Pag Sport 300 specs, pics, MSRP

[tcs]

Now on the web:

http://www.johnnypag.com/motorcycles/sport/index.php

Shame the bike doesn't fit 17" wheels (18/15). And an MSRP of $3500? That's Ninja 250 territory (little Ninja: well earned reputation, better dealer network, better resale, more HP, etc.) Of course a lot of China bikes have ridiculous MSRPs but sell for reasonable amounts. IMO this Pag is a cool bike if the street price is no more than 2/3rds of MSRP.

tcs

[maf119l]

Did not know he added a sport bike.I'm happy with my 250 spyder chopper

[ChiGongJitsu]

that thing looks really neat, i like the streetfighter style goin on...that's a good move to go with that style, it seems to be pretty popular right now

[SpeedSouth]

I went to my local dealer earlier this week and eyeballed a couple of these up close. One red, one black.

I didn't get as much time to look it over as I would have liked, due to a salesman who seemed determined to insult me, but they are very sharp looking bikes.

It's too bad they want so much for them though, as they won't sell many with the EX250 available at similar prices. And I was told it only has about 16-18 HP, which is really sad for a 300cc engine. The EX is rated around 24-26.


I think the only thing the salesman and I did agree on, was a desire to see them introduce a 500cc model.
Maybe one day.

[almonpoole]

He is $1,000 too high on the price.

$2,500 is a better price, a 2008 Ninja looks better, rides better and goes faster for the same money (3.5k)

Almon

[IronFist]

Originally Posted by almonpoole

He is $1,000 too high on the price.

$2,500 is a better price, a 2008 Ninja looks better, rides better and goes faster for the same money (3.5k)

Almon

I can't get a used ninja for that price, well not a good used one. I like the sport bike look, but my back doesn't. Still almonpoole is right, $1000 too high.

[tcs]

FWIW the 2009 Ninja 250 MSRP will be $4000.

That's right, the Ninja 250's MSRP has gone from $3000 to $4000 in ten months.

tcs

[almonpoole]

A new 2008 Ninja from my dealer here in the U.S. is $3,500. I'm surprised they have not gone up to 4k before 2009 though.

[tcs]

The baby Ninja was always a loss-leader for Kawasaki USA. They actually didn't import that many most years. The idea was that prospective owners would come in to the dealership looking for this great little bike at an astounding price, only to be told that the dealer didn't have any and wouldn't be getting anymore until "next year" - however, they did have plenty of larger, more expensive models...

tcs

[AZ200cc]

Kinda looks like a Blast knock off...Little high on price but it looks nice.
For the price I'd go Hyosung or Ninja though.

[SpeedSouth]

Originally Posted by tcs

The baby Ninja was always a loss-leader for Kawasaki USA. They actually didn't import that many most years. The idea was that prospective owners would come in to the dealership looking for this great little bike at an astounding price, only to be told that the dealer didn't have any and wouldn't be getting anymore until "next year" - however, they did have plenty of larger, more expensive models...

tcs

I'm not sure I understand how that is possible, when you consider that the 250 didn't change for nearly 20 years.
How is it possible to be a "loss leader" when nothing changes?

Surely it could turn a profit after 10 years of production, no? 8O

And the bikes are everywhere! It's not like it's difficult to find a used one from any given year.


I'm not trying to argue, I just don't understand how it's possible.
Do you have any links or numbers to help provide some insight?

[tcs]

The Ninja 250 had almost the same number of the same kind of parts in it as the very similar design Ninja 500. It took about the same engineering effort to design. It had about the same amount of assembly labor putting together those similar parts, and the same shipping and set-up costs. From an industrial engineering view, to make the same profit it couldn't have been priced much less that the 500 (which also hasn't changed in over 20 years!). But, and it's a big but, the 250 was MSRP'ed at $3000 and the 500 was MSRP'ed at $5000.

The Honda Nighthawk 250 and Rebel - which also haven't changed in over 20 years - are both simpler mechanically and lower spec than the Kawasaki Ninja 250, but both had a higher MSRP from the late 1980s until last year, when - tada - Kawasaki raised their price.

Several dealers I've talked to over the years have told me that they didn't stock the little Ninjas them because with Kawasaki's price structure the dealer made hardly any money selling them - but they liked having the bike in the line-up and in the catalogs because they could up-sell the folks that came in looking for one.

BTW - If "not changing" drove costs down, they would give Royal Enfields away! And don't believe that stuff about "the tooling is paid for" - think about it. Nobody uses 20 year old tooling on a production line. Manufacturing tools wear out and have to be replaced ($$) on a regular basis.

tcs

[SpeedSouth]

Thanks for the explanation. I understand what you're saying, and I have no doubt that your points play a part in the overall numbers...but I guess I'm still questioning the conclusion you've reached, based on the critical factor that we don't seem to have in this equation...volume.

Your statements seem to depend upon the 250 not selling many units, and I am not sure that's accurate. Everything I have found, which admittedly isn't much, points to the 250 sales numbers being much greater than that of the 500. So, while the actual profit per unit may be smaller, it can still generate more income through volume.

