| Author | Message | ||
     Ustorque |
Sorry, but the more i watch Erik's video the more i want to puke! The man looks like he's in agony! Puts my stomach in a knot! Delete it or move it to the backfire I don't care! | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I watched it again as well. That look is the same when you realize that you've done everything you can but the bank is still coming to foreclose on your farm and auction your farm equipment. I sincerely hope Erik Buell gets the chance to show HD the "shocker". | ||
| Xlcrguy |
I wonder if the all-seeing board of director bean counting brainiacs had any idea that they would be completely p!ssing off 125,000+ current owners worldwide (yours truly included). How do you recover from that? | ||
| Mikef5000 |
I can't watch the video again. Absolutely cannot. Just seeing the still frame at the beginning before you click play gives me a lump in my throat. Once was enough. | ||
| Dalefranks |
I wonder if the all-seeing board of director bean counting brainiacs had any idea that they would be completely p!ssing off 125,000+ current owners worldwide (yours truly included). How do you recover from that? Well, let's see, Buell sales are slightly less than 0.2% of HD's total motorcycles sales, based on 2009's figures of 4,000 Buell registrations out of 222,200 total HD new bike registrations. And, of course, the charge-offs that will accrue from things like buying out the remainder of the Rotax contract, etc. will all be written off against tax, so they'll essentially cost the MoCo nothing. So, I don't think recovery will be much of an issue in Milwaukee. The MoCo didn't care much about Buell owners before they shut Buell down. What makes you think they'll start caring now? | ||
| Rocketsprink |
for once, I agree with you | ||
| Xlcrguy |
STILL, 125,000 owners is 125,000 owners. That would seem to my pea brain to be a bad thing. It's not like when they decided to dump the Aermacchi bikes in the 70's...(which I now own two of!) | ||
| Dalefranks |
STILL, 125,000 owners is 125,000 owners. It sounds like a big number, sure. Compared to 7 or 8 million Harley riders...not so much. It's all a numbers game in Milwaukee. And Buell's numbers just weren't that good. It seems like a lot of you guys don't understand that. The quality of the bikes, Erik Buell's technical genius, the handling...all those things aren't even side issues at the corporate level. They literally don't matter. Look at it this way: You may think that black Twizzlers are the best candy ever made. You eat them daily. But if the guy at local candy store has 1,000 regular customers, and only 20 of them, including you, buy Twizzlers, then the guy at the candy store may decide that it isn't worth the trouble to keep ordering and inventorying Twizzlers. It doesn't matter how much you and your 19 friends like them, or how PO'd you'll get when he stops carrying them. They just aren't worth the extra effort they cause his business. It has nothing, objectively, to do with how good black Twizzlers may be. It's not even part of the candy store owner's decision process to think about that. That's the reality of how these decisions are made. | ||
| Oldog |
Dale how much would keeping the buell brand going even at a reduced output have cost VS having to pay for the shutdown? how many other riders will those "buellies" interact with lets say 10 1.28 million, many of these contacts will be new riders, or riders on other brands, many rice riders are curious about my old buell now there is no reason for them to seek out a harley dealer and go see, some things are not as simple as numbers | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Odd how the expense of shutting down the operation is "no big deal" but the costs of keeping the brand going are insurmountable. I believe that there is no logic to this decision. I think the walls were dripping with piss and in the end the guy with the checkbook had more piss. | ||
| Dalefranks |
some things are not as simple as numbers Maybe. But at the end of the day, numbers are the only data you have. Everything else is guess-work. how much would keeping the buell brand going even at a reduced output have cost VS having to pay for the shutdown? Harley isn't going to pay anything for the shut-down. All those shut-down costs are charge-offs. The MoCo will just write them off and deduct them from their tax bill. That money was already going to be spent by sending it off to the US government. Now, they'll send it off to Rotax instead. It's not costing them anything extra to just kill it. how many other riders will those "buellies" interact with lets say 10 1.28 million, many of these contacts will be new riders, or riders on other brands, many rice riders are curious about my old buell now there is no reason for them to seek out a harley dealer and go see, Well, look, Buells have been in production for years. But, in 2009, they sold 4,000 motorcycles. So, I guess the real question is, why haven't those 1.28 million potential customers already bought a Buell? Again, you can throw out what-ifs all day long. But you've gotta ask yourself, "why didn't any of those what-ifs come true over the last 15 years?" Numbers are a lot simpler, because, at the end of the day, they reflect the reality of what is actually happening, as opposed to what we wish was happening.} | ||
| Dalefranks |
Odd how the expense of shutting down the operation is "no big deal" but the costs of keeping the brand going are insurmountable. Again, you don't seem to understand that the costs of shutting down will just come out the corporation's tax bill. Essentially, by shutting it down, they get to use the money they were going to have to send off to Uncle Sam. It's all deductible business expenses. Total cost to the MoCo: $0. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Again, you don't seem to understand that the costs of shutting down will just come out the corporation's tax bill. Uhhh, yeah. I DO understand. You understand that BMC was making money, right? Not much, but it was making money. Even if it weren't, even if BMC was showing a loss, HD could write THOSE losses off just like the costs of shutting down the operation. The cost to HD ISN'T $0. Their cost is whatever it is minus the combined tax rates of 35% (Federal) and 7.9% (the flat corporate tax rate for WI). So lets say that the cost to buy out the remaining Rotax engines was $10,000,000. This means that the real cost to HD is $10M - 42.9% ($4,290,000), $5,710,000. | ||
