Yesterday in Team Oregon vs MSF (part 1) I wrote about friction between Team Oregon and the MSF. At that time I was not aware of the history behind the squabble. A reader on the Motorcycle-USA forums pointed me to three articles in Motorcycle Consumer News.

“Trouble in Rider Training” May 2004 (3 parts)
“The Fuss About Rider Training” January 2005 (2 parts)
“Is This the MSF’s Secret Plan?” August 2005 (6 parts)

The articles are well worth reading and I encourage you to do so if you are interested in this subject. For those who want only the short version, here is my take on the contents of the articles:

• The MSF is not independent. It is a motorcycle industry organization whose purpose, as stated in their bylaws, is to “promote and foster the interests of the manufacturers through rider training.” In short it is a part of the MIC marketing effort.

• The MSF is not a 501(c)(3) charitable, non-profit corporation as is Team Oregon. Instead, it is a 501(c)(6) non-profit, a Business Interest corporation. So any profit at the end of the year could be paid, without losing its non-profit status, to the MIC thus decreasing the amount the manufacturers would have to contribute to fund the MIC’s activities.

• From its early days in the mid 70s the MSF has apparently wanted to be the controlling organization for motorcycle rider training—to offer rider training franchises to motorcycle dealers who would provide rider training as a profit making service. The dealers would pay an up-front franchise fee and remit a percentage of the course fees to the MSF. So motorcyclists could wind up paying for the motorcycle industry’s public relations and lobbying efforts, and motorcycle dealers would reap additional profits.

• They could not establish franchises in the early days because they did not have credibility and later, in the 1980s the industry recession made it economically unfeasible. But since the mid 1990s the industry has been booming and the MSF has been working to establish its franchise scheme. To do this and turn a profit they must eliminate the competing non-profit rider training organizations in each state. Few riders would pay higher course fees to a MSF franchise operator if lower cost training is available from other organizations. So the MSF has been taking actions to gain control of the state run organizations which would place it in a position to convert training centers into franchise operations.

• Profit is a powerful motive for both the MSF and motorcycle dealers to strive for exclusive control of rider training. Based on the Harley-Davidson’s Rider’s Edge course fees and class size, “a franchise with two classes a week could make roughly $34,000 a month.” But motorcycle dealers would undoubtedly reap even more profit from course attendees through sales of gear and accessories that might otherwise be purchased from non-dealer sources.

  Note: The Rider’s Edge course cost ranges from $195 to $350 depending on the dealer. At $300, to achieve a $34,000 monthly gross from training classes would require 113 students each month.

• In 2001 the MSF introduced a revised version of the Basic Rider Course curriculum “with a focus on making it more identifiable as the MSF training.” The new course is “less intimidating and more fun.” Some view this as dumbing down the training to make it more marketable and appealing which is essential for franchise profitability.

• At the same time, the MSF cut off communication with the state programs, cancelled the state memberships in the SMSA organization and began ignoring input or complaints from states. The MSF is also developing a number of new courses. The state organizations can’t even keep up with demand for existing courses, so who would offer these extra courses? Newly created franchises perhaps?

• The MSF would face opposition from state run non-profit organizations if it tried to create franchises. That problem is eliminated if the MSF is the non-profit program administrator. Since the mid 90s, the MSF has been lobbying the states to administer their programs. Today the MSF administers the programs in New Mexico, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and California. [As I reported yesterday they are currently lobbying Colorado and perhaps other states.]

• The cost of state run courses is subsidized by some states. Franchises can not make money by offering courses at the low price charged by most of the non-profit programs. For franchising to be profitable and successful, the fees charged must increase. In several states, lobbying has resulted in the removal of price caps or has tried to raise the price of training. Such efforts, successful or not, have occurred in Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, South Carolina, Ohio and California.

I’m sure the MSF would put a different spin on their actions but it seems clear to me that they have orchestrated and implemented a plan to (1) gain administrative control of state programs, (2) increase course fees, (3) replace the non-profit programs with for-profit programs conducted by their franchise operators (primarily motorcycle dealers), (4) reap an annual profit from the courses which is then returned to the MIC thereby lowering the MIC operational costs which are paid by the manufacturers.

In light of that, the actions being taken towards Team Oregon make perfect sense—if you are the MSF or a motorcycle manufacturer. Those actions don’t bode well, however, for the motorcycling community and especially not for future new riders who will pay more for training that may be of lower quality. As a new rider who took the Team Oregon course in 2004, I for one am quite happy with the current system and quality of instruction in Oregon.

I can’t speak about programs in other states but from my (admittedly limited) experience the Team Oregon program is very professional and has dedicated, quality instructors. This is borne out by their first place ranking by the NHTSA. The old adage “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind.