The fall of Kona Bikes :(

[rothwem]

Originally Posted by buddybikes

Have to tell pathetic self as I ride with a little power, getting exercise, enjoying life, keeping my A1c down, that this isn't recreational.

I swear I'm not being snarky--is there any reason why you couldn't do that on a regular bike?

[ridethecliche]

Originally Posted by rothwem

I swear I'm not being snarky--is there any reason why you couldn't do that on a regular bike?

I think that riding on the road requires being able to ride at a certain speed for safety even if it's for short periods of time. If I haven't ridden in a while, I end up riding the trainer for a while till I feel comfortable outside again. I feel like a liability if I'm riding outdoors and am out of shape.

Others can't exert themselves since they may not be able to get their heart rate up past a certain level.

There are a lot of reasons why someone might want the assist.

One of my supervisors used to race a ton when she was in grad school but now has an e-assist road bike and said that it lets her ride with her husband or just at a level where she can exert herself without going over.

Everyone has different goals. I'm just stoked to see folks getting out and getting exercise and fresh air.

[ridethecliche]

I'm kind of in a weird spot here but even though I know the effects of inflation and bike tech and..... etc.

I still can't get over the fact that I bought a race-able caad9 with 105 for 1300 and that was a frame that was recently tour-ridden.

I think the market has changed where the trickle down effect doesn't quite work the same way, but I really do think that the increase in integration and tech has really pushed price of bikes up like crazy.

IIRC a full DA with zipp supersix was like what... 6.5k? Now you'd be hard pressed to get a top of the line bike from them for 10k which is inflation adjusted-ish.

I know there's a huge difference in tech here since that top of the line bike now has electronic shifting, is more aero, disc, etc etc etc. But I think it still alienates people to see things that are that expensive. I think on average, wages haven't really kept up with inflation much so the average person feels the pinch more than ever and it further makes things like bikes look elitist.

In reality, I think things are the result of poor planning. Thinking the demand during and post pandemic would keep up. It happened in so many industries including musical instruments, like with fender, that things grew too fast, then they slashed and burned when reality started to set in.

That said, I'm a little bummed that I wasn't really in place to capitalize on some of these sales. It would have been nice to have bought a fully modern fleet for the price I've paid for my cobbled together used bikes/parts.

[benb]

Bikes have gone sideways a lot the last 10 years, then they had to spend a whole bunch more money to try and make sure they didn't get slower as they went sideways.

You see the same model of bike now versus the one 10 years ago and the new one gained a ton of weight from the disc brakes + electronic groupsets, then they worked to minimize that weight gain. As a result in the same model you're often paying for a higher grade of Carbon in the frame/fork and you're paying for fancier cockpit bits made of carbon along with carbon wheelsets whereas that same bike 8-10 years ago would have had alloy wheels. The new one will still be heavier but the price went into making it 500g heavier instead of 2000-2500g heavier.

[krooj]

Originally Posted by ridethecliche

I'm kind of in a weird spot here but even though I know the effects of inflation and bike tech and..... etc.

I still can't get over the fact that I bought a race-able caad9 with 105 for 1300 and that was a frame that was recently tour-ridden.

I think the market has changed where the trickle down effect doesn't quite work the same way, but I really do think that the increase in integration and tech has really pushed price of bikes up like crazy.

IIRC a full DA with zipp supersix was like what... 6.5k? Now you'd be hard pressed to get a top of the line bike from them for 10k which is inflation adjusted-ish.

I know there's a huge difference in tech here since that top of the line bike now has electronic shifting, is more aero, disc, etc etc etc. But I think it still alienates people to see things that are that expensive. I think on average, wages haven't really kept up with inflation much so the average person feels the pinch more than ever and it further makes things like bikes look elitist.

In reality, I think things are the result of poor planning. Thinking the demand during and post pandemic would keep up. It happened in so many industries including musical instruments, like with fender, that things grew too fast, then they slashed and burned when reality started to set in.

That said, I'm a little bummed that I wasn't really in place to capitalize on some of these sales. It would have been nice to have bought a fully modern fleet for the price I've paid for my cobbled together used bikes/parts.

I was reflecting on this the other day - like, I got my $1500CAD CAAD9 with 105 (Ultegra RD!) back in ... 06? Realistically, I could've kept that thing going with various group and wheel changes until about 2 years ago, but the whiplash at seeing what a modern equivalent would cost ... staggering; maybe 6~9k? That price bracket significantly outpaces inflation, so either the margins on those old bikes were razor thin or we're being bilked as a consequence of easy money that's been flowing at near-zero interest rates since '08 or so.

