Has anyone seen a news bulletin or memo on the reasoning behind listing this charge up front now, on their website? I know what a destination charge is, and the need to cover these expenses as a manufacturer. A brief look at other manufacturer's websites show that they are not listing this charge at this time. I am curious as to the reasoning for the change of policy. In my experience, the cost is hidden in the MSRP, or it is a part of the haggling that goes on after a purchase when a person negotiates all the incidentals a dealer wishes to add to the sales price. Perhaps a coy way to keep MSRP prices low by segregating costs? But that is speculation on my part. Has anyone seen the Honda explanation? I believe the other manufacturer's will soon follow. For reference, a Honda XR650L destination charge is $310. A Chevy cruze is $795. A Ford F350 is $995. I mention these other vehicles not to make this a math debate (2 XRL's = 1 Cruze, or 3 F350's to ship) or some tutorial in shipping practices, but to highlight the relative cost that is now part of any Honda bike purchase, which to my mind's eye, is not negotiable. Which would be a better way to sell a Honda? $7000 XRL, or a $6600 XRL (and add destination fees later)? I have my preference, but I'd like to know how Honda explains this. Thanks.