Trouble at Mill

Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
893
Couldn't play the news report here, but this could become a snow ball.
Which in turn could be The End.
AC.
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
2,983
Country flag
This from a former executive of Indian Motorcycle,September 2003:

What happened?

The company needed enough money to carry it just a few more months, until its 2004 bikes were ready to be sold. Without the investment it was counting on, O’Hagan said Indian didn’t have the cash to finish building the 2004 models and plan its future products. Even if the company had stopped its product-planning to fund 2004 production, it “would go another six months, and then it would close,” O’Hagan said.

“The motorcycle industry is not for the faint of heart,” O’Hagan said. “(It) takes an awful lot of capital to succeed. ... In the end, the company didn’t have the money.

“On the other hand, our 380 employees and 200 dealers have something to be proud of, and that’s 13,000 beautiful Indian motorcycles driving around the country.”

More Indian motorcycles have been selling than ever before. May was the firm’s best sales month ever, although September was on track to beat it. This year, O’Hagan added, Indian was on track to sell 4,500 bikes, compared to 3,822 last year. Indian planned to build 6,000 machines for 2004.


Indian had been in business for some five years and had actually delivered over 13,000 bikes before its demise.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
1,152
Country flag
JimC said:
This from a former executive of Indian Motorcycle,September 2003:

What happened?

The company needed enough money to carry it just a few more months, until its 2004 bikes were ready to be sold. Without the investment it was counting on, O’Hagan said Indian didn’t have the cash to finish building the 2004 models and plan its future products. Even if the company had stopped its product-planning to fund 2004 production, it “would go another six months, and then it would close,” O’Hagan said.

“The motorcycle industry is not for the faint of heart,” O’Hagan said. “(It) takes an awful lot of capital to succeed. ... In the end, the company didn’t have the money.

“On the other hand, our 380 employees and 200 dealers have something to be proud of, and that’s 13,000 beautiful Indian motorcycles driving around the country.”

More Indian motorcycles have been selling than ever before. May was the firm’s best sales month ever, although September was on track to beat it. This year, O’Hagan added, Indian was on track to sell 4,500 bikes, compared to 3,822 last year. Indian planned to build 6,000 machines for 2004.


Indian had been in business for some five years and had actually delivered over 13,000 bikes before its demise.

yes, but the new Norton company is doing great (to put the forum spin on it for the rose colored glasses crew)
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
8,216
JimC said:
Indian had been in business for some five years and had actually delivered over 13,000 bikes before its demise.
Be careful of totally believing strongly-worded publicity blurbs ?
If you were watching around 2003 and 2004, quite a number of those '13000' bikes were sitting unsold in Dealers Showrooms. Quite a lot.

Some probably still are...
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
10,389
Country flag
AussieCombat said:
Couldn't play the news report here, but this could become a snow ball.
Which in turn could be The End.
AC.
This is not the first person to want their money back from what I understand. But I doubt its the end.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
569
Country flag
maybe not needed to understand it, but needed to establish the understanding between the two parties involved with their obligations to each other.

JD

JimC said:
It is foolish to assume if someone made an "over the phone" deal on a car from a dealer, that the manufacturer would need to backup the dealers promise on a verbal contract.
As I stated before, Norton is both manufacture and dealer. It doesn't matter which hat they are wearing, they failed to deliver as promised. One need not be a lawyer or a manufacturer to understand this.
 