The more disturbing aspect is how normalized this pricing has become, but I guess you don't notice it with the steady drip of purchases over the course of 20+ years.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by krooj

I was reflecting on this the other day - like, I got my $1500CAD CAAD9 with 105 (Ultegra RD!) back in ... 06? Realistically, I could've kept that thing going with various group and wheel changes until about 2 years ago, but the whiplash at seeing what a modern equivalent would cost ... staggering; maybe 6~9k? That price bracket significantly outpaces inflation, so either the margins on those old bikes were razor thin or we're being bilked as a consequence of easy money that's been flowing at near-zero interest rates since '08 or so.

The more disturbing aspect is how normalized this pricing has become, but I guess you don't notice it with the steady drip of purchases over the course of 20+ years.

I don't can't possibly imagine what $6-9k modern bike you consider to be "equivalent" to a CAAD 9 with 105. You can get a CAAD Optimo rim brake bike with 11 speed 105 for $1625 MSRP. You can get a CAAD 13 disc brake with 11 speed 105 for $2325 MSRP. You can even get a Supersix Evo with disc brake 11 speed 105 for $3,225.

If you're looking at a Supersix Evo Hi-Mod Disc with 12 speed Ultegra Di2 and carbon wheels (MSRP $8,050) and thinking that's somehow the equivalent of a CAAD 9, then your sense of equivalence is not based on product attributes, engineering costs, or production costs.

[unterhausen]

It looks to me that the owners did the vulture capitalist thing where they get a big loan to pay the executive's golden parachutes and leave the companies with the debt. Hasn't fully played out yet, but that's pretty standard.

[krooj]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I don't can't possibly imagine what $6-9k modern bike you consider to be "equivalent" to a CAAD 9 with 105. You can get a CAAD Optimo rim brake bike with 11 speed 105 for $1625 MSRP. You can get a CAAD 13 disc brake with 11 speed 105 for $2325 MSRP. You can even get a Supersix Evo with disc brake 11 speed 105 for $3,225.

If you're looking at a Supersix Evo Hi-Mod Disc with 12 speed Ultegra Di2 and carbon wheels (MSRP $8,050) and thinking that's somehow the equivalent of a CAAD 9, then your sense of equivalence is not based on product attributes, engineering costs, or production costs.

Maybe my stated ranges are too high, but my point here was that, in 2006 a CAAD9 with 105 was the sweet spot for what a serious enthusiast would consider to be an acceptable state-of-the-art road bike, and those were not extremely expensive bikes. Today, you'd be looking at an SL8, Aethos, or maybe Allez, which start around $4k. So we're in a situation where these bikes' pricing has far outpaced inflation, everything is made in the far east, so labour costs are significantly reduced - you'd expect greater margins to come out of all that.

We're seeing a correction of sorts - just browse Trek's website - but I don't think we're anywhere near bottom.

All of this is different from the whole Kona situation, which just sounds like scummy VC and even worse management. I always pegged Kona as a roach of the cycling industry - un-killable.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by krooj

Maybe my stated ranges are too high, but my point here was that, in 2006 a CAAD9 with 105 was the sweet spot for what a serious enthusiast would consider to be an acceptable state-of-the-art road bike, and those were not extremely expensive bikes. Today, you'd be looking at an SL8, Aethos, or maybe Allez, which start around $4k. So we're in a situation where these bikes' pricing has far outpaced inflation, everything is made in the far east, so labour costs are significantly reduced - you'd expect greater margins to come out of all that.

I'm not sure that your comparison is valid. A CAAD 9 with 105 would not have been considered a "state-of-the-art" bike, even in 2006. It has an aluminum frame and the lowest "enthusiast level" group set, so it would be more likely be considered an entry-level race bike. The closest modern comparison would probably be the Cannondale CAAD 13 Disc 105, which is the direct descendant of the CAAD9. You reported earlier that the CAAD9 with 105 was about $1500 in 2006. According to this inflation calculator, this would be $2334 in today's dollars. This almost exactly the same as the $2325 price tag on the CAAD 13 disc 105.

[vertr]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

This almost exactly the same as the $2325 price tag on the CAAD 13 disc 105.

Right, every time I see someone do the actual math the pricing changes are bang-on for inflation aside from the absolute top of the market.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by vertr

Right, every time I see someone do the actual math the pricing changes are bang-on for inflation aside from the absolute top of the market.

