Comments on: Zero Motorcycles Introduces 2013 Line To Press Assembled At Long Beach (video) (Bike Reports) (News) (Videos) http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/ Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:43:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Sabu http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-158849 Sabu Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:40:51 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-158849 Total deathtrap for big city riding, I wouldn't even take one for a test ride around here in San Francisco. They need to create some sort of noise on these bikes so that pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers can know you're coming. Total deathtrap for big city riding, I wouldn’t even take one for a test ride around here in San Francisco. They need to create some sort of noise on these bikes so that pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers can know you’re coming.

Report this comment

]]> By: Keyser Soze http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-157369 Keyser Soze Sat, 05 Jan 2013 05:15:44 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-157369 And something else that kept bugging me. You imply that Tesla, along with Facebook and Apple, is an example of a company that is not "doomed to play second fiddle to an entrenched, bureaucratic mega-corp". Tesla? By what criteria? I am curious to know why you picked Tesla. If this were early January of 1981, would you have picked Delorean? Last time I looked, Tesla's debt was still increasing. I recall that just a few months ago, sometime in the fall, they were in negotiation with the U.S. Dept of Energy for repayment of the money that the D.O.E. loaned to them (which I believe was more than double the amount that they raised in the IPO in 2010). And something else that kept bugging me. You imply that Tesla, along with Facebook and Apple, is an example of a company that is not “doomed to play second fiddle to an entrenched, bureaucratic mega-corp”. Tesla? By what criteria? I am curious to know why you picked Tesla. If this were early January of 1981, would you have picked Delorean? Last time I looked, Tesla’s debt was still increasing. I recall that just a few months ago, sometime in the fall, they were in negotiation with the U.S. Dept of Energy for repayment of the money that the D.O.E. loaned to them (which I believe was more than double the amount that they raised in the IPO in 2010).

Report this comment

]]> By: Keyser Soze http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-157359 Keyser Soze Sat, 05 Jan 2013 03:53:43 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-157359 Allowing that Zero might be the company that breathes life into the electric motorcycle, that does not guarantee that their name will be worth a great deal, and does not make their name worth more than their IP would be worth, in the hypothetical case where they had some really valuable IP. The way I look at is this: assume that at a certain point, the annual revenue (sales) for Zero reaches X% of the revenue of say, Honda, where X is the point where Honda will decide that they would like for that revenue to appear on their own annual shareholder statement. Maybe X is 5%. Maybe less, maybe more, but it is the point where they decide that they want that piece of revenue. They will then ask whether it makes more sense to buy that company, vs. start making electric bikes of their own. You can take for granted that they already have a few prototypes inside the walls of their R&D facilities. There just isn't any way that a company like Honda would not. The question they will ask, first and foremost, is what is Zero's manufacturing cost. They will look at that very closely, and study all the angles, to consider possibilities such as buying the company and keeping its products but moving production to another location in the USA. They will consider that, and every imaginable variation and permutation. If they determine that Zero's production costs are higher than what they normally strive for traditionally, and they don't like the alternative of buying the company and moving it elsewhere, they simply won't have any interest in that company. If they reach the conclusion that they can make the machines for significantly less, even after factoring in the shipping costs and import tariffs, and sell them for less and do that and still realize greater margin that Zero is realizing at that point in time, the only reason that they would then have any interest in buying that company is if it gets in serious financial trouble and can be bought at fire sale prices. Allowing that Zero might be the company that breathes life into the electric motorcycle, that does not guarantee that their name will be worth a great deal, and does not make their name worth more than their IP would be worth, in the hypothetical case where they had some really valuable IP. The way I look at is this: assume that at a certain point, the annual revenue (sales) for Zero reaches X% of the revenue of say, Honda, where X is the point where Honda will decide that they would like for that revenue to appear on their own annual shareholder statement. Maybe X is 5%. Maybe less, maybe more, but it is the point where they decide that they want that piece of revenue. They will then ask whether it makes more sense to buy that company, vs. start making electric bikes of their own. You can take for granted that they already have a few prototypes inside the walls of their R&D facilities. There just isn’t any way that a company like Honda would not. The question they will ask, first and foremost, is what is Zero’s manufacturing cost. They will look at that very closely, and study all the angles, to consider possibilities such as buying the company and keeping its products but moving production to another location in the USA. They will consider that, and every imaginable variation and permutation. If they determine that Zero’s production costs are higher than what they normally strive for traditionally, and they don’t like the alternative of buying the company and moving it elsewhere, they simply won’t have any interest in that company. If they reach the conclusion that they can make the machines for significantly less, even after factoring in the shipping costs and import tariffs, and sell them for less and do that and still realize greater margin that Zero is realizing at that point in time, the only reason that they would then have any interest in buying that company is if it gets in serious financial trouble and can be bought at fire sale prices.

