Motorbike sales soar on high fuel prices

[Lazy7]

Wednesday July 5, 2006
By James Ihaka and NZPA

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10389816

Motorbike sales are rocketing as New Zealanders turn their backs on cars to combat the soaring cost of fuel.

Motorbike registrations rose for the 27th consecutive month in June, when 758 machines were sold. That figure is up by a third on sales at the same time last year.

And it is a 45 per cent increase in motorbike sales since January, compared with the first half of last year, Land Transport New Zealand figures show.

June car registrations are down 19.2 per cent on the same time last year.

Climbing fuel prices have been blamed on the rising cost of oil internationally. In June 2004, petrol cost about $1.20 a litre. A year later it was about $1.30 a litre. Yesterday the price was $1.70 a litre.

Mike O'Sullivan, of Mt Eden Motorcycles, said people were finding alternative transport options.

He said sales were "unbelievably out of control" as more "non-motorcyclists" bought scooters and motorbikes to combat crippling fuel prices.

"It's been three really good years of business and it's looking even better for the future.

"If a motorcycle dealer is not doing well, even though it's winter, they are doing something wrong."

High-performance and high-output motorcycles were the most popular among people with money to spend.

But others were being more frugal, buying smaller machines such as 50cc motor scooters.

Mr O'Sullivan said the lure of filling a scooter for between $6 and $10 was great when car owners had to spend close to $100 for a tankful.

"There's a big percentage out there buying scooters now," he said. "It's the frugal people who can't afford to fill their cars any more."

The Land Transport New Zealand figures also show car-buyers are increasingly opting for small vehicles.

These made up 40 per cent of cars sold in the first half of this year, compared with 30 per cent last year.

In the first six months of this year, 37,115 new cars were sold, compared with the 37,263 sold in the first half of last year.

Goldman Sachs JBWere economist Shamubeel Eaqub said the drop in registrations was a sign of economic weakness and belt-tightening, as the value of the New Zealand dollar had fallen 15 per cent this year.

But the Motor Trade Association said the sharp fall in car sales was not unexpected after booming sales last year and early this year.

"The drop in the value of the New Zealand dollar earlier in the year meant that car-buyers had looked to snap up lower-priced stocks before import costs rose," said the association's communications manager, Andy Cuming.

"Likewise, buyers choosing to downsize to smaller cars in the face of higher fuel costs had brought forward their buying decisions for maximum advantage."

Last year, registrations were buoyed by the strong domestic economy and lower car prices caused by the strong currency.

But slow car sales suggested the economy was struggling to grow, and Mr Eaqub said he was comfortable with his forecast of 1 per cent economic growth this year.

"While recent business surveys have been buoyed by improvement in export sector sentiment, the weakness in motor vehicle registrations is an important reminder of spreading weakness in the domestic economy and the household sector more generally."

[Bob]

Following on from the thread about the increase in bike sales in New Zealand:

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=31883

Clive Matthew-Wilson, editor of car buyers publication the Dog and Lemon Guide, is generating a spot of self-publicity as he claims the recent rise would inevitably mean a big increase in road deaths and injuries.

Matthew-Wilson said Land Transport New Zealand (LTNZ) figures showed motorcyclists were 40 times as likely to be killed or injured than a person driving a car. "High fuel prices mean there's a natural temptation to switch to two wheels but people really need to realise the risks they are taking when they ride a motorbike," Matthew-Wilson said "You can't simply allow young people to hop on to motorcycles after a couple of days training because the consequences are likely to be tragic."

LTNZ spokesman Andy Knackstedt agreed and the risk of injury higher for a motorcyclist than a car driver "It's basic physics. I mean if you're in a car you have got two tonnes of steel surrounding you, you've got airbags, and you've got seatbelts and everything else. If you're on a motorbike, I mean even if you are doing everything right as the motorbike rider, if somebody pulls out in front of you and you are involved in a crash the only thing you've really got protecting you is your helmet."

Knackstedt did correct Matthew-Wilson, saying it took about 18 months for someone to get a full motorcycle licence "You do have to sit a skills course and pass a practical test."

