What is behind the continuing stream of new motorcycles (and cars) badged with old names from companies long dead? Any business major or business owner will tell you there is value to good will and name recognition and both entice investors to pay a premium when taking over a going concern but what does the name really mean to potential customers of a resurrected firm? If your new motorcycle has great design, high quality and performance or low cost and reliability or stunning new technology, what is wrong with letting buyers find that out? Why not create a new name that will live long into the future instead of borrowing the reputation of someone else’s work?
When an individual or investment group buys the rights to call their new creation the continuation of the great XYZ company, do you feel all warm and fuzzy remembering old bikes from your childhood? They hope you do but the name and shape of the logo mean nothing except in fond memories and fast moving antique auctions, the new motorcycle must stand on its own merits. Why should a new company run the risk of dragging a great name into the mud or, if the new bike is a great success, why would they want to share the pride of building a new marque from nothing? Some call it a tribute to the old company, others might say it’s like impersonating Elvis.
The exception is when someone literally picks up where the old company left off, building the old bikes exactly as they were so current owners can experience what they were like brand new. In some sense, Royal Enfields, now manufactured in India are like that. The difference is they never shut down, the British firm went under while India kept producing the original Bullet. Modifications made now are true continuations of that original.
But what of these constant efforts to bring back the Indian? Without the multitude of legal problems having to do with use of the name and trademark, they might have had a motorcycle out there. The Excelsior Henderson tanked and the name didn’t help. Will the new Norton do better? The new Commando is a nice looking bike and may perform well but what is the real connection to Norton beyond the name? Vincent Motors has a new Vincent, a beautiful motorcycle built by a successful individual but a Vincent in name only. How about the upcoming new Duesenburg car and motorcycle? The failures in this group put a cloud over the heads of those still getting started and the most unfortunate thing is these bikes might stand on their own if the owners would try it that way. They could say their bikes are “built in the spirit of (insert name here).” The originals are in museums or the garages of collectors. Respect the past but look forward.
All of these old names were wonderful in their day and beautiful restorations or even hot rod custom versions show what appreciation and imagination can do. But the names do not have some magic or restorative qualities nor do they guarantee new business success.
We should admire the guts and drive necessary to start a new company and build a new motorcycle, but why diminish those efforts by inviting the inevitable comparisons with the original? Begin your own marque. Had John Britten lived longer, he would have done it, Michael Czysz with his Motoczysz is doing it, Confederate Motorcycles has done it. These companies and others like them deserve our respect and support and they serve as inspiration to those many dreamers ready to try. The example of their success may also prevent someone from bidding for the right to use another name on a tombstone.
hoyt says
great post, Kneeslider…
hopefully more readers will give some feedback since there is a lot to be said about this topic.
(I agree with you since I personally would want to put an original name on a bike after all the effort put into realizing a motorcycle from concept to production. In addition, the “re-born” craze is played out and not interesting anymore*)
Marketing, alone, seemed to have shoved its way to the front of the business plan for Excelsior Henderson, Indian, and others instead of a solid product. [the Super X couldn’t even out perform a Harley]
Triumph is a challenging example in this topic because they are succeeding not only in terms of sales numbers & marketing, but their product line is sharp no matter what name is on the tank. Under the new company, innovative and entirely new bikes (Rocket III, Daytona, 650 4) co-exist well with modern examples of the classics (Thruxton, Bonneville, etc.).
I think the Triumph name helped Hinckley get to the current line-up sooner than an original name would have. Also, the re-born craze wasn’t as bad when Triumph brought back the name so consumers/investors were more receptive.
So, Excelsior and Indian demonstrated what not to do by putting marketing first. Why wouldn’t Eller Industries push on, then? They had the product line-up first but didn’t have the “necessary” historic mark (they lost a court battle for the Indian name).
The last I knew Eller was moving forward with their own identity, but then one day I couldn’t even log onto their site. Major bummer…their prototypes consisted of a fresh looking cruiser, a sport crusier, and my personal favorite, a v-twin sportbike with the engine mounted guzzi-style across the frame but with chain drive. Eller Industires could be a victim of trends in marketing…at the time, it was a common belief that you had to have “history” to compete against HD. [did Eller spend too much time and money in court going after the old Indian name? ]
* the latest re-born mark that I know of is Moto Morini (not available in the States, yet). This could be the cleanest looking, liquid-cooled naked bike going….to your argument, kneeslider, then why not put a fresh name to it? Now that the re-born craze is over-baked a new name might serve them better, anyway. check out: http://www.motomorini.com/
kneeslider says
I specifically did not mention Triumph because it is almost a special case, Triumph was dead but the body was still warm and if I am not mistaken, some original Triumph employees came on board (not sure of that) so there was more of an actual connection. A lot of good will also existed from previous customers still riding their old Triumphs. There was a customer base already in place waiting for someone to make it happen. In a way, I think the success of Triumph is one reason why some of these other companies got the idea, ignoring the special differences that existed.
The companies I mentioned above simply bought a name under the idea that if they build it, buyers will come. There’s always the curious few who will buy anything but long term you need a better plan.
Rp says
You have a valid argument but I have to point out the most bikes of today have nothing in common with thier ancestors.
hoyt says
Triumph is a special case for the reasons you cited….the others don’t seem to have a connection at all.
Moto Morini doesn’t have the connection that the 2nd coming of Triumph has; but Moto Morini has something there more than a cloned-HD with an Indian badge…..maybe it is the engine and the play on the “3 1/2” name.
Maybe Indian would have done better if they waited until they had their own engine from day 1.