CourseLover
$10/per page/Negotiable
the segment includes: critical global markets, important political events, newly industrialized countries,different cultural attributes
Polaris Industries, Inc., designed, engineered and manufactured snowmobiles, all terrain recreational and utility vehicles (ATVs), motorcycles and personal watercraft (PWC), on and off-road vehicles, and low emission vehicles; and marketed them, together with related replacement parts, garments and accessories (PG&A) through dealers and distributors principally located in the United States, Canada and Europe under the brand names of Victory, Indian, Ranger, Sportsman, RZR, Switchback, and others.
The garment and accessory items included helmets, boots, T-shirts, sweat pants, touring luggage and trailers.
The company was widely known as the world’s largest manufacturer of snowmobiles and one of the biggest makers of all-terrain vehicles and personal watercrafts in the United States. In 2013, Polaris Industries employed seven thousand people at eleven manufacturing locations and five research and development centers worldwide. The company had over three thousand dealerships and operated in more than one hundred countries.
Polaris produced its first snowmobile in 1954 under co-founder and former CEO Alan Hetteen. Textron, Inc. bought Polaris from its original Roseau, Minnesota ownership group in 1968. Then in 1981, Textron, Inc. sold the Polaris division to a group of private investors led by W. Hall Wendel Jr., a Textron division head.
The snowmobile business kept the Roseau, Minnesota plant busy six months out of the year but company managers wanted to figure out how to fill the other six months, so they extensively surveyed their snowmobiler customer base and decided in 1985 to diversify and produce all terrain vehicles (ATVs). The company once again diversified by manufacturing personal watercrafts (PWC) in 1992, and eventually became a world leader in both ATV and PWC production and sales. In 1987 Polaris became a publicly traded company.
As a result of its diversification strategy, Polaris was able to manufacture products all year. Snowmobile manufacturing took place in the spring through late autumn or early winter and personal watercraft were manufactured during the fall, winter and spring months. Polaris has had the ability to manufacture ATVs year round since May 1993. ATV production starts in late autumn and continues through early autumn of the following year.
Because of the seasonality of the Polaris products and associated production cycles, total employment levels varied throughout the year. Approximately 3,000 individuals were employed by the company. Polaris’ employees have not been represented by a union since July 1982. The company announced layoffs in their Osceola, Wisconsin plant in early 2011 due to the recession.
Matt Parks joined Polaris in 1987 as a district sales manager for California, Nevada, and Arizona to develop the dealer network. He was named ATV product manager in 1992 and earned a spot at the company’s headquarters. W. Hall Wendel Jr. asked him to do research on prospective acquisitions or expansions. Parks, with the additional title of general manager of new products, considered such things as go-karts, golf carts, lawn-and-garden products, chain saws, and Hula-Hoops by investigating the various industries in terms of competition, size, level of service, and new trends. Parks and others studied the off-road motorcycle market when two dirt bike companies were put up for sale. Then a European motorcycle company asked to distribute their bikes through Polaris. “That sparked a study of the motorcycle business that uncovered signs of a promising market. Along with the dirt bike research, we did a quick study of the street bike business at that time, and we were kind of interested. We thought, ‘You know, this makes some sense,” recalls Parks.
In 1993, Polaris distributed over 300,000 surveys through the company’s Spirit magazine for Polaris vehicle owners to measure the readers’ interest in buying a wide variety of products from Polaris. “Motorcycling did really, really well [in the survey],” said Matt Parks. The survey results were personally interesting to Parks since he was a lifetime motorcycle rider and owned several motorcycles, including a ’74 Norton, ’66 and ’91 BMWs, a ’77 Harley XLCR and an ’81 Ducati. Motorcycles also caught the interest of Wendel who at the time owned a Harley-Davidson.
In pursuing the possibility of motorcycle production, Victory became the project’s confidential codename. Parks came up with the name because it was a nonsensical name with positive connotations. “It’s ‘V’ for victory. It’s nostalgic; it has World War II connotations.”
