NY Times Article on Chris Bangle - The Unofficial BMW M5 Messageboard (m5board.com)

MET · 21st November 2002, 19:24

Today's New York Times business section features a story on Chris Bangle: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/21/bu...wanted=1&8hpib

Need4Spd · 21st November 2002, 20:21

Very interesting article, where Bangle describes his cars as moving works of art. Also interesting is that sales of 7 series is UP 45% and that overall, sales are up 17%. That, in a very tough market. So, either BMW is getting new buyers or past buyers ignore the hideous trunk ("You can't see the trunk from the driver's seat," said one dealer) because the vehicle dynamics are so good.

MEnthusiast · 21st November 2002, 22:27

they are playing games with the sales numbers.

Andrew2.8L · 21st November 2002, 23:57

Quote:

they are playing games with the sales numbers.

Quite possible. Statistics can be manipulated in so many ways.

Even so, with all the advertising and hype that BMW and the automotive press have given to this car, I am not surprised that there are 45% more people buying it than the old 7. I dont ever remember this much advertising for the last seven series. You also have to consider that many people buy on brand image alone and BMWs image in the eyes of the public is probably a lot stronger than it was 8 years ago. In other words these increased sales can be attributed to many factors other than the styling.

My personal take on it is that BMW is simply appealing to a different group of buyers than before, possible more the lexus and infinity crowd than the enthusiast buyer that they used to target. However, BMW is interested in growth, and one way to achieve this it to appeal to a broader crowd. The problem with this is that in the process of gaining new customers, they may lose old ones who dont like the new direction that the company is taking. Time will tell if this approach will work. I dont think it will. The mainstream luxury car market just isnt big enough IMO. BMW should stick with what they are good at.

Andrew

Chris Foote · 22nd November 2002, 00:03

Agreed, what are they comparing it to, the 2001 sales #'s? Give me a break. I have seen 7 series SITTING on dealer lots for WEEKS.

-Chris

MEnthusiast · 22nd November 2002, 00:36

ok here is the shell game they are playing.

they have just about 1 year of sales on the new 7. the last year of production on the old 7 went through July- so they had only 7 months of sales. if we simply assume monthly sales are the same for both cars- doesnt it stand to reason that with more months of production= more cars and if sales remain constant that = more sales.... also they are not discounting the cars that have been "returned" and Im sure they are playing games with cars that the dealers have as demo cars and Im sure there are more games.

the sense I get from conversations I have with people "in the know" is that the 7 is selling "flat at best" relative to the last one. from what I see on the street, I believe it.

dhackney · 22nd November 2002, 05:22

I'm with ME on this one.

The last year of a chassis' production run will be stunted by people waiting for the new generation. This is usually offset by special "aniversary" editions, or special performance packages only available in the last one to two years of a car's production run. You can see this phenomenon today in PT Cruisers and other designs that are undergoing their mid- to late-life "freshenings."

I looked at 7s the last year of production. The dealers I visited were having trouble moving their allocation, even at very, very aggressive pricing.

The 45% is probably a number comparing total current units "sold" to dealers' stock compared to the extremely low sales of the last year's production of a slow selling model. Lies, d*mn lies and statistics.

As noted, the pent up demand of the "I'll buy anything from BMW and drive it like a Buick" crowd replacing their aging 7 coupled with unprecedented (for the 7 series) advertising support is what is giving them the sales they've got.

The story was a beautiful puff piece and BMW's PR agency should be commended. I'm sure the investment of the kazillions it cost BMW to get it written and placed are a result of the loads of bad press and customer reaction Bangle's designs are receiving.

If it was just the 7 series product manager's head on the block it would be over by now. Someone (i.e. the board) obviously has a tremendous investment in their fair haired boy Bangle, and correspondingly enough at risk, to spend what it takes to get a story like this in that kind of position in that publication.

Andrew2.8L · 22nd November 2002, 05:56

Quote:

I'm with ME on this one.

The last year of a chassis' production run will be stunted by people waiting for the new generation. This is usually offset by special "aniversary" editions, or special performance packages only available in the last one to two years of a car's production run. You can see this phenomenon today in PT Cruisers and other designs that are undergoing their mid- to late-life "freshenings."

I looked at 7s the last year of production. The dealers I visited were having trouble moving their allocation, even at very, very aggressive pricing.

I figured that they were comparing first year sales number, ie 2002 vs 1993 numbers. If what you guys are saying is true then that 45% figure is complete nonsense.

MEnthusiast · 22nd November 2002, 06:13

well, I think if you notice they dont even say what the comparison is- they just say its a 45% increase. the fact is, it is compared to 2001.

while I also thought the article was a nice puff piece, the word I hear is BMWNA is furious over this. I dont know the why part, but my guess is the word "ugly" in the title of the article- and thats what most people read. I wonder if this really came from BMWNA's PR or somewhere else.... I know Bangle had a huge picture of him put on all the dealer materials- a first for a BMW designer- and the comments I was hearing are along the lines of "hes a maniac"............

///MorePower · 22nd November 2002, 06:51

Mr. Hakim interviewed me about the petition that I created a while back. But apparently he decided not to even mention the existence of the petition in his article. It would have been better had he decided if he was going to mention it, before asking me quite a few questions. Heh, I even pointed out that the petition got started here, on BMWM5.com

.

greg · 22nd November 2002, 07:18

Quote:

Originally posted by MEnthusiast
the word I hear is BMWNA is furious over this. I dont know the why part, but my guess is the word "ugly" in the title of the article- and thats what most people read.

Might have to do with the amount of $$ BMW spends on advertising in the NYT.

Of course, this battle goes on for every publication, every day. The editorial side, needing to avoid conflict of interest at all costs in order to maintain complete objectivity, prints what they want, trying to represent both sides of the story. (In this case I think they did a good job of this.) The advertising department screams bloody murder but they know they can't win against the sanctity of the highest moral codes of journalism. But then the advertiser threatens to pull the plug on a multi-million $$ advertising contract with the paper. Sometimes the editorial staff begins to see things a little differently - they want a job to go back to in the morrning. Happens all the time.