As has been touched on in previous comments, the fact is that bikes these days are built really really well. Sportbikes have long since only been able to be properly exploited on a racetrack, and cruisers are finally seeing some real improvement (*cough*Polaris*cough*).
It’s relevant to this article to also point out that the Big Four gentleman’s agreement to not build bikes that would not exceed 300kph was shaken on about 15 years ago. Litrebikes routinely now have more horsepower than a y2k GP bike, and off the showroom floor are well capable of wearing out a set of tires long before anything else in the course of a track day. Realistically there isn’t much in terms of performance upgrades that these machines can accommodate that most riders could even find themselves in need of after literally hitting the edge of performance envelope of the stock bike. This definitely has an impact on the aftermarket whereby there isn’t nearly as big of a need for one.

Thank you Michael, for an insightful article and reply.
You are correct (once again) – one can witness the demographic changes with models like the Honda Grom and the huge list of aftermarket bits.
There was a time when one out of every two motorcycles sold in North America was a Honda, and one out of two of them was a CB350. No question, the latest generation of middle and lightweights is stellar.
As a wiser man than I once said, “its way more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.”
Let’s hope that trend continues.

The aging population in North America is the reason why the big four Japanese brands have not returned to the kind of full catalogue of bikes of pre-great-recession times. For example, why did Suzuki not update the GSX-R line once in a decade? Why are they selling the ancient TU-250 over here when the 250 market is so hot now?

The answer is Asia. The sales growth of the global motorcycle industry is in Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, and especially Indonesia. Why waste time trying to pry the last few new motorcycle dollars from 55+ Americans when there are literally tens of millions of new middle class consumers who can ride all year long.

Yamaha and Honda are now most hotly linked to the slogans “Semakin di dipan” and “Satu Hati”.

We are no longer the centre of the world, TK4. We should be grateful. Thanks to this demographic shift, we get terrific, inexpensive motorcycles like the Honda CB500 family, Yamaha R3, and others.

To take this article in a kind of sideways fashion, one issue I have is when new machines are given road tests or ‘riding impressions’ journalists tend to overlook the shortcomings in favour of feel good reviews. The next year or major model change, they tell you all about what was wrong with the old one and how the new one is so much better. I realize this is a case of not biting the hand that feeds you, but being more critical could help us lesser lights in not only buying a new machine but in what to buy and how to bring it up to snuff.
The full blown chopper craze seems to have slowed down too, replaced by generally unrideable cafe racers bodged together with bailing wire and duct tape. I applaud the efforts, but the results are generally less than stellar.
As I have alluded to in previous posts, the makers have shot themselves in the foot by building machines that are too good. One regularly sees bikes that are 30+ years old still out there running around. Its tough for anyone in the aftermarket to be all things to all people and make a living. There is a resurgence in very small specialty manufacturers out there, but you have to hunt for them.
What thoughts do you have too, about the aging of the riding population ? Could this be changing the target audience for accessories ?