As you may have noticed, the MotoringFile staff eagerly awaits each month the sales results from MINI USA. We always wish that MINI could sell more cars week in week out, but that wish won’t come true this time. After nine consecutive months of positive results, MINI USA sales have stalled in July 2015. Numbers are down by -10.7% compared to the same period last year. Read on to learn what explains this sudden decrease.
When looking at the numbers in more detail, sales of the Countryman, or the lack thereof, appear to be responsible for MINI USA’s poor performance this July. With a -45% decrease compare to the same month last year, this is the worst July for the Countryman since its introduction in 2010. And when a model which accounts for a third of all MINI sales underperforms that way, it has a significant impact on the brand as whole.
While there isn’t much else to say about these results, we want to bear in mind that MINI is only selling three models at this point in time; the F56, F55, and the R60. All other models are either discontinued, about to be discontinued or barely alive. Given that, it’s no easy task to keep on performing at the highest levels. The new Clubman can’t come soon enough.
<p>To be honest, this isn’t surprising. The styling is the main reason Hardtop sales are down. That combined with poor fuel economy in S models and pricing that’s really high, people aren’t seeing any value in the MINI brand. It’s unfortunate because until 2014, Mini’s relaunch had been mostly successful. I’m really shocked too at the awful fuel economy rating that the JCW 2-door received.</p>
<p>MINIUSA’s own research shows that the vast majority of MCS and JCW put fuel efficiency very low on the list of things that matter to them. So while it may matter to you it doesn’t seem to impact consideration or sales. Styling – who knows.</p>
<p>While fuel economy wasn’t my highest/biggest concern, it is something I would expect in a small car, especially with what is being done with Turbo engines these days and what other brands large cars are getting in gas mileage that is comparable to the MINI.</p>
<p>Part of the problem is that MINI made the Fuel Tank smaller. With that action, the range has been cut down and has me getting gas more often then I did with my R50.</p>
<p>The reasons I didn’t get the non-S were multiple:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Spec’d with the very limited options I wanted plus having to add some equipment to the non S that is standard on the S, the cost difference between the two was only about $500 dollars. That $500 savings isn’t enough to justify getting the NON-S, considering the significant HP increase you get with S. Not worth getting the NON-S with less HP for almost same money as S.</p></li>
<li><p>I’m still not sold on the 3 cylinder engine, especially the long term reliability vs the 4 cylinder. IMO, I believe the 3 cycl will have problems in the future (just my opinion).</p></li>
<li><p>Non S braking/brakes were poor. Just didn’t like them.</p></li>
<li><p>15″ rims on NON-S are UGLY and cheap looking.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Alex notes that per MINI, the top 3 reasons consumers buy a MINI, Fun to drive, tech & design, well 2 of those are not mine especially not tech and design. Fun to drive was #3 but still want very good fuel economy.</p>
<p>Now I will agree, if a person is buying a JCW, especially the 2-door, fuel economy should not be a top reason for that model. I don’t see it as a Daily Drive.</p>
<p>This is the silliest remark I’ve heard. You can’t tell me that in today’s world, especially in Europe, fuel economy doesn’t matter. Nobody I know is impressed that the JCW scored worst fuel economy estimates than a Focus ST. It may not make you buy it or not buy it, but when you purchase a small car you would expect it to be fuel efficient. More so than your typical medium sized hatchback at least that has more power and torque. If BMW/MINI wanted to do something exciting and unique, the JCW and S should have been powered by high performance versions of the 1.5T. I don’t understand why the JCW weighs so much more than the S. Why isn’t the highest performance version that comes pretty bare, the heaviest and least efficient. The old JCW and S scored exactly same EPA rating.</p>
<p>I’m not telling you. It’s not my opinion. MINIUSA’s data is showing us that American buyers rank it either very low or non existent when it comes to what they’re looking for when considering a Cooper S or JCW. That’s not an opinion. That is data from MINIs research from this year.</p>
<p>Also you want to keep in mind that summer months are historically low for MINI. And when it comes to sales of the 2-door, they are being canibalized by the 4-door. So all in all it’s hardly alarming.</p>
<p>It would be interesting to know whether buyers of the 5-door would have bought the F56 or gone to a different brand, if the F55 were not available.</p>
<p>“summer months are historically low for MINI”</p>
<p>That’s not really true.</p>
<p>If we define “year” as starting with Spring and ending with Winter (March to February) — reasonable thing to do, yes? — then Summer (June to August) has been the highest selling season for MINI in 6 of the last 8 years. And it’s been 1st or 2nd highest-selling season in 9 of the last 10 years.</p>
<p>Your milage may vary. In July, with the AC on, I drove 375 miles at the speed limits, on two and four lane roads, through small towns, 80% in green mode, and came away with a dash MPG of 44.3. Two occupants, luggage, and a Golden Retriever. 2015 JCW Hardtop Auto.</p>
