GuzziMoto Posted December 3 Posted December 3 I did not hear about trying to use the subscription based features model for KTM. That would be a deal breaker for me. I can understand how some people would like that option, to only pay for features when they need them and cancel them at other times. But I don't need that. All I see it as is a way for them to milk more money out of me. If I am buying something, I expect that it is mine after I buy it. If it is not, I will not buy it. Maybe I am just too old, but I am who I am. As to KTM and Red Bull, KTM is part of one of the largest European motorcycle groups with almost 2 billion a year in revenue (not profits but sales). And Red Bull is even larger, with over 10 billion a year in revenue / sales. All of Red Bulls marketing, including sponsoring the KTM race teams and owning their own Formula One team along with all their adventure sports and whatnot, help them sell 10 billion worth of sugary energy drinks. Red Bull, and KTM, do not make money by racing. They spend money racing to promote what they sell, energy drinks for Red Bull and motorcycles for KTM. And it works, perhaps more so for Red Bull then KTM, as KTM sales did struggle this last couple years it seems. But that may be due to a variety of reasons, including a possible subscription based sales approach along with a gap in their range that they are just now filling. They have also had some well publicized reliability issues with some of the motors, including the mid sized parallel twin (790, 890, 901). And they may not have handled it very well at first, originally denying warranty coverage for these failures if the customer did not have a full dealer service history (meaning, you do your own oil changes and you might be SOL). But they have since correct their attitude, and are even offering reimbursement for people with failures that were originally denied warranty coverage. That is good news, but some damage has already been done to their reputation. You probably can't treat your customers like that and not hurt your reputation. They are also subbing out building of various KTM models, with the build quality ramifications that brings. A number of KTM models are now made elsewhere, including India and China. It may be harder to justify a European price tag on your European motorcycle when it is actually made in India or China. It makes some sense with intro level models, but they are making higher end models in those places as well. I ain't buying a Chinese built motorcycle for a KTM price. But I am old, as mentioned earlier. 1
GuzziMoto Posted December 3 Posted December 3 (edited) By the way, KTM is finally coming out again with a sportbike they can sell based on their MotoGP efforts. https://www.ktm.com/en-us/990-rc-r.html Sadly, it still has that origami look like the first KTM sportbike. But it is not as bad as the original RC 8C. If they sold it with the camouflaged paint job of this one it is actually not bad looking. https://www.cycleworld.com/bikes/ktm-990-rc-r-first-look/ Edited December 3 by GuzziMoto
audiomick Posted December 3 Posted December 3 (edited) 5 hours ago, LowRyter said: I've never understood either KTM or Red Bull. I assume that both companies are somehow wrapped up into some Austrian deep money pockets. Neither company seems have the sales outreach to match their respective marketing budget and international presence, particularly Red Bull. Maybe I don't know "what" Red Bull actually is? I can't comment on KTM, because I haven't paid attention to them. I find their bikes very ugly, so I don't look in that direction. As far as Red Bull goes, that is a success story. There is lots of money in the company. This bloke was co-founder: Quote In April 2022, Mateschitz's net worth was estimated at US$27.4 billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Mateschitz A colleague had dealings with him, ended up working in his TV Station in Austria, I believe. He said Mateschitz is a nice enough bloke, and told the following anecdote: As Mateschitz was setting up the company, he got a good deal on a company car from a particular Opel dealer (used to be GM subsidiary in Europe). Because he was pleased with the deal and thought the handler was a good bloke, he continued buying all of the Red Bull company vehicles from that handler, even after Red Bull had grown beyond a multi-million dollar company. Looking at these two articles, I'm also impressed that Mateschitz went into business with the bloke from Thailand, instead of just pinching his idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_GmbH In the first of those two links, you can find an explanation as to why the company spends so much money on sports events Quote Rather than following a traditional marketing approach, Red Bull has generated awareness and created a "brand myth"[14][15] through proprietary extreme sport event series such as Red Bull Cliff Diving World Series, Red Bull Air Race, Red Bull Crashed Ice and standout stunts such as the Stratos space diving project.