ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
Makes And Models => Zero Motorcycles Forum | 2012 and older => Topic started by: protomech on October 15, 2012, 09:45:31 PM
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/automobiles/electric-motorcycle-sales-are-low-despite-hype.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/automobiles/electric-motorcycle-sales-are-low-despite-hype.html)
I posted on Facebook:
Some truth in this article. Zero Motorcycles is on track to 500-600 units this year, and Brammo may sneak in a few units before the end of the year. Given NYT's 450k motorcycles/year figure (2011), that's about 0.15% of gas sales. (Electric cars, at around 28k vs 10M total car sales, are tracking about 0.1%).
However.. the electric cars currently being sold come from established manufacturers with established distribution networks. Zero has a handful of dealers on the west coast and a few more scattered over the rest of the US. As they roll out their dealer networks (and if Brammo can get their 2013 bikes into Polaris dealers), expect to see sales grow.
One thing the NYT misses is that with a gas bike, typically you buy performance. A 250 is cheaper than a 600 which is cheaper than a 1000 which is cheaper than a 1300/1400. On an electric bike, you buy range.
So while the 2012 CBR250R is comparable (top speed, acceleration) to the top-of-the-range 2012 Zero S ZF9 ($4k vs $14k), the smaller-battery ZF6 model is $11.5k and just as fast.
And the 2013 bikes are a huge step up - almost double the power, faster, quicker, and more efficient. The $14k model gains 11% range in mixed riding, has a higher top speed and should be quicker to 60 mph than the CBR250R. The range-topping $16k model has almost 50% more mixed riding range than the range-topping $14k 2012 model.
I would rate the 2013 bikes as more comparable to a 500cc bike. Honda's new 500cc bike is expected to be around $6000.. so if the 2012 bike had enough range, then the price gap has shrunk from $10k to $8k while picking up new features (smartphone integration and a bit of integrated storage).
The NYT also missed one other key feature for the 2013 bikes - with the optional CHAdeMO adapter, they can charge to 95% in one hour at a CHAdeMO charger. Certainly, they are few and far between on the ground presently - though we did see two at a Cracker Barrel coming back through TN this weekend. If Zero had batteries that could make full use of the charger, they could charge as fast as 15 minutes.
Ride at 70 mph on the interstate for an hour, take a 15 minute break to eat, ride for another hour? Doesn't sound too bad.
-
Good response - I read this article too and looked for a place to post a comment on NYT, but couldn't find one.
The author obviously has a bias against EVs, or didn't spend even five minutes researching before writing the article. We have to stand up for electric bikes and EV technology in general whenever some ignorant person publishes nonsense like that.
Thanks Protomech.
-
About two years ago (while I was still waiting for delivery of my first ZERO DS) I read an article (don't remember where) that was very negative toward electric cars. The guy was saying that there was no sense in spending time and money developing them. I huge surprise for me was in the final paragraph. He said that he thought the motorcycle was the logical platform for electric power and that the development efforts should be put there. This guy was so down on electric cars that his last statement, promoting electric two wheelers, just floored me. :o
Trikester
-
"Electric motorcycle makers like to talk about a rider’s daily commuting distance and show how their bike’s limited range is just right. The problem is that most real motorcyclists don’t commute on their bikes. They commute in air-conditioned cars that keep their hair in place, their smartphones in hand and their clothes insect-free."
I am sick and tired of authors (like this bozo and Wes Siler) telling me I'm not a "real motorcyclist". With 3 countries, 30 states, 25 years, 7 bikes, and 200k+ miles; I'd have to think I belong in the group of "real motorcyclists". If he had said "typical motorcyclist" I might agree.
He is on to something regarding sales/volume/future with emotos however. "Typical Motorcyclists" (who buy the vast majority of motorcycles) want a big loud Harley or a big loud 160hp/0-60-in-2.5s Crotch Rocket. And they'll ride on nice days. There'll never be an emoto that'll replace a Harley for a 99.9% of Harley riders. Maybe when emoto's start competing head-to-head with the 0-to-60-in-3s/160hp Hayabusa's and Ducati's and winning races; there might be a future with that market assuming the pricing is comparable (up front costs, few care about lifecycle costs).