<p>The poor fuel economy rap is a joke. I just went on a trip to Carmel last week . I drove fast on I5 and lots of in town driving and driving on Hwy one on the coast and averaged 36.2 mpg. On a previous trip to Petaluma, mostly 55mph, I averaged 42.9 mpg. ’15S sport auto. My new car gets consistently better mileage than my ’12S manual. Also, “real world”</p>
<p>The cars are butt fugally now and it’s why I left the MINI brand, well that and the handling computer overkill, for Fiat Abarth. I owned a MINI from 2002-2012 (’02 MCS & ’04 MCS). The only “MINI” I’d own now would be a Countryman.</p>
<p>Man I’m getting tired of people complaining about the styling of the F5x cars. Go inside, we’re tired of hearing you yell from your porch.</p>
<p>From my own experience, the 4-door hardtops are selling like hotcakes, people really want convertibles, but new ones are few and far between (so pre-owned ones are selling very quickly), the 2-doors are doing just fine. The 4-door hardtop has also stolen a few Countryman customers, too, which would be another reason for the sales drop for that model.</p>
<p>“The new Clubman can’t come soon enough.”
I wonder whether the new Clubman, even at a bigger size, will be a sales hit in the US. Americans have not exactly embraced the wagon, while everything that looks remotely like an SUV/CUV (except for the Countryman) is selling like crazy.</p>
<p>You may be right, but I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the same people complaining so much about the F56 will find oh so many things wrong with the Clubman too. Not a real Clubman, too big, too wide not enough space for its size, too long, not fast enough, doesn’t get 40 mpg and so on. All these naysayers make me sick. Glad we can vent, but does have to be all the time? Isn’t there anything positive instead of bit*hing all the time about the catfish snout? Hey, paint it black, or wrap it in some dark color? I’ve thought about wrapping it in carbon fibre, and I bet I’d get lots of compliments. As for a very young child complaining about the front overhang……..I wonder just who put that into her mind?</p>
<p>I am certainly guilty for dinging the F56 for its styling, primarily the cartoon sized tail lights and the lower front fascia. Luckily both can be avoided on the Clubman.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why so many people (at least here on MF) dislike the tail lights. I have no issue with them and in fact I like them. Now the front fascia, especially the lower intake section which sticks out, not a fan of it. That section on the NON-S looks better but the price diff between NON S and S when options are added plus adding standard S equip to the NON-S and more HP is important.</p>
<p>Tail lights, not an issue. Crappy, cheap looking fuel gauge, yup that’s poor and a major dislike with me.</p>
<p>The performance and styling are the main issues. The 1.5T is unique but it’s underpowered. You can’t styling isn’t a factor when nearly every major U.S. publication has dinged the cars for the new look. Even my little niece said she didn’t like the new look at all and bemoaned the large sized overhang. It just lost the spark that we all loved and anyone who disagrees is kidding themselves. The R56 v. F56 argument can be summarized in a few points. First, the R56 was lighter. It was smaller and more nimble, better looking and the S model was quicker. It also scored better in crash testing and was rated higher in EPA fuel economy estimates. It cost less, had the MINI uniqueness and wasn’t about pleasing everyone. Even so, the sales increased each year up to the point where no more orders could be placed.</p>
<p>I don’t understand how you can even say that, when the 1.5T-powered F56 does 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, which is .6 seconds faster than the R56 non-S.</p>
<p>Now that’s data! Monthly sales vs year ago is a problematic statistic, at best.. It’s a noisy metric. Most in the industry look at SAAR, or seasonally adjusted annual rate. Like Nick pointed out annual sales shows more about overall brand health.</p>
<p>But another thing to look at is how MINI did relative to the industry overall. The problematic July year on year numbers overall for the industry are up, and MINI is down. It will take a couple more months to see if this is just normal MINI sales noise or not. Looking at the bottom graph, the variation, month to month, is sometimes much larger than the average. This is the perfect example of a very low signal to noise metric.</p>
<p>To be honest, this isn’t surprising. The styling is the main reason Hardtop sales are down. That combined with poor fuel economy in S models and pricing that’s really high, people aren’t seeing any value in the MINI brand. It’s unfortunate because until 2014, Mini’s relaunch had been mostly successful. I’m really shocked too at the awful fuel economy rating that the JCW 2-door received.</p>
<p>MINIUSA’s own research shows that the vast majority of MCS and JCW put fuel efficiency very low on the list of things that matter to them. So while it may matter to you it doesn’t seem to impact consideration or sales. Styling – who knows.</p>
<p>To Gabe’s point, fun to drive, technology and design are the top three reasons why consumers choose to buy a MINI these days.</p>
<p>If fuel economy is a concern there’s always the Non-S that combines all 3 of those plus incredible mileage.</p>
