Sorry, I still don't get why Polaris purchased Indian, regardless of what the Polaris spokesman said in that article, a portion of which is below:
__________________________________________________________
Mark Blackwell, Vice President of Polaris Motorcycles, sees it this way: “Victory is the New American Motorcycle, appealing more to enthusiasts than die-hard bikers, while Indian appeals to the other end of the spectrum.” Would that make it the Old American Motorcycle? Blackwell calls it a bookend strategy, with Victory and Indian at opposite ends of the Polaris shelf. Both are relatively small players in the big picture. Separately, each brand has its weaknesses. But together, Polaris will own a much bigger slice of the cruiser/tourer pie.
___________________________________________________________
Nope, sorry, I don't get it.
Both Victory and Indian will be higher priced large-displacement V-Twin Cruisers. So what that one of them will now supposedly have some "heritage". I don't think that that will be enough to draw a sufficient enough number of big dollar spenders(and Indians will most likely be even more expensive than Victorys are) in order to justify this second lineup of basically the same style of motorcycle.
Yep, it still all goes back(or will go back...that's a prediction) to Victory not having a lower priced "entry-level" motorcycle such as H-D has with the Sportsters, and which help draw a greater number of people into their showrooms.
(...however, that being said, I DO wish them luck and hope my predictions are wrong)