Until then; I think emoto's are doomed to be a low volume novelty; purchased by green or techno enthusiasts or "real motorcyclists" ( of which there apparently aren't many! ;D )
-
I updated my FB post with the following numbers: cars have sold 11M YTD, electric cars have sold 20k YTD (about 0.2% market share).
I don't think the author is ignorant - they're basically spot on with electric motorcycle sales expectations - but he/she does get some of the basic facts (performance, comparable gas models, best-case charging time) wrong.
If we compare electric startups, motorcycle vs car .. cars sell about 25x better than motorcycles in the US, but in Tesla's best year they sold about 1000 Roadsters (2x Zero). Tesla is targeting 20k Model S sales in 2013 .. I would wager Tesla will sell about 10k Model S vehicles, and Zero will sell about a thousand motorcycles next year. (Granted, there's a huge cost difference, $50k-100k after rebate vs $8-16k no rebate .. but this compares pretty well to a cheap gas bike @ $4k vs a cheap gas car @ $16k).
Coda's sales are very soft to date, with an estimated 100 EV cars sold (http://green.autoblog.com/2012/09/24/coda-ready-to-increase-production-sales-in-2013/).
So yeah. I think EV motorcycles are doing just fine.
-
"Electric motorcycle makers like to talk about a rider’s daily commuting distance and show how their bike’s limited range is just right. The problem is that most real motorcyclists don’t commute on their bikes. They commute in air-conditioned cars that keep their hair in place, their smartphones in hand and their clothes insect-free."
I am sick and tired of authors (like this bozo and Wes Siler) telling me I'm not a "real motorcyclist". With 3 countries, 30 states, 25 years, 7 bikes, and 200k+ miles; I'd have to think I belong in the group of "real motorcyclists". If he had said "typical motorcyclist" I might agree.
He is on to something regarding sales/volume/future with emotos however. "Typical Motorcyclists" (who buy the vast majority of motorcycles) want a big loud Harley or a big loud 160hp/0-60-in-2.5s Crotch Rocket. And they'll ride on nice days. There'll never be an emoto that'll replace a Harley for a 99.9% of Harley riders. Maybe when emoto's start competing head-to-head with the 0-to-60-in-3s/160hp Hayabusa's and Ducati's and winning races; there might be a future with that market assuming the pricing is comparable (up front costs, few care about lifecycle costs).
Until then; I think emoto's are doomed to be a low volume novelty; purchased by green or techno enthusiasts or "real motorcyclists" ( of which there apparently aren't many! ;D )
That was one of my suggestions to Zero, for Zero position itself as the un-Harley motorcycle.
Even among us old farts who have the coin to spend on an expensive electric motorcycle not all of us want to dress up in a pirate costume and pretend to be Easy Rider for 2 hours a week if permitted to after the repairs to the deck are done and the lawn is mowed, and if the kids don't have a baseball game.
From a generational perspective, the macho Harley image is old and tired. The younger generation doesn't want to look like Dad on his fat hog.
That said, the sports bike power+noise trend is here to stay. Zero can waste piles of money trying to go after that audience. They want to make noise and burn fossil fuels. Let Brammo bust a pick trying to break into that market.
Generally not a terrible article. Stupid, but not as stupid as most.
-
Also.. I wonder if a price per year strategy would work.
Eg a typical 250cc bike is $4k up front, 12k miles @ 75 mpg @ $4/gal = $640 gas, say $1150/year total running costs.
A 2013 Zero XU 2.8 @ $8000 could be $4000 down, $1000/year for 4 years. 12k miles are about $120.
A typical 500cc bike is $6k up front, 12k miles @ 50 mpg @ $4/gal = $960 gas, say $1500/year total running costs.
A 2013 Zero S 8.7 @ $14000 could be $6000 down, $1500/year for 6 years.
Zero could extend the warranties out to match. I think they should do this anyways, or at least make it available as a low-cost option; it *should* cost them little (if the bikes are reliable).
-
Also.. I wonder if a price per year strategy would work.
Eg a typical 250cc bike is $4k up front, 12k miles @ 75 mpg @ $4/gal = $640 gas, say $1150/year total running costs.
A 2013 Zero XU 2.8 @ $8000 could be $4000 down, $1000/year for 4 years. 12k miles are about $120.
A typical 500cc bike is $6k up front, 12k miles @ 50 mpg @ $4/gal = $960 gas, say $1500/year total running costs.
A 2013 Zero S 8.7 @ $14000 could be $6000 down, $1500/year for 6 years.
Zero could extend the warranties out to match. I think they should do this anyways, or at least make it available as a low-cost option; it *should* cost them little (if the bikes are reliable).
That gets to the heart of what I call the electric motorcycle market conundrum. If you include depreciation, the fully loaded cost of a Zero is far higher than an ICE bike for the first 5 years, like 60 cents per mile versus 30. But after 5 years it falls to 10 cents while the older ICE bike's rises to 40. But the electrics improve quickly and become obsolete within 5 years while the ICE bikes don't. You want to dump our 5 year old Zero just as it's starting is ultra-low cost per mile life. I've thought of a solution to the problem, but I'm not giving it away for free. ;D
-
"Electric motorcycle makers like to talk about a rider’s daily commuting distance and show how their bike’s limited range is just right. The problem is that most real motorcyclists don’t commute on their bikes. They commute in air-conditioned cars that keep their hair in place, their smartphones in hand and their clothes insect-free."
I am sick and tired of authors (like this bozo and Wes Siler) telling me I'm not a "real motorcyclist". With 3 countries, 30 states, 25 years, 7 bikes, and 200k+ miles; I'd have to think I belong in the group of "real motorcyclists". If he had said "typical motorcyclist" I might agree.
He is on to something regarding sales/volume/future with emotos however. "Typical Motorcyclists" (who buy the vast majority of motorcycles) want a big loud Harley or a big loud 160hp/0-60-in-2.5s Crotch Rocket. And they'll ride on nice days. There'll never be an emoto that'll replace a Harley for a 99.9% of Harley riders. Maybe when emoto's start competing head-to-head with the 0-to-60-in-3s/160hp Hayabusa's and Ducati's and winning races; there might be a future with that market assuming the pricing is comparable (up front costs, few care about lifecycle costs).
Until then; I think emoto's are doomed to be a low volume novelty; purchased by green or techno enthusiasts or "real motorcyclists" ( of which there apparently aren't many! ;D )
Paul, we've got very similar under-the-belt stats and i live over in grand junction. if you're ever headed this way, please dont hesitate to look me up for a ride.
_pete
-
Although my Zero S is my favorite way to get anywhere, I think that the real problem is finding a market. My friends tend to fall into two categories, the Harley crowd who are convinced my Zero is a toy and those that think that motorcycles are the most dangerous thing on the planet and that I must have a secret death wish. Both groups are wrong, but trying to convince them otherwise has been a lost cause for me. After riding mine most days for almost 18 months and sharing my experience, not a single friend, relative or coworker has given Zero ownership any consideration. I do market research for a living and I use Zero motorcycles as an example of a potentially perfect product: its fun to ride, cuts fuel costs by 90%, quiet, fast, high tech, saves the planet, and despite the benefits-no one seems to want one. Can you imagine a world where 80% of commuters ride electric motorcycles: goodbye traffic jams, pollution, parking lots, highway noise....
Maybe we need a movie like Easy Rider with a nerdy Peter Fonda anti-hero type riding his Zero and introducing the world to new rebellious lifestyle off the grid and full of adventure. Sound exciting...no, and that is the problem.
