What you forgot to point out was that they took over a business that was already manufacturing a motorcycle and that with the TVS touch and the amount of money they poured in they should have been able to turn around the production line within at least a year. I don't care if it was 5 bikes a week they should have been able to do so given the resources available within TVS. TVS is a giant in manufacturing so making excuses for them is needless. They mass produce many products and with all the companies they own getting Norton back running should be child play to them.
With respect CG, you talk in absolutes and as though your opinions are fact. There would likely have been significant undertakings in many areas to be dealt with. Norton Birmingham/TVS were not in the business of ‘
knocking out 5 bikes a week’, but in setting up a thriving automotive marque in a globally competitive environment.
Maybe it took time:
- completing business purchase in an environment where the sale/legalities where still under contest
- winding up SG Norton and dealing with legacy issues
- finding a new site for the business
- building a new factory from the ground up
- sourcing and equipping that new facility with high tech equipment
- sourcing professional staff from at home and abroad
- resolving legacy model technical issues
- setting up a quality system whilst establishing and qualifying new suppliers
- planning a model line-up and putting that plan into motion
- ensuring when they did open for business they were ready to do so because heaven knows, there would be enough people intent on crucifying them if they got it wrong
- to complete the above during a global pandemic and where logistical supply lines were severely restricted
Bottom line is we just don’t know why they have taken the time they have. Your speculation on how long it should have taken them could be considered as ‘needless’ to use your words. I offer my opinion (speculation) as to why these delays may have occured, but it’s my opinion only. We do not have the full picture and should probably resist commenting as though we do.
If you would like though, we may tease out some more interesting aspects - if you do know that it should have taken no longer than one year to produce the first bikes, maybe you could tell us why they
have failed to meet this timeframe? Incompetence? Poor staffing choices? An intent to mislead? Other unspecified nefarious reason?
I‘m not seeking to defend or justify these delays (nor the company), just to give my opinion as to why they
may have occured - as a counter to the all pervasive ‘they just got it all wrong’ commentary. And just maybe, because I‘d like Norton Birmingham to succeed.