Yup. Aside from a few covid blips, the real cost of bikes has been stable or coming down.

The issue is that there has been a lot of advancement at the top so people who want to ride the same bikes the pros are riding have to pay a lot more. This can create social pressures where people buying bikes based on some perceived status feel they have to spend more money to maintain the same perceived status level of their bike.

This is a real phenomenon, particularly in a competitive environment like racing, but it's a very different phenomenon than "inflation."

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by prototoast

Yup. Aside from a few covid blips, the real cost of bikes has been stable or coming down.

While getting a much better machine, at the same time.

CAAD 9 was great, but, the new bike will have more tire clearance, probably ride nicer, disc brakes, 11/12-speed and better gear ranges, and so on.

[litcrazy]

I do think folks want to present inflation as the same item for the same price.

No one is asking what the price of an iPhone 10 is right now. They compare the newest iPhone in 2024 to the newest iPhone in 2014. They don’t say inflation doesn’t apply because it has a bigger screen, faster processor and additional cameras. Likewise when considering the cost of automobiles, I don’t see the same consideration of trying to adjust inflation consideration to subtract technological advances.

This apples to apples comparison strategy seems to lose track of why road cycling is perceived as less and less accessible. I think that comparing an aluminum bike from 2006 to a carbon bike in 2024 isn’t particularly unreasonable when you look at market share.

I fear this kind of thinking will create blindspots in the industry that will just make road cycling more and more out of touch from most people in the same way skiing has gone. With the continuing trickle done effect that more and more people will view bikes on roads as at best a nuisance and at worst trespassers.

[mstateglfr]

Originally Posted by litcrazy

I do think folks want to present inflation as the same item for the same price.

No one is asking what the price of an iPhone 10 is right now. They compare the newest iPhone in 2024 to the newest iPhone in 2014. They don’t say inflation doesn’t apply because it has a bigger screen, faster processor and additional cameras. Likewise when considering the cost of automobiles, I don’t see the same consideration of trying to adjust inflation consideration to subtract technological advances.

This apples to apples comparison strategy seems to lose track of why road cycling is perceived as less and less accessible. I think that comparing an aluminum bike from 2006 to a carbon bike in 2024 isn’t particularly unreasonable when you look at market share.

I fear this kind of thinking will create blindspots in the industry that will just make road cycling more and more out of touch from most people in the same way skiing has gone. With the continuing trickle done effect that more and more people will view bikes on roads as at best a nuisance and at worst trespassers.

I partly see the point you are making and partly don't understand it at all.
Your comment about not being able to compare apples to aolles because the tech is fundamentally different is a good one, and I referenced that in a post I just made about 105 now compared to 105 bike from 5 years ago.

I don't understand why you conclude this creates blinds spots in the industry though. I think the industry is very aware of the consequences of advancing tech and addresses those consequences in varying ways.
- SRAM for the road has clearly said 'we don't care' about offering less expensive options.
- Shimano for the road has clearly said 'we partly don't care, but we also partly do care, oh and here is some sort of universal plug-n-play tech that we think will work for the less expensive end of the market'.
- Campy has clearly said 'ci preoccupiamo solo dei vecchi ricchi'.
- And brands like Microshift, ltwoo, and Sensah have clearly said 'we will fill the void and maybe convince users to them upgrade to our more advanced tech later on'.


I really don't think this is a blind spot to the industry.
You can still buy a major brand road bike for under $1k, not discounted- Trek domane al2. One of my kids has had one of those for 4 years now and even trained for and rode an ironman on it.
Road cycling can be very accessible still.

[litcrazy]

I agree that there are deals out there and one can break into the sport on a budget. I do it by riding last decade's technology. But I think there's a lot of momentum against it.

I hear reports of a real like of enthusiasm from shops when friends go looking for those bikes when they feel they've outgrown their hybrid or want to ride more once their kids are older and less dependent on them.

Likewise, my college aged son reports quite a bit of snobbery towards lower tier bikes and/or disbelief about the functionality of those bikes provided the right (human) motor among his riding peers.

I know I'll be told cassettes and chains are so much better now, but I can't get my brain around the cost a new twelve speed chain and cassette. And prices have started to come down.

I just broke into 10 speed with my friction shifters, so I know it can be down, but the I fear the increased cost of the cool bikes in the magazine gear reviews and in the shops is awfully off-putting and isn't helping grow the sport.