Profiteering? High time we had an investigation into cartel price-fixing in the motorcycle market. The defence of lower volumes can't hold water when most of the manufacturers now have plants in developing countries with wage costs 1/3 that of the previous production centres. And as for materials costs, just look at what these machines are made of - if they're that heavy they ain't made of unobtanium, are they?visfix wrote:Instead of these misguided 'styling' attempts to woo potential buyers, why don't Yamaha stop pissing about and drop their overly inflated prices?
And they are still made in volume quantities sufficient to justify economies of scale over the now-extended life of the product - gone are the days of 'new model every year'.
Yet prices rise at a rate above inflation persistently and consistently. Does that imply a good deal for the consumer to you? And the operating economics are based on fallacious criterion that haven't actually been true for twenty years of more - there is absolutely no reasons a realtively lowly-stressed CVT scooter shold need a service before 20K miles, and if there is something going 'off there ought to be sufficient electronics on board to monitor for it, and alert the rider to somethig needing attention.
And of course it's the real customer who is the victim in all of this - the failed sales and marketing strategies result in profit over smaller numbers of units, so who gets squeezed so they can make the same or greater profit?
There can be no justification for a market model that doesn't at least follow the line of the automotive sector (of course, there is massive scrutiny and legislative control in the car markets leading to genuine competition).
Prices should reflect what markets will bear, to accentuate sales. Does that seem true in the scooter market?