:
- Does the M2 weaken the ///M brand?
- Does the X6M weaken the ///M brand? (Those of you who know Mazdas know why BMW couldn't use "MX6"
- Does the M240i weaken the ///M brand?
- Do M Sport variants of regular BMW models weaken the ///M brand?
These are questions BMW AG asks itself
on a daily basis because that brand is arguably the most valuable thing it owns. The proof? It's easy: Resale value and demand for "full" M models. As long as the 'full' designation exists, the value will remain high and tangible -- and the moment the gap between 'full' M cars and "M spiced" cars closes too far is the moment the ///M brand begins to lose value.
Is that gap between the M240i and the M2 too narrow? I would say no -- and BMW is positioning both as well as it possibly can from now until the 2020 model year to maintain a proper gap between the two models.