[16] In addition to sport series, its marketing includes multiple sports team ownerships; celebrity endorsements; and music, through its Red Bull Records label.[17] And it works. Everyone here knows what Red Bull is. Particularly in Leipzig. Red Bull bought a minor league soccer team here, and pumped money into it until it got into and was consistently winning in the first league. That annoys me a bit actually. The stadium that the team uses is about 4 km from me, and the most prominent feature in an otherwise rather nice view out my kitchen window is the Red Bull advertising on top of it. PS: I can't stand Red Bull myself. Tastes like liquid jelly babies. Edited December 3 by audiomick
p6x Posted December 3 Author Posted December 3 8 hours ago, GuzziMoto said: I did not hear about trying to use the subscription based features model for KTM. My bad. It is not a subscription, but a one time fee. For 1500km you have access to features such as quick shifter, cruise control, rally mode. After 1500km, if you want to continue using those features, you need to drop an additional 700 EUR/USD. It is for the KTM Adventure R. According to KTM, not everyone needs these features, so they are optional and it is up to you to activate them or not.
audiomick Posted December 3 Posted December 3 (edited) 28 minutes ago, p6x said: According to KTM, not everyone needs these features, so they are optional and it is up to you to activate them or not. Fair enough, and actually good marketing, and even fair, to let people try the features out and then decide if they want to keep them or not. Fair because the customer gets a chance to try before buying, and good marketing because I reckon the majority of owners would have a hard time giving up on something they have had the use of, even if they never really noticed the full benefits of it. A motorcycle is, after all and if we're really honest with ourselves, a bit of a status object, and everyone wants his or her motorcycle to be the best one of all. Edited December 4 by audiomick
LowRyter Posted December 4 Posted December 4 6 hours ago, audiomick said: I can't comment on KTM, because I haven't paid attention to them. I find their bikes very ugly, so I don't look in that direction. As far as Red Bull goes, that is a success story. There is lots of money in the company. This bloke was co-founder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Mateschitz A colleague had dealings with him, ended up working in his TV Station in Austria, I believe. He said Mateschitz is a nice enough bloke, and told the following anecdote: As Mateschitz was setting up the company, he got a good deal on a company car from a particular Opel dealer (used to be GM subsidiary in Europe). Because he was pleased with the deal and thought the handler was a good bloke, he continued buying all of the Red Bull company vehicles from that handler, even after Red Bull had grown beyond a multi-million dollar company. Looking at these two articles, I'm also impressed that Mateschitz went into business with the bloke from Thailand, instead of just pinching his idea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_GmbH In the first of those two links, you can find an explanation as to why the company spends so much money on sports events And it works. Everyone here knows what Red Bull is. Particularly in Leipzig. Red Bull bought a minor league soccer team here, and pumped money into it until it got into and was consistently winning in the first league. That annoys me a bit actually. The stadium that the team uses is about 4 km from me, and the most prominent feature in an otherwise rather nice view out my kitchen window is the Red Bull advertising on top of it. PS: I can't stand Red Bull myself. Tastes like liquid jelly babies. Still makes no sense, unless the $ billionaire is just spending his own money to keep all that operation afloat. Or like I said, they're making money off the sports/entertainment as "life style" brand but seems doubtful.