ZFD

Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
638
Country flag
JD,
Had you paid a deposit on trust, then been asked a while later to pay the rest of the purchase price because "your bike is on the assembly bench now", then been fobbed off with all sorts of stories for another year, what sort of contract would you think you have entered into?
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
98
Norton had a large stand at the NEC Motorcycle show last week and it was still one of the stands drawing in the crowds. However they were being more realistic with their delivery schedule compared to previous years. I ordered a 961 Sport at the show two years ago and was given a predicted delivery of June/July 2010 but due to problems with engine supply I did not get delivery until March 2011. I had paid in full 6 months before delivery as I had been given a build date of August 2010 but i was kept informed of progress on a regular basis and I was prepared to wait for the bike I wanted.
I did get concerned when delivery kept getting put back and I did consider at one point asking for a refund(that was a year ago after reading all the stories on here that they were about to fold). However after a visit to the factory I felt reasurred that I would eventually get the bike, Chris Walker was the Sales Manager at that time and he always kept me up to date with progress. I am very pleased with the 961and have covered around 3,500 miles so far and the after sales service has been superb(the bike was collected from my home for the service at the Donnington factory FOC)
I believe that they are currently in the USA at various motorcycle shows for the next month so things can't be that bad!
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
569
Country flag
that's hypothetical... the real issue is between the two parties, all else is speculation. If a contract was made and breached then by all means legal measures needed to be persued, hence the involvement of the legal trade. Please note, I AM NOT defending anyones action, just stating that people here are prejudging with personal bias this case from the outside and that the details of the action and of the contract (if any) has not been pubilcally disclosed. So as far as I'm concerned, people are forming their opions on hearsay information.
Here in the US, contract law 101, a contract is defined as consideration must be exchanged by both parties to be considered leagaly binding by the two parties (provable verbally or written) and thereafter the terms can be ammended only by the consent of both the two parties. What were the details (if in writting) of the two? What were the details of their ammended contract when the "second" payment was made (if it was not defined in the original contract)?
In law, it's not what is right, it's what you can prove in court. Was the "contract" breached according to the terms of the contract? Was the "injured" party justified (legally) in persuing an out from his contract (details unknown)? It seems the court agreed with the one asking for his deposit back..... but we still don't know enough about the details of the contract itself to pass a "public" verdict. and a public verdict, as I said before, is personally biased. The public will always judge, try, and pursacute on feeling rather than hard provable fact. Even if it were I who had paid "up front", I would have to prove that breach of contract was involved to recieve a refund form a legally binding contract. If I didn't have a contract with the sums of monies involved, I would be stupid and a victim worthy of theft.

JD


ZFD said:
JD,
Had you paid a deposit on trust, then been asked a while later to pay the rest of the purchase price because "your bike is on the assembly bench now", then been fobbed off with all sorts of stories for another year, what sort of contract would you think you have entered into?
 

ZFD

Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
638
Country flag
Firstly, I happen to know the background of the story.

Secondly, if your quote "If I didn't have a contract with the sums of monies involved, I would be stupid and a victim worthy of theft." is applied then all the customers of the new company, hoping for the best of the new Norton enterprise and giving their money to make the new start possible, are "stupid and victims worthy of theft."

Don't you think this is a very harsh judgement on Norton enthusiasts?
 
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
2,983
Country flag
Jeffdavison,

Since you think people who make a good faith contract are stupid and worthy of theft, I have a pretty good idea why you are no longer a manufacture. I would never want to have any dealings with anyone who thinks people should be sheared if they are not protected by a shield of legal boiler plate.
 
Joined
Apr 15, 2009
Messages
10,389
Country flag
JAYMAC said:
Norton had a large stand at the NEC Motorcycle show last week and it was still one of the stands drawing in the crowds. However they were being more realistic with their delivery schedule compared to previous years. I ordered a 961 Sport at the show two years ago and was given a predicted delivery of June/July 2010 but due to problems with engine supply I did not get delivery until March 2011. I had paid in full 6 months before delivery as I had been given a build date of August 2010 but i was kept informed of progress on a regular basis and I was prepared to wait for the bike I wanted.
I did get concerned when delivery kept getting put back and I did consider at one point asking for a refund(that was a year ago after reading all the stories on here that they were about to fold). However after a visit to the factory I felt reasurred that I would eventually get the bike, Chris Walker was the Sales Manager at that time and he always kept me up to date with progress. I am very pleased with the 961and have covered around 3,500 miles so far and the after sales service has been superb(the bike was collected from my home for the service at the Donnington factory FOC)
I believe that they are currently in the USA at various motorcycle shows for the next month so things can't be that bad!
Kind of funny how people are ignoring a positive first hand account of a happy new Norton owner. Shame on you Jaymac for enjoying your Norton, shame on you! :mrgreen:

Sadly there are many more like you out there but all we hear about are the whiners.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
569
Country flag
You dont know the facts of my not any longer being in the manufacturing business. You don't even know what I manufactured or even the industry that I was involved in, but you're all too ready to jump to an uneducated judgement without even attempting the look for the history and the facts. Do you have any sort of objective capacity in looking at a situation? Appears not. If you have any desire, I would be more than glad to share... but you have already convicted me.

