How to save Harley Davidison
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Proper oil for cruisers
Next: 9-11 was an inside job.
From: The Older Gentleman on 16 Jul 2010 17:32 don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT), "TOG(a)Toil" > <totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > >> You are no different than the many Harley haters that have cruised > >> through this forum, blind to the facts and stubborn in their opinions. > > > ><chortle> > > > >You silly sod. I don't hate Harleys at all. In fact, a browse through > >this forum will show several references which I made to the effect > >that I might actually *buy* one[1]. > > And yet your posting record shows you avail yourself of every > opportunity to bash the brand. No, I don't. Got it wrong *again*. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: The Older Gentleman on 16 Jul 2010 17:32 tomorrow(a)erols.com <tomorrowaterolsdotcom(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > A thought that strikes me is that diversification may be a two-edged > sword. Yamaha and Honda and other megacorporations can afford to > maintain excess motorcycle production capacity during downturns like > the current one, and move inventory by slashing prices deeply - > providing incentives and kickbacks to dealers. Harley and others like > them can't afford to do that Because they're not a volume manufacturer. > - they need to expand when times are > good, and contract when times are lean. Harley, in particular, grew > phenomenally over a twenty-year stretch of record growth in sales, > profits, and share prices. Now, they are closing some production > lines, laying off workers, shutting down Buell, writing off MV Agusta, > etc, in order to survive in the current economic climate. However, > they cannot and will not slash prices or hold a fire sale, so they > move the bikes they have, and reduce production to avoid a glut. > > The consumer then has the PERCEPTION of quality and desirability > REINFORCED by the fact that the prices hold up, and that echos through > the market, reinforcing RESALE values as well, making current owners > happier with their purchase, whether it was bought in fat times or > lean. I'll agree that Harley's rseale value is excellent. And it's true that they don't discount, which does what you say. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: The Older Gentleman on 16 Jul 2010 17:32 tomorrow(a)erols.com <tomorrowaterolsdotcom(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I've read over and over again in the automotive press; that Porsche > (back when they were independent) could not survive making "just" > sports cars. > But Porsche weren't making 'just' sports cars - they were making only one sports car, 924, 944 and 928 notwithstanding > But Ferrari seems to survive (and prosper, and thrive) doing just > that. No one seems to think that being overly dependent on V8 and V10 > powered rwd supercars is a bad thing for them! Ferrari has produced a lot more models than Porsche. > > And yet, by the same reasoning that says that Harley *has* to build > standards and sport tourers and entry level beginner bikes, etc, > Ferrari will not be "successful" until they start building SUVs and > sedans and pick-up trucks! I take your point. Time will tell, I suppose. And what they do has worked for a century, but they're still stuck with a single core product in what is essentially a fashion industry. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: don (Calgary) on 16 Jul 2010 19:57 On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 22:32:21 +0100, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> IMHO Harley should send a thank you card to the metric manufacturers, >> especially Honda. By selling millions of entry level bikes, they have >> created and continue to create new customers for Harley. > >Do you know what Edward Turner, he of Triumph, said, back in the early >days of the Japanese invasion? > >He said that the British ought to be glad of having the Japanese on >their turf, bcause they were selling all these little bikes to riders >who'd then graduate to the big bikes that he, and BSA, Norton etc made. > >And he was wrong, too. So in your opinion no one has started on a smaller metric motorcycle and later purchased a Harley product who wouldn't have done so if metric entry bikes were not available. Sorry doesn't pass the giggle test.
From: J. Clarke on 16 Jul 2010 19:40
On 7/16/2010 2:35 PM, tomorrow(a)erols.com wrote: > On Jul 16, 2:18 pm, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older > Gentleman) wrote: >> tomor...(a)erols.com<tomorrowaterolsdot...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> HD *is* a small volume producer, really, and yes, BMW, Ducati and >>>> Triumph are even smaller. Moto Guzzi smaller still It's impossible to >>>> argue otherwise. >> >>> How do you define "small volume producer," then? >> >>> Anyone who doesn't produce millions of scooters and mopeds? >> >> I think anything over half a million units counts as volume in today's >> world, but ultimately it's pointless trying to establish a yardstick. >> >> Millions of scooters and mopeds certainly count - why shouldn't they? > > Because in general, when motorcycle enthusists think about > motorcycles, they don't think about mopeds and scooters. And thus > Harley, with 40+% of the current total U.S. streetbike market, Not even Harley claims 40 percent. They claim something like 50 percent of the 750 and up market. > does > not qualify - to most motorcycle enthusiasts - as a "small volume" > manufacturer. Neither does BMW BMW is ten times the size of Harley. > or Triumph Actually Triumph is pretty small. > or Ducati, One thinks of Ducati like one thinks of Ferrari, as an adjunct to a race team, so no, one does not think of them as being large and one does expect them eventually to either change their character or get digested by some larger company, just as happened to Ferrari, Maserati, and Lamborghini. > who have a > fraction of the U.S. market share (and a fraction of the worldwide > sales) that Harley has. And on the other hand, Kymco produces FAR > more 2-wheeled units than Harley-Davidson does, but somehow I don't > see that reducing Harley to a "small volume producer" of motorcycles. > > Maybe it's just a matter of perception and semantics, but when I think > about "small volume" motorcycle producers, I think of Moto-Guzzi > (today), Boss Hoss, MuZ (until recently) and MV Agusta as examples. |