Last three bikes were new.
Suzuki - charge
Honda - pay for consumables only (first service)
Ducati - charge
I think you may be very naive, you dropped what $35-40k on that new Kawasaki and you did not have a conversation about servicing and associated charges? Certainly part of a pre-purchase conversation when I am looking (particularly most recently when I was only looking at Italian bikes).
The car market is significantly larger than the motorcycle market - the new car market may also be propped up by the home company - as in brand X wanting to be market leader in NZ so offers free servicing for X years. They can then use their premo position in NZ as a pressure tactic to other countries to improve. That shit was told to me some years back by the NZ GM of brand X .....
Motorcycle market - the poor sods are happy for the sale, servicing following this will not be free - it helps keep the doors open to allow the bikes to be sold.
Car dealerships do that to lock toy in to going back to them. Not out of generosity. They leave plenty of fat in the charge. They don't give you any back if the cost is lower. So who really gets a good deal?
Sent via tapatalk.
Damn and Blast... no one has asked the obvious question, been waiting for it to be asked...
When you collected your bike, did you ask why you were being charged? Especially as you said you were surprised to be charged.
If you did ask, what did Experience say? And, if you did ask, why didn't you say so in your original post?
Make your mind up, your first post suggests they should start charging, your second that they have already by building it in.
Best they also point out the petrol at time of sale will not last a lifetime, tyres will wear out etc.....
I think I understand what you are trying to say...
If it was never included, then obviously no.
If sold for full price it might be something that is thrown in because it can make a customer feel like they've had a bit of a win despite not getting a discount (more important for some cultures than others) or it could just be used as something to close the deal on a sale instead of a cash discount (or nothing at all), which would be better because once the free ones are used up the customer will (ideally) keep coming back and paying for them
Bollocks, Dealerships cannot legally void a warranty if you get it serviced elsewhere. They can (and do) make life difficult if you have a warranty claim, and if the warranty claim is because of bad servicing or a failed part they did not supply then that is a different matter.
I mentioned vegetables once, but I think I got away with it...........
In my experience EVERY new vehicle sold with the stated bonus of free services get them. EVERY new vehicle where they don't say you get free services you don't.
BTW: NO vehicle where they state free services actually get the services for free, the cost of those services are incorporated into the purchase prices.
If you want to know "why no free services on some new bikes" then that is fairly simple and obvious once you realise it. In a competitive market a vendor can get more sales by trimming down the margins, lowering the price and to aid this they may have to leave out some extras like for example free services.
The first 3 years free services = significantly higher asking price for the vehicle. Drop that offer and you can sell the bike for less money and make more sales.
The obvious question:
Can you get more sales by offering a better price or by offering free services & WoFs?
The answer to that question (or the best guess as to what the answer would be) determines what the seller does.
Terrible experience?
Sounds like the experience was fine and the $500 cheaper (or whatever it may have been) the bike was when purchased easily covered the first service with plenty left.
The only problem is what I quoted - assumed wrongly.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks