Mind you KM, Mercedes is in front in the poll!

BMW sell more cars than M-B; is that not some sort of indicator considering the close level of competition in the marketplace between these particular brands. BMW overtaking M-B in the sales stakes is surely largely down to having managed the brand image better.

I'm off to vote for BMW now.

Larzyh.

larzyh wrote: Mind you KM, Mercedes is in front in the poll!

no they're not

I think a new poll is in order?

"Which brand has the better after-sales image?"

(better of two, best of three or more - bl**dy pedants)

Women do not like Mercs as much as they like BMWs, but then they would not even look at a M3 or M5 if a Porsche Boxter is around.

Still most important thing to the fairer sex is... colour and year.

Rhys wrote: Merc's aren't built as well as they used to be - you just pay for the badge now unless you have the dosh to afford top of the range.

same as bmw then?

i think merc has a better image, bmws are still perceived as being driven by to**ers

635CSi wrote: Kin Mak wrote: Seriously... what kind of poll is this? You ask on a BMW forum if Mercs or BMWs have a better image? I think it makes sense, not all BMW drivers are totally biased I hope.

No some of them also like...........................

Volvo's ................

aaaaagggghhhh......

thepits wrote: 635CSi wrote: Kin Mak wrote: Seriously... what kind of poll is this? You ask on a BMW forum if Mercs or BMWs have a better image? I think it makes sense, not all BMW drivers are totally biased I hope. No some of them also like...........................   Volvo's ................     aaaaagggghhhh......

And Rovers, don't forget the Rovers !

I like Volvo's too and getting close to being liable to kill for an Alfa Brera

There is some blind bias towards BMW around though and no matter if its a BMW forum (say with imaginary "" marks), if you like BM's you've got to like some efforts from other marques as well.

Is there any way to frig the poll so I can vote again for Merc......Opps!

Don't care about the begrudgers having a go at the poor old (new) Alfa's, what a V6 engine and what looks!!, you can't believe allwhat you read - have a drive in one. Had a GTV and that was some blast of a car, never had much trouble with it, herself is mad to off the Volvo and get another one !!

Have to agree about the 159, just doesn't look right.

Anyway, it's about BMW vs Merc image, as Bimmer drivers are percieved as a bunch of pr**ks, the Mercs have the better image - but they also have their fair share of them as well.

635CSi wrote: nn_dd wrote: Anyway, it's about BMW vs Merc image, as Bimmer drivers are percieved as a bunch of pr**ks, the Mercs have the better image - but they also have their fair share of them as well. Agreed, but I have a feeling Mercedes have lost their image. They are no longer the envy of of every other driver on the road. Nobody really dreams of owning a Merc nowadays due to their "ould fella" image and of latter years their lack of quality. Whereas BMW portrays a young, energetic image. Sure remember when about 2 or 3 years ago a bunch of young lads drove a 3 Series from Dublin to Australia?? That further proves my point. They wouldn't be doing it in a C Class because that car is generally perceived as an old geezer's wheels!

yes but these guys that are buying bmw are getting on a bit and the yunguns are now buying scoobies and evos or ganza if they cant afford the first 2

BMW's going to win you know - as it should

(especially when it allows you to vote more than once! )

Even as a BMW owner, I don't quite understand this poll.

BMW has a SHOCKING brand image.

Yes we all like our cars, and we know they're quality cars, and other people know they're quality cars too.

However, this question is about brand image.  The image of the BMW brand is a dreadful one.  You only need to look at polls on a multitude of other places to see that almost every other car owner will put BMW's down as having the worst image.  Not because they're crap, because of course as I said before, people know they're not - but because of the perception of the driver that has been created by the few idiots out there and fixated on by those with stereotypical minds.

Now then, Mercedes-Benz build is improving - but it's still not up to BMW or Audi standards.  However, their image is definitely better! 

Maybe the context of the poll is too broad, but as I said to begin with, even as a BMW owner I'm sorry to say I'd have the brand image a long way down.  Brilliant cars, crap image.

Of course it's all irrelevant, because if anyone is having to think about image to begin with, then you're probably not driving the car you should be. 

