Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-11-2010, 02:57 PM   #61
Voyager
Registered Member
 
Voyager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarnali2 View Post
I assume "receivership" in England is the same as "Bankruptcy" here? That being the case the company didn't go out of business they filled bankruptcy and John Bloor bought them lock, stock and barrel with Les Harris still manufacturing parts and bikes under Bloors ownership.
No. In this case the receiver was acting as a liquidator appointed to wind-up a business and sell the assets in order to refund out-of-pocket creditors. The business had already failed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarnali2 View Post
So, the company as an entity merely changed hands.
No. It had already closed. Ceased to be. The business was no more. It had shuffled off this mortal coil and gone to meet it's maker. It was a dead parrot.
Voyager is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 08-11-2010, 03:19 PM   #62
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarnali2 View Post
Yes, as I said I've owned 3 of them. The tail goes from the R to the H instead of from the H to under the I...

I learned to ride on my dad's '66 Mountain Cub and twin pipe CZ ISDT bike. I've been around bikes for quite awhile.

I assume "receivership" in England is the same as "Bankruptcy" here? That being the case the company didn't go out of business they filled bankruptcy and John Bloor bought them lock, stock and barrel with Les Harris still manufacturing parts and bikes under Bloors ownership.

So, the company as an entity merely changed hands. Just like Harley Davidson went from the Davidson family to AMF and back to private ownership with Vaughn Beals running the show.
Here's some stuff from Wiki:

Triumph Motorcycles (Hinckley) Ltd is the largest surviving British motorcycle manufacturer. When Triumph went into receivership in 1983, John Bloor, a former plasterer turned wealthy English property developer and builder, became interested in keeping the brand name going, and bought the name and manufacturing rights from the Official Receiver.[6] The new company, initially Bonneville Coventry Ltd, ensured that Triumph has produced motorcycles since 1902, winning it the title of the world's longest continuous production motorcycle manufacturer. A short licensing agreement granted to pattern spares manufacturer, Les Harris, kept the Triumph Bonneville in production until 1988 until Triumph re-launched a new range in 1990/1. Triumph now makes a range of motorcycles reviving the model names of the past, including a newly designed Bonneville twin.[7]
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 12:33 AM   #63
Voyager
Registered Member
 
Voyager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
Here's some stuff from Wiki:
You might like to imagine that Wikipedia is the font of all knowledge but it is not.

Read the link from your own quote ' ....and bought the name and manufacturing rights from the Official Receiver.[6]'

6. "1980's - The end and the new beginning.". Retrieved 2008-09-20.

Quote:
1980's - The end and the new beginning..

The Meriden factory closed its doors in early 1983. The cash had simply run out and liquidation followed along with the sale of the company assets. The Meriden site was bulldozed into rubble in ’84 and houses built. It seemed like the end of Triumph and, with it, the British motorcycle industry. But, fortunately, it wasn’t. Property developer and self-made millionaire John Bloor bought the Triumph name and a new, privately owned company - Triumph Motorcycles Limited - was born.

Initially Devon-based firm Racing Spares (who’d previously been making parts for Triumph) were licensed to build the final incarnation of the Bonneville, principally to keep the Triumph marque alive, while the new company laid plans for Triumph’s return to the world stage.

From 1985, for three long years, Racing Spares built the ´Bonneville USA´ model as Triumph put plans in action in total silence and secrecy. During this time a new factory was built in Hinckley, Leicestershire. By 1989 the rumors were circulating. The new Triumphs would be totally different to those that had gone before - three and four cylinder engines with water-cooling, four valves per cylinder and double overhead camshafts - in other words, contemporary with the then Japanese technology. As Racing Spares carried on with a legend that had been born and very much left, in a very different era, the new company were focused very much on not only the here and now, but also on the future. Triumph would once again be a force to be reckoned with.

1990's - New factory, new technology, new bikes..

Six new brand new Triumph motorcycles were unveiled to the bike industry and press at the Cologne Show in September 1990. Based around two different engine formats, these models – the unfaired Trident 750 and 900 Triples, the touring-oriented Trophy 900 triple and 1200 four and the sports-slanted Daytona 750 triple and 1000 four - employed a modular concept, meaning that many parts were common to all. Thoroughly modern in performance and technology, they were well received in all quarters. The line up evolved when in ’93 the Daytonas grew in capacity becoming a 900 triple and 1200 four. Soon after a Triumph once again wore the name ‘Tiger’ on its tank, with the introduction of an off road styled 900cc triple that won legions of fans for its long-legged capabilities.
Now, I may not totally agree with the way that is written but I think it shows that your idea that 'the company never stopped operations and disappeared' is not correct.

