How to save Harley Davidison
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Proper oil for cruisers
Next: 9-11 was an inside job.
From: tomorrow on 14 Jul 2010 12:41 On Jul 13, 7:56 pm, 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. Correcting unfair trade practices ina supposedly free trade world is always difficult, and even moreso when faced with a country like China and all the attendent political considerations it raises.
From: tomorrow on 14 Jul 2010 12:44 On Jul 13, 10:25 am, "Beav" <beavis.origi...(a)ntlwoxorld.com> wrote: > "tomor...(a)erols.com" <tomorrowaterolsdot...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:e01615b6-bff3-4b96-912f-95e75f447b3b(a)y11g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 10:39 pm, sean_q_ <nos...(a)no.spam> wrote: > >> tomor...(a)erols.com wrote: > >> > What I want to know is how someone can claim that a nation's legal > >> > response to an illegal trade practice by the company of another > >> > nation, a legal response that did not put ANY money into Harley- > >> > Davidson's coffers... > > >> Were there any govt loans or any other kind of direct aid such as > >> subsidies or tax relief? I don't know for sure about this, > >> but at least one blogger mentions loans. > > > There were no subsidies or loans. > > >> > ...can be described as a "bail-out" of Harley-Davidson. > > >> > It most assuredly was NOT a bail-out. > > >> Bail-out or not? Other factors aside, the answer depends a lot > >> on your views on government intervention in a "free" market. > > > I'll echo Calgary's point that with the Japanese companies receiving > > coordinated Japanese government assitance, and using profits earned > > (legitimately) in other markets and from other products to subsidize > > those products which competed with Harley-Davidson in the marketplace, > > the market was hardly "free" prior to the impositon of the tariff. > > I'm interested to know which bikes the Japanese produced were in competition > with Harley? Until they produced the Harely clones I can't think of one. I answered this question elsewhere in the thread. Short answer is that the Japanese very quickly (1976, 1977, 1978) began making liter and then liter-plus bikes styled as "cruisers" and "customs," see Kawaski LTDs and Yamaha Specials and Honda Customs and Suzuki Low Slingers for examples.
From: tomorrow on 14 Jul 2010 12:53 On Jul 13, 10:49 pm, "don (Calgary)" <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:59:53 -0700 (PDT), BryanUT > > > > > > <nestl...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >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. " > > So what's the solution? Slap import tariffs on everything Chinese? > Add Mexico, India and several others to the list of areas where labour > is cheaper than in the US. > > Another question would be, what are you willing to pay to limit > Chinese imports? If they are producing goods 30 to 40n points cheaper > than can be done in the US, are you willing or able to pay the > upcharge for a made in USA stamp. > > This is a tough one Bryan. China has a built in advantage over the US > and right now they are making good use of it. I'm not sure government > intervention is the answer for this problem. There could be a very > dark downside to it. We have contributed to this state of affairs, of course, as consumers, demanding the lowest possible price point regardless of the effect on our own economy. A current example: My neighbors received a brand new, made in America, very expensive, aluminum-framed, powder-coated, re-buildable (fabric components) patio furniture set from one of their sets of parents seven years ago for their daughter's outdoor wedding. I completed building my deck in June, and the neighbors asked me what I was going to do for deck furniture. I hadn't thought of that yet, and they offered my theirs. "Aren't you just going to get it recovered?" I asked. "No," they replied, "we got some other furniture for less than the price of recovering it, but we can't bring ourselves to throw out the old stuff." So I took it. I ordered the new fabric last week. Yes, actually it cost more than a cheap, Chinese patio furniture set. But theirs lasted outdoors seven years without ever being covered or brought inside. I suspect that it will last me the rest of my life, being covered when not in use, and brought into the basement in the winter. I also suspect that the neighbors who gave me their set will be replacing their new, cheap, Chinese set in about 3-4 years.
From: tomorrow on 14 Jul 2010 12:55 On Jul 13, 11:26 pm, High Plains Thumper <h...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > Actually, I'd like to see Harley put the water cooled V-Rod engine into > a cruiser. I know it would break the mould of oil cooled offerings at > the loss of the potato - potato - potato sound. But I feel that it is > inevitable that such should happen. Besides, the newer generation has a > slightly different view of what type motorcycle turns them on. It will > be appeasing that generation that will keep the H-D company in business > and profitable. I think we'll see a liquid-cooled dohc 4v/cyl Harley V-twin touring bike in the next year or three.
From: tomorrow on 14 Jul 2010 12:58
On Jul 14, 2:13 am, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: > Beav <beavis.origi...(a)ntlwoxorld.com> wrote: > > I'm interested to know which bikes the Japanese produced were in competition > > with Harley? > > None, unless you assume that every big bike is a competitor. > > >Until they produced the Harely clones I can't think of one. > > Nor can I. > > But people prefer to believe they've been beaten unfairly. But of course, the Japanese WERE gunning for Harley-Davidson in the early 1980's. The historical record leaves no doubt about that. And, of course, the Japanese WERE competing unfairly in the U.S. motorcycle market in the early 1980's. Again, the historical record leaves no doubt about that. And of course, in the U.S. market, the Japanese have been soundly beaten by Harley-Davidson ever since the playing field was leveled. The historical record leaves no doubt about that. |