-
Although my Zero S is my favorite way to get anywhere, I think that the real problem is finding a market. My friends tend to fall into two categories, the Harley crowd who are convinced my Zero is a toy and those that think that motorcycles are the most dangerous thing on the planet and that I must have a secret death wish. Both groups are wrong, but trying to convince them otherwise has been a lost cause for me. After riding mine most days for almost 18 months and sharing my experience, not a single friend, relative or coworker has given Zero ownership any consideration. I do market research for a living and I use Zero motorcycles as an example of a potentially perfect product: its fun to ride, cuts fuel costs by 90%, quiet, fast, high tech, saves the planet, and despite the benefits-no one seems to want one. Can you imagine a world where 80% of commuters ride electric motorcycles: goodbye traffic jams, pollution, parking lots, highway noise....
My experience also. My conservative friends sneer at it as a green toy and my liberal friends see it as evidence that I'm a daredevil. Articles like this one http://www.allaboutbikes.com/motorcycle-news/safety/5321-motorcycle-fatality-facts-charts-statistics-and-safety-information (http://www.allaboutbikes.com/motorcycle-news/safety/5321-motorcycle-fatality-facts-charts-statistics-and-safety-information) and this one http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsMotorcycleSafety/ (http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsMotorcycleSafety/)don't help. The oft-repeated statistic is that you are 37 times more likely to die if you crash a bike than a car.
No question riding a motorcycle is more dangerous than driving a car, but a bike accident isn't on the top of the list of things most likely to kill me. The top 10 are:
1. Heart disease: 599,413
2. Cancer: 567,628
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
4. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
6. Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
7. Diabetes: 68,705
8. Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
Maybe we need a movie like Easy Rider with a nerdy Peter Fonda anti-hero type riding his Zero and introducing the world to new rebellious lifestyle off the grid and full of adventure. Sound exciting...no, and that is the problem.
I've told Zero that they need to spring for product placements in movies. The home run is a movie where a Zero is a character in the movie the way the BMW Mini was a character in The Italian Job (2003).
-
I interpreted the article a little differently. A better word than "real" might be "actual". In other words, it appears Zero for example, being well-aware of the limitations of their bike, then created a somewhat artificial scenario (akin to a strawman argument) where the bikes shortfalls are avoided and the bike performs perfectly in terms of speed of the commute, distance of the commute, ability to re-charge at work, not needing to use the bike again while at work, or stop and pick up some groceries, kids, etc. Nothing wrong with any of this of course. It's advertising. I have to assume if someone bought a Zero to commute on, that he would actually use it for that, afterall, and that he wouldn't buy one and find out only afterward there was no place to charge it at work, that work was too far, or he couldn't keep up with traffic, etc. It's still going to be a small number of consumers as the article pointed out and even smaller with the cost and limited range of electric motorcycles. Commuting is still the best use and best attribute of the Zero S for now. They seem to be on the verge of harnassing all that torque for racing though. If they win a big race or two, then people will want one for that alone. Of cours both Brammo and Zero are well aware of this fact too.
-
In other words, it appears Zero for example, being well-aware of the limitations of their bike, then created a somewhat artificial scenario (akin to a strawman argument) where the bikes shortfalls are avoided and the bike performs perfectly in terms of speed of the commute, distance of the commute, ability to re-charge at work, not needing to use the bike again while at work, or stop and pick up some groceries, kids, etc.
I don't follow where Zero created this somewhat artificial scenario?
If Zero was "avoiding" shortfalls then there would be no need to offer a ZF 5.7 or a ZF11.4 bike. Building a modular battery pack allows Zero to sell bikes with different levels of capacity. If capacity (and thereby range) is not an overwhelming consideration, why would you label your bikes by capacity?
My two huge complaints from the way Zero marketed the bikes in 2012 was maximum vs nominal capacity and the highway commuting range specification. For 2013 they're more properly listing the old "highway commuting" spec as "combined" and made explicit the previously hidden pure-highway range spec. I'm not a fan of them continuing to list maximum capacity - I think it's disingenuous at best - but I'll concede that capacity is not terribly useful, and that range and recharge time (as expressed in miles/hour or minutes/mile) are more critical.
Btw, 1.3 kW * 7.4 hours (0 to 95%) for the ZF 11.4 points to a ~10.1 kWh battery pack.