But he said LTNZ also encouraged people to do more than the minimum that was legally required "We encourage people to do safe riding courses, because the more you can do to protect yourself the better."

Even Matthew-Wilson admitted it is normally car drivers, not the bikers, that cause the accidents.

Now here is a proposal for you… rather than all bleat on here about what a wanker Matthew-Wilson is, how about burying his magazine’s postbox with letters and emails defending the position of the biker, possibly even suggesting that car drivers need “biker-awareness” training as part of their tests. Don’t just send abuse, it gets nowhere. Spot of thought, bury the title in correspondence and then keep track of their letters page in the newsagent (why buy the rag if it denigrates us?) to see what happens. If nothing else, being buried in letters and emails will make him think twice before jumping on the bandwagon.

Well? Up for the challenge?

The Dog and Lemon Guide can be found at:

http://www.dogandlemon.com/

[Mr. Peanut]

I think he's absolutely right.

Bikes are more dangerous, and the current licencing system is pathetic. I know so many people hopping on motorcycles that just have no idea.

A friend of mine rides to work with no gloves in the freezing cold on his scooter. Took me the better part of half an hour to convince him why this was a bad idea. I ended up giving him a pair of my own and still had to talk him into it the next day.

"Hey Chris, these gloves are awesome, so warm! I can actually use the controls now!"

O_o Etc etc etc etc.......... X 2500 new bikers + traffic = deaths.

[ManDownUnder]

I agree with him too, he's pointing out some facts that are uncomfortable for motorcyclists... but they're not necessarily wrong.

If you are going to bury his mailbox, why not takr it from the angle of agreeing with him, thanking him for pointing out those risks and suggesting ways to reduce them.

Priority lanes, lights etc for bikes? Free basic/advanced driver training?

It's a basic business writing approach. "Kiss Kick Kiss", usually used for breaking bad news, and in this case that bad news is that you want something.

Kiss 1 - get the guy onside, give him a reason to relate... and read on.

something like - "thanks for highlighting this, as a motorcyclist I am well aware of what you're saying and it concerns me too"

Kick - here's the problem... and ask for what you want - ,

"If more funding was available for (solution A, Solution B, Solution C) we'd all benefit because (benefit #1, Benefit #2 etc - make some of them mutual benefits... like lower traffic density and err... ?).

Kiss 2 - something else nice - in this case recognise his expertise in the area, a little flattery never hurt. Let's face it, he's obviously a louder voice than mine in the ear of the right people tthat CAN do something about it...

"I'm interested to hear your thoughts on how we can put some or all of these solutions into place as we both obviously benefit, and I welcome suggestions on how to put them in place/secure funding to reduce the m/c road toll ... etc "

[Bob]

EXCELLENT! This, to my eyes, is the perfect way to go. I said what I did as all too often, all everyone does is hurl abuse - and that is never going to get the "opposition" onside, let alone get us any column inches.

Lets face it, the "Powers That Be" are, by and large, car drivers. So if they see well-written, informed comment on bikes in their car magazines, then maybe, just maybe, they'll take a little notice. Live up to our sterotype and throw abuse about... and we're just confirming that their view of us is right.

So how about everyone else? Up to sending in a spot of well-informed comment to Mr Matthew-Wilson? Hit his mailbox the way ManDownUnder says and I'd like to think he'll have to respond. I understand he used to ride himself (having done a bit of homework), but appeared to be a little accident-prone. So perhaps a touch of poacher turned gatekeeper?

As a non-Kiwi, I'm kinda precluded from this - unless of course someone would like to provide me with some items you'd like to see your side of the water and I'll see what I can do to provide comparison and contrast of how "we" do it over here in the UK.

For example, we are trialling letting bikers use bus-lanes, letting bikers enter the centre of London without charge (cars, trucks etc pay £8 per day - about NZD 24) and so forth. We've also actually got a government-produced paper on the future of motorcycling, which was put together in conjunction with our major lobbying groups (our versions of BRONZ). OK, our government still let us down - only to be expected - but there are good things being thrown our way as well.

