Re: Why are the "BIG" bikes pricier than cars? A lot of valid points made by forum members: my 2 cents to the discussion.
1) most car manufacturers have tie-ups where they share technology with each other. Whether it is the chassis, drive train, transmission or electronics, companies share the technology to keep costs down. The Japanese Big 3 (Honda, Toyota, Nissan) all share the same suppliers for parts. Among the European car manufacturers - best example is VW. They own Audi, Bentley, Lamborghini, Ducati, Porsche, Skoda. A lot of them are premium brands, but Skoda uses the same platform as VW and shares similar electronics as Audi.
Hence a car maker can offer cheaper segments to India while market the higher end models to Western countries and maintain their profitability portfolio.
2) Big car makers have the backing of government due to the contribution they make to the economy and to jobs. GM and Ford in the US are too big to fail, and the US government stepped in 2008 to ensure they don't go bankrupt. The same goes for European makers and for the Japanese. To keep car makers afloat and competitive, they receive a lot of government subsidies. This also helps the car maker to lower the cost of the end product and pass the savings to consumers - the effect of trickle down economics. Best example is the current EV movement and the rise of Tesla.
Motorbike companies focus on a niche segment of the market and do not get these government grants or subsidies. They are left to fend for themselves. Harley is a prime example of how it is failing.
Now lets examine motorbike makers.
Among the Japanese manufacturers, only Honda and Suzuki make both cars and bikes. Yamaha does collaborate with Toyota to make automobile engines, but they are not active as a car maker. They make more pianos and electronic synthesizers than big bikes probably. Kawasaki is the odd man out, with their main business in ship building, bullet trains, and heavy industries. Motorbikes are a very small segment of their portfolio.
The liter class bikes designed by the 4 makers are influenced by their participation in the WSB / MotoGP races and by consumer demand from the Western world. They do not participate in any technology transfers, do not get subsidies and are more or less insulated from the parent entities. While they do make bikes in bulk, the parent entity treats them more as a hobby or business diversification than an actual profit generating entity. To survive and make $$$$, they need to price their bikes accordingly and thus the prices are often higher than sedans.
The same rationale is applied to BMW, Ducati, Triumph and MV Agusta. Ducati makes 50000 bikes annually, MV makes 5000. Both are boutique companies and do not have the economies of scale to make cheap bikes to compete with Bajaj or Hero. And they don't want to.
India is a tough market for super bikes. High taxes, gasoline prices and import duties add more to the cost of super bikes. The superbike companies here are not looking for mass market, but exclusivity.
Hence comparing 10 lacs for a car against a bike wont really work out well. |