audiomick Posted December 4 Posted December 4 8 hours ago, LowRyter said: Or ... they're making money off the sports/entertainment as "life style" brand... I'd be very suprised if they weren't. Owning a successful soccer team, for instance, brings in quite a bit. The air races, too. Cost a lot to stage them, but earn a lot selling TV rignts etc. . 1
GuzziMoto Posted December 4 Posted December 4 (edited) 10 hours ago, LowRyter said: Still makes no sense, unless the $ billionaire is just spending his own money to keep all that operation afloat. Or like I said, they're making money off the sports/entertainment as "life style" brand but seems doubtful. They bring in more money then they spend to promote the brand. Spending all that money as they do makes them even more money. They have built themselves into a 10 billion dollar, that billion with a B, company. They have done that by spending money to market themselves. As they say, you gotta spend money to make money. They don't lose money on all that spending, it is marketing and advertising. It leads to more sales of their product, and that makes them money. I don't know the numbers, but no doubt each dollar spent on sport brings back more money from product sales. All that spending has made them the number one energy drink in the world, and as such they are making lots of money by spending relatively little money. They spend a lot on sport, but compared to how much they make back what they spend on sport just isn't that much. They make back more. Edited December 4 by GuzziMoto 1
p6x Posted December 4 Author Posted December 4 13 hours ago, audiomick said: Fair enough, and actually good marketing, and even fair, to let people try the features out and then decide if they want to keep them or not. Remember that the airlines used the same kind of argumentation when they started to implement their fees: -you pay for checking your suitcase, because not everyone travels with luggage; really? I would say that most travellers take a few basic necessities with them. Furthermore, on long haul flights, the airlines reasoning does not hold water. -you pay for picking your seat; it started with the seats located at the exits, because they offered more leg room, and they were limited to those initially. Today, you pay for picking any seat. However, for this, there is a snagg they can't avoid. You have to travel seated, and the price of the ticket includes a seat. When I travel domestic, I get my seat assigned at the gate, sometimes just at boarding time. So far, always in the middle, and I don't care. -the last one I came upon was the boarding pass. There is an airline that charges if you do not come to the airport with your boarding pass, and need to print it there. I thought those machines which print the luggage tags were also printing the boarding passes, but I was wrong. I believe all those fees that seem to be the norm in the USA, coupled with the tip gallore, contribute to the general public unrulyness and bad behavior in planes. Personally, the line of thinking that some features could be turned on or off by adding money to the initial purchase is not correct. If I cannot use it, then I do not want it installed. 1
LowRyter Posted December 4 Posted December 4 2 hours ago, GuzziMoto said: They bring in more money then they spend to promote the brand. Spending all that money as they do makes them even more money. They have built themselves into a 10 billion dollar, that billion with a B, company. They have done that by spending money to market themselves. As they say, you gotta spend money to make money. They don't lose money on all that spending, it is marketing and advertising. It leads to more sales of their product, and that makes them money. I don't know the numbers, but no doubt each dollar spent on sport brings back more money from product sales. All that spending has made them the number one energy drink in the world, and as such they are making lots of money by spending relatively little money. They spend a lot on sport, but compared to how much they make back what they spend on sport just isn't that much. They make back more. So they're a lifestyle sports/entertainment company that also sells soft drinks? At least that's what they say they are? Thanks for confirming.