-
No question riding a motorcycle is more dangerous than driving a car, but a bike accident isn't on the top of the list of things most likely to kill me. The top 10 are:
1. Heart disease: 599,413
2. Cancer: 567,628
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
4. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
6. Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
7. Diabetes: 68,705
8. Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
These are counts, not probabilities. To turn them into probabilities you have to divide by the sample size. I'm pretty sure that the divisor for "motorcycle deaths" is much smaller than the divisor for "general health issues". The only time it might make sense to divide the number of motorcycle deaths by the entire population is if you are providing data for a "generic unidentified person" and in that case you would be factoring in the "chance that this generic person rides a bike" for the overall probability. But in your case we know the "chance that you ride a bike" is 100% so you don't get to hide behind that aggregate population number to estimate your specific personal risk...
-
My experience also. My conservative friends sneer at it as a green toy and my liberal friends see it as evidence that I'm a daredevil. Articles like this one http://www.allaboutbikes.com/motorcycle-news/safety/5321-motorcycle-fatality-facts-charts-statistics-and-safety-information (http://www.allaboutbikes.com/motorcycle-news/safety/5321-motorcycle-fatality-facts-charts-statistics-and-safety-information) and this one http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsMotorcycleSafety/ (http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsMotorcycleSafety/)don't help. The oft-repeated statistic is that you are 37 times more likely to die if you crash a bike than a car.
No question riding a motorcycle is more dangerous than driving a car, but a bike accident isn't on the top of the list of things most likely to kill me. The top 10 are:
1. Heart disease: 599,413
2. Cancer: 567,628
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
4. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
6. Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
7. Diabetes: 68,705
8. Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
Maybe we need a movie like Easy Rider with a nerdy Peter Fonda anti-hero type riding his Zero and introducing the world to new rebellious lifestyle off the grid and full of adventure. Sound exciting...no, and that is the problem.
I've told Zero that they need to spring for product placements in movies. The home run is a movie where a Zero is a character in the movie the way the BMW Mini was a character in The Italian Job (2003).
Two observations, both of which are a bit off topic. First, it is a bit ironic that conservative/liberal for your friends breaks down into aggressive/conservative risk takers... I am sort of surprised they correlate at all. Fun with machines should cross ideological boundaries :)
Second, careful with your stats. I assume those numbers shown are the gross number of fatalities attributed to each item (for the US?). The more appropriate way to assess the risk is to make it per capita (as a motorcycle rider what are YOU more likely to die from) or to relate it to per units of exposure. EG, a motorcycle is X times riskier than the comparable mode of transportation/hobby. Unfortunately, it doesn't hold up so well on that metric. From Wikipedia: "According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2006, 13.10 cars out of 100,000 ended up in fatal crashes. The rate for motorcycles is 72.34 per 100,000 registered motorcycles.Motorcycles also have a higher fatality rate per unit of distance travelled when compared with automobiles. Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists' risk of a fatal crash is 35 times greater than a passenger car. Those stats stand to reason given the rider is more exposed." OTOH, when managing your personal risk, you can look deeper: 50% of motorcycle fatalities involve alcohol. So, eliminate that risk and you've halved the risk factor! Further evidence suggests crotch-rocket super bikes also dramatically increase rider risk (eg riders of those tend to go faster and be more reckless). You get the drift.
-
I am not sure where to post this item, so I will dump it here: I just received the November issue of American Motorcyclist, (the AMA's monthly rag) and on page 35 is an item about Zero Motorcycles sponsoring the 2012 AMA motorcycle hall of fame rings (as in a farkle that you put on your finger). The article says that Scot Harden, VP of global marketing and a member of the AMA's Hall of Fame, says that Zero Motorcycles is proud to be a part of the Hall of Fame induction ceremony. Harden says: "On behalf of the entire staff of Zero Motorcycles, it is a proud honor indeed to support the Hall of Fame as (an) official ring sponsor of the 2012 induction ceremony. The men and women selected reflect the highest level of achievement and accomplishment possible in our sport." What the article doesn't mention is how much Zero had to pay the AMA to become a "ring sponsor".