<p>While fuel economy wasn’t my highest/biggest concern, it is something I would expect in a small car, especially with what is being done with Turbo engines these days and what other brands large cars are getting in gas mileage that is comparable to the MINI.</p>
<p>Part of the problem is that MINI made the Fuel Tank smaller. With that action, the range has been cut down and has me getting gas more often then I did with my R50.</p>
<p>The reasons I didn’t get the non-S were multiple:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Spec’d with the very limited options I wanted plus having to add some equipment to the non S that is standard on the S, the cost difference between the two was only about $500 dollars. That $500 savings isn’t enough to justify getting the NON-S, considering the significant HP increase you get with S. Not worth getting the NON-S with less HP for almost same money as S.</p></li>
<li><p>I’m still not sold on the 3 cylinder engine, especially the long term reliability vs the 4 cylinder. IMO, I believe the 3 cycl will have problems in the future (just my opinion).</p></li>
<li><p>Non S braking/brakes were poor. Just didn’t like them.</p></li>
<li><p>15″ rims on NON-S are UGLY and cheap looking.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Alex notes that per MINI, the top 3 reasons consumers buy a MINI, Fun to drive, tech & design, well 2 of those are not mine especially not tech and design. Fun to drive was #3 but still want very good fuel economy.</p>
<p>Now I will agree, if a person is buying a JCW, especially the 2-door, fuel economy should not be a top reason for that model. I don’t see it as a Daily Drive.</p>
<p>This is the silliest remark I’ve heard. You can’t tell me that in today’s world, especially in Europe, fuel economy doesn’t matter. Nobody I know is impressed that the JCW scored worst fuel economy estimates than a Focus ST. It may not make you buy it or not buy it, but when you purchase a small car you would expect it to be fuel efficient. More so than your typical medium sized hatchback at least that has more power and torque. If BMW/MINI wanted to do something exciting and unique, the JCW and S should have been powered by high performance versions of the 1.5T. I don’t understand why the JCW weighs so much more than the S. Why isn’t the highest performance version that comes pretty bare, the heaviest and least efficient. The old JCW and S scored exactly same EPA rating.</p>
<p>This info is coming straight from the top and pertains to US customers not European.</p>
<p>I’m not telling you. It’s not my opinion. MINIUSA’s data is showing us that American buyers rank it either very low or non existent when it comes to what they’re looking for when considering a Cooper S or JCW. That’s not an opinion. That is data from MINIs research from this year.</p>
<p>Also you want to keep in mind that summer months are historically low for MINI. And when it comes to sales of the 2-door, they are being canibalized by the 4-door. So all in all it’s hardly alarming.</p>
<p>It would be interesting to know whether buyers of the 5-door would have bought the F56 or gone to a different brand, if the F55 were not available.</p>
<p>I think the Countryman numbers show that most of the sales of the F55 would’ve gone to MINI anyways, they’d have just been in the R60.</p>
<p>“summer months are historically low for MINI”</p>
<p>That’s not really true.</p>
<p>If we define “year” as starting with Spring and ending with Winter (March to February) — reasonable thing to do, yes? — then Summer (June to August) has been the highest selling season for MINI in 6 of the last 8 years. And it’s been 1st or 2nd highest-selling season in 9 of the last 10 years.</p>
<p>Your milage may vary. In July, with the AC on, I drove 375 miles at the speed limits, on two and four lane roads, through small towns, 80% in green mode, and came away with a dash MPG of 44.3. Two occupants, luggage, and a Golden Retriever. 2015 JCW Hardtop Auto.</p>
<p>There should be MINI police who go after folks who drive JCWs in Green mode.</p>
<p>Hehehe. Busted! Officer, it was an experiment. It won’t happen again ;-)</p>
<p>The poor fuel economy rap is a joke. I just went on a trip to Carmel last week . I drove fast on I5 and lots of in town driving and driving on Hwy one on the coast and averaged 36.2 mpg. On a previous trip to Petaluma, mostly 55mph, I averaged 42.9 mpg. ’15S sport auto. My new car gets consistently better mileage than my ’12S manual. Also, “real world”</p>
<p>The cars are butt fugally now and it’s why I left the MINI brand, well that and the handling computer overkill, for Fiat Abarth. I owned a MINI from 2002-2012 (’02 MCS & ’04 MCS). The only “MINI” I’d own now would be a Countryman.</p>
<p>Man I’m getting tired of people complaining about the styling of the F5x cars. Go inside, we’re tired of hearing you yell from your porch.</p>
<p>From my own experience, the 4-door hardtops are selling like hotcakes, people really want convertibles, but new ones are few and far between (so pre-owned ones are selling very quickly), the 2-doors are doing just fine. The 4-door hardtop has also stolen a few Countryman customers, too, which would be another reason for the sales drop for that model.</p>
<p>From what we’ve heard about the convertible, dealers can’t place new orders or change existing ones.</p>
<p>Correct.</p>
<p>AMEN</p>
<p>“The new Clubman can’t come soon enough.”
