General Biking Discussion Approved.

Care to explain this?

Over here people live to live and surive?

So every other form of enjoyment like music, literature and arts all died out during the World Wars is it? Weren't people trying to survive back then after all?

How about when we were under the British Raj and fighting for freedom? Did people fervently avoid theatre, carnatic music and innumerable dance forms?

As far as I can see, people have lived harder lives in the past and inspite of everything the human race has always sought fragile moments of pleasure in things that have nothing to do with 'survival'. Maybe those moments are what keeping the sanity in us intact.

So dear sir, don't you go around pointing out people below the poverty line to stop me from having my moments. It's not about surviving. It's about living. We're not animals are we?


Now that we're done with the philosophical hogwash, in terms of reality...

We've been mollycoddling our bike manufacturers for a long time and it has to stop. Probably if we had affordable 250s and 175s from other countries for competition, our manufacturers would've taken steps to offer us much more technologically advanced products than what we're being fed now.

Development doesn't come from slogging yourself to death doing a 9 to 5 job without any joy. Development comes from necessity, development comes from passion, development comes from dreaming, wanting, and working towards it.

Finally, rich or not, nobody wants to pay double the cost of a bike/car.

^
Superbly said. If a person walks 10 kilometers barefoot, does it mean I should not dream of an SBK to ride for 10 kilometers in light of how many people live below poverty line?

Agreed we can certainly take measures to end poverty, but I didn't quite get it how paying (freakishly, if I may add) greater import duty helps these people. For all we know it might be going into deep pockets.

The topic is very touchy, because many people don't have an idea of facts and figures, including me. But definitely paying 100% duty and a penalty for a below 800cc bike is wrong. Opinions may differ.

I at time feels what made govt to come up with rule of penalty for two wheelers below 800cc and 100+ import duty

1. We dont have any manufacturer other then Enfield producing bikes from 250cc+, so whom is govt trying to protect here ?
2. Hero Honda is worlds largest bike producer in the world for the category between 100 - 250cc. No where in the world I have seen govts trying to block imports of a product for whom the worlds largest producing company is in there country. Rather govt should open up the category above 250cc so that we have more competition for innovativeness, or else we will keep seeing the sticker jobs every 6 months.
3. How much govt could earn from few 100 motorbike imports per annum. Probably govt can earn more if they allow proper motorsports, this will develop a big industry and direct revenues from it would bring in large income for government. And this will help the automoble industry and its ancillaries to start producing world class products. India has good opportunity to quickly grow in automobile hub, we have seen that happening in small car segment. Which less that 1/10 of motorbike segment size.
4. How much logically and morally its right to kill ones aspirations to meet others aspirations. Middle class has already being lot of compromises in there life, they need opportunities to have some happiness for which they are willing to pay real amounts and not the highly inflated ones.


Thank god they are not charing 110% import duty on iphones/htc/blacberry's saying that they are more of luxury products

I dont think I understood what you were trying to say. What exactly are you complaining about again? The rich getting all ther kicks from expensive products and the poor not being able to afford them and hence becoming poorer? Or NOT bringing in expensive stuff to India will in some weird way make the life of the poor better? Or there are a million problems plaguing our nation and so we otta stop getting better bikes/cars in?

The only reason sound enough to be accepted for this side of the debate is that we need indigenous developement- and I think people have answered that. But even so, the companies we have now are big enough to be not babied- they need someone to tell them they cannot be commercial monopolistic gods- Bajaj was contemplating buying Triumph, HH is probably bigger. Whats stopping them from going a step further and doing something actually laudable? Surely its not Kasab or the erstwhile LTTE.

Great to hear from all the members in here. I appreciate your words and time on this thread.

@niks_devil666
In developed nations taxes are not on the basis of slab system, hence a part of income which is extra gets deducted in tax which at times turns out to be a lot, 33% or so, where as in India the slab lets the tax to be deducted in tune of 10-30% for income above 5lacks and so. Adding on, majority of Indian population's income lies in the Nil slab. A small percentage of people living mostly in urban India pay taxes above 30%. The average software engineer in India pays less tax than what one pays in US.

@theslayer
I understand entertainment is a part of life and it should be there. I cannot imagine my life without music and movies. However, entertainment like riding a 1000cc motorbike which consumes more fuel per kilometer than a poor rural Indian earns in a day is lavish. I ain't against the enjoyment factor, I'm against the fact that people spend huge money on entertainment when someone living few miles away doesn't get enough food to survive.
So, when we are talking about 1000cc bikes, we are talking about a lot of money, and that money can come only from the one who has the capacity to spend, i.e. the rich, so even if they pay double on what they might have paid in US, the rich won't mind it.
With time these policies will be relaxed and of course we will see bikes sold at much affordable prices in India, but the time needed is inversely proportional to development. I'm sure you don't want to ride a Harley from the "smallways" made in between slums.

@svjhonda
How many people do you think want a superbike? A small percentage of people living in urban India. The rural population still strives to own a motorcycle. For that small percentage that wants and can afford a superbike, spending extra is not at all difficult.