Parks along with Bob Nygaard, Snowmobile Division General Manager, proceeded with investigating the motorcycle production possibility by hiring two outside firms to assist them in conducting further confidential research on motorcycles. They chose McKinsey and Company, one of the largest and most prestigious consulting firms in the world, and Jerry Stahl, an advertising executive who was very familiar with recreational motorsports and the motorcycle business. Stahl also had experience with Harley-Davidson’s advertising campaigns. From May through August of 1993, Parks &Nygaard assessed the Polaris infrastructure, including the company’s sales force, dealer network, service and warranty operation, and parts and accessories division. They also looked at Polaris’ current customers to see what types of things they were interested in and whether they would buy a motorcycle from Polaris. Polaris analysts and consultants also analyzed statistics from the Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC) in terms of the location, displacement, and types of bikes sold in the industry.
The research showed there was industry capacity for another manufacturer in the cruiser business. The research also revealed that Polaris dealers would like to have on-road motorcycles to sell. Consultants believed that a functionally superior cruiser built in America could find competitive space between Harley-Davidson and the Japanese producers. “We focused in on Harley and the Japanese manufacturers and said to ourselves, ‘Is Harley vulnerable from any standpoint?’ We thought that their costs were high,” Nygaard said. “We thought that, based on re-engineering the Harley bike, we could build it for less money. We felt that customers were waiting too long to take delivery of their Harleys, and they (Harley-Davidson) were vulnerable from that standpoint. We could get to market with a bike that we could make money, and the heavy cruiser end of it was certainly what we wanted to target because that’s where the (sales) numbers were, and that’s where the (profit) margin was. It was the best fit for us, in that the Japanese were vulnerable there. They really hadn’t been able to tackle Harley, because it might look like a Harley, but the real rider knew that it wasn’t an American-made bike from an American manufacturer. We were close (at the time) to being in the domestic engine business, and we could build our own U.S. engine, and that gave us a major leg up on the Japanese. We were an American company.”
“The result of the study was, believe it or not, yes, there was a tremendous opportunity in the motorcycle market,” Parks said. “It’s not the off-road motorcycle market; it’s the on-road motorcycle market, and the entry point, the best entry point, would be in the cruiser market.” Cruisers were defined as stripped-down versions of heavyweight touring bikes that were intended for leisurely travel. Research showed that many cruiser owners immediately replaced many components, such as brakes, seats, wheels, vibration-adsorption devices, frame stiffeners, and intake systems on their brand-new motorcycles. This was interpreted as an opportunity to fulfill demand created by undershot customers in the market.
Polaris had experience producing recreational vehicles for over 44 years. It had the engineering talent and production capabilities to design and produce distinctly different vehicle lines – snowmobiles, ATVs, and personal watercraft – and produce its own engines for many of those vehicles. Parks said the study showed “the manufacturing capabilities and technological know-how required to produce cruisers seemed within Polaris’ grasp.” “My biggest concern was: Let me sell against price, let me sell against features and benefits, let me sell against more advertising, and I can find ways to do that,” Nygaard said. “Help me to sell against the lifestyle, with loyalty that is as passionate as I’ve ever seen on any product (Harley-Davidson). To sell against an image is very, very difficult, and that was my biggest concern.” In August 1993, the officer group gave the okay to continue with the study to see if it fit with existing manufacturing systems and if it could make money.
An early decision was to determine which parts to make or buy. Dapper and Klancher explained that “they bought a Honda Shadow and a Harley-Davidson FXRS, took them completely apart, weighed, measured and estimated the cost of every single part, and determined for each part whether they would make it or buy it.” After figuring manufacturer, dealer, profits and sales volumes, the consultants and managers felt there was a good opportunity in the motorcycle business, and in February 1994 the officers group gave the okay to move forward and build a prototype.
A major boost to the motorcycle development occurred in September 1994 when Geoff Burgess agreed to lead the Victory team. His extensive motorcycle industry experiences and his emphasis on thorough analysis and design work set the direction for the Victory development. The Victory team took a very thorough, methodical, and analytical approach to research and development so the program didn’t waste time, money, or valuable resources. Extensive computer-aided design was employed in building a prototype. “A lot of up-front thinking has saved us a lot of time on the back end,” explained Matt Parks.
The Victory team began an in-depth benchmarking study by obtaining and extensively road-testing a fleet of the competitors’ cruisers in Minnesota, Tennessee and Arizona. The Yamaha Royal Star and Virago, Honda Shadow ACE and Valkyrie, Harley-Davidson Road King, Ducati Monster and BMW R1100RS were evaluated, compared, and ranked. The goal was not to copy the competition but to find the benchmarks for building a superior cruiser. The cost of producing the best features was also analyzed to ensure they could produce the motorcycle within their target price range.
The Victory team contacted Dunlop, manufacturer and tire supplier of Polaris ATVs, to obtain information about motorcycle tires. Steve Paulos, a Dunlop test technician with an impressive motorcycle industry background, assisted the Victory team by sharing competitors’ development and production process information. He accompanied the Victory team to Arizona and shared valuable insights about the benchmarked bikes.
In the early stages of the motorcycle project, the Victory staff determined the bike must excel in two key performance areas – handling and power. Marketing studies told Matt Parks that the engine had to be a big V-twin, and it had to be U.S.-made; an American company like Polaris couldn’t import the engine for a bike whose targeted buyers represented the red, white, and blue image of the cruiser culture. The group felt that the motorcycle needed to have its own signature engine. Talks with consulting firms with power-plant expertise convinced the Polaris team that designing an engine would provide experience curve benefits that would become valuable when Victory Motorcycles broadened its model line to include other classes of bikes in the future. This fit well with Polaris’ considerations of starting its own engine manufacturing operation.
Geoff Burgess first laid out the parameters for the Victory V92C engine in November 1994. Victory engineers refined the design, and in February 1995 a concept drawing was created. In March 1995 Polaris engineering department visited England’s Lotus, Cosworth and Triumph plant, Italy’s Ducati and Aprilia plant, and Germany’s BMW operation. The team also benchmarked engines made by Fuji, Kawasaki motorcycles and the Dodge Neon for manufacturing and assembly ideas.
From the Arizona test, the Victory team determined it should build a bigger engine than the competition. This would also give it bragging rights for the biggest cruiser engine with the most horsepower on the market. The Arizona tests helped define handling goals as a top priority, so much so that chassis’ and frames were designed as desired, then the engine was reconfigured to fit in the available space in the frame.
The Arizona tests also convinced the team that the Victory engine should be oil-cooled. Since rows of cooling fins are an essential part of the cruiser look, the idea of using liquid cooling was rejected. Instead a system was designed that circulates extra volumes of oil to enhance the fins’ cooling effect. Steve Weinzierl, who has deep knowledge of aircraft-engineering history, strapped a Czech-built Velorex sidecar onto a prototype Victory bike and took it to Death Valley, California, for worst-case cooling trials. At temperatures of 121 degrees Fahrenheit, he pulled within ten inches of the Victory going 90 miles per hour, and handed the rider in the sidecar the wires from the thermocouple to test the cooling data. This method was used to test and enhance engine thermal stability.
Once the team had collected and analyzed loads of chassis data, “Francis the Mule,” a crude prototype was created in May 1995. It was built with interchangeable clamps and drilled metal brackets so selected components, such as its wheel base, steering-head angle, and rear-suspension geometry, could be mounted in varied positions and adjusted accordingly. The team could test one thing at a time and meticulously evaluate the changes in subsequent test rides. They also used the Mule to focus on the chassis because it was a priority to achieve the Victory ride and handling. After hundreds of hours riding around on Frances and obtaining some assistance from Polaris engineers on the frame and chassis, the team agreed on a chassis design. Their analysis helped reduce the weight of the frame by 20 pounds over the original prototype. In addition, the Victory team sought larger suspension forks to ensure that the chassis would have the desired rigidity and earn bragging rights for the biggest forks on the market.
