Originally Posted by
WhyFi
How is it not contradictory to say that shops "took it [price reductions] 100% on the chin" and then to say that shops were offered deep discounts on upcoming closeouts?
He delineated two different scenarios for the shop. The stock the shops buy at the beginning of the year is the first. If the shop has those leftover, the shop will eat the price reduction. When a manufacturer has a load of leftover bikes, they will sell them to the shops at warehouse clearance prices. In that case the shop is buying them at a reduced price. In that scenario the manufacturer eats the loss. His comment that the shop eats the loss 100% applied to the first scenario because he understood the OP to be asking about that scenario.