> It's easier to expand downwards

Lots of business research says this is not true, and in fact, the opposite. This is why VW is the world's most popular car maker, and not Porsche.

IIRC, it's actually Toyota that's the world's most popular car maker (by number of cars sold, at 10.23 million last year), not VW; this has been the case for the last 3 years [0]. VW is very close behind, though, at 10.14 million (and GM is close behind that at 9.92 million).

Not to say that your point is inaccurate (it's actually very accurate; the ability for companies like Toyota to drive down costs goes a long way toward mass adoption, and it's something that "luxury" makers like Porsche don't typically have the experience in). Tesla could very well be an exception here, since the big focus as of late is to ramp up manufacturing until Model-whatevers (and, in particular, their batteries) can flow out of factories at ludicrous speeds.

[0]: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/113...

So, anecdotally, low end Porsche models have sold well, like the Boxster and Cayman, and high end VW models have often not sold well, like the Phaeton.

Aren't VW and Porsche part of the same company?

VW is one of the car brands of VW Group - along with Seat, Skoda, Audi, Lamborghini, Bentley, Bugatti and Porsche...

VW Group are masters of "badge engineering" - features and designs trickle down from the likes of Audi to VW and then to Seat and Skoda.

>Lots of business research says this is not true, and in fact, the opposite.

I just named an example that makes very obvious sense to a bunch of people even without evidence (though I'm sure Cayenne sale numbers would back it if I had to). You allude to "a lot of research" claiming the opposite. Care to share said research?

Your example of VW being popular is an example of absolute market position and is entirely irrelevant to debate as to whether its easier to move from the low end of the market t the top or vice versa.