Some elements of the V92C design were dictated by customer demand. It had to have some traits that are popular with, and familiar to, cruiser enthusiasts. Styling dictated a triangular rear swing-arm that mocked the “hard-tail” look of the unsuspended bikes of the 1940s. A single shock mounted underneath the seat included an aluminum sub-frame supporting the seat and rear fender. They determined that a high-quality Fox shock was to be a standard feature. Polaris still owns several rear suspension patents as a result.
In May 1995, Mark Bader, who was familiar with compact, high-performance engines, was hired to lead the engine design staff. One of the first engine mock-ups was made from paper. Created from CAD drawings using the Victory rapid-prototyping machine, it was made of thousands of precisely cut pieces of paper glued together. These computer-generated mock-ups allow parts to be generated and test-fit without excessive costs. The first engine prototype via computer-aided-design consisted of a tall, 1,507-cc V-twin with a 55-degree angle between its cylinders. This was too big to fit the frame so the angle was narrowed to 50 degrees. After the frame and chassis was developed, the engine had to be shrunk. It seemed backwards to fit the engine to the frame and chassis, but Burgess felt it was appropriate for the V92C in order to deliver the ride and handling they wanted instead of the engine size determining the bike’s size and layout. In addition, they decided to solid-mount the engine and utilize it as a stressed member or supportive of the frame and relatively more integral to the bike as a whole. The handling was greatly increased.
To develop the crankshaft, the team also benchmarked the performance of competitors’ bikes. The Polaris team also considered using Harley-style cylinder heads with push rods operating the valves, but they decided on a more modern overhead-camshaft design.
The Victory team found that it could eliminate virtually all traces of vibration, but it refused to do so because they felt it was a trademark of a cruiser. They had to determine the proper balance of vibration. Cruisers are supposed to have vibration. As described by Dapper and Klancher, “In the perfect world, there is imperfection. Without it, things just don’t seem right. Motorcycles need to have personality; a little rumble here and tingle there lets you know that the machine underneath you is alive and kicking.”
The braking system was a concern of the Victory team and they set out to develop braking similar to high-performance sport bikes, rather than what’s typically on cruisers. They chose Brembo hardware and worked with Brembo technicians to develop the desired feel and responsiveness. In addition, the Victory team decided to make its own master brake cylinder.
The Victory motorcycle team continued with numerous rigorous tests of the engine, chassis, and other components. The first prototype bikes with Victory engines were known as C bikes and an early prototype cost approximately $250,000 to build. On November 7, 1996, the Victory concept bike C-1 (engine and chassis together for its first test ride) was first ridden at the Osceola, Wisconsin municipal airport. Eighteen people witnessed the event.
Finally, on February 19, 1997, Polaris issued a press release announcing that it would be entering the motorcycle market. On June 26, 1997, the Victory was rolled out to the press at Planet Hollywood in the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota. Al Unser Jr. rode a preproduction bike into the restaurant, and Victory team members fielded questions about the new bike. The next day, editors from several motorcycle magazines met the Victory staff in Osceola, Wisconsin to learn more about the new American motorcycle.
Since the announcement the Victory motorcycle has received universally positive reviews in the motorcycle press. It has also received coverage in newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and USA Today. Matt Parks has appeared on CNN and CNBC television networks promoting the bike. In August 1997, Victory made an appearance at the 57th annual Sturgis Rally & Races in South Dakota. Demonstration rides sponsored by dealers were given for the first time during January 1998 in Palm Springs, California. Over 200 motorcyclists received demo rides on preproduction prototypes of Victory motorcycles during Daytona Bike Week in March 1998. After taking the bikes for a ride, experiencing street speeds, corners and brakes, riders were given a questionnaire and interviewed by the Victory marketing staff. The riders’ feedback indicated the bikes delivered outstanding handling and power. The Victory staff also made a few adjustments to the motorcycle based on customer feedback.
