Re: Brand Awareness (was: "old design was oilheads-digest V1 #47")

[Steve Makohin <wateredg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/7/04 12:04 PM, rennsport@xxxxxxxxx rennsport@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

>On Wednesday, Jan 7, 2004, at 11:40 US/Eastern, Steve Makohin wrote:
>>
>> I will stop you here to interject and reposition your statement in a 
>> more
>> accurate fashion, thus: "Maybe BMW wants to remain a niche player 
>> selling
>> motorcycles at premium prices that do not compete on a peak horsepower
>> basis."
>
>Nah, I like my sentence better. But i will change the word "inflated" 
>to over-priced.hat way we can avoid the economics lesson.
>
>:-)
[...]

I will take your response in the spirit of something you said in your 
posting earlier today:

  "You know I never looked for the proof nor do I car[e] for any."

At this point, I will pursue this issue no further :-)




>> There are many other differences, too. And upon examination of these
>> differences, we will see that both Ducati and BMW Motorrad are
>> "justified" in their premium pricing. For example:
>>
>>   o Ducati is a multi-time race winner, and as such, has earned a lot 
>> of
>>     prestige amongst motorcycle fans who are interested in performance
>>     (or looking like the guys who win races).
>>
>>   o Ducati is also perceived as The Ferrari Of Motorcycles. There is a
>>     lot of "Exotic" prestige associated with the Ducati brand of sports
>>     bikes.
>
>And in BMWs case, the old saying comes to mind, "What have you done for 
>me lately?"
[...]

For MANY answers to this question, refer to the responses on the "other" 
list where people provided a flood of answers to the question "why do you 
ride a BMW motorcycle." It appears that BMW bikes tickle a lot of 
people's fancy. Much fewer than Honda, per se, but still a fair number of 
people.




>>> ...As far as sport touring models
>>> go, Ducati's ST4 is less expensive than BMW K1200RS or R11RS. The same
>>> goes for Aprilia, another niche player.
>>
>> In one of your examples, we are making an "apples to oranges" 
>> comparison
>
>I was comparing sport touring motorcycles from three different 
>companies, not exactly apples and oranges.

The part I wrote, which you did not quote, shows the fair identification 
of an "apples to oranges" comparison. For review:

  Robert: ...As far as sport touring models go, Ducati's ST4 is less
          expensive than BMW K1200RS...

  Steve:  ...In one of your examples, we are making an "apples to
          oranges" comparison of a 130 hp 4-cylinder BMW K1200RS
          versus a 117 hp 2-cylinder Ducati ST4s, so I am not sure
          what your point is.

I stick to my original statement that I am not sure what conclusion you 
want the readers to come to with such a "comparison". The "marketing 
lesson" you want to avoid is pertinent to this discussion. Ignore 
marketing and the picture suddenly becomes mysterious and arbitrary: 
statements of "inflated prices" and "underpowered" motorcycles end up 
carrying some weight, and we all sit around and scratch our collective 
heads wondering how those rich and stupid BMW motorcycle riders can make 
such bad decisions with so many "better" bikes out there. Have an 
appreciation for marketing (degree not required) and the picture makes a 
lot more sense.





>> So what exactly is the point you want to make in your posting?
>
>That there are other options in the sport touring realm of motorcycles 
>with better value.

Without a doubt (depending on how you define value)! Honda arguably 
provides an even better "value" than premium motorcycle manufacturers do. 
It appears that BMW Motorrad is not competing using the same measure of 
"value" as you present. BMW Motorrad is positioning their product to a 
specifically targeted demographic, and it appears that BMW Motorrad 
changes as much as they have to in order to maintain or grow sales at the 
forecasted rate, in response to market pressures within that target 
market. Which, incidentally, is what many other manufacturers do unless 
there is a driving corporate objective to make it otherwise.

Quite a while ago, for example, Honda publicly stated that their 
intention was to dominate each segment of the motorcycle market. They 
have not achieved that goal yet, but they are well on the way do doing 
that (I don't know if it is possible for Honda to dominate some markets, 
depending on how they are defined). BMW Motorrad, on the other hand, does 
not appear to have such lofty goals. They are content to be a niche 
player with ever-increasing sales, and a small market share, playing in 
the premium motorcycle market. For the most part, this strategy appears 
to be working. It also explains, in part, why BMW Motorrad lacks the 
frenetic pace of innovation that is seen in some other markets like the 
sports bike segment, and why a company like Harley-Davidson can 
positively thrive in spite of a marked lack of innovation and significant 
change, and in spite of most other motorcycles providing a better "value".

You accurately state "That there are other options in the sport touring 
realm of motorcycles with better value [than BMW's]." I say that this 
only matters to BMW if BMW's sales are cannibalized because of their 
competitors' products. It appears not to matter much to most BMW riders, 
either.

- -Steve

 Oakville, Ontario, Canada
 2000 R1100S/ABS, Mandarin

------------------------------