Lucky Phil Posted December 4 Posted December 4 8 hours ago, p6x said: Remember that the airlines used the same kind of argumentation when they started to implement their fees: -you pay for checking your suitcase, because not everyone travels with luggage; really? I would say that most travellers take a few basic necessities with them. Furthermore, on long haul flights, the airlines reasoning does not hold water. -you pay for picking your seat; it started with the seats located at the exits, because they offered more leg room, and they were limited to those initially. Today, you pay for picking any seat. However, for this, there is a snagg they can't avoid. You have to travel seated, and the price of the ticket includes a seat. When I travel domestic, I get my seat assigned at the gate, sometimes just at boarding time. So far, always in the middle, and I don't care. -the last one I came upon was the boarding pass. There is an airline that charges if you do not come to the airport with your boarding pass, and need to print it there. I thought those machines which print the luggage tags were also printing the boarding passes, but I was wrong. I believe all those fees that seem to be the norm in the USA, coupled with the tip gallore, contribute to the general public unrulyness and bad behavior in planes. Personally, the line of thinking that some features could be turned on or off by adding money to the initial purchase is not correct. If I cannot use it, then I do not want it installed. These things are just another consequence of the IT world we live in. The IT now allows the airlines and hotels etc but esp airlines to break down what was a standard service into it component parts and charge for them separately. Book your ticket 9 months in advance and chose what you would like to eat on the flight in 9 months time! Chances are they won't even be serving those meals in 9 months. What pissed me off greatly 10 years ago travelling by air within the States was paying extra for my luggage and then sitting at the gate lounge with people showing up to board with large suitcases that they were obviously not going to be allowed to board with and the gate staff informing them of such and then sending their luggage down the shute to be loaded into the hold for FREE. I made my feelings known to the gate staff that I didn't appreciate paying for my luggage to be put on board in the hold only to see grifters that work the system getting it loaded for free. Personally having travelled the world a few times pre and post internet the only benefit I see is Google maps for navigation and more convenient ways to pay for things. The flight and hotel booking processes have been broken down so much into their component pieces it's more painful than it was just arriving in a town or city and driving up and asking if there was room at the inn. And if you think internet hotel images are useful think again. I arrived at an internet pre booked hotel at Bakersfield in 2015 and looked at the neighbourhood it was in and then the actual room and quietly went back to the car and drove to the nearest holiday inn for the night. The next day I dropped back in to the reception of the first place and handed the keys back in after having paid for a night in a hotel I didn't stay at. Life is just to short to stay in a dump like that and i couldn't be bothered with a discussion about it with the staff at the time. Phil 2
gstallons Posted December 5 Posted December 5 I don't see how these places exist. You have to ask if you can see the room and these folks are offended ! I would NOT leave my dog there and they act like it is a 4 star hotel . When you walk in and see the staff , you know it's time to pass .
Lucky Phil Posted December 5 Posted December 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, gstallons said: I don't see how these places exist. You have to ask if you can see the room and these folks are offended ! I would NOT leave my dog there and they act like it is a 4 star hotel . When you walk in and see the staff , you know it's time to pass . The main issue with the place at Bakersfield was the part of town it was in. Looked well dodgy and the icing on the cake was a dark morbid room that hadn't been updated in 25 years. It's a bit hard as a tourist on the road to ascertain the actual quality of the neighbourhood a place is in from an Ipad image. Now I just use Google maps street view to get a better idea of the lay of the land before booking. We got up earlyish the next day to have breakfast in town and a bit of a look about before we continued on and found almost nothing opened until about 11am for some reason. Hit the road after that. Phil Edited December 5 by Lucky Phil
gstallons Posted December 5 Posted December 5 (edited) The first indicator is "their accent" on the telephone . they have become slick and have someone at the desk that can speak in "American" English and w/European descent. Edited December 5 by gstallons
p6x Posted December 12 Author Posted December 12 Fresh from the press, and it should not be a surprise at all, KTM AG is dropping MV Agusta from their brands. The MV Agusta production is returining to Italy where it was before KTM took over the brand. MV Agusta said it is an opportunity to finally grow on its own, without any guardianship and custodians. They have just presented a bunch of new models out of which some have already been manufactured and can be dispatched to dealership for distribution. The Varese region will help financially. The tooling and specifics are going to be moved from Austria back to the MV factory; according to the KTM AG administrator, this process will be completed by March 30th, 2025. The administrator said that he was confident that KTM AG will survive this financial turmoil. GasGas and Huskvarna are safe at this time. Now, for MotoGP, we alaready know that KTM will complete the two remaining years in their contract with Dorna. So, until 2026. That development in 2026 will be frozen will probably help, but some within KTM have said that 2025 development will be limited to make the MotoGP bike complient with the new 2025 rules. While everything seem to be continuing as planned, a test of the 2025 bike in the wind tunnel was canceled. Last, there is no certainty KTM will continue MotoGP after 2026; in fact, to be able to, they need to work on their new prototype in 2025. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now