richard-7 said:
Fast Eddie said:
richard-7 said:
I really liked Stuarts response on Twitter. I wont ruin it for you so look it up by going to twitter then searching for @norton_ceo . Well done! I love my Norton. I would feel like I'm cheating on my Norton if I rode that Triumph. Norton should be flattered that Triumph tried to make their new model look very much like the 961. I would be. It`s like when you are cruising in your 300M Chrysler Hemi that looks similar to the Bentley thinking you are the cats ass and then a Bentley pulls up beside you.
How about sharing it for all the luddites out there who don't do twit - er (like me)??
QUOTE by Stuart Garner on twitter regarding the new Triumph line up.
"two great brands, very different propositions, prices and residuals. Both have their place. Personally happy Brit bikes are back!"
Well, I take my hat off to Garner for making such a statement. And I think (and hope) he is right, the market is plenty big enough for both to coexist nicely, as they did for decades previously.
However we live in modern times, and coexistance (of anything) is only possible if products meet the base customer requirement of the broader market. So whilst I respect Garners philosophical words, I hope that behind the scenes, he is taking the Triumph 'threat' rather more seriously.
It is surely an undeniable fact that most buyers of a modern motorcycle expect high reliability. Even if this is not met, they expect very high levels of customer service (surveys in the automotive industry show that customers are actually NOT very negatively effected by some reliability issues provided they are not exesive / chronic and that they subsequently are treated well from a customer service perspective).
And whilst I know there will be those on here who protest strongly that their new Norton has been 100% trouble free, you are the lucky ones and very much in the minority if we measure by the amount of information 'out there' on the topic.
There must be many, many, potential buyers out there who have considered a new Norton but then shied away due to the negative stories of both of the above. I know that I have. Several times in fact. And I know that I'm not so different to many others.
Garner should look at Harley for inspiration. Yes, I know their market is different in some ways, but it is also very similar in some ways. And the size of their market is staggering in compassion (over 300,000 per year I believe). My point here is that Norton seem to have the paradigm of being able to 'get away with murder' because their core followers will still buy with 'blind faith'. And this is true. But how different could it be, how different could Nortons entire existence be if it did not have to rely only on these few, but if it could tap into just 10 or 15% of that Harley size market?
IMHO, the comments about the Nortons looks are valid, the Norton probably does out score the Triumphs in terms of looks (although I've not yet seen a new Triumph in the flesh) but that is not even close to out weighing the rest of the 'ownership experience' for me. Whilst looks are important to classic / retro buyers, for most at least, this is not enough on its own. Reliability, performance, service levels, or in other words, the whole 'ownership experience' is what matters.
So I will definitely be checking out the new Triumphs and am hoping they 'tick the box' for me, as I'm really looking for that niche to be filled in my garage. My biggest problem is hopefully going to be an inability to decide between 'High torque T120' and 'High power Thruxton' !!
For those who are wondering... My reason for waffling on about this is the hope that it helps Simon (or someone) get this message back to Garner, to up the game and stop turning away good customers!