The Victory team felt the bike was ready to roll and named the first model the V92C. “V” stood for the V-twin engine, “92” for the engine’s 92-cubic inch displacement, and “C” indicated cruiser. The V92C had the stiffest frame of any cruiser on the market (as stiff as some sport bikes), and utilized the engine as a stressed member (fundamental component) of the frame for increased strength and rigidity. Complementing the stiff frame were its large 45mm diameter fork tubes with a rear suspension incorporating a stiff triangulated swing-arm controlled by a single shock absorber under the seat. The Victory V92C delivered up to 50% more horsepower than any of its direct competitors. Victory motorcycles were first produced in “Knock-Your-Socks-Off Blue” or “Antares Red.”
“The first Victory V92C motorcycles rolled off the assembly line at the Polaris plant in Spirit Lake, Iowa on the Fourth of July, 1998 just over a year after unveiling the prototype.” Previously, in May 1998, Cycle World, the largest motorcycle magazine in North America, selected the Victory motorcycle as the “Best Cruiser of 1998” before the first bike was available to consumers.
The Polaris team believed it could successfully produce a motorcycle because of its history of design, manufacturing, and distribution of recreational vehicles along with its engineering talent, business savvy and loyal Polaris customers. Former Polaris CEO W. Hall Wendel Jr. said, “Entering the motorcycle market is a logical extension of our diversification strategy. We have the Polaris name, the engineering and marketing expertise, the manufacturing infrastructure, and the dealer and distributor network worldwide to effectively compete in this marketplace. Our main goal right now is to build the brand name recognition. When somebody says, ‘What kind of bike do you have?’ we want the answer to be, ‘I have a Victory.’”
Today, Victory motorcycles are lighter, have more torque, more storage, better engine performance, and a lower center of gravity than comparable Harley-Davidson bikes. Riders claimed that victory bikes were less tippy, more stable going over bumps, and offered more control while riding than other cruisers and touring bikes. Victory enjoyed a 95 percent owner satisfaction rate in 2010.
In addition to developing a new, quality American motorcycle, another challenge was to develop quality manufacturing, distribution and marketing plans. In determining how to best produce their bikes, the Victory team visited three European companies: Triumph Motorcycles in England, a company that made most of its engine parts; Aprilia of Italy, a scooter and small racing-bike builder; and BMW, a well-known German bike producer. As a result of these visits, Polaris decided to combine both outsourcing and original equipment manufacturing. Polaris would manufacture their own parts and components when they felt they could do a superior job, and outsource other components to good suppliers with requisite expertise.
The outsourced components of the Victory come from many sources. Wheels, pre-painted body parts, ignition coils, rear shock absorbers and the lower end of the motor were purchased from reputable U.S. suppliers. Brakes and front forks were supplied by companies in Italy. The electronic fuel-injection system was made by the British firm MBE, and pistons and cylinders were purchased from Mahle, a German company.
Victory motors were assembled at the Polaris plant in Osceola, Wisconsin, alongside lines on which engines for watercraft and all-terrain vehicles are made. Steel tubing for the bike’s frames is also formed and fabricated in Osceola.
The engines and frame parts were then shipped to Spirit Lake, Iowa, where robots were used to weld up the frames before they were given a powder-coat treatment. Making the frames in-house was essential, the company believes, because it ensured the consistent geometry required to make each bike behave as the designers intended. Engines and all the other parts came together on an assembly line that consisted of a carrier suspended from an overhead track. The bottom of the carrier is waist high so employees do not have to bend over. The assembly line is staffed by nine two-person teams, who walk from station to station on a padded surface covering the concrete floor, each building an entire motorcycle. At the end of the line each bike is scrutinized by an optical measuring device called a laser theodolite, which checks the chassis for misalignments that could hurt handling. Finally, a few test miles are put on each bike using a “rolling road” dynamometer. The Victory team knows the success of the Victory project depends on the quality of the bike. This philosophy was expressed by Spirit Lake plant manager, Chuck Crone, who said, “The interest is not to make them quick. The interest is to make them right.”
