Posted by sean_q_ on July 10, 2010, 8:36 pm
Bob Myers wrote:
> You'd spend way too
> much time and money keeping everyone trained.
The volunteers would pay for their own training.
There would be free parking though (for Harleys only,
of course).
> HD is going to make it or not on their own merits, like any
> company should.
Then I don't suppose you have a very good opinion of Reagan's
protective tariff to bail HD out the 80's.
SQ
Posted by tomorrow@erols.com on July 11, 2010, 9:17 pm
> Bob Myers wrote:
> > HD is going to make it or not on their own merits, like any
> > company should.
> Then I don't suppose you have a very good opinion of Reagan's
> protective tariff to bail HD out the 80's.
Bail out? How so?
Posted by sean_q_ on July 12, 2010, 2:11 am
tomorrow@erols.com wrote:
>> Then I don't suppose you have a very good opinion of Reagan's
>> protective tariff to bail HD out the 80's.
>
>
> Bail out? How so?
http://www.japanlaw.info/lawletter/july83/ase.htm
SQ
Posted by Vito on July 12, 2010, 11:17 am
sean_q_ wrote:
>> tomorrow@erols.com wrote:
>>
>>>> Then I don't suppose you have a very good opinion of Reagan's
>>>> protective tariff to bail HD out the 80's.
>>>
>>>
>>> Bail out? How so?
>>
>> http://www.japanlaw.info/lawletter/july83/ase.htm
>>
>> SQ
For those old enough to remember, Japan has (had?) an government agency that
approved bikes for export manufacture. Once approved, the maker was
essentially guaranteed to make a profit. If a bike didn't sell as expected
the maker lowered the price, again and again if necessary to sell the bikes.
When the price made sales unprofitable, the Jap Government stepped in and
made up the difference rather than stop production and put people out of
work. It was called "exporting unemployment" and contributed to the demise
of the Brit industry. As a result, Jap mfgr's were trying to dump 1000s of
new but previous years models on the US market for less than it had cost to
build them. That's when RR and the US gummymint imposed the tarriff.
Posted by tomorrow@erols.com on July 12, 2010, 12:43 pm
> sean_q_ wrote:
> >> tomor...@erols.com wrote:
> >>>> Then I don't suppose you have a very good opinion of Reagan's
> >>>> protective tariff to bail HD out the 80's.
> >>> Bail out? How so?
> >>http://www.japanlaw.info/lawletter/july83/ase.htm
> >> SQ
> For those old enough to remember, Japan has (had?) an government agency that
> approved bikes for export manufacture. Once approved, the maker was
> essentially guaranteed to make a profit. If a bike didn't sell as expected
> the maker lowered the price, again and again if necessary to sell the bikes.
> When the price made sales unprofitable, the Jap Government stepped in and
> made up the difference rather than stop production and put people out of
> work. It was called "exporting unemployment" and contributed to the demise
> of the Brit industry. As a result, Jap mfgr's were trying to dump 1000s of
> new but previous years models on the US market for less than it had cost to
> build them. That's when RR and the US gummymint imposed the tarriff.
I'm certainly old enough to remember. I was riding motorcycles when
it happened. Japanese motorcycles. I also recall that the ICC found
Harley's evidence that the Japanese were dumping, and that they were
ONLY dumping their large displacement (over 700cc engine displacement)
motorcycles[1] to be compelling, and thus the temporary, sliding
scale, import tariff was applied.
What I want to know is how someone can claim that a nation's legal
response to an illegal trade practice by the company of another
nation, a legal response that did not put ANY money into Harley-
Davidson's coffers, can be described as a "bail-out" of Harley-
Davidson.
It most assuredly was NOT a bail-out.
And the tariff was a VERY good thing that happened to work, unlike
many other government interventions in free trade.
[1] Because there were no American manufacurers of small-bore
motorcycles to be driven into bankruptcy by collusion between Japanese
manufacturers and Japanese government
> much time and money keeping everyone trained.