In the late '80's the new Triumph business was keen to dissociate itself from the disaster the workers co-op had been and from the bikes they were making and from any 'historic' legacy. It was an entirely different concern - better than pretend Indians for sure as they were making contemporary bikes and not a facsimile of some historic throwback. but it was still a new business.

Now I'm sure you want the last word, but I was involved with designing parts for the new Triumph business in the early days, so I do have some idea of what the history was and I'm pretty sure you were 4,000 miles away and, at best, reading magazine articles about it.
Voyager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 07:50 AM   #64
pushrod
Founding Member
 
pushrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Baja 'Bama
Posts: 3,642
Default

Although I am usually loathe to wander off-topic, I shall in this case...

Voyager,

Can you explain why Bloor can't (or doesn't) use the old Triumph trademark? The 'new' one is different in the 'swoosh' under the name.

If he bought the rights to the whole crate o' stuff, why not the trademark?
__________________
You would not understand,
this is not how I am...

I have become -
Comfortably Numb.
pushrod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 08:28 AM   #65
Voyager
Registered Member
 
Voyager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pushrod View Post
Can you explain why Bloor can't (or doesn't) use the old Triumph trademark? The 'new' one is different in the 'swoosh' under the name.

If he bought the rights to the whole crate o' stuff, why not the trademark?
I think it was because they wanted to differentiate the two 'Triumphs' - show the new company was not associated with the old one.

I don't know if John Bloor is particularly involved with the decision making process though.
Voyager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 09:42 AM   #66
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
You might like to imagine that Wikipedia is the font of all knowledge but it is not.

Now I'm sure you want the last word, but I was involved with designing parts for the new Triumph business in the early days, so I do have some idea of what the history was and I'm pretty sure you were 4,000 miles away and, at best, reading magazine articles about it.
You're being Led by the Ring in your own Nose, and don't even know it.......





(Just thought someone ought to flag you a warning, that's all)
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 12:51 PM   #67
sarnali2
Aging Cafe` Racer

 
sarnali2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sittin' down by my window, lookin' at the rain.
Posts: 8,719
Default

Please ignore that Airhawk behind the curtain........


I appreciate the Pythonesque allusion, however your very argument shows you are wrong. Triumph the Meridan co-op went into receivership. All assets are sold including intellectual property along with the Triumph name, to John Bloor who starts a new company with new designs, new factory etc under the Triumph name. He then employs Les Harris to manufacture however many bikes he can from whats left while Hinkley Triumph gets underway.

The continuity exists because the intellectual rights, tooling and name along with production of a few bikes continued "under new ownership" but continued none the less. Finally, John Bloor is a very astute businessman, I would imagine before he opened himself up to liable and claims of false advertising by claiming that his version of Triumph Motorcycles was the continuation of the Triumph Motorcycles that started in 1902 he would have had some very clever Barristers investigate the issue under English corporate law six ways till Sunday.

If your legal system agrees that it is indeed the same company then the argument, as you so eloquently put it becomes simply your opinion, which sadly in this case is wrong.
__________________
"Carpe` Throttelum -Loud Suits Save Lives"

"He said he's farting because of his medication"...
sarnali2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 01:13 PM   #68
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarnali2 View Post
Please ignore that Airhawk behind the curtain........
But you weren't playing fair!

Besides, I didn't want to scare off the new QPaule Kiouk; HM's GMP, before we were done playing with him!
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 01:44 PM   #69
sarnali2
Aging Cafe` Racer

 
sarnali2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sittin' down by my window, lookin' at the rain.
Posts: 8,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_AirHawk View Post
But you weren't playing fair!

Besides, I didn't want to scare off the new QPaule Kiouk; HM's GMP, before we were done playing with him!
SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gahd, he can probably hear you!....
__________________
"Carpe` Throttelum -Loud Suits Save Lives"

"He said he's farting because of his medication"...
sarnali2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 02:36 PM   #70
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarnali2 View Post
SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gahd, he can probably hear you!....
Speaking of the Kook. He was over posting on the MD blog. He's stalking old Gabe now.

I'm sure he's in the "MD's readers are intelligent and thoughtful" phase of his lunacy.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off