Report this comment

]]> By: Keyser Soze http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-157356 Keyser Soze Sat, 05 Jan 2013 03:36:00 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-157356 Why is it that other people are so quick to tell me things that I have assumed, when I did not make any such assumptions? I did not "automatically" assume any such thing. Brand value is worth keeping if the sales of the company are substantial, but I just doubt whether a large company like Honda or BMW (for example), with a well-established brand that they are always interested in keeping at the forefront of everything, is likely to view a small brand of that sort as something that should be kept. Of course I could be wrong on that point, but I doubt it. As far as getting access to the material information, licenses, and patents, that is a valid point only if there is intellectual property worth acquiring, and I believe that I made that point very clearly. Perhaps not, but I just looked back at what I wrote, and I'm pretty certain that I was pretty clear on the intellectual property point. The problem, as I see it, is that there just isn't much there that a large company such as Honda or BMW would deem of important value, because there isn't any intellectual property there, to speak of. Buyouts occur in the world of high-tech when small companies have either developed technology, often software, that would be very costly to re-engineer from scratch, or else have intellectual property that is deemed of significant value. Electric motorcycles are not high technology. As I said, a large company such as Honda or BMW could be churning out electric motorcycles within a few short months of whenever the people who make the decisions make the decision to do that. There isn't one thing about it where they would encounter any difficulty where they would find themselves wondering how this other company solved this problem or that problem. The only thing that would seem to be there, that a large company might possibly want, is the brand, and you point that out, but I just don't see that happening. In order for a brand to have particularly strong value, it has to be old. When you see companies paying for the rights to use a brand name, it is always some very old brand that has a lot of brand recognition. I just don't see it. Why is it that other people are so quick to tell me things that I have assumed, when I did not make any such assumptions? I did not “automatically” assume any such thing. Brand value is worth keeping if the sales of the company are substantial, but I just doubt whether a large company like Honda or BMW (for example), with a well-established brand that they are always interested in keeping at the forefront of everything, is likely to view a small brand of that sort as something that should be kept. Of course I could be wrong on that point, but I doubt it. As far as getting access to the material information, licenses, and patents, that is a valid point only if there is intellectual property worth acquiring, and I believe that I made that point very clearly. Perhaps not, but I just looked back at what I wrote, and I’m pretty certain that I was pretty clear on the intellectual property point.

The problem, as I see it, is that there just isn’t much there that a large company such as Honda or BMW would deem of important value, because there isn’t any intellectual property there, to speak of. Buyouts occur in the world of high-tech when small companies have either developed technology, often software, that would be very costly to re-engineer from scratch, or else have intellectual property that is deemed of significant value. Electric motorcycles are not high technology. As I said, a large company such as Honda or BMW could be churning out electric motorcycles within a few short months of whenever the people who make the decisions make the decision to do that. There isn’t one thing about it where they would encounter any difficulty where they would find themselves wondering how this other company solved this problem or that problem. The only thing that would seem to be there, that a large company might possibly want, is the brand, and you point that out, but I just don’t see that happening. In order for a brand to have particularly strong value, it has to be old. When you see companies paying for the rights to use a brand name, it is always some very old brand that has a lot of brand recognition. I just don’t see it.

Report this comment

]]> By: Keyser Soze http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-157355 Keyser Soze Sat, 05 Jan 2013 03:20:54 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-157355 Nope, Gary, my comments do not assume anything of the sort. Now, let's explore what you wrote, from a logical perspective. You are saying in effect that because the three companies that you name are examples of small start-ups that were successful, that somehow and someway, every small, lean nimble startup that comes along is guaranteed to be successful. No? That isn't what you meant? Hmmm, okay, suppose then that you only meant that on some occasions, small nimble startups can be successful. Well, if that is all you meant, then it just wasn't worth saying. And on top of that, the tone of your comment is just rude. Whatever exactly it was that you wanted to say, you should have just said it, and left out the rhetorical question, which obviously was only meant to be insulting. I reiterate that my comments do not in any way imply what you say they imply. That is only your interpretation, and not something that is genuinely inherent in the comment. Nope, Gary, my comments do not assume anything of the sort. Now, let’s explore what you wrote, from a logical perspective. You are saying in effect that because the three companies that you name are examples of small start-ups that were successful, that somehow and someway, every small, lean nimble startup that comes along is guaranteed to be successful. No? That isn’t what you meant? Hmmm, okay, suppose then that you only meant that on some occasions, small nimble startups can be successful. Well, if that is all you meant, then it just wasn’t worth saying. And on top of that, the tone of your comment is just rude. Whatever exactly it was that you wanted to say, you should have just said it, and left out the rhetorical question, which obviously was only meant to be insulting.

I reiterate that my comments do not in any way imply what you say they imply. That is only your interpretation, and not something that is genuinely inherent in the comment.

Report this comment

]]> By: Dave http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-156790 Dave Wed, 02 Jan 2013 03:44:02 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-156790 Indeed. Zero should attempt to copyright "Motorcycle", forcing all of us to forever call our bikes "engine-cycles". Indeed. Zero should attempt to copyright “Motorcycle”, forcing all of us to forever call our bikes “engine-cycles”.

Report this comment

]]> By: Cowpieapex http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-156764 Cowpieapex Tue, 01 Jan 2013 20:20:03 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-156764 I love these new machines and can't wait to ride one. BTW My home is off the grid solar powered and I ride a horse. In the mean time I own 9 I.C.E. vehicles. The future/past is now. I love these new machines and can’t wait to ride one.
BTW My home is off the grid solar powered and I ride a horse. In the mean time I own 9 I.C.E. vehicles. The future/past is now.

Report this comment

]]> By: MGNorge http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-156738 MGNorge Tue, 01 Jan 2013 16:58:24 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-156738 ..and yet they employ a motor ..and yet they employ a motor

Report this comment

]]> By: HalfBaked http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-156672 HalfBaked Tue, 01 Jan 2013 01:08:12 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-156672 Yeah that's what it's like. Yeah that’s what it’s like.

Report this comment

]]> By: Tom K. http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/12/zero-motorcycles-introduces-2013-line-to-press-assembled-at-long-beach/comment-page-1/#comment-156664 Tom K. Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:34:52 +0000 http://www.motorcycledaily.com/?p=25122#comment-156664 Todd said, "Zero is currently Number 1 in the Electric Motorcycle business." Kind of like being the tallest Munchkin in Oz, isn't it? Todd said, “Zero is currently Number 1 in the Electric Motorcycle business.”

Kind of like being the tallest Munchkin in Oz, isn’t it?

Report this comment

]]>