How to save Harley Davidison
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Proper oil for cruisers
Next: 9-11 was an inside job.
From: Beav on 13 Jul 2010 10:30 "The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:1jlk3jf.1qwuiad1nqkx1cN%totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk... > Dean Hoffman <dh0496(a)in#&ebr^as^#ka.com> wrote: > >> J. Clarke wrote: >> >> > If one knows what one is about and is allowed to inspect, reject, and >> > modify parts that could be a wonderful opportunity. If it's just turn >> > wrenches as GM tells you it's a lot less so. >> >> I'd just about bet one would just turn wrenches with some GM type >> watching closely. Maybe a union guy there too. And a lurking lawyer. >> There would probably be some liability waivers to sign. > > A few years ago, an English motoring magazine asked the Nissan factory > in Washington, northern England, if they could build their own long-term > test Primera. The whole car, in Nissan's plant. > > The factory assented, and they did. IIRC they made quite a good fist of > it. BGN, is that you? :-) -- Beav
From: don (Calgary) on 13 Jul 2010 21:26 On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:56:01 -0700 (PDT), BryanUT <nestle12(a)comcast.net> wrote: >On Jul 13, 5:43�pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:33:09 -0400, "J. Clarke" >> >> <jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> >> >> I am the last one to condone governments messing with the free market, >> >> but it wasn't a free market. The Japanese had already screwed it up. >> >> They had used similar techniques in the past to dominate the consumer >> >> electronic product business. >> >> >What techniques, making a better and more technologically advanced product? >> >> In fact for a couple of decades after the second world war Japan had >> in place a variety of programs to provide tax relief and government >> subsidies directed to improve exports. �I stand to be corrected but I >> believe one of the subsidies was a tax exemption for export income. >> >> It was only pressure from the IMF in the mid 60's that encouraged >> Japan to drop the various subsidies. >> >> Wasn't it 60 Minutes that did a segment exposing Japan's unfair trade >> practices? � > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/11/AR2009091103957.html > >Things never change. Fact is that China is dumping tires on the US >market, with full complicity of the American manufacturers. > >If tariffs were fair and good for Harley (and its workers) it is also >fair and good today for tire workers. I didn't see anything in the article that suggested China is subsidizing their tire manufacturers or providing tax relief for exports. Is the issue just that manufacturing is cheaper in China?
From: don (Calgary) on 13 Jul 2010 21:37 On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:29:39 -0400, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote: >On 7/13/2010 7:43 PM, don (Calgary) wrote: >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:33:09 -0400, "J. Clarke" >> <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote: >> >>> >>>> I am the last one to condone governments messing with the free market, >>>> but it wasn't a free market. The Japanese had already screwed it up. >>>> They had used similar techniques in the past to dominate the consumer >>>> electronic product business. >>> >>> What techniques, making a better and more technologically advanced product? >> >> In fact for a couple of decades after the second world war Japan had >> in place a variety of programs to provide tax relief and government >> subsidies directed to improve exports. > >Good for them. Perhaps the US government should try this. > >> I stand to be corrected but I >> believe one of the subsidies was a tax exemption for export income. > >Good move if true. > >> It was only pressure from the IMF in the mid 60's that encouraged >> Japan to drop the various subsidies. > >So let's see, the whole conquest of the American automobile industry and >so on by the Japanese took place after the "various subsidies" were >"dropped" but it's still the result of predatory activities by the >nefarious Japanese and not to the bumbling incompetence of American >industrialists. > >> Wasn't it 60 Minutes that did a segment exposing Japan's unfair trade >> practices? > >That alone is enough to convince me that it isn't so. Silliness, not even worth spending the time to respond.
From: BryanUT on 13 Jul 2010 21:59 On Jul 13, 7:26 pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:56:01 -0700 (PDT), BryanUT > > > > <nestl...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >On Jul 13, 5:43 pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 08:33:09 -0400, "J. Clarke" > > >> <jclarke.use...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > >> >> I am the last one to condone governments messing with the free market, > >> >> but it wasn't a free market. The Japanese had already screwed it up.. > >> >> They had used similar techniques in the past to dominate the consumer > >> >> electronic product business. > > >> >What techniques, making a better and more technologically advanced product? > > >> In fact for a couple of decades after the second world war Japan had > >> in place a variety of programs to provide tax relief and government > >> subsidies directed to improve exports. I stand to be corrected but I > >> believe one of the subsidies was a tax exemption for export income. > > >> It was only pressure from the IMF in the mid 60's that encouraged > >> Japan to drop the various subsidies. > > >> Wasn't it 60 Minutes that did a segment exposing Japan's unfair trade > >> practices? > > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/11/AR200... > > >Things never change. Fact is that China is dumping tires on the US > >market, with full complicity of the American manufacturers. > > >If tariffs were fair and good for Harley (and its workers) it is also > >fair and good today for tire workers. > > I didn't see anything in the article that suggested China is > subsidizing their tire manufacturers or providing tax relief for > exports. Is the issue just that manufacturing is cheaper in China? http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_49/b3911401.htm ""The China price." They are the three scariest words in U.S. industry. In general, it means 30% to 50% less than what you can possibly make something for in the U.S. In the worst cases, it means below your cost of materials. "
From: High Plains Thumper on 13 Jul 2010 22:48
TOG wrote: > High Plains Thumper wrote: > >> I'd like to see a single cylinder 800 cc bike, HD style, with a 5 >> gallon petrol tank - Thumpster. Make if fuel injected to meet EPA >> if required, oil cooled, but a thumper nonetheless. Price it >> slightly below the entry level Sportster. I think it would be a >> hit. > > Sounds nice, but just about every roadgoing thumper made in the last > 30 years has enjoyed mediocre sales, at best. Dirt thumpers - yup, > they seem to sell brilliantly. Pure road bikes don't. For a dirt bike at slightly lower speeds, the singles have considerable torque, which I think has caused them to prosper. > There have been a few exceptions: Yamaha's SR500[1] was in > production for a quarter of a century, [1] I still want another > one. I remember seeing the SR500 back in early '80s. I could not believe a thumper could be so large of a displacement at the time. (My ride was a venerable '71 Honda CB100 as a poor college student at the time. The SR500 could ride the entire island of Oahu comfortably.) Yes, I wanted one, if I could have afforded it. > and they still make it as a 400 for the home market, I think. Yes they do: http://www.yamaha-motor.jp/mc/lineup/sportsbike/sr400/ Reason for downsizing the engine is graduated driver's license restrictions and bike registration fees. AFAIK, after 400 cc's is the big bike license, requires additional testing, registration taxes are higher. We're more primitive here in US when it comes to graduated licensing and registration fees for bikes. > For decades there have been calls for a nice roadgoing thumper, but > my own feeling is that the thumper addicts make a noise out of all > proportion to their number. People do like riding thumpers, agreed, > but when it comes to putting their own money down, they frequently > choose performance instead. And on a horsepower per � or $ basis, > thumpers really don't cut it.... That could be. However, I never felt like paying the same amount for a motorcycle as I would a small cage. Also, if I went sport bike I'd want it a naked one. -- HPT |