-
Great thread.
Since ordering a 2013 S I've had nothing but sneers or incredulity from friends and colleagues. This hasn't been a surprise. After posting on the Brammo forum and this about a few electric bike shortfalls or people's perception of ebike shortfalls I'm coming around to the view that as an early adopter you just have to pay for the privilege.
I'd like to see better deals from both the manufacturers and better consumer incentive from governments. Extended warranties or purchase plans, lease upgrade plans or buy back schemes don't seem like unreasonable expectations. I've read with interest about how profit margins are tight but I remain unconvinced. For a three year old(give or take) technology that is not free from problems I think there is enough of a risk being taken by the consumer that they shouldn't have to saddle(puns everywhere) the startup costs. Why do I have to pay a registration fee for an EV when I'm already paying an unnaturally elevated(in comparison with performance related ICE equivalents) price to cover development costs?
Having said all that I do take the point that I don't have to buy a Zero, nobody is twisting my arm!
Given the energy and environmental challenges we all face and governments never shut up about isn't it rediculous and infuriating that we are having this discussion? These efficient and energy saving products should be at such a discount that friends and colleagues should be racing to the dealership, not ridiculing and pointing out the opportunity cost, which is large.
-
Great thread.
Since ordering a 2013 S I've had nothing but sneers or incredulity from friends and colleagues. This hasn't been a surprise. After posting on the Brammo forum and this about a few electric bike shortfalls or people's perception of ebike shortfalls I'm coming around to the view that as an early adopter you just have to pay for the privilege.
I'd like to see better deals from both the manufacturers and better consumer incentive from governments. Extended warranties or purchase plans, lease upgrade plans or buy back schemes don't seem like unreasonable expectations. I've read with interest about how profit margins are tight but I remain unconvinced. For a three year old(give or take) technology that is not free from problems I think there is enough of a risk being taken by the consumer that they shouldn't have to saddle(puns everywhere) the startup costs. Why do I have to pay a registration fee for an EV when I'm already paying an unnaturally elevated(in comparison with performance related ICE equivalents) price to cover development costs?
Having said all that I do take the point that I don't have to buy a Zero, nobody is twisting my arm!
Given the energy and environmental challenges we all face and governments never shut up about isn't it rediculous and infuriating that we are having this discussion? These efficient and energy saving products should be at such a discount that friends and colleagues should be racing to the dealership, not ridiculing and pointing out the opportunity cost, which is large.
If you don't pick up that tab that means the investors need to. A buy back, lease program or anything else where the manufacturer is left holding the bag on the residual value of the bike means that to the extent they don't realize that value somewhere in the market (through used re-sale, parts stripping, etc) it is a real loss for them. At that point they may as well have sold the bike for less originally because if the consumer isn't paying for it the investors are. That in turn means that the investors would have to assume that by selling the bike for less (or buying it back/lease assumption) the ultimate profitability/cash flow generation would be greater sooner than if they laid off the risk on the consumer and profits grew more slowly but at lower risk. Compounding the problem is that every $ the PE investor spends today has to contribute to generating a massive return on capital given how risky the investment is. So they have to balance those extra outflows (lease/buyback) and the potential for a more rapid sales growth against a lower risk but longer horizon-ed approach.
-
No question riding a motorcycle is more dangerous than driving a car, but a bike accident isn't on the top of the list of things most likely to kill me. The top 10 are:
1. Heart disease: 599,413
2. Cancer: 567,628
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
4. Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
6. Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
7. Diabetes: 68,705
8. Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
These are counts, not probabilities. To turn them into probabilities you have to divide by the sample size. I'm pretty sure that the divisor for "motorcycle deaths" is much smaller than the divisor for "general health issues". The only time it might make sense to divide the number of motorcycle deaths by the entire population is if you are providing data for a "generic unidentified person" and in that case you would be factoring in the "chance that this generic person rides a bike" for the overall probability. But in your case we know the "chance that you ride a bike" is 100% so you don't get to hide behind that aggregate population number to estimate your specific personal risk...