| Court |
Water under the bridge . . . See the future. | ||
| Niceguyeddy |
Cryptic as usual. What's the future? Just for fun, ofcourse...or speculation/hypothethes( or euphomism if you prefer). (Message edited by niceguyeddy on October 16, 2009) | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Can-AM...... Bring back that dirty widow maker | ||
| Vtwinbuell |
Someone had a vendetta, it makes no sense to spend over $600,000 per employee to shut down a company. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
and to think some here thought Dale Frank was a crackpot when he predicted Buell's demise a few months, ago It's not about "making money". It's about maximizing the return on your investment. In other words, Buell, might have been earning HD a 3% return when, in fact, HD could have been earning a 5% return if their money were invested elsewhere. Personally, I believe it's short-sighted but then again, I'm not a HD investor. | ||
| Oldog |
Everything else is guess-work. Tell edison, the wright bros, and Oh yeah Ford. they started with ideas, accountants "make money" by ????? Harley isn't going to pay anything for the shut-down. I really do not understand it has to be costing them something, what I think you are missing is that weather or not the 1.29 million prospective customers are here today or not, total speculation or not. as riders here in the usa get the news and they will, what effect will this story have ON HD prospective customers? My guess not good, I for one will not buy a GM product, Ford is not on the federal teat, guess who gets my coin.... perhaps you were right in your prediction, but I stand by my belief, I have been in a similar situation in a different business, The group I was with was part of the technical service department and not local to the corperate offices we were the hands on equipment experience, the management thought that we were expendable, we all to a one left, many erie parallels to the buell situation for me. recently I was in a meeting with their largest customer, about support work for you guessed it equipment & control systems. for a year and a half after I left I found work by assisting owners of the equipment and other vendors.. they lost perhaps 10% of their business in a largely static market, specualtion is not as definate as "numbers" but experience beats them both, from my prospective, the new customers that HD wants to attract, will have gone through hard times, this will resonate with them, not likely in a good way. The term "Myoptic" has been applied here From my experience it appears to be "an accurate statement" from the porch} | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
Erik is down now but I know we'll see him smile again. really do you think they can keep a guy like this down?  | ||
| Xb12xmike |
Dude...That is a great pic! -----------------------------------
Aren't these "numbers" pre-championship numbers? | ||
| Court |
>>>>Dude...That is a great pic! It really is . . . I spent some time and ran down the photographer and got prints for Erik and I to hang over out desks at home . . . pretty much says it all. By the way . . . the fellow holding the clipboard is Pretap Varma. He came here from India to work for Buell and is one of the smartest and nicest folks I've ever met. | ||
| Swordsman |
Dude, we HAVE to get a bigeer version of that photo! ~SM | ||
| Dalefranks |
The cost to HD ISN'T $0. Their cost is whatever it is minus the combined tax rates of 35% (Federal) and 7.9% (the flat corporate tax rate for WI). So lets say that the cost to buy out the remaining Rotax engines was $10,000,000. This means that the real cost to HD is $10M - 42.9% ($4,290,000), $5,710,000. Umm, you should probably toss in the $215-$245 million one-time charge-off for future sales losses in there somewhere. I mean, if you really want to do the math. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
You can't deduct future sales losses. You can deduct the difference between what you have in inventory costs vs. what you sell the inventory for. You can deduct losses on sale of machinery, contracts, etc. You can't say "we would have sold another $250M of bikes, but because we are shutting down, we won't get those sales." It doesn't work that way. At $10,000 average dealer cost for the bikes, $250,000,000 would mean 25,000 units. There are not 25,000 units. | ||
| Dalefranks |
Wow. You should probably tell that to the accountants at HD, who are saying: The company said that 180 jobs will be lost over time as it shuts down Buell. It said it will book one-time charges of $215 million to $245 million in 2009 and 2010, about $55 million ahead of its July projections. | ||
| Oldog |
You can't deduct future sales losses. You can deduct the difference between what you have in inventory costs vs. what you sell the inventory for. }Wow. You should probably tell that to the accountants at HD, who are saying: The company said that 180 jobs will be lost over time as it shuts down Buell. It said it will book one-time charges of $215 million to $245 million in 2009 and 2010, about $55 million ahead of its July projections. I wonder if a little "Enron" accounting is going on ? How do you account for "future sales losses." er don't loose them, } | ||
| Carbonbigfoot |
A big chunk of that money is probably going to the dealers, essentially "rebates" that will help them liquidate their Buell bikes that they have in stock. I went with my better half to look at bikes today. When the silly stupid ridiculous pricing comes down the pipe, I plan to snatch up something for her. 'Bout the only consolation I'm gonna get from this clusterf**k. R | ||
| Midknyte |
You can't deduct future sales losses. Really? Tell that to the the RIAA | ||
| Blake |
Dale. Listen up. Go •••• yourself. I don't want to see anyone like you here rationalizing the dishonorable actions of HDI to murder the Buell brand. Take a hike jackass. |
