Motorcycle Forums banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Some website or another wrote that the TT6R had been delayed because the new crop of 600s from Japan sent Triumph designers back to the drawing board. Apparently Triumph wanted to avoid a repeat of the sound thrashing the original TT600 received when it was introduced.



Whether or not this is true, it seems like the only possible outcome when a small company like Triumph shoots at a rapidly moving target like the 600cc Supersport class. By the time Triumph makes the TT6R competetive with the '03 600cc class, the Japanese will be introducing a new crop of 600s that once again eclipses the TT6R.



I wish them well, but frankly, I think it would make better sense for Triumph to focus on niches where they wouldn't be competing against the Japanese head to head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Re: Don't worry Triumph has deep pockets.

So the 600TT was a success in your book, Cook? Obviously finances don't equate into your particular formula. The TT was a sales disaster, and Triumph lost its ass on that model. That means Bloor lost his ass. From everything I've read, it seems like Bloor might be at least contemplating cutting his losses and pulling the plug on Triumph. In one interview this year, he said he'd pumped over $100 million into Triumph, and had yet to see any return on his investment. He estimated that Triumph's break-even point was going to take at least five years longer than he had originally predicted.

$100 million is real money, regardless of how rich Bloor is. Triumph had better start turning a profit soon or the Bloor fountain of cash is going to dry up.

Anyone know where Bloor was the night of the big fire?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Re: Was the TT a success? Was the Millie a success?

Five years ago Aprilia wasn't in the sportbike business, and Triumph was. Now Aprilia builds a superbike that spanks Triumph's Daytona.

I don't see why you are comparing Triumph to Aprilia, except to show yet another way in which Triumph failed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
97 Posts
Re: The numbers say TT was a good performer

The reason I pick on you, Cook, is because I've had my fill of motorcycle apologists. These are people who will do mental backflips to defend the brand of their particular wet dreams.

These people kept Harley-Davidson in business through the dark years of the 1970s and 1980s, so they serve a purpose, but most brands can't survive on the mental malfunctions of their apologists alone. Most brands need to provide a solid product to survive. This is true of Ducati, Moto Guzzi, Triumph, and even BMW.

BMW does a pretty good job of providing a solid product, and their sales figures show it (BMW sold more bikes in the U.S. market last year than Triumph, Moto Guzzi and Ducati combined). The other brands need to do some work on their product lines. What they need are good, solid criticisms from their customers (in my case, I'm a former Triumph customer, and won't be a future one), and not lame-ass excuses from brainwashed apologists like you. You are not doing Triumph any favors. Was it Thomas Payne who said, "No man loves a country more than its greatest critic"?

If I had to bet money one way or another, I'd bet that unless Triumph gets its crap together in one hell of a hurry, it will not be building motorcycles by 2005.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top