So I'm as good as dead, just a matter of time, as my friends believe ::)
I think my odds are improved by eliminating those parts of the 100% sample that do not apply to me.
30% of fatalities are drunk riders. I don't ride after drinking, so you can take me out of that category.
Another 30% are young and prone to rash decisions that lead to accidents.
I'm not in that category either.
By the time you peel off the various high risk groups within the biker population, I'd guess my probability of death is only 10x higher than for the average car driver.
Seriously, the fact is that when you suit up to ride it is not the same as climbing into a car. You have to be up for it. You have to be aware. That's what I like about it.
-
Great thread.
Since ordering a 2013 S I've had nothing but sneers or incredulity from friends and colleagues. This hasn't been a surprise. After posting on the Brammo forum and this about a few electric bike shortfalls or people's perception of ebike shortfalls I'm coming around to the view that as an early adopter you just have to pay for the privilege.
I'd like to see better deals from both the manufacturers and better consumer incentive from governments. Extended warranties or purchase plans, lease upgrade plans or buy back schemes don't seem like unreasonable expectations. I've read with interest about how profit margins are tight but I remain unconvinced. For a three year old(give or take) technology that is not free from problems I think there is enough of a risk being taken by the consumer that they shouldn't have to saddle(puns everywhere) the startup costs. Why do I have to pay a registration fee for an EV when I'm already paying an unnaturally elevated(in comparison with performance related ICE equivalents) price to cover development costs?
Having said all that I do take the point that I don't have to buy a Zero, nobody is twisting my arm!
Given the energy and environmental challenges we all face and governments never shut up about isn't it rediculous and infuriating that we are having this discussion? These efficient and energy saving products should be at such a discount that friends and colleagues should be racing to the dealership, not ridiculing and pointing out the opportunity cost, which is large.
If you don't pick up that tab that means the investors need to. A buy back, lease program or anything else where the manufacturer is left holding the bag on the residual value of the bike means that to the extent they don't realize that value somewhere in the market (through used re-sale, parts stripping, etc) it is a real loss for them. At that point they may as well have sold the bike for less originally because if the consumer isn't paying for it the investors are. That in turn means that the investors would have to assume that by selling the bike for less (or buying it back/lease assumption) the ultimate profitability/cash flow generation would be greater sooner than if they laid off the risk on the consumer and profits grew more slowly but at lower risk. Compounding the problem is that every $ the PE investor spends today has to contribute to generating a massive return on capital given how risky the investment is. So they have to balance those extra outflows (lease/buyback) and the potential for a more rapid sales growth against a lower risk but longer horizon-ed approach.
Great analysis.
I wonder if your average "real motorcycle rider" could have worked that out. ::)
As I said, Zero can't expend capital trying to cover depreciation costs to the installed base caused by the rapid innovation (increased consumer value/dollar production ost) that is needed to capture the broad market that investors need the company to reach to produce a return on investment. They have to use every dollar to go after a broad market.
Wups. We just had a little earthquake.
-
Last year I would not have considered an ebike. Zero did the MY12s and generated sufficient utility to move me to buy. I'll upgrade to the MY13 and leave my MY12 to the secondary market; one more ebike on the road.
My point is that the process has begun. There is enough utility for ebikes to be something more than a novelty. When the utility increases to the point where the cost can be justified by a larger audience then competition will start to drive costs down. Volume will drive it down further. Again, the process has begun.
Tesla crawled with the Roadster. They will toddle with the Model S. With luck, they will survive to walk with a Leaf priced truly useful small car. The process has begun.
I'm happy the process has begun and I have opened my wallet to do my small part.
-
Last year I would not have considered an ebike. Zero did the MY12s and generated sufficient utility to move me to buy. I'll upgrade to the MY13 and leave my MY12 to the secondary market; one more ebike on the road.
My point is that the process has begun. There is enough utility for ebikes to be something more than a novelty. When the utility increases to the point where the cost can be justified by a larger audience then competition will start to drive costs down. Volume will drive it down further. Again, the process has begun.
