- Joined
- Aug 10, 2014
- Messages
- 2,038
Finally, someone who understands and shareholders want to see positive cashflow so they have that to worry about as well.Take the £124M and the 62000 bikes at £2K profit as good. The £124M could be in a bank getting 5% interest or if its a loan you would be paying 8%.
So at 5% you would get £6.2M in interest or be paying £9.9M to service a loan annually. Call it £10M to service a loan.
At £2K profit per bike then just to repay the loan is sales of 5,000 bikes a year just to stand still.
So you are really talking about 124,000 bikes made over a max of 10 years ie 12,400 a year to service the interest and pay back the £124M.
To pay all that off, you would first have to run a functional company. To sell 5000 bikes a year, you first have to sell 500, or even 50. That is not happening.
Norton is one of the strongest brands in biking, a magical name with an iconic logo. It would be a dream job to be handed the reins. This could have been an easy assignment.
How it is possible to fail at the extreme basics so far, i.e. to pull a late-Garner-Norton v.2 is beyond me.
Garner may have been a con at the end, but most of the time it was not this bad, was it?
Why are there no get-togethers with current Commando owners?
Why is there no customer support?
Why is the sales team not calling up every lead?
OK, maybe they think this approach would not be fitting with the exalted aura of the brand, but by now they should realize that is not the correct way forward.
And: even the most snotty brands actually return calls to mortals who have handed over money for their products.
If Norton are somehow trying to sabotage their development to be able to say that they will build a brave new world with e-bikes, they should go hang themselves.
The money these companies like Triumph, etc make is from other avenues. Motorcycle sales"profit" is very low for a manufacturer. Look at licensing, accessories, clothing, etc and you will see it makes up in some cases 75% of sales and those are high markup items. Parts sales, again high profit.That’s a good video and I’m not gonna argue with any of his points. I was surprised at the low margin he calculated for Triumph (but I do understand that privately owned companies deliberately try and make that look as low as possible). And I agree with his approximation for Norton.
A couple of thoughts:
1. he actually missed out A LOT of announcements that they made over the 3 year period, I guess that was intentional, to focus on the highlights and prevent it being 3 hours long !
2. his payback calculations for the £124m are interesting, I agree with him that it shows TVS are in this for the long game. But it’s still rather sobering. Remember that investment will have to increase for any new models which are yet to be developed and operationalised, which they obviously have to make as they’ll simply never reach break even with the current line up. So that investment is not the final number, it’s work in progress…
But all your reasoning fails simple arithmetic.No surprise that I have a slightly different take - and my view is that some of these comments may be a little ‘short sighted’. Not by way of accuracy/intent, but context.
Papa Smurf states that Norton are not gonna return that investment anytime soon - a statement of the obvious, obviously! He then goes on to say that hopefully TVS is in it for the long haul - yup, they’ve signed up to an initial ten year plan.
TVS is not looking at 3-5 years - more like Norton‘s stated 10 year plan and far beyond - the long game. They’ve invested heavily in the startup phase with infrastructure, machinery, special tools and test equipment (STTE), in the hiring of a workforce and development of legacy machines.
They have authorised a definitive approach that is future focussed (EV’s etc) and individualistic (atelier etc), whether you agree with this or not. This indicates a long term intent. TVS (and shareholders) don’t expect to get their money back in the short term - certainly not from legacy machines in an interim period, before they introduce their own line-up or see their plan/vision develop.
In this context doing rudimentary maths for number of bikes sold to effect repayment, whilst at the same time pointing out that most income for an ‘established’ bike manufacturer does not come from bike sales, seems somewhat meaningless.
How many 961’s did Norton expect to sell - who knows? More than they have for sure. But given the profit margin (the video highlights), even a good expected sales outcome would have resulted in a modest return at best, in relation to their investment.
The 961 & V4 were readily available gap fillers IMO, to showcase engineering abilities (put a quality marker down) whilst their main game commences. Predictions of doom based on poor sales may be a little premature; this ain’t TVS’s first rodeo!
What is worrying are reports of a non-responsive spares department/poor communication - nothing new for some I realise. We are guessing at the reasoning for this of course. Maybe a turnover in the spares department of a (relatively) small workforce may cause this - who knows. If this is going to manifest it would do so in relation to comms with customers from outside of its current market - easy to spot an overseas enquiry. UK based purchasers have pointed out how responsive Norton have been.
Most of this is speculation. IMO, reaching for the most negative/catastrophic likely outcome in the absence of meaningful information is flawed thinking. Continuing to bang on about what should or should not have occurred in the past (communication, detail of re-engineering, spares etc), based on personal opinion, seems a bit pointless.
Although there are certainly significant improvements to be made from a layman’s perspective, this is obviously not “….an easy assignment” and I suspect all such forays into automotive manufacture are an “expensive gamble”.
Happy to discuss/debate - not willing to have my thoughts/opinions escalated to argument.
View attachment 110242
This makes me laugh every time.Happy to discuss/debate - not willing to have my thoughts/opinions escalated to argument.
I am following these discussions from a distance.My main problems with TVS Norton is…..
Lack of communication in both the parts department and media.
They refuse to share ANY information to its customer base. It blows my mind on how lackluster they are in todays world on how easily and cheap it is to advertise and spread the news. They choose to do this.
They choose to keep their sales and marketing numbers low.
They choose to be a quiet mouse.
Well seeing that Triumph makes some popular motorcycles I dont think they need much direction. THey tried that over at Harley Davidson and the CEO ended up being replaced because sales sucked. They didnt Rushmore to the dealers to buy and the small-liter bikes failed to sell and the electric and offroad just didn't sell as well either.I am following these discussions from a distance.
The Norton community is a very loyal one, and I think it surprised TVS how the community tries to guide (or instruct?) the company to march in a certain direction.
So my question to you brits is: Is there an equal strong following of Triumph, and do you also try to tell John Bloor what to make?
Cheers,
Knut
I’m not a Brit. I’m a dumb American.I am following these discussions from a distance.
The Norton community is a very loyal one, and I think it surprised TVS how the community tries to guide (or instruct?) the company to march in a certain direction.
So my question to you brits is: Is there an equal strong following of Triumph, and do you also try to tell John Bloor what to make?
Cheers,
Knut
In still not understanding how "Norton" is iconic. Half the people that walk into the shop never heard of a "Norton" so I can't agree with iconic.I’m not a Brit. I’m a dumb American.
I’m not asking anyone to make anything. That would be ridiculous.
But, if I owned a motorcycle business or a business that sells anything, I’d advertise it to the fullest.
Wait, I do own a business and I did advertise.
But the difference is, I’m not selling an iconic brand of motorcycle or a business that dumped multi millions of dollars into.
TVS in “my opinion” fails with a F in this category.
Triumph knows how to advertise and they also provide news and updates. The new triumph dirt bike is an example.
TVS Norton has yet to show or talk about anything new or coming. They haven’t even done anything other than some updates to Donington designed and engineered bikes.
Hell, even Erik Buell is making bikes again and he advertises.