Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP Files Class Action Suit Against Harley-Davidson, Inc.

SAN DIEGO--May 25, 2005--Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") (http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/harleydavidson/) today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of purchasers of Harley-Davidson, Inc. ("Harley-Davidson" or the "Company") publicly traded securities during the period between January 21, 2004 and April 12, 2005 (the "Class Period").

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from May 1, 20058, 2005. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff's counsel, William Lerach or Darren Robbins of Lerach Coughlin at 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058, or via e-mail at wsl@lerachlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/harleydavidson/. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

The complaint charges Harley-Davidson and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Harley-Davidson and its subsidiaries produce heavyweight motorcycles, offer a line of motorcycle parts, accessories, apparel and general merchandise and provide wholesale and retail financing and insurance programs primarily to Harley-Davidson dealers and customers.

The complaint alleges that due to defendants' efforts, by 1997 demand for Harley-Davidson motorcycles was significantly outpacing supply. With its motorcycles intentionally kept in short supply, by 2000, Harley-Davidson's dealers were able to charge 20% premiums over MSRP and to keep some customers waiting up to 18 months for delivery. This confluence of the opportunity for premium sales and the shortage of motorcycles provided Harley-Davidson with a large modicum of control over its dealers. Dealers who did not toe the line faced falling out of grace with Harley-Davidson and could see their allotment of new and hot selling models shrink. Defendants' ability to force shipments on dealers was also aided by the perception that the Company's motorcycles were in short supply so any disclosure that certain dealers were overloaded would also have adversely affected Harley-Davidson's ability to force other dealers to accept additional inventory. As alleged in the complaint, as dealers' showroom floors were crammed to full capacity, the premium markups on motorcycle prices dealers had become accustomed to receiving dried up and they were forced to slash prices. As a result, Harley-Davidson's ability to force motorcycle deliveries on its dealers dissipated. Then on April 13, 2005, defendants disclosed that Harley-Davidson would be forced to cut production of new 2005 motorcycles, cutting 10,000 motorcycles in the second quarter of 2005 alone, due to declining demand and burgeoning inventories at its dealers.

According to the complaint, during the Class Period, as defendants continued reporting quarter after quarter of "record" revenues and earnings, promising mid-teen earnings per share growth rates in fiscal 2005 and that Harley-Davidson would break the psychological barrier of shipping 400,000 new motorcycles by 2007, Harley-Davidson's stock price traded at inflated levels, increasing to as high as $63.75 on July 14, 2004. During this same period, defendants caused Harley-Davidson to repurchase 10.6 million shares for $564 million in fiscal 2004 and another 2.9 million shares for over $175 million during the first quarter of 2005, further driving up the Company's stock price. Meanwhile, the Company's top officers and directors sold almost $92 million worth of their own shares, including the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer who sold over $50 million worth of Harley-Davidson stock himself. Then, on the April 13, 2005 disclosure, the Company's stock price plummeted by 16.7% in a single trading session, or $9.84 per share, and would fall a total of 22% by April 15, 2005. Over $3.6 billion in market capitalization was erased.

The complaint alleges that the true facts, which were known by each of the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) demand for Harley-Davidson motorcycles was declining and the Company's market share was shrinking; (b) the number of unsold 2004 and 2005 model year motorcycles in dealer inventories was growing exponentially; and (c) over-stocked inventories were running down the price dealers could obtain for new motorcycles.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Harley-Davidson publicly traded securities during the Class Period (the "Class"). The plaintiff is represented by Lerach Coughlin, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

Lerach Coughlin, a 150-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Houston, Philadelphia and Seattle, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations. Lerach Coughlin lawyers have been responsible for more than $20 billion in aggregate recoveries. The Lerach Coughlin Web site (http://www.lerachlaw.com) has more information about the firm.