Coasting - if the BMW brand image was anyway near as bad as you suggest BMW wouldn't sell as many cars as they do; I think the buying public is more sensitive to brand image than you seem to suggest.

I think BMW have been extremely successful at creating and cultivating their brand image.

larzyh.

Yes they would, because thankfully a lot of people ignore the stereotype and buy the car for what it is, not the image it presents.

Most people don't like BMW's.  Until they buy one.  Then all of a sudden they don't shut up about them.  It's the typical 'only any good once I buy one' buyer that rubbishes so many brands.

I've encountered pretty much the same recently because we're looking at changing my wifes car.  The front runner is a Lexus RX400h SE-L.  Frankly, it has made its competition look poor by comparison.

However, mention the prospect of buying a Lexus and not a german marque...and the responses are really quite funny to witness!  I'll admit it wasn't a car I thought we'd be interested in, but driving one has changed that.

Maybe we're generalising a bit, because an earlier poster asked for clarity of the question.  I'd say the same.

Brand image can cross a range of matters and it is difficult to summarise on the whole.  I agree that the BMW 'brand' is a very strong one.  But the BMW brand image can be split into driver perception, worth, prestige value, aspiration, build, dynamics and so on.  

I maintain that, even as a BMW driver, I think the brand has a poor image to the majority of other drivers (until as I say, they decide to buy one because thats how fickle so many people are).

"Most people don't like BMW's. Until they buy one" - but what on earth makes them buy one if they don't like it? Perhaps driving one but then what makes them go for a test-drive. I have never gone for a test drive in a car I didn't like!

I would contend that if a car maker can convince people, who don't like their cars, to go for a test drive they have a very strong, positive brand image.

What I like about the BMW brand image is that they (at least traditionally) are bought by people who want a driver's orientated car; a car that says "I like driving cars". Very few mainstream brands have this image; Alfa Romeo is another one, in my view.

I do think (and have expressed this before) that BMW has to some extent become just another prestige brand, unfortunately.

Larzyh.

I think BMW has a stronger image to the "performance driver", however, to the general public its Mercedes all the way.

I work as a chauffeur for a local company at times and they have mainly Mercs, when I asked why they didn’t use BMW’s I was told its because of Mercedes perceived image with their type of clients over BMW…and to be fair, the guy does have a point..

The women all love to say I was picked up in a Mercedes to their friends and customers , saying I was picked up in a BMW doesn’t say as much in this type of business

Coasting, most people that don't like BMW can't afford one. Most people I know aspire to own one, male and females alike.

It is just like people who say Porsche driver are self cantered arrogant pigs, the same people would buy one in an instant if they could afford one.

Brand image is different from brand jealousy.

dryle wrote: or ganza if they cant afford the first 2

what's a ganza?

Coasting wrote: because if anyone is having to think about image to begin with, then you're probably not driving the car you should be.

don't quite get this bit, can you elaborate?

brybusa wrote: saying I was picked up in a BMW doesn’t say as much in this type of business

not when the 3-series outsells the ford mondeo by a significant margin, bmw is so common nowadays, selling 1-series to appeal to a lower market sector doesn't help either

Kin Mak wrote: Coasting, most people that don't like BMW can't afford one.

maybe when buying new, but it's not an excuse - there's always the secondhand market so it becomes a question of they could own a bmw but they choose not to....

to give an example of pure image based car buying a lot of people moved away from mercedes back when the 190e dropped to a level that youngsters could afford to buy secondhand and start modifying them - the traditional merc buyer didn't like the association

from a marketing perspective porsche will be next i reckon, although the 924/968 started the ball rolling the diluting of their brand really started with the boxster - when they start making prestige brands affordable to the man in the street they lose their magic, the cayenne, like the 1-series and the x-series, is a market porsche should have stayed out of, they cheapen the brand by diversity and volume pricing

stephenperry wrote: Kin Mak wrote: Coasting, most people that don't like BMW can't afford one. maybe when buying new, but it's not an excuse - there's always the secondhand market so it becomes a question of they could own a bmw but they choose not to....

BMWs are not cheap even in the second hand market. Most people do not want to buy a 15 year old BMW when they can buy a newer car from another marque at the same price. Running costs are going to be higher, even though my M5 is only worth around €30K the servicing and parts cost are that of a car that is €150k. Prices of cars go down, servicing and parts don't.

Interesting notion that the "rarity" of the IS is a plus-point.

There are many BMW's on our roads because they have a strong brand image and make some quite good cars. The fact that there are a lot of them about does not make them any less good!

Saab used to make interesting cars...

Larzyh.

635CSI - I don't think you need to pity anybody for driving a new 3Series, I would suggest you're wasting your emotions.

Larzyh.

You mean by having chosen 1.6 liter engine? I still don't think they would care about your pity.

Larzyh.

635CSi - of course you can think what you like but expressing your somewhat prejudicial view on this forum is likely to generate a response; is that not the point of doing it in the first place?

You can have your view but equally allow me to challenge it each time you put it forward here.

Larzyh.

larzyh wrote: 635CSi - of course you can think what you like but expressing your somewhat prejudicial view on this forum is likely to generate a response; is that not the point of doing it in the first place? You can have your view but equally allow me to challenge it each time you put it forward here. Larzyh.

everyone is entitled to their own opinion - please remember that.

no amount of experience entitles a person to a viewpoint - if every is biased - then there can be no objectivity. Judgements based on experience may, however, be coloured by prejudice

this is an open forum, and debate is encouraged.

flaming is not.

Howard wrote: But is not Mercedes owned by Chrysler? Not much brand image there what? Howard

not any more, according to this months Evo

besides if you're going down that route, then an aston martin or a jaguar is a ford; a bugatti a volkswagen; a roller a bmw; a lamborghini an audi; a ferrari a fiat and a lexus a toyota

Howard wrote: Both companies have a good image in their own particlular area. But is not Mercedes owned by Chrysler? Not much brand image there what? Howard

i thought it was the other way around or an amalgamation of the 2 and merc are getting out as it is costing them 2 much.

what about Lada,

russian engineering and italian styling

Is it not the E30 that caused the bad image for BMW as the yuppy wide boys went for these cars before they got their porsches and ferrari's.

I alwalys thought this was the case

The E30 was (and is) one of the best BMW's in so many ways; I think it made BMW, and it spawned the "purest" of all the M cars (M1 possibly excepted).

Larzyh.

More and more people nowadays are appreciating what classics these cars are, you do see the odd hideous max power styleeee one but nothing like the number of horrendous E36’s you see now!

I am old enough to remember when the 2002 was a current model and it was quite a niche product (in the best sense of the term, I like 2002's).

The E21 was the first BMW to sell more than a million. The real "explosion" in sales and marketshare came with the E30 in the 80's; without it I doubt BMW would have survived as an independent (thriving) manufacturer.

Larzyh.

Kin Mak wrote: Coasting, most people that don't like BMW can't afford one

Sorry but to say 'most' is a vast overstatement.

Over on our place we have a mass of new RS4 owners, S4 owners, and owners of other brands, all well capable of buying a BMW - but they just don't like the image.

That isn't something I can understand on the basis that I don't really see why image has to be such a huge factor, but it is certainly evidence that it is nothing to do with affordability.

Without meaning to offend, I also think that sort of claim is one of the reasons BMW drivers get such a bad name!

stephenperry wrote: Coasting wrote: because if anyone is having to think about image to begin with, then you're probably not driving the car you should be.  don't quite get this bit, can you elaborate? [

Yes, I mean there is far too much emphasis put on the image of a car and that, personally, I think that someone who is really bothered about the image their car gives off needs a bit of a reality check.

It's nice to have a nice car, but in my opinion it's all down to what you think and not what everyone else thinks, so why give a flying stuff about image?