Good faith purchases with only a hopeful fullfilment does not fair well in most business transactions. My rhetoric never meant to imply that suckers should be taken, tho through your personal prejudices it appears you have read it that way. In the real world, if anyone "gives" $15,000 on good faith with no "assurances" of fullfilment, well in my book, that is a foolish move. Shame on both both parties for entering into that sort of agreement. Giving up $15,000 on "faith" is extemely naive at best. Also someone giving false expectations in asking for the money is a business person of dubious agenda.

Demanding a contract for an up front ammount of even half the $15,000 is good business practice for anyone involved in such a transaction as the contract will give either party legal recourse if either one breaches the agreement between them for the conditions set forth in that contract. I would not order tooling with out assurances of delivery as I plan production based on a timeline that revolves around the arrival of that tool. The person whom I ordered from would, as like, need some sort of agreement up front so he can extend his ability and resources to produce the tool, as it costs him money to produce / procure it. I sent out finished goods to dealers based on their dealer contracts with terms set forth in our dealer agreement and the credit I afforded to extend to him. This is business and both parties benefit from those agreements. If the agreements are breached, then one or the other party has to cover their ass(ets) by whatever legal means at their disposal. Any reciept or order form is a written document that is viewed by law as a contract. When I order $15K, $25K $100K worth of hard tooling I have to make sure, in order to protect my business, that I have more assurance than a verbal conversation. If I send $15K, $25K, $100K worth of product to a customer, I need assurances of his ability to pay within the timeframe agreed upon. If the supplier failed to deliver or if the customer failed to pay and I didn't have any form of a contract or agreement, who would take responsability, who would be hurt by the loss? Who would have to bear the cost of the legal fees in trying to recover the loss? How would I even prove I had a loss to begin with?

For nickle and dime stuff, $10, $50, $100....(over the counter stuff, if you will) sure I agree with you about not needing the legal protection of a hard contract.... but God... we are talking about $15,000, that's REAL hard earned money!
Why do you think Bernie Madoff is in deep doo doo and his clients are S.O.L.

JD

JimC said:
Jeffdavison,

Since you think people who make a good faith contract are stupid and worthy of theft, I have a pretty good idea why you are no longer a manufacture. I would never want to have any dealings with anyone who thinks people should be sheared if they are not protected by a shield of legal boiler plate.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
569
Country flag
First... I only speak for myself. If by inference you think I speak of other people, that's your assumption. I can only speak of my experience and what "I" would have done.
You are extrapolating to an assumptive hypothetical ( to your preconcived notions) conclusion. You have taken this "quote" out of the context I wrote it to fit the context into which you want to pigeon hole it, then try to make it sound as if I were talking about a judgement on a community. That is nothing but manipulation of words to put "spin" on it. We have enough of that in the American Political Theater.

Knowing the background and knowing the legal facts presented are two different things.

JD

ZFD said:
Firstly, I happen to know the background of the story.

Secondly, if your quote "If I didn't have a contract with the sums of monies involved, I would be stupid and a victim worthy of theft." is applied then all the customers of the new company, hoping for the best of the new Norton enterprise and giving their money to make the new start possible, are "stupid and victims worthy of theft."

Don't you think this is a very harsh judgement on Norton enthusiasts?
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2011
Messages
96
When I heard they were going to make Nortons again I was overjoyed but when I saw the bike and the price I nearly cried. It is not enough to stick a Norton decal on something and call it a Norton. The bike must actually have the characteristics of one.

Take the decal off and try to find anything about it that is Norton-like. Practically every Norton I have read about always had the crankshaft centre below the line of the wheel centres. They called it low "lean weight". This new bike is massive and top heavy just like all the killer "stoppie" bikes that everyone else makes. I think I'm going to go and have a good cry now.
 
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
4,962
Country flag
Murry's not from N.Z. ??

Had much the same reaction . Shock , Horrors . Disown Nortons if thats the future .
Calmed down but find it nothing but irritateing . A missed opertunity . Tangent . etc .

Seeing development of previous efforts required countless hours of refinement , or is that meddling ?
the diversity of effort left the lot in the lurch . Seems say 1 % of the engineers have the ability to refine things to a practical useable level ,
and the foresight to keep it simple . All Round . Cant be said if committes or Govts ( pleuocracies ) are involved .

