I know we’re talking about M cars, and I wasn’t countering your point at all. Just wanted to point out that the 1er is probably the single non-M BMW also still relevant. I met a guy recently with a 1M, and he’s struggling with the inflated value of it, because he’s become afraid to drive the thing. Even he said…

135i with $5K in suspension - relevant without the collector pricing

I irrationally love this car way too much for never having driven it...accept, without a manual, I’d never even consider it, even if it was available in the US.  

I’m just saying considerably more people at high income levels use Apple.  I don’t know how they deal with the licensing of this stuff, but, if they’re going to pick only one, they’re going to pick Apple.

Kids are the issue.  After owning a 911 Targa and then a Cayman, I’m now driving a 135i simply because I have one child (and a dog,) and the trunk/backseat allow us to easily road trip in the car. I know my 911 had a backseat, but it’s comparably tiny, and then you’re left without much cargo room. Of course, we…

From Forbes a few years back, in terms of OS related to income: “iPhone people are more affluent: they over-weight +11% for >$75,000⁽³⁾, +30% for >$100,000⁽³⁾ and +48% for >$125,000⁽³⁾. “

Also by far the worst 911 interior (I drove one for years.)

I’m a former Cayman owner, and I think you need to add the qualifier “for two people.” The cargo space is big compared to something like a Lotus, but it still pales in comparison to something like an M2 (not to mention backseats.)

Neither would regular X3s.  

You know, now that even Lamborghini, Ferrari and Lotus are building SUVs, I guess you’re right and it may not matter. So, I’ll focus my ridicule on the buyers, rather than the sellers. If I actually start seeing numerous ultra-fast SUVs at the Porsche/BMW track days I attend, then maybe I’ll change my tune on that,…

I think it’s part of the problem of selling primarily luxury SUVs. Porsche and BMW’s sports cars are inching in their direction, with overtech’d luxury interiors, bloated sizes, poorer steering feel, etc.

Growing up in a GM town with a dad who worked for GM for 30 years, I loved all cars, especially the exotics that I saw in magazines (I felt like the only kid who even knew about the Muira back in the ‘80s,) but my next door neighbor bought a red 944, and then upgraded to a 911, and it was wild to see such an unusual…

Sure, same with Harleys, but there ends up being a sea change in vibe, like what started happening in the ‘90s for Harley. Only a quarter of Porsche’s sales in the US last year were two-door sports cars, which doesn’t bode well for appealing to the kids of today. Porsche is primarily a more practical, luxury car…

Where are you?  Here on the West Coast, I see lots driving Porsche, BMW and even the occasional Jaguar SUV, although Lexus and Mercedes are also represented very well in that regard.

Sure, my larger point is that today’s older clientele are still buying Porsches based on what they were in the ‘60s-’70s-’80s, back when today’s buyers were kids and Porsches were somewhat rare and solely focused on sporting.   Are today’s kids going to look back and desire the brand of their mom’s mall car someday? W…

It doesn’t matter. Sports cars aren’t necessary, and if they’re not perceived as “cool” down the road, because of who’s driving them today (like what’s happening to Harley, ) it could be a problem.

I know the Cayenne was a huge success, but the 996 was also the biggest selling 911 at the time. I don’t buy that Porsche wouldn’t still be making sports cars today, especially if companies like Lotus still manage it.

Diluting the brand long term to help the company in the short term. What could possibly go wrong? Well, for brands like Porsche and BMW, today’s kids are going to look at them like “mom’s car,” which doesn’t bode well for them thinking they’re cool cars when they grow up.  It’s already happening to Harley Davidson.

Hardly. I’ve seen many rich soccer moms in cars like the equally awful Cayenne Turbo.

///Mall