Take the image of Skoda as a good example.  Far superior cars these days to most others out there, yet a recent survey proved that people still wouldn't buy one because of the 'image'.  Pathetic in my opinion.

i must admit that i'm pathetic, i wouldn't buy a lot of cars because of their reputation or image (would you like a list? ), plus because a lot of people feel the same way i bet a skoda is more difficult to resell than a vw

i have to laugh because every skoda owner i've met always feels the need, without prompting, to defend their choice when they tell you what car they drive - "it's as good as a vw at half the price" or "it's a rebadged passat/golf etc"

personally i can't see vw shooting themselves in the foot by releasing seats and skodas with the same quality at less money...

it's perceived quality, the tactile dashboard, the way the doors clunk when you shut them.... the cheapening up happens under the skin, the bits you can't see or feel

I just think thats very unfortunate.

So you're saying you'd ignore driving dynamics, the capability of the car and it's value or overall package just because of the badge it wore?

My wife had a Skoda Octavia 1.9TDi before her 320d arrived, and it was superb car.  The build wasn't up to the BMW standard, but it wasn't a long way behind either.  Materials were cheaper, but the value for money was there for all to see. 

You say that a Skoda driver feels the need to point out to you that it's a rebadged Passat etc, which is fair enough as that seems rather a silly thing for them to feel the need to do.  However, putting the shoe on the other foot, isn't that as bad as someone saying they'd ignore all the driving facts about a car and dismiss it because of a few badges?  Surely the latter is much worse?

Unless it's a Perodua of course, in which case the driving and package is possibly, if its possible, even worse than the badge.

stephenperry wrote: personally i can't see vw shooting themselves in the foot by releasing seats and skodas with the same quality at less money... it's perceived quality, the tactile dashboard, the way the doors clunk when you shut them.... the cheapening up happens under the skin, the bits you can't see or feel

I didn't say they were the same.  Of course they're not - but they're still good quality and a lot better than a high percentage of other 'mainstream' (whatever that means) cars.

They use different materials, yes, but they also act as a very good feeder car into the VW network, because people subconsciously get used to a certain layout and driving feel.  Rather like Mini and BMW.  The Mini has proved to be a collosal success as a feeder car, as much as a car in its own right.

Yet it's not a small BMW.  But it is a car BMW make with certain dynamics in mind, using slightly inferior materials, and they keep a close relationship with the dealer network to feed customers through.

It's individual opinion ultimately, but I just have a preconceived idea of my own that people who think about image a lot are also those that drive down a high street thinking "Ooo look, they're looking at me in my BMW", or as they pull up in a car park, imagining that people are looking at their car because it's a BMW.  Most of them aren't.  They're just getting on with their lives.  It's the 'wrapped up in me' sentiment that I don't understand.

p.s.  Stephen, I'm not saying that applies to you, I'm just saying that to some drivers image is such a big thing and I cannot comprehend what it is they think it does for them.

Coasting wrote: So you're saying you'd ignore driving dynamics, the capability of the car and it's value or overall package just because of the badge it wore?

it's not all about the badge; i used to like fords back when they made good cars, the vauxhall omega was very underrated as a 5-series rival, and i'd gladly give a vauxhall monaro a home given half a chance

i have great respect for cars, there are some real hidden gems out there, but i'm very shallow and prejudiced against certain makes and models through a mixture of reputation and experience...

some examples...

i don't like french cars (peugeot - unreliable, citreon - unreliable, renault - ugly and unreliable), skoda still has that stigma, rover - old mans car, mg - old mans car trying too hard, japanese cars - capable but very uninvolving, fiat - rusty and unreliable, alfa - unreliable, saab - too much power for front wheel drive, volvo - only consider a t5 but too big and powerful for front wheel drive, audi - posh vw, lexus - posh toyota, bmw z3 - girls car, bmw 1-series - ugly

dryle wrote: what about Lada, russian engineering and italian styling

could be worse, italian engineering and russian styling

Coasting wrote: I'm just saying that to some drivers image is such a big thing and I cannot comprehend what it is they think it does for them.

could be a touch of narcissism or conversely, low self-esteem?

I think the Skoda Octavia is a great car - I'd love a vRS petrol or diesel. But as said, the differences are visible, and also hidden. They are cheaper for a reason.

I saw a crashed Mk1 Octavia beside a crashed Bora in a scrappy one day. Both were stripped of dash etc. The Bora had a approx 2-3" dia pipe running between the A-pillars, the Octavia had nowt there. I know which one I'd rather have a crash in....