A wise man once told me, "You can't judge a man's finances by the car he drives." Not too big a leap to apply it to bikes, too.
That's some golden wisdom right there, the wealthiest man I know drives a twenty year old Caddy with bad paint and more dimples than a golf ball.
Something I've noticed in this conversation that I'd like to comment on, some of the discussion of costs, both comparison and recovery are really skewed. We all love to tell other people how to spend their money, it's an american pastime, but here are some points to consider.
Money spent on a vehicle that is a daily or semi-daily driver, that will acquire hard miles and spend most of it's service life with you, is money spent. Sure it's nice if that vehicle holds a greater % of it's value than a comparable vehicle, (like a Harley) but this is a minor convenience at the bargaining table of the next similar vehicle. The vehicle is not an investment.
Likewise, money spent on upgrades and improvements to ANY vehicle, is simply money spent. You're not recovering it, you're spending it for your own satisfaction. It's a price you would pay for own time and pleasure just as with any other hobby, from golf to fishing, it's money
spent. It's only value is the pleasure you derive from it.
By contrast if you buy a Tucker, drive it four times a year, rent it out to dealerships for events, and keep it pristine for twenty years, that's an investment. Your satisfaction is derived solely from the ownership, not the detrimental use of, the item.
Personal example, I collect guns. I shoot them, I enjoy them, I tinker with them and marvel at their design, they are purchases. I have a 1943 Union Switch .45 with 9th infantry provenance. I've never fired it, it sits in a glass case and I enjoy the fact that I own it, but I don't DO anything with it, and someday I expect a handsome chunk of change from it. It's an investment.
So.... when we're talking about Vmaxxes, actually all motorcycles, or shoes and ships and sealing wax for that matter, it's a bit disingenuous to cry that one is a "scam" over the other, or that a purchaser is foolish, stupid, or reckless to spend money for performance that could be matched elsewhere for less coin. The money is spent on an item whose value is wholly in the mind of the buyer, and the enjoyment he derives from it's use. I don't see spending 30k on a Road King, but I'm hardly going to tell someone who did that they're an idiot. "pleasure vehicles" like bikes and watercraft are completely discretionary purchases, and I have to agree that most of what I've heard regarding the pricing of the new Max and it's inevitable family of aftermarket toys, sounds like a lot of sour grapes.
I wanted an 09 Max very badly, and signed up for one, but backed out because I realized that the price did not match up with the satisfaction of ownership that I would experience, that's for me. By the same token, many of my shooting buddies would never spend the money I have on certain items, because for them, any Glock will do. In the end, it's simply another case of "to each his own". Ultimately, I think it's foolish, perhaps childish, and even detrimental for a fraternity like ours to become divisive over the haves and have nots of discretionary income.
Right, so thats my 88 cents, I'm going for coffee.
unk:
