Taking that political scenario as an example. Was the decline caused simply because Harley kept to the same working formula refusing to innovate for competition? As to the likes of Honda and Co?

Manufacturing is cheaper if you have access to resources and such. Japan may of had abundant of but in this case I don't feel it's was all about manufacturing costs.

Was it a cash cow situation, where their one formula was working but as well as where Harley were reluctant to invest in a different avenue, to innovate causing cow to dry up. And that is when they called in the government to settle? That is always the impression I seem to receive.

Excluding manufacturing costs was it because they were scared of an innovation being a failure?

The same cash cow formula can be seen with the likes of Disney Pixar and Toy Story 5, a pointless movie plot at this point where if money was invested, a new creation could be born.

▲

smallmancontrov an hour ago | parent [-]

A current account deficit is a capital account surplus, assets and exports compete in the balance of payments, an asset windfall kills exports by increasing the currency hurdle and embedded asset price.

What you are seeing is "the bar" for a successful manufacturing business increasing until only the most profitable are left -- things like chips, things like shell companies that exist to monetize a brand. "New growth" isn't highly profitable so it never has a chance to get started (unless a recipient of an asset windfall is willing to finance it all the way to "the bar" -- see: Elon Musk).

	▲	doublerabbit 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Ah. I get it now. A established economic model is provable and that in five years, you can forecast that if you follow X guide you'll end up on top with Y. If competition is on the scene then how can you assure me that myself taking the risk of investing will return me the sum I wish for in return. Production has already been established but the threat is in that an another forecastable model exists and that to catch up to their market will require more investment and expenditure which that could lead in less chance of a return. And even if the model is copyable; as like the trope of Chinese knockoffs to of Japanese products, you're still at a lower advantage point. It's not they don't want to innovate but the risk to gamble on innovation is high when you could isolate the competition cheaper another way. This slows their forecast and where you can then strategise to overcome the competition rather than risking via innovation. Cheers.