So over to you guys to lob a little feedback my way - I WILL put something together if given some ammo to work with - and also join in with the writing campaign.

Got to be worth a go, surely?

[Lou Girardin]

Congestion charging in London caused a boom in the number of bikes and scooters on the roads, the injury and fatality rate for them fell!

[Rashika]

Congestion charging in London caused a boom in the number of bikes and scooters on the roads, the injury and fatality rate for them fell!
funny thing that I've always thought is this:
when a motorcyclist has an accident generally there is 1 or maybe 2 injuries or worse.
A car has an accident there could be up to 8 people (or more) injured or dead.
So how does that figure in the stats?

[Hitcher]

Mothers, don't let your children grow up to be bikers.

After having glamourised the motorcar for decades, some motoring writers are possibly a bit miffed that there are alternative forms of personal motorised travel that are growing in popularity. What's the point of extolling the virtues of a Hindustan Ambassador if people want to ride Bergmans instead?

[James Deuce]

The injury and fatality rate for bikes and scooters has been dropping steadily and registrations have been going up. He is talking anecdotal nonsense. The stats do not support what he and the LTNZ are saying.

He is nothing but a troll.

And we all know: Do NOT feed the troll.

As has already been posted:

(Stolen from SPMAN)
"She said 19 motorcyclists had been killed this year, compared with 24 at the same time last year.

ON THEIR BIKES

2003: 6772 new motorcycle registrations, 761 injuries and 28 fatalities.

2004: 8869 new registrations, 721 injuries and 34 fatalities.

2005: 12,789 new registrations, 903 injuries and 36 fatalities."

Matthew-Wilson's assertion is anecdotal blather rubbish, but if we dare to point that out, the rebuttal will simply be, "There is greater potential for death and injury when riding a motorcycle."

LTNZ will murmur sympathetic sweet nothings in his ear, and all the people who've never been near a bike (most of the driving populace) will continue to prat on about the friend of an uncle's friend who had their head cut off by some wire strung across the road.

You can't convince people who don't want to be convinced. We should be spending our energy building our own feel good PR instead of reacting to other people's sniffy comments.

It is a statement designed to extract incoherent, foaming at the mouth responses from motorcyclists to evince our barbarian like social status.

There is no point trying to get this idiot onside, nor is their any point trying to convince LTNZ that working from assumptions based on 20 year old stats has any relevance to current motorcycles or motorcyclists.

[Macktheknife]

Here is a copy of what I sent, just for interests sake.


Hi there,
I was reading the comments of Clive Matthew Wilson recently on the subject of Motorcycle Safety and was very interested in what he had to say.
In this time of rising fuel prices and ever increasing pressures on the traffic flow it is not surprising that people are seeking alternatives to the gas guzzling cars they have traditionally used for transportation.

I agree that motorcycles have a greater risk of injury and also that it seems that most accidents are caused by car drivers who often say 'but I didnt see you'
as though that somehow makes it ok! However, As a keen motorcycle enthusiast myself I really would like to see something more done than
simply mentioning the risks. Like Clive, I am also concerned by the risks that many riders are exposed to and I would really like to see something constructive done about it. It occurs to me that in your position you are perhaps better placed than many to provide some vocal support to ensuring a higher degree of safety becomes a reality for the general riding community. Things like for example, advocating for dedicated lane use, or sharing bus lanes for motorcycles would make a great difference. Advocating for a driver/biker awareness program to be compulsory for all drivers in the first year of having a licence might also improve our safety record.

I think it is important for all drivers to be aware of the risks of road use and indeed to raise awareness of safety issues is a good and valid thing
While I agree that motorcycling is inherently somewhat risky, I dispute that more motorcycles sold will 'inevitably' lead to higher road deaths for riders.
Having people such as yourselves vocally advocating a higher level of training for drivers of cars, who everyone acknowledges are the highest cause of accidents for motorcyclists, would be a great assistance. Almost all of the riders I know are active in undertaking further riding skills courses, and constantly upgrading their abilities. Sadly the same cannot be said for most car drivers I know, perhaps this could be another area in which you could provide a good social lead, encouraging drivers to annually undertake a skills refresher course or advanced driving course.

