When did Harley start costing over $40,000?

[lund]

Harley will be in the history books with the passing of the babyboomers.
Old, fat, long grey haired from the past are finding there way to 3 wheels and wheel chairs Harleys customer base is getting smaller.
Its a company with a very narrow minded view that forgot to move with the times.

 

[Sierra1]

The people who were running Harley during the AMF years are most likely dead....

Am I wrong for laughing at that?

 

[Sierra1]

. . . . Its a company with a very narrow minded view that forgot to move with the times.

In their defense, I'm pretty sure that's what their customers wanted; that certain image. Which is also why @lund could be correct.

 

[RCinNC]

I think this is actually HD's goal at this point; to become an expensive boutique brand and reduce production to increase demand. The golden years of the early to mid 2000's are pretty far in the rear view mirror at this point, when they were moving a quarter million bikes a year during the age of easy credit. My impression is that their target market is going to be buyers who don't really care about the brand, but do care about the status of owning a bike that costs 40 grand and up. Even when the vehicle market crashes (and that's inevitable) and prices drop, I suspect Harleys are going to stay extremely expensive. I have serious doubts about how well a marketing strategy like that will work out, though. Luxury brands like Mercedes, Bentley, Porsche, Ferrari, etc all have the status of either class, performance, or wealth, or a combination of all three. People who don't really know much about cars will still see a Mercedes and think "ooo look, rich guy driving by". Or they'll see a Ferrari and think "man, look at that awesome machine, must be nice to have all that money, bet he can't even drive it". I don't think people have that perception when they see a Harley, even if they have some idea of what a Harley costs. Harley has spent 50 years cultivating that image of "born-to-be-wild badass biker", and that's not going to be an easy transition to "Oooo look, a Harley, that guy's probably a Fortune 500 CEO with a supermodel trophy wife", or "look at that amazing high tech performance machine". If I'm a well-off guy who has the disposable income to spend 50 grand on a motorcycle, I sincerely doubt I'd spend it on a Harley, a bike that's legendary for its image of being owned by either gang members or else roleplaying orthodontists.

I think the intersection of the sets of "people who have a lot of disposable income and want to buy status" and "people with money who want a to pay 50 grand for a Harley with the rep of an old man's bike" is going to be pretty small.

 

[Sierra1]

. . . . Harley has spent 50 years cultivating that image of "born-to-be-wild badass biker" . . . .

Which what's gonna make it hard to become a boutique brand. The bad ass biker image is still going strong with their clothing line. (which I think is their real money maker) On the other hand, the outlaw bikers don't seem to be getting any less prevalent. So, unless they make the jump to Indian, there's that.

 

[RCinNC]

That's why I don't think it'll be a successful transition. Brand recognition is a powerful tool, up until a company that's been around for 120 years tries to transition to a new image. Then brand image becomes an anchor around your neck. You can't please your traditional market, and the market you're shooting for can only view your product through the lens that you've spent a half century meticulously crafting. Harley is tied to their image in a way that few manufacturers are, and have (until recently) steadfastly avoided any changes to that brand image. That type of image realignment can't be done abruptly; it can take years to get the public to stop thinking about a product in a specific way and learn a new way. Harley might not have that kind of time.

 

[Sierra1]

Speaking of Harley's financial woes, saw this article: Harley-Davidson Has An Interesting Problem Causing Million-Dollar Losses

 

[RCinNC]

I'd have to disagree with the article's reason for the York shutdown as a supply chain problem. It was more of a subcontractor problem, where brake lines made by a subcontractor were substandard and can't be used. Unlike the standard supply chain excuse, in this case the parts are available; they just suck.

As far as credit losses, HD is 8n the same boat as a lot of big banks who made lots of car loans to people who couldn't actually afford the loans. I think it's going to be a mini version of the 2008 mortgage crisis for the automobile finance industry.

 

[Sierra1]

And what's worse is that everything was overvalued. Now everything is upside down money wise. At least a house doesn't wear out in a 5-10 years.

I remember when covid kicked off and everybody was buying campers, motorcycles, and outdoor stuff. They weren't working, but they were buying. Didn't make sense.

 

[Eville Rich]

I don't think I'd be so quick to write-off Harley. They are doing small bikes and have developed and international supply chain/market. In the U.S. they are definitely leaning into their historical demographic and running into issues with that history, branding and price point. But they can pivot once they've wrung the stale sweat from the boomers.

They have tried innovating in the U.S. but it hasn't worked out. Waffling on corporate strategy and conflicts with their traditional branding. Sort of herky jerky like their big bikes. But I suspect they'll have staying power over the long term as long as people keep riding.