This article at Cycle World says the 250 is Kawasaki's best selling streetbike - http://www.cycleworld.com/article.as...article_id=816 - (3rd paragraph)

Granted, that isn't clear enough for my taste, as it's possible they are referring to the 2008 model only. But they do talk of the value it holds and make mention of owners trading in their bikes for something bigger and faster, so I think it's fair to assume the "best selling streetbike" is mentioned for all Kawi 250 models, and not simply the 2008....as the 08 hasn't been around long enough to speak of it's sale/trade history.

Then there's numbers like these - http://jama.org/statistics/motorcycl...sales_year.htm

Again, it's not a direct statment of sales figures for the EX250, so one must translate the data...but if you look, it's obvious that (assuming the data is correct) sales numbers for 125-250cc motorcycles outsold everything above 250cc's for just about every year since the data was collected. Both before and after the EX250 was introduced.

Consider the number of bikes available in the ranges provided, and you get a clear picture that the smaller bikes outsell the larger bikes pretty consistently. Sure, there are a few years where the larger bikes have sold more, but those are the exceptions, not the rule.

And to put that into perspective, here's the numbers from the Kawasaki line-up as is currently listed on their web site.

Total number of bikes between 125-250cc = 9
Total number of bikes above 250cc = 24


A few dealers who don't stock the 250 is anecdotal, at best. Some locations simply sell more of certain styles and less of others. Like a beach area dealer may sell more scooters, and a small-town country dealer may sell more dirt or dual sport. No dealers have been able to "stocK" the 250 this year, as they sold faster than they were imported.

The mention of the higher priced Honda 250's actually goes to further my point. Who is going to buy the Rebel or Nighthawk with lower specs and for more money, when the Kawi is available? And then what does that say about the statements of sales numbers? It's the best value in the 125-250cc market....how does one conclude that it didn't sell very well? 8O

I agree that simply not changing doesn't "drive cost down". I never said it did. However, I do think it's reasonable to conclude that the longer you sell the same version, the better your profit becomes because the R&D is spread out over a longer period of time. Instead of paying for the R&D over 10 years, it's spread over 20 years and thus, 50% less profit is required from each unit for the full period of time.

I don't remember anything about tooling. Not mentioned here or elsewhere. I assume that the cost of tools and manufacturing are calculated into the cost from the jump. Surely they have expectations for the life of the tool, and plans in place to remain "tooled" and prepared.

Also, since the 500 shares some of the same parts, according to your statement, shouldn't the higher profit from the sales of the 500 be included in the cost of retooling? Those tools are making parts for more than one bike, therefore, more than one bike contributes to the cost of maintaining said tool.

Again, I'm not arguing the amount of profit per unit is high, or higher than you claim...I'm simply questioning the sales volume, which MUST be taken into account, when talking about a "loss leader".

Well, in my opinion, at least....which is worthless.

And that's about all I have on that, at the moment, but it seems possible to me that while the 250 may have the smallest margin of profit, it may also generate the highest volume of sales...making the profit per unit issue somewhat moot.




Somewhat off topic, here's an article I found with some interesting information - http://www.webbikeworld.com/Motorcycle-news/blog/

From the - 2009 and Beyond Motorcycle Rumors - section...

"And finally, busy Honda will also release a very nice-looking new 250; unfortunately, it looks identical to a Ducati Ducati Monster 696!"

Anyone have a picture of this Honda 250 they mention?

[Dragon]

Nice! I really like the proletarian look of this bike. It's not overstyled and much more reasonable than the Ninja.

[VinceDrake]

Mr. TCS and Mr. SpeedSouth:

You both could be very, very right.

From a Manufacturing perspective, I would have to agree with Mr. South. By the numbers presented, I doubt Kaw loses money on the Ninja 250. The R&D has long since been paid for, and the bikes rely on very static technology, not requiring a lot of exotic materials, or special handling. Staffing Costs are likely minimal, as staff is already trained, and Uber-specialists aren't really required. So for Kawasaki Corporate, I suspect they make out like Bandits in the 250.

However(!) from a Dealership perspective, they could very wll be a loss leader. Smaller MSRP=Smaller mark-up for the dealer, Especially, in a learner/econo-commuter bike, there is a lot of price pressure, usually ending up in a smaller percentage of gross profit for the retailer.

Specifically, (Using all theoretical numbers, k?) If I was going to stock 1 Hyabusa, and I could make 50% gross profit per unit... If I could sell 1 'busa, that cost $7500.00 for $15000 retail, I still need to spend $7500 to get the next one to keep in stock. Total Liquid Profit-- $0. If you prefer, I need to sell *2* units, before I have actually any money in the bank from selling 'Busas.

If I was going to stock 1 EX250, and can only make 20% gross profit per unit, I need to sell *5* units, before I actually pay for the first one!
I.e., $2500cost @ 20%Gross Profit = $500profit/unit Therefore, 5units X $500/unit = The cost of the 1 unit I want to keep on the showroom floor!

Regardless, I just wanted to jump in, and mention, that you're both likely right, just from different perspectives.

(Individual mileage may vary, Offer not available in all locations, see your dealer for details, etc.)

--Vince