This doesn't make sense to me and here is why. BMC is supposed to invest millions of dollars on tank palet to modernize the factory while still building the Karasu plant. This means BMC must invest it's profits into these factories. This would mean they make less profit. While Otokar didn't need to build a new factory for Altay (as far as I know), so according to this logic, Otokar would've made more money per tank if they were to win the tender with the same price. And I don't know the ins- and outs of when Otokar or BMC would turn a profit (which is well deserved for these companies, imo), just making a counterargument on what you said here.
To be honest, these discussions with BMC and Otokar is always fueled by partisanism and this speculative quote does give the impression that it also came due to partisanism (coupled with the implication), I mean how are we supposed to know how much profit these companies would (potentially) make per tank.
And no, I don't believe Otokar was trying to rob the people, like I said, I do not know the ins- and outs of these companies and when they make profit per tank. But its not just profit per tank, it is also the risk a company is willing to take and company strategy. For instance if they make 10 usd per tank profit, this might not be enough of a profit for company A but enough for company B due to the risk these companies are willing to take on. Risk is determined by speculating over the future and scenario playing. "If scenario B happens, will the company be able to surive with 10 usd per tank?" yes or no? How bad does scenario B have to get, in order to be in the red with 10 usd per tank? etc. And according to this, these companies weigh their options. BMC, FNSS, Otokar and companies in the world weigh their options according to the risk they are willing to take. For this tender apperently BMC had a higher risk profile and a more aggressive strategy compared to the other two companies which allowed them to give the lowest bid.
According to the interview with Ethem Sancak on Haberturk (you can view it on youtube), he has been actively looking for financiers, which he found with the Qatari's. This gives BMC the edge to offer more aggressive prices when it comes to tenders and the prices of their products, because BMC has something it can fall back on if it were to go south (risk profile). The 49% shares of Qatari's investors means that the risk is shared with the Qatari's. Due to risk being shared, this allows BMC to take on a more aggressive strategy and more risk. This allows them to offer more aggressive prices in order for them to gain more market share and grow its brand name. Gaining more marketshare is also a form a investment, a company is willing to take on losses by offering cheaper products in the short term, if it means gaining more market share, because this will pay off in the long term, but highly risky as competitors aren't standing still either.
By the way, I was personally rooting for FNSS during the tender. Due to the reason that FNSS innovates the most in my opinion and was hoping that they would innovate with the Altay if they were to win the tender. With innovate I mean that they keep coming with newer versions of their platforms like Pars 3's and the various Kaplan medium tanks. But ultimately for me, it doesn't matter which one wins because I like all three companies. When it comes to their products, FNSS makes the best looking equipment while BMC make the ugliest in my opinion, but all are much appreciated.
