Gummiente wrote:If you think that two years is sufficient time to completely redesign, retool, secure finacing for and to launch production of an improved product, then you clearly have no understanding of how a manufacturing industry works.
I understand how the process works, and I understand that two years isn't a great deal of time in large scale manufacturing. However, I also know that the only big innovation H-D made during the tariffs, was the intro of the 1340cc Evolution engine in 1984, less than a year after the tariffs were granted. However, they began development of that SEVEN YEARS prior to it's introduction. Yet, they asked for and were granted tariff protection the year prior to it's release. They didn't start in '81 on that project, but back in 1977.
They asked for tariff protection for one reason and one reason only, they were afraid they could not compete with the foreign bike makers. Hell, the H-D website even alludes to that:
"Harley-Davidson makes both business and American history. H-D petitions the International Trade Commission for early termination of the five-year tariffs on heavyweight motorcycles. In effect, the move demonstrated confidence in H-D's ability to compete in the marketplace." http://www.harley-davidson.com/wcm/Cont ... cale=en_US
Please note the portion in bold. They didn't have confidence in their ability to compete in '83, but did in '87. The ONLY major innovation made during the tariffs was the intro of the Evo engine, and that project was in development long before '81, and long before the tariffs were put in place in '83, and it was introduced less than a year after the tariffs were put in place in '84.
So what exactly was the big redesign, retooling, securing of financing, and launch into the market place that "necessitated" the tariffs?
That's rhetorical, as the only major change to the H-D line was already on it's way before the tariffs were put in place. Further, the word "necessitated" is in quotes, because even if your thesis were correct (which it's obviously not), it's BS to ask the government to interfere in the market place rather than have a company compete on it's own merits. Hell, in '81 CEO Beals (who was a VP when the Evo project started) said that if the couldn't compete then they were the only ones to blame (see my previous post). However, in '83 Beals and the rest of the H-D management was putting plenty of blame on their inability to compete in areas other than H-D itself.
I don't consider myself as one of the "faithful", nor am I making excuses for the company, I am simply presenting my opinion on the subject as I see it, based on my experiences.
No it's very obvious that you are trying to make excuses for the inability of H-D to compete in the free market in the mid 80s.
And if you really are as pragmatic as you say, you would have taken a bit more time to research the issue and to read my posts more carefully before shooting off your mouth in response.
I think anyone that has read my posts on this thread can see that I certainly did take the time to research the subject.
Mike 
I guess you didn't notice that I originally linked to that same CATO editorial, when I got the quote from Beals. 