@viny
1. There ain't much takes of 250cc bikes in India. In metros the common bike is a 150cc, in semi urban its 125cc and in rural India its 100cc. Its demand and supply principle that doesn't lets manufacture go high on engine capacity.
2. Yeah I agree with you on this. The sticker job from Hero Honda is really bad and can be implied due to lack of quality competition.
3. I understand that the government wants to earn some money and also to limit the use of these vehicles to the class that can afford it with a smile. However, what the government fails to deliver this extra money to the poor and in need.
4. Pay real amounts, then please don't bother paying the extra.

@pudix
I've extensively traveled in various poor states of India. Have been to many villages, hitchhiked on villager's vehicles, and have seen the face of India from a farmer's view. I saw how much pain, trouble and misery poor people go through just to survive. After this I never went back to Taj Land's End or an expensive phone and have used that extra money that I had to help the poor in some way or the other.
With this zeal to develop infrastructure in Rural India, I felt the need for people to see the picture before being biased on the use of expensive vehicles in India. When your brother in a village can ride a Splendor, feel free to own a Harley, but when he struggles to repair his bicycle, its all obnoxious.
India has been talking about development and GDPs, but the whole lot of development is limited to a large Urban population. Even these villagers want a better life and so they migrate to metros increasing burden and population. Problems are everywhere, but they have different sets in places. In India we are hampering our thoughts by thinking that we have the latest Blackberry and now its time to have Harley, where at the same time a farmer is committing suicide because he cannot repay 1/3rd of what that Blackberry costs. Blame it on politicians, or on system, trouble starts from us.


Summing it up, I ain't against the use of expensive vehicles. I feel the need to have a balance in our society and nation, a Harley and a bicycle doesn't create a balance. Hope my comment didn't hurt anyone's, I just tried to present my take on this.

but dont you think 100% duty is a bit...or shall i say really tooo much???
if all the extra money was genuinely going to the poor and the development of the country u might have had a point...
which i dont think is the case ..is it??

If I were industry minister I would hike duty to 200%, why import ? Let the biggies set up plants here give jobs to us and make profits and share them here in India ? Importing is bad on economy (both macro & micro).

that too is good enough!!but provided the biggies set up the plants!!

It is good to see someone caring about under privileged people of our country.

But there is one more perspective.
Imagine a person working hard to achieve his goal in life. He has worked very hard to get an admission to a good institute,secured good marks and has finally landed himself a good job.[He also is a 150cc bike rider and enthusiastic biker.]
After some years he has earned some money. But enter our fu@#ed Government. You can't fulfill your dream of owning a superbike! Because you can afford a car for 5L but not a 1000cc superbike!
Whereas a similar person in a developed country will be already riding the same superbike. He even might be at a lower position professionally! All because of our protectionist guv policies.

Regarding helping the poor people. Are we responsible for their plight? If you are helping the needy in India why just stop there. You have even more poor people in Africa. Join UN Relief force. Do you think people in developed countries who buy these big bikes might give a damn about poverty in India?
I will help the poor in whatever way possible. But will i sell my house and start living in a shanty? Will i ride a bicycle because many others walk. Will i wear only a cloth and dhoti because many people don't have clothes?

This is 21st century mate. We are dreaming of India being a developed nation. Look where others are. And i will definitely buy a 1000cc superbike in future. For me it is a symbol of being advanced and developed. Seeing other Indian people on big machines fills my heart with pride. Jai Hind.

Agreed anyday that the percentage population that knows about, understands and desires to own a superbike as compared to the entire population of India is very less.

But That does'nt make Superbike an exclusive right, meant only for the rich and people who can afford. Why should it be? If that be so, then its like saying a small time village lad can't dream of becoming a biggie in the cricket industry. This example is'nt very relevant, just trying to show the dimension.

I am neither saying make them available for the masses. Let them be priced for what their value is, whatever the company makes a profit of and a 'reasonable' amount of duty. Also enough done with the junk protectionism. We have more than 30 years of evidence that out manufacturers are making hay while the sun shines. They 'know' there is no competition so no hurry to tap higher cc segments.

Just for once. For once let the Govt. allow lower duty for the 200-300cc segment. And see how bums are set on fire.

Biggies are not setting up plant precisely because they know they don't need to. Peoply can't buy any above 250cc bike (except bullet) at sane prices, so they will have to be content with 100-150cc crop the companies currently have. If at all 250cc bikes are introduced at same international price level, then the current players may have to play in unknown territory.

Secondly, this more export and less import story. Allow me to quickly explain: Suppose I produce rice and you produce daal. If I say I will only export rice, or for 10kg export of rice I'll import only 1kg of daal, I won't help your economy to improve. Fine, so this excess 9kg rice (assuming the prices are same) that you have gotten, how does it end up in the books? It is a 'debt' that you owe me. But how else are you going to repay this debt, except to send me daal?

So basically, in order to have more export, we MUST have more import. It is not a one way road.

Hope the above explain the stuff

As per the responsibility thing, I am not going to fight or defend whether the import taxes are appropriate. Overfed and overpaid babus have made these laws, and they have got a good support from the current players. Like it or not, I don't think the decision was made seeing the 'responsibilities of rich to the poor' (those responsibilities are supposed to be taken care of from tax, and partially they do, by ending up in the pocket of our poor politicians).

IMO its a very debatable and controversial topic and definately this thread will go for ages.

IMO every individual has a right to live whether poor or rich. And whatever circumstances they are in they do live accordingly as per there needs and desire.