The Spirit Lake plant was already producing certain all-terrain vehicles and personal watercraft prior to assembling motorcycles. The Spirit Lake site was chosen because it had production capacity and required Polaris to add only a handful of new jobs. Assembling the Victory motorcycles at the Spirit Lake site allowed approximately 400 employees to change from seasonal workers to year-round workers. This also marked the first time that a motorcycle was manufactured in Iowa for commercial distribution.
Polaris managers planned on keeping the motorcycle break-even point low and to start with conservative numbers to ensure quality, then eventually to expand internationally. Longer term they expected Victory to become a significant part of the company’s business. Managers planned initial production to be 2,000-3,000 units.
The first dealer shipments were rolled out in July 1998. To recognize the significance of Victory’s entrance into the motorcycle market, Polaris numbered each of the first 1500 bikes with a plate fastened to the handlebar clamp. Victory number 0001 was kept by the company to commemorate its history. Initially, motorcycles were manufactured and assembled in the spring and summer. However, in the long term, manufacturing of motorcycles commenced year round.
Victory motorcycles were sold through the Polaris dealer network. The selection criteria for these dealers were very strict. The intent was to monitor quality. Polaris dealers also sold lawn and garden equipment, marine products, motorcycles, and farm implements. The Victory was designed to eventually help Polaris leverage its existing engineering and manufacturing base, and provide cross-selling opportunities to its entire network of over two thousand dealers.
Matt Parks wanted dealers who were completely committed to the Victory brand. He felt that the company would be very well represented by dealers in all 50 states when the motorcycles became available. All dealers were fully trained in service and sales prior to receiving their motorcycles. The initial Victory rollout involved two hundred dealers, and each dealer received approximately 10 bikes
Polaris managers felt the company’s best opportunity for entering the motorcycle industry was the heavyweight segment. Heavyweight motorcycles were utilized as a mode of transportation as well as for recreational purposes. There were four sub-segments including cruisers, touring, sport bikes and standards. Polaris analysts sawthat U.S. retail cruiser sales nearly doubled from 1993 to 1997. The company estimated that approximately 128,000 cruiser motorcycles were sold in the U.S. market in 1997. Demand for cruisers at the time was strong. Cruiser sales in the United States increased thirty-one percent between 1994 and 1996. Sales were predicted to jump another nine percent in 1997 just prior to Polaris’ entry, to nearly 134,000 bikes. According to industry estimates, the worldwide market for cruiser motorcycles was more than 200,000 units annually in 1997/98.
In their annual report, Polaris predicted an 11-15 percent annual growth for the next five years in U.S. cruiser sales. Polaris started distributing conservative quantities of bikes during the first few years of production. The company estimated that the first sales would be to existing Polaris customers, due to a survey that indicated thirty percent of Polaris ATV and PWC owners also owned motorcycles. Polaris managers felt that re-entry customers were a major potential source of sales for Victory. Longer term, the company expected to expand internationally and broaden the product line to include models in all four motorcycle segments – cruisers, touring, sport bikes and standards. The expectation was for Victory bike sales to become a significant part of the overall company business. The worldwide motorcycle market was larger than that of snowmobiles or PWC, and Victory bikes were priced to sell at about twice the average price of Polaris’ other products.
“Our assumption all along has been that our target buyer is also a hard-core Polaris enthusiast,” said Matt Parks. “We asked them if they’d be interested in a motorcycle made by us, and they said ‘absolutely.’ We asked how many of our customers had owned or ridden motorcycles and 100 percent said yes.” Parks said they were not aiming at the youth market. “A major source of cruiser business is comeback riders. They’ve had careers, children and mortgages and got out of bikes. Now they have empty nests, disposable income and more leisure time, and they’re getting back into riding.” Polaris marketing executives were initially targeting a rising cruiser wave fueled by baby-boomers in their 30s, 40s. One Polaris dealer said his customers had two things in common, “They wanted another choice besides Harley-Davidson for an American cruiser … and people want their money’s worth. They don’t care what it costs as long as they get their money’s worth.”
