[DanKearney]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/I-dont-want-to-be-anybodys-clone-Siddhartha-Lal/articleshow/45695400.cms


Cheers,

Dan K.

[GreenMachine]

Last sentence can mean anything..We're all hoping a old school modern twin design but the India market may dictate something completely different..They mention 2010 as a turn around in the Enfield market..Not sure if that product line can sustain a continuance of pattern with newer technologies or a redirection towards Asian markets is their thinking ..

So, any new products we plan for the future cannot be of sub-scale size.

[pknopp]

 It was kind of offensive to ask whether or not the success was because of luck. Obviously a lot of work has been put into this.

[ace.cafe]

He says,"We want to be a leader in our category."

He already is the leader in his category. And that category is making very accurate retro 1950s British-style motorcycles. They already lead their category. In fact they are the only real remaining big company in that category.

What concerns me is the apparent obsession with big numbers of sales. This inevitably leads to watered-down products, made to attract the wide scope of prospective buyers who have been Japanese bike riders previously, and expect it to be like a Japanese bike. And so, it will BE like a Japanese bike as a consequence of the broader market demands.

This is the danger of chasing big sales numbers. You make money, and lose your soul. And the bike loses its soul too. It worries me.

When I read these articles, there is always mention of big sales and high profit margins.
That seems to be the focus.
It would be nice if the focus was on building great motorcycles.

I'm thankful that we had the opportunities to get what we have now. We may be looking at very different RE products of a much more "mainstream" type soon. The "mainstream" is expecting disposable  plastic Star Wars Insecto-Raptoid Transformer zoomies, just like all the magazines have told them they should have. When you aim for that market, you have to give them what they want.

[GSS]

Seems like a fairly positive statement. The fact that he acknowledged that REs are higher on maintenance is hopefully a good sign that they will continue to work on improving quality.

[pknopp]

 I agree with you ace. It doesn't concern me in the same way it does you though. My 2000 will most likely be the last new R.E. I ever buy and that's part of the problem. Those like myself that helped R.E. to get off the ground are not enough to keep it going.
 
 You do touch on something though. They can not build better (or equal) Japanese bikes than the Japanese. I don't know why the idea of being a good solid niche market bike isn't enough. Improvements are great, being something you aren't isn't.
 
 But hopefully they prove me wrong.

[rjshrm057]

i kind of understand that the way they are being forced to make changes to the traditional design due to strict safety and pollution law that even if they wanted they cant keep it the same, and yes major changes came around 2000 and the bike has not been the same ever since, what i am worried about is that are those improvements would introduce bikes like cafe racer or some honda or yamaha.
i am ok with they going mainstream as long as the leave the RE brand alone...would they, i don't know

[Ice]

 My bet is that any "new" Enfield will only be new to the market not new technology wise.

 What design technology in the UCE engine itself is newer than 1961 ?
Nothing.

What in it's rolling chassis is newer than the ca 1973 tech front disc brake ?
Nothing

 What in the UCE E.F.I. is newer than 1982 ?
Nothing.

 Were the UCE machines a leap ahead of the AVL or even the Iron Barrel ?
No sir, merely an incremental advance.

 My bet is will be no DOHC, SMPFI, titanium or carbon fiber in any "new" Enfields. I surmise they will likely be chock full of *ahem* "proven" technology as the current crop and be just as user serviceable.

 My guess is Mr Lal knows what qualities sell Royal Enfields.

[pmanaz1973]

I always wonder when I here him talk time-and-time again about sales number, new markets and profit that those sounds bites are primarily aimed at investors and stock holders, etc.  Deep down, you don't build the bikes they have the past few years without loving the sole of these bikes and the whole concept of building simple "traditional" British motorcycles.

I too would be really bummed out if they started making what is passing for motorcycle styling lately - no offense, but most of the new bikes I've seen lately look like a f'ing jet ski with wheels. 

[Ice]

 in 2014 well over 300,000+ people voted with their wallets at dealerships worldwide against the post modern bike.
 That's nothing to dismiss and methinks Mr. Lal knows precisely where both his bread and his butter come from.

[AmBraCol]

In the U.S. the Royal Enfield is a niche bike that sells mainly to folks with nostalgia for "the way things were".  Here in Latin America it is a step up from the ubiquitous 100-150 CC "people's bikes" used by the masses as a primary means of transportation. There's VERY LITTLE to be had in the "mid range" size - and the big bikes (over 500 CC) are priced out of the range of the middle class.  The closest competitor price wise here in Colombia, for example, is the Suzuki GS500 which retails this month for $15,050,000 compared to $13,350,000 for the Rumbler 500 or $11,950,000 for the Rumbler 350 or $12,???,000 for the Classic 500 (C5 in the US). If one steps down to the 200-250 CC class then there's the Avenger 220 (for around $7,000,000) the Bajaj Pulsar 200 NS for around $7,500,000 and the UM 200 for close to the same money.  But none of the 200-250's have the torque or stability of the RE bikes.  Lal has a good idea of what it take to fill in that niche between the small "popular" bikes and the big "gotta have $$$$$" bikes. It's a completely different ball game when you're outside of the US of A.

[yogi bear]

I agree with  grease monkey about what he says about modern bikes they do look awfull and some off them are very uncomfatable to ride.   Why do they make them so big and uncomfatable to ride?
I tried to sit on a bike at a bike show once and I couldn't get it of its side stand.
I think I will stick with my Enfield its a nicer bike than the modern stuff.
Yours in Enfield.
yogi bear.