Tesla crawled with the Roadster. They will toddle with the Model S. With luck, they will survive to walk with a Leaf priced truly useful small car. The process has begun.
I'm happy the process has begun and I have opened my wallet to do my small part.
this. but i'll wait a year or two (i think. maybe.) to upgrade. my 2012 is also just great, surpassing my expectations.
thanks to zero, the e-bikes are definitely coming.
-
So I'm as good as dead, just a matter of time, as my friends believe ::)
By the time you peel off the various high risk groups within the biker population, I'd guess my probability of death is only 10x higher than for the average car driver.
Anyone enjoy the Onion?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/ (http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/)
BRIDGEPORT, CT—Moments after purchasing a new Kawasaki Ninja 250R, your friend Pete has already been killed, bystanders outside the motorcycle dealership have just confirmed. "Boy, that didn't last long," said bike salesman Chris Varrick, adding that “no more than 10 seconds†after becoming a bike owner, Pete lost control of his motorcycle, collided with an 18-wheeler, was flung approximately 30 yards, and died upon impact with the pavement. "He handed over the check, thanked me, and took off down Jackson Road. And then he died." At press time, Pete's younger brother, who inherited the bike, has also already died.
-
So I'm as good as dead, just a matter of time, as my friends believe ::)
By the time you peel off the various high risk groups within the biker population, I'd guess my probability of death is only 10x higher than for the average car driver.
Anyone enjoy the Onion?
http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/ (http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/)
BRIDGEPORT, CT—Moments after purchasing a new Kawasaki Ninja 250R, your friend Pete has already been killed, bystanders outside the motorcycle dealership have just confirmed. "Boy, that didn't last long," said bike salesman Chris Varrick, adding that “no more than 10 seconds†after becoming a bike owner, Pete lost control of his motorcycle, collided with an 18-wheeler, was flung approximately 30 yards, and died upon impact with the pavement. "He handed over the check, thanked me, and took off down Jackson Road. And then he died." At press time, Pete's younger brother, who inherited the bike, has also already died.
Actually I died two months ago but like Dr. Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis, Sixth Sense) I haven't admitted it yet and keep posting to this forum from the afterlife.
-
http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013308250026 (http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013308250026)
http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/ (http://www.theonion.com/articles/breaking-friend-who-just-got-motorcycle-already-de,29685/)
Be safe out there!
(Still waiting for my ride back)
--Karl
-
Last year I would not have considered an ebike. Zero did the MY12s and generated sufficient utility to move me to buy. I'll upgrade to the MY13 and leave my MY12 to the secondary market; one more ebike on the road.
My point is that the process has begun. There is enough utility for ebikes to be something more than a novelty. When the utility increases to the point where the cost can be justified by a larger audience then competition will start to drive costs down. Volume will drive it down further. Again, the process has begun.
Tesla crawled with the Roadster. They will toddle with the Model S. With luck, they will survive to walk with a Leaf priced truly useful small car. The process has begun.
I'm happy the process has begun and I have opened my wallet to do my small part.
Despite Lola being wrong about the brakes :) he's right about this.
I've been following Zero for a few years and decided that with the '12s they'd achieved enough utility to buy a DS. Now, my engineer daughter is infatuated with it and is buying it from me so/as I buy a '13 S.
I can't imagine a more soul-destroying job than marketing. Oh wait - marketing electric vehicles. Guys are out there developing eye-opening packages to convert old VWs to electric and nobody in this country gives a rat. It's got to parallel why motorcycle racing and soccer can't stimulate any interest here. Tesla seems to be on a roll and may be the exception to the rule. Between the ersatz weekend Harley Easy Rider crowd (no disrespect to one of the best movies ever) and the 'performance' guys that think removing baffles makes them faster (it doesn't, in fact usually just the opposite), there's precious few motorcycle consumers whose opinion I value more than a mouse fart. I'll continue to do my own thing on my Zero, my Tiger, the trials bikes and the vintage stuff and if anyone is interested, I'll talk their ears off. But try to convince the average consumer, even average motorcycle consumer of the benefits of going electric? I'd rather eat worms.