Hence Triumphs sucess , as a Dictatorship . :D
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
2,210
If ever a example of BRAND power was to prove that people can be drawn in....well here it is.
That "Norton" logo as convinced some people they are getting a "Norton" when infact they are not.
What they are getting is a new manufactured motorcycle...and a outdated one at that! Push rods,aircooled?
But the NORTON logo on the tank forgives all that....Lets look at the fact's; other than that logo, what as the bike got in common with the original factory,or its 70 year history? .....well? answer .....the Name....but what if S Garner had stuck VILLIERS on the tank? Yep dont sound quite the same and i would imagin the fans would have NOT flocked to part with their dosh....so if they have put their money into the "Brand ",,which they have done so...then that must say something about that person.

OK , i have seen them at the show, and you have to smile at New Nortons attempt to "style" it loosely around the old commando...every one [the fans] where drooling over that famous "NAME" Norton commando! But change it to Villiers DOMMINATOR ... well i doubt it would be a dead duck....dont get me wrong here, if someone [SG] thinks theres a demand and money to be gleened.......then its fair play to the guy...but not at the expense of hard working punters.
I hope all the depositers get their DREAMS or the cash back......one day!
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
2,210
ZFD said:
JD,
Had you paid a deposit on trust, then been asked a while later to pay the rest of the purchase price because "your bike is on the assembly bench now", then been fobbed off with all sorts of stories for another year, what sort of contract would you think you have entered into?
Stew Garner , adopted a interest free loan plan, heavy sponcership from depositer's . Unfore-seen delays in manufacture and getting bikes out within a realistic time as "buggered up "the job. There is no contract,as proper contracts are normally read over by a business solicitor..i would say "they"the depositers have parted with their dosh on a limb, for an I.O.U note.
 

grandpaul

VIP MEMBER
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
11,039
Country flag
For what it's worth...

"GP, I'm sworn to secrecy on how my son and I were able to get our money back.. however, suffice to say, it wasn't easy.

I spoke with my attorney, who I've known for years, and he told me that although I (we) sent a $3000 "Non-refundable" deposit (see order form here: http://www.southbaytriumph.com/custompage.asp?pg=norton ), there is an "expectation of delivery", and Norton failed to deliver as promised. He was willing to draft the paperwork to South Bay Norton (sole U.S. distributor at the time - not sure if they still are) on my behalf, and to represent me if I was willing to take it that far. The fact Norton had been delivering bikes in the UK and other parts of Europe since the 1st of April of 2010 didn't make it any more palatable that I wasn't seeing my bike.

Frankly, I count myself very lucky that I was able to get the money back.

That's about all I can say about how my son and I got our money back.

Chris"
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
569
Country flag
This sure looks like a contract to me...Give us $3000 that you can't get back (if you change your mind for any reason) and we'll put you in line and deliver the bike when we get around to your order....sign here and send us a check:

http://cdn-9.psndealer.com/e2/dealersit ... norton.pdf

Even tho contractural in nature, I would not want to commit to those terms. If I really really had a hard on for the bike and I did sign up, I'd have to realize that the waiting time untill delivery is undefined with an open hard delivery date, tho SouthBay says they will "inform" you only upon receipt of the deposit... still very grey. This "order form" is a cleaverly crafted document that I am sure had been gone over by legal counsel before publication. It leaves a "grey area" which can be defended if a refund is requested. What is cleaver on Norton's part is that SouthBay is the agent who takes the deposit (and up front liability), not Norton it self, so if legal action is taken, they are buffered with less risk. Norton has given itself a shield more or less. I wonder if the full deposit is passed along to Norton or if Southbay banks a partial ammount. It would be very interesting to read the agreement between South Bay and Norton. ;)

Even if the factory ceased production before delvery, one would have a fight to reclaim the deposit as there probably would be a longer line of creditors that would need to be served up first. The cost of an attourney would probably be greater than the deposit unless he was Pro Bono, so it would be less costly to simply walk away from the deposit and consider it the cost of an education.

This is one of the effects of the modern ages credo of "I want it, and I want it now!" Being a first adopter may give one prestige and pride to have something no one else has, but you have to have it in your hands to make that claim. I don't mind waiting until there is some real establishment of a company with a dealer network with inventory on the floor, a well trained service department and a stock of spares on site. All local to me.

The order form (i.e. contract) posted IS an I.O.U. for a hopeful promise that may or may not be fullfiled at a time of Norton's choosing....

If you can afford the wait and the possible loss of the deposit, then I say go for it, but until the criteria I mentioned above is met, count on me to walk away.
Who knows, in 30 years an unpaid I.O.U note might be as valuable and collectable as the motorcycle itself (sarcasm). Hopefully that won't happen and Norton would be a viable business concern well before that.

JD
 
Top