I wonder whether the new Clubman, even at a bigger size, will be a sales hit in the US. Americans have not exactly embraced the wagon, while everything that looks remotely like an SUV/CUV (except for the Countryman) is selling like crazy.</p>
<p>and new subcompact UVs are coming now from Honda and Mazda</p>
<p>You may be right, but I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the same people complaining so much about the F56 will find oh so many things wrong with the Clubman too. Not a real Clubman, too big, too wide not enough space for its size, too long, not fast enough, doesn’t get 40 mpg and so on. All these naysayers make me sick. Glad we can vent, but does have to be all the time? Isn’t there anything positive instead of bit*hing all the time about the catfish snout? Hey, paint it black, or wrap it in some dark color? I’ve thought about wrapping it in carbon fibre, and I bet I’d get lots of compliments. As for a very young child complaining about the front overhang……..I wonder just who put that into her mind?</p>
<p>I am certainly guilty for dinging the F56 for its styling, primarily the cartoon sized tail lights and the lower front fascia. Luckily both can be avoided on the Clubman.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why so many people (at least here on MF) dislike the tail lights. I have no issue with them and in fact I like them. Now the front fascia, especially the lower intake section which sticks out, not a fan of it. That section on the NON-S looks better but the price diff between NON S and S when options are added plus adding standard S equip to the NON-S and more HP is important.</p>
<p>Tail lights, not an issue. Crappy, cheap looking fuel gauge, yup that’s poor and a major dislike with me.</p>
<p>USA SALES JULY 2014 – JULY 2015</p>
<p>Total R55/R56 @ 2,882 vs Total F55/56 @ 3,515 = 22% increase</p>
<p>USA SALES YTD 2014 – YTD 2015</p>
<p>Total R55/56 @ 12,513 vs Total F55/56 @ 22,003 = 75.84% increase
Total all MINIs 2014 @ 29,963 vs 2015 @ 35,451 = 18.3% increase</p>
<p>All is well.</p>
<p>Nice summary!</p>
<p>The performance and styling are the main issues. The 1.5T is unique but it’s underpowered. You can’t styling isn’t a factor when nearly every major U.S. publication has dinged the cars for the new look. Even my little niece said she didn’t like the new look at all and bemoaned the large sized overhang. It just lost the spark that we all loved and anyone who disagrees is kidding themselves. The R56 v. F56 argument can be summarized in a few points. First, the R56 was lighter. It was smaller and more nimble, better looking and the S model was quicker. It also scored better in crash testing and was rated higher in EPA fuel economy estimates. It cost less, had the MINI uniqueness and wasn’t about pleasing everyone. Even so, the sales increased each year up to the point where no more orders could be placed.</p>
<p>1.5T is underpowered? What?</p>
<p>I don’t understand how you can even say that, when the 1.5T-powered F56 does 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, which is .6 seconds faster than the R56 non-S.</p>
<p><a href="https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ed9ab6694f38dca2ad9e7cf741c5f5302591f137d902ea98f48f8428d652c74.jpg" rel="nofollow ugc">https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ed9ab6694f38dca2ad9e7cf741c5f5302591f137d902ea98f48f8428d652c74.jpg</a></p>
<p>A bit of a wider view…</p>
<p>Now that’s data! Monthly sales vs year ago is a problematic statistic, at best.. It’s a noisy metric. Most in the industry look at SAAR, or seasonally adjusted annual rate. Like Nick pointed out annual sales shows more about overall brand health.</p>
<p>But another thing to look at is how MINI did relative to the industry overall. The problematic July year on year numbers overall for the industry are up, and MINI is down. It will take a couple more months to see if this is just normal MINI sales noise or not. Looking at the bottom graph, the variation, month to month, is sometimes much larger than the average. This is the perfect example of a very low signal to noise metric.</p>