Polaris also intended to build strong owner loyalty through their Preferred Registered Owners (PRO) program, consisting of more than 600,000 members in 1998. Members were eligible for exclusive merchandise, competitive insurance rates for their Polaris vehicles, special group rides, and package tours. In return, these informed, responsible riders served as informal advocates for the Polaris brand. These customer groups provided valuable feedback on their riding habits and product demands. Dealer councils were formed to stay attuned to the market and their retailer needs.
Polaris expected to recoup the money invested in Victory within three years. Victory was expected to break even on 4,000 bike sales a year – about three percent of the market. Managers believed that Victory would help Polaris’ overall sales. With an initial retail price of $12,995 nearly all of the 2,000-3,000 bikes made in 1998 were pre-sold. For example, John Gardner at Mt. Hood Polaris sold 10 of his first 15 bikes sight unseen. Gardner said the number of customers was a surprise.
One of the first public appearances of the production version of the Victory motorcycle was during The Rock to Rock Victory Tour. This tour was intended to showcase the quality, performance, and dependability of the Victory motorcycle by riding across America on a Victory motorcycle. “We’re doing it to demonstrate the ‘rock-solid engineering’ of the new Victory V92C,” said Mark Klein, owner of Big City Motorcycles in Manhattan, New York.
Mark Klein’s father, Joe, started the ride from a historic ‘rock’ on one coast, the Statue of Liberty, and rode to another one on the opposite coast, Alcatraz, in the San Francisco Bay. The tour started in Manhattan October 2, 1998 and within eight days and over 3,300 miles later, the tour ended in California. At the completion of the tour, Joe Klein said he had no problems with the ride. “I could hop on and ride the bike back home. That’s how much confidence I have in the bike. I had a taillight bulb that went out and that was it,” Klein said. “The gas mileage increased the further west we went, and the bike just performed flawlessly. It was really great.” The only other thing that had to be done to the bike was to adjust the clutch once. They named the support truck driver and mechanic the Maytag repairman because he seemingly was just along for the ride.
A billboard outside Polaris headquarters showed a pair of Victory bikes against the dramatic backdrop of Monument Valley, Arizona—a Harley-Davidson kind of scene. The message on the billboard states, “It’s a free country. Act like it.” The Victory trailers were also used to market the motorcycles. The graphic on the Victory trailers featured a huge photo of the V92C motorcycle and the image of the American flag provided the background on the truck’s sides. The Victory fleet of semi-trailer trucks was honored by Fleet Owner magazine as winner of a 1998 Fleet Owner Vehicle Graphic Award.
At the beginning of the 20th century there were three big American manufacturers producing large displacement bikes: Harley-Davidson, Indian and Excelsior-Henderson. Harley-Davidson, Indian, and Excelsior accounted for ninety percent of the US market in 1930. The Great Depression devastated the industry, wiping out most of the smaller manufacturers. Starting in 1975 and continuing through the mid-1980s, Japanese companies penetrated the big-bore custom motorcycle market with Harley look-alikes sporting V-twin engines. Harley struggled against Japanese competition in the 1970s, but came back stronger than ever in the eighties. As the twentieth century ended, 1998 marked the first time since 1955 that Americans have had the choice of a large American designed and manufactured motorcycle other than Harley-Davidson. The introduction of the Victory marked the first time in sixty years that a new American motorcycle manufacturer introduced a “significant motorcycle” that will be widely distributed.
The Victory motorcycle was aimed at grabbing market share from both the Japanese manufacturers (Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki and Suzuki) and Harley-Davidson. Victory’s initial assessment of the attractiveness of entry into the motorcycle industry was based on their assessment of Harley’s profit margins. When Victory was launched Harley-Davidson had a nearly fifty-four percent share of the U.S. market for heavyweight bikes and held an estimated thirty percent share of the $3 billion worldwide heavyweight market. Victory’s goal was to take five percent of that market, or in other words, sales of approximately $150 million. The heavyweight cruiser market had been growing and Harley-Davidson had been unable to satisfy the demand in the United States. By default, the Japanese producers were able to capture increasingly larger shares of the market. Some analysts felt that Victory bikes would take share from the Japanese but not from Harley-Davidson.