It’s a bit like with cars, for example there are also extremely similar cars from the same manufacturer with sometimes very different pricing.
Providers with a multi-brand strategy like VAG with Seat/Skoda/VW/Audi/Porsche are only weakly represented in the housing industry.
Car comparisons are often exaggerated. Neither is Viebrockhaus a Porsche, nor Town & Country a Dacia. Dacia uses technology from the 1980s (torque converters, hydraulic power steering), which does not apply to the equipment of a Town & Country house, which is state of the art when seen from a normal standard perspective.
And a Porsche is more likely the individually planned architect houses, like from that one user with the 80m³ cistern tank in the garden, and not a Viebrockhaus from the catalog, just because they have Villeroy & Boch sinks instead of Vigour.
Lagging behind is a main feature of car-house-brand comparisons, but the cars (real and dream car) of the building families still help to assess which providers you don’t need to consider at all. Even if someone knows Staff, Gail or Dornbracht but prefers to dress at C&A rather than at D&G, that says something about them. The humble hut of would not be included in the Viebrockhaus program: alone with the window panes, a general contractor would never get into an attractive discount scale because they are too rarely specified on other models. But one can clearly say that Viebrockhaus focuses on privately insured clients and Bien-Zenker has a high proportion of employed academics entitled to company cars among its clientele.
There are too many providers for me to really categorize.
I am not familiar with the many local construction companies.
Such categorization is – not only because it overlooks owner-managed regional construction companies – more entertaining than useful. Nevertheless, it pleases me to read that AI is now on its way to being more than just a crystal ball for fortune cookie weather forecasts. However, it still produces some inaccuracies that are hardly noticeable to laypersons (and above all, it apparently evaluates the aspect of source citation of its statements as low, so it is difficult to verify where it is conveying knowledge and where rather repeated hearsay). For example, Roth belongs to the Baumeister cooperation, which would be incorrectly described as a “franchiser.”
For us, the question about kfw40+ is also involved (otherwise financing will be difficult). The question is whether one should not look for a company that plays in the corresponding league right away. Otherwise, the nasty surprise may come later during the upgrade. Right?
Upgrading at the discounter and removing options at the premium provider are economically almost equally ineffective. The greatest possible congruence between the project and standard construction performance description contributes significantly to customer satisfaction with the final price-performance ratio. Many providers have a system with several equipment levels (e.g., MB: Classic / Sportline / Elegance) and/or packages. The nobler energy-efficient house categories “pay off” basically almost never, and first of all a financing that relies on a subsidy as a main pillar is structurally always unhealthy and thus “not a good first choice.” How well house providers can/want to respond to government caprices (EH 40+, QNG) is not proportionally graded by “leagues.” No provider has to first retrieve an EH 40 wall construction from a dusty poison cabinet, and for the money cutting, tile sizes and decoration options are much more popular than a bit more bio-label insulation material.
If a subsidy-promenade is needed to even afford the house, then better save on size and frills or bring in own work (not individual subcontracting!).