Motorcycles have the potential to greatly ease the congestion on our roads, and do not need to be high risk, in fact in many countries they are experiencing great reductions in the rate of injuries to motorcyclists due to the increase in bike use, just having more of them on the road encourages drivers to be more aware and more careful. Having a strong community support will further reduce risks and raise awareness of all safety issues for road users.

Rather than simply saying that motorcycles are risky and people shouldn't ride them, perhaps you could use your influence in the community for a positive outcome and work towards reducing those risks. You could be making a positive difference in the economy, the environment, national health costs and improving the lives of many thousands of Kiwis in the process. You could be a constructive and powerful force in reducing road deaths and improving the quality of life in our cities.
Or you could do nothing, and be seen as just another person/organisation who offers nothing but problems, and complains that things are not as they should be but is not willing to do anything about it.



Regards

[Lou Girardin]

I have just emailed him asking how he explains the FALL in fatalities in NZ and London.
And what his qualifications are to comment on this particular field of transport.

[Macktheknife]

I think their email server is down, mine got bounced back.
Oh well will just send it to the Herald instead.

[placidfemme]

More bikes = More deaths

What smartass figured that out? just like "more shops = more people buying shit"

And how strange for a "car mag" editor to make such allegations (true or not) when the fact that his income relies on car sales... pffft

[Lou Girardin]

What smartass figured that out? just like "more shops = more people buying shit"

And how strange for a "car mag" editor to make such allegations (true or not) when the fact that his income relies on car sales... pffft

No, his income relies on people being stupid enough to think he knows what he's talking about and buying his books.

[Hitcher]

What motorcycling needs is a media "go to" guy or gal, a source of a quitty wip and easy copy, like Mr Hyphen from the Dog & Lemon. An ambassador, if you will. In the absence of such a frontperson we will always be relegated to reactive mode -- letters to the editor, that sort of thing.

[Lou Girardin]

What motorcycling needs is a media "go to" guy or gal, a source of a quitty wip and easy copy, like Mr Hyphen from the Dog & Lemon. An ambassador, if you will. In the absence of such a frontperson we will always be relegated to reactive mode -- letters to the editor, that sort of thing.

You have my vote.
Unless we get a 'got to' girl.

[placidfemme]

No, his income relies on people being stupid enough to think he knows what he's talking about and buying his books.

yeah so if they buy a car, they will buy a car mag... meaning his mag...

[Motu]

As part of the motorcycle practical test at some point a bike similar to the test subjects bike should pass them just entering a corner,then move off rapidly.If the test subject attemts to catch the other bike they should be bared from holding a motorcyle licence for 10 years.

[Motu]

What motorcycling needs is a media "go to" guy or gal, a source of a quitty wip and easy copy, like Mr Hyphen from the Dog & Lemon. An ambassador, if you will. In the absence of such a frontperson we will always be relegated to reactive mode -- letters to the editor, that sort of thing.

Like Allan Kirk? The go to guys have too much baggage.

[Gremlin]

I don't exactly see how they mean the LTNZ encourages people going on training courses?? The only one that have is the Defensive Driving/Riding course, which is not very practical, and more on the observation skills to avoid you getting into trouble in the first place.

The BRONZ course is hardly ever mentioned by them, and it is more practical then the defensive course, and a helluva lot cheaper. (Defensive was $145, BRONZ was $45).

Hmmm on reflection, they had different things, but the BRONZ was better value for money I reckon. Not sure if the BRONZ covered more advanced stuff tho, more a course you do after covering a few thousand k, after the BHS...

[NordieBoy]

What motorcycling needs is a media "go to" guy or gal, a source of a quitty wip and easy copy, like Mr Hyphen from the Dog & Lemon. An ambassador, if you will. In the absence of such a frontperson we will always be relegated to reactive mode -- letters to the editor, that sort of thing.
Well you're the one with the National TV experience :D