Those prices are still low. Even after taking currency into account, bikes are worth less in the US market than they are here (which is why people bother with importing them)
|
|
|
Approximate Values of 10 Motorcycles in Average Condition and Mileage
- Thread starter VifferFun
- Start date
Those prices are still low. Even after taking currency into account, bikes are worth less in the US market than they are here (which is why people bother with importing them)
kiwi
Well-known member
For sure. We need to add the "Ontario" pricing factor to them here.
Actual market cost x 1.45%
MarcosSantiago
Well-known member
Perhaps even more than 1.45%.
Just one model in the list I am familiar with: 2007 KAWASAKI ZZ-R250 NINJA= In the USA is marked as Low: $1,730, Avg: $2,275...
There are two Ninja 250 in the Trader right now, $2,600 and $4,000, so the average is $3,300 (I know the sample is too small, but it is for discussion's sake).
Avg in the USA: $2,275
Avg in Toronto: $3,300
Factor: multiply the USA price for approx. 1.5 to get the Toronto price. PLUS 13% taxes.
Including taxes: multiply the USA price for approx. 1.7 to get the Toronto price
Just one model in the list I am familiar with: 2007 KAWASAKI ZZ-R250 NINJA= In the USA is marked as Low: $1,730, Avg: $2,275...
There are two Ninja 250 in the Trader right now, $2,600 and $4,000, so the average is $3,300 (I know the sample is too small, but it is for discussion's sake).
Avg in the USA: $2,275
Avg in Toronto: $3,300
Factor: multiply the USA price for approx. 1.5 to get the Toronto price. PLUS 13% taxes.
Including taxes: multiply the USA price for approx. 1.7 to get the Toronto price
This is exactly why the US market is not directly comparable to the Canadian/Ontario market, you hit on a good example. A Ninja 250 will command a way higher price here as it is much more in demand.
:lmao:so true
This implies that if we did understand "how everything works" we would be okay with the rates. I doubt it.
Here is my issue: when I looked at the breakdown in my rates (State Farm), I realized that the lion's share was for "accident benefits", which are mandated by provincial legislation. I have no problem with that - motorcycles are pretty dangerous and it might cost my insurance company a lot of money to look after me if I mess myself up.
But then when I ask them about rates to ensure a second motorcycle, they tell me it will be as much as the first one again, please (or maybe with a 10%-ish multi-vehicle discount). Now, if we are to accept that the rates are based on a calculation of the company's actual exposure to risk, can you please explain to me how owning two motorcycles makes me exactly twice the risk to State Farm as if I owned one motorcycle?
Secondly, why can't actual use (mileage) come into this in a more significant way? When my life got busy enough that my annual mileage was substantially reduced, it was costing me about $100 in insurance every time I went for a ride. That's nuts. No insurance company offers a product that meets my needs as a low-km rider. Why? Because they legally can't, or because they simply can't be bothered?
Basically, the Ontario insurance industry killed motorcycling for me. I got so disgusted I took the bike off the road and now ride track only.
|
|
|
|
|