Brand Loyalties – By Phil Hall
Last week was the opening round of World Superbikes and the restive ones were all over the social media expressing their joy that, FINALLY, the racing season has started again. (It actually started a month ago at Island Classic but we’ll keep that quiet).
Aforesaid social media went in to total meltdown last week with news that Australian icon, Troy Bayliss, was stepping into the #1 spot at Ducati at Phillip Island following the unfortunate testing accident that sidelined Davide Giugliano for the weekend. Bayliss, 45 years old (who cares?), supremely fit (ask his fellow dirt track competitors) and still hungry (he has already hinted at a return to dirt track racing in the AMA series in America this year) was on the pace pretty quickly but ultimately a lack of seat time on the bike and time to set the machine up to his liking saw him make strong starts only to slowly drift back through the field when his tyres were shot.
Despite being totally different machines and race teams, it seems that the MotoGp red bike and the WSBK red bike, both suffer from the same malady. Good qualifying pace but a propensity to fade back into the pack at mid-race distance. I have said it from day one that I believe the Panigale is fatally flawed as a race bike with the high-revving engine being fully developed in street trim with little or no leeway for major power increases to be made in race trim. Perhaps the Evo-class rules this year may close the gap but that will only be because the other manufacturers have had to lose some power, not because the Ducati has found a whole lot more.
However, away from the actual racing itself, the first meeting of the season is always interesting for all sorts of reasons. A measure can begin to be made of how each team has interpreted and implemented the new rules package (though team principals usually say that Phillip Island bikes are “interim” bikes and that the peculiar nature of the Australian circuit mean that developments implemented here are really irrelevant on any of the other circuits on which they race. Indeed, several team managers have said to me that they really regard PI as a “one-off” race and that the “real” racing doesn’t really start till the European rounds begin). Agree or disagree, most teams look to score as many points as they can at PI (obviously) but affirm that the real work begins in a month or so.
One reason why I always find the opening round so interesting is to see how riders adapt to new teams and new manufacturers. Several of the top runners have swapped teams in the off-season and it will be fascinating to see the results as the season progresses. Johnny Rea is now on a Kawasaki with Tom Sykes, long-time incumbent, as his team mate. No surprise that the man who, in the eyes of many, robbed Sykes of the title in 2014, is no longer there. Despite what I will mention in a moment, loyalty IS important and most feel that Baz, with a MotoGP contract almost in his pocket, showed stunning lack of loyalty to Sykes (who could have won with his support) and to the team in the penultimate round last year. Again, not stating an opinion of my own, just saying what is out there.
But it made me wonder just how the riders manage to switch loyalties when they switch manufacturers. The part answer is that they are professionals and that that is what they are paid to do, but that’s too simple. Surely, in the back of a rider’s mind when he is being interviewed about his new team and his new bike, he is thinking, “All this stuff that I am saying about the Yamazuki now is exactly the same stuff I was saying about the Kawacati last year.” Oh sure, they talk about “new challenges” and “bike differences”, “getting used to a new crew” and so forth, but I wonder if, deep down, the riders have any REAL loyalty to the manufacturer for whom they are riding or are they “guns for hire” and go where the pay is the best?
Do not mistake my enquiring mind for criticism. A rider’s career is short in this sport (unless he happens to be called Bayliss). In spite of coaching, training and having personal managers, the number of riders to whom I speak (and I speak to lots of them) who have no plan for what they are going to do AFTER racing is disappointingly high. Therefore they have the right, indeed, the obligation, to earn as much while that window of opportunity is open. But does the knowledge that they won’t still be swanning around the world, living the lifestyle of the rich and famous, forever, impact upon their career decisions? Of course it does, but where does that leave them in the matter of brand loyalty?
Put simply, if they want to have a successful career, there is only one loyalty that matters, their loyalty to their bank account. And so they CAN speak in glowing terms of the bike they are presently riding even though they were deriding it (in private, don’t say it in public, your words could come back and bite you) the year before.
But thinking about this did make me think, in broader terms, about motorcyclists and brand loyalty. The essential difference between pro racers and us is that we aren’t being paid to ride (at least I’m not). So we are free to pick and choose and we don’t have to answer to anyone about it. And because of this, brand loyalty is a vastly more pervasive concept than it is in racing.
I believe that, were the subject to be researched, it would be found that a huge percentage of riders feel a loyalty to and ride bikes from the manufacturer of the first bike that they owned. Certainly a small sample amongst my close riding friends seems to indicate this.
I have a very close friend whose brand loyalty borders on an obsession. He owns over 20 green bikes and new ones are almost constantly being added to his ever-expanding shed. The shed, by the way, is somewhat TARDIS-like in that it seems able to accommodate however many bikes need to be accommodated at any particular time. He is a fount of knowledge about the most arcane matters of his chosen manufacturer and I am sure that, were he ever to be injured, the blood spilt would be green.
Another close friend seems only to be able to think about bikes if they are red and come from Italy. He speaks lovingly of them, his conversations sprinkled with word that only a few really understand. Campagnolo, Verlecchi, Conti and bevel regularly appear.
And I would probably be just as guilty, though my knowledge of my chosen marque is far less encyclopaedic. My first bike was a red one out of Japan and, with a few diversions into other areas, my choices have nearly always been from that same manufacturer.
What about you? Is your present bike/s representatives of the same manufacturer as your first bike was? Maybe you have eclectic tastes and like to sample. Another very close friend recently had the misfortune to have her red bike written off in an accident and her choice as a replacement was a V-twin bike from Italy (the OTHER one). But then she is a very creative and artistic person and I suspect that her choice was not completely influenced by mechanical issues.
I have been berated by acquaintances for not being adventurous in my choices, but I have been riding for over 40 years and I don’t really need to go out and sample the market. I strongly suspect that, were money available (it’s not; that’s why I’m here instead of Phillip Island) my choice would be the upgraded version of the bike I presently ride. ☺
Yes, I’m an example of brand loyalty. I do think that most of us, in our own way, are.
