Gather ye Mootses while ye may

[alexstar]

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/north-america/2015/10/01/miller-sells-moots-cycles-brent-whittington


Miller sells Moots Cycles to Brent Whittington
Published October 1, 2015
by BRAIN Staff

STEAMBOAT SPRINGS, Colo. (BRAIN) Moots Cycles announced Thursday that longtime owner Chris Miller has sold the titanium bike and component manufacturer to Brent Whittington, a former executive officer for Windstream Holdings, Inc, a Fortune 500 telecommunications company.

Whittington, a passionate mountain biker and road cyclist, purchased a 100 percent ownership stake in the company along with the Moots factory building in Steamboat Springs. Moots' world headquarters will remain there and all current employees, including company president Butch Boucher, will remain in place, the company said.

"It's incredible for me to have this unique opportunity to own one of the most respected cycling brands in the industry," said Whittington. "I'm excited to help the Moots team continue to develop their innovative designs as the brand prepares to celebrate its 35th anniversary in 2016. Maintaining its high quality standards, focusing on its handcrafted heritage and helping to support its talented team will be my main priorities as we embark on the next level of growth and service with our customers, dealer partners and distributor partners worldwide."

Miller said, "I'm very pleased to pass the Moots torch to an individual who possesses both a true love of cycling and a great depth of business experience ... Brent embodies everything we were looking for in the new Moots owner. The energy, skill set and business experiences he'll bring to Moots will continue to keep Moots a strong industry brand and certainly signifies a bright future for the company."

Boucher said, "Since Chris purchased Moots in 1995, the company has experienced steady growth, elevated innovation standards in titanium bikes and positioned itself well for continued success ... It's definitely an exciting time for everyone at Moots and I'm looking forward to leading this business as we begin a new chapter."

Whittington, 44, served as COO at Windstream Holdings from 2009 to 2014. He oversaw the company's business sales and service, network operations, engineering, information technology and enterprise marketing. Prior to that role, he served as executive vice president and CFO of Windstream from 2005 to 2009. He has been an independent director at RigNet, Inc., a leading global provider of digital technology solutions to the oil and gas industry, since 2010. He serves on the board of trustees of The Nature Conservancy of Arkansas.

The sale is effective immediately. Financial terms were not disclosed.

[beeatnik]

Yikez

[oldpotatoe]

Yikez

Chris Miller is a member of the Disney family and was very hands off when it came to the day to day Moots operations. That left up to guys like Butch and Jon Carivou.

[cat6]

Chris Miller is a member of the Disney family and was very hands off when it came to the day to day Moots operations. That left up to guys like Butch and Jon Carivou.

So then that means it could be a bad thing that he's sold it. Perhaps Brent Whittington will not be so hands off.

[FlashUNC]

The times they are a-changin'.

[SoCalSteve]

From the press release, it seems like nothing will change except ownership. Did you guys read something into this that I didn't? And, why fix some thin' that ain't broke?

[xjahx]

All acquisitions and change in ownership promise no change in structure, operation, or administration. 6-12 months later, time often reveals a significant change from these initial promises.

I stopped by th IF factory the other day in Somerville, the physical location that is. It is now my Brazilian Jiu Jitsu gym.

[beeatnik]

wonder what the sales price was

[charliedid]

I suspect it will be easier than ever to get a MOOTS...no need to hoard.

[Mikej]

If "nothing will change" is true it will be the first time in history.

[texbike]

Changes will definitely happen! I've had a chance to interact with Brent while he was at Windstream and the guy is solid and incredibly sharp. I think he'll be able to do a lot for the company from a distribution and marketing perspective as well as back-office systems.

I just hope that he doesn't try to make Moots into a Lynskey or move it from Steamboat.

Texbike

[MattTuck]

Interesting. Sounds like a bit of a vanity project...

Has there ever been a case when a bike manufacturer is sold and they do awesome afterward?

[texbike]

Has there ever been a case when a bike manufacturer is sold and they do awesome afterward?

Moots.

Texbike

[beeatnik]

Changes will definitely happen! I've had a chance to interact with Brent while he was at Windstream and the guy is solid and incredibly sharp. I think he'll be able to do a lot for the company from a distribution and marketing perspective as well as back-office systems.

I just hope that he doesn't try to make Moots into a Lynskey or move it from Steamboat.

Texbike

Let's hope he doesn't think Ti bikas can be a billion dollar play.

[AngryScientist]

I dont know how old Brent is, but maybe; just maybe he's taking this on as a "retirement project" and just thinks it's hella cool to own Moots. Not A moots, but moots.

[texbike]

Let's hope he doesn't think Ti bikas can be a billion dollar play.

Yeah, I think he's smarter than that. Let's hope. :)

I dont know how old Brent is, but maybe; just maybe he's taking this on as a "retirement project" and just thinks it's hella cool to own Moots. Not A moots, but moots.

Not exactly sure how old he is, but I'd guess mid to late 40s. He definitely seems to have done well enough for himself to take on a "retirement" project that he has a passion for. He was at Windstream as an executive for many years so I would guess that he's done alright. However, their stock has taken a nasty beating over the past year...

Texbike

[Cameron]

I dont know how old Brent is...
Not exactly sure how old he is, but I'd guess mid to late 40s.

Whittington, 44, served as COO at Windstream Holdings from 2009 to 2014.

44 according to the article.

[tumbler]

It looks like he had his job eliminated not too long ago. I'm sure there will be changes, but unless Moots was a bloated disaster of a business (doesn't sound like it), hopefully he will keep things moving the way they have been and with the same people.

http://www.fiercetelecom.com/story/windstream-coo-whittington-resign-company-realigns-top-management-team/2014-08-20

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/08/26/number-of-chief-operating-officers-declining/14644255/

[campy man]

Just the other day I was researching some info old Serotta catalogs. Afterwards, I was thinking where did Serotta go wrong? :bike:

Wishing Moots good luck as they enter a new era :beer:

[texbike]

44 according to the article.

Hmmm. Crazy what reading can do for you.... :)

[FlashUNC]

From the press release, it seems like nothing will change except ownership. Did you guys read something into this that I didn't? And, why fix some thin' that ain't broke?

Its an acquisition with a new guy at the top. There's always change.

Sometimes it works brilliantly -- IF is a perfect example -- but its impossible to ignore that there isn't change. Heck, without that move, Firefly doesn't exist. That was a win-win-win all around.

Doesn't mean the business fails -- Competitive Cyclist I think is an example of change that wasn't necessarily terrible, but not a home run either -- but the Moots we know today won't be the Moots we'll see 18-24 months from now.

[SoCalSteve]

Its an acquisition with a new guy at the top. There's always change.

Sometimes it works brilliantly -- IF is a perfect example -- but its impossible to ignore that there isn't change. Heck, without that move, Firefly doesn't exist. That was a win-win-win all around.

Doesn't mean the business fails -- Competitive Cyclist I think is an example of change that wasn't necessarily terrible, but not a home run either -- but the Moots we know today won't be the Moots we'll see 18-24 months from now.

Curious how you think it will change?

[beeatnik]

I've always liked Moots's style. Heck (first time I've ever used that word!), I'm a 2x owner. If new ownership means more of the same, great! If new ownership means, more cats on ti bikas, that's awesome as well. Every now and then the little guy becomes Apple.

[Butch]

Please take a second to read this.
I think most of you know I have been here doing various things for a few years, 19 to be exact. There are a number of us who are long term employees who have taken great pride in working together to build Moots to where it is today. Chris, who owned the company for 20 years, really supported us to manage and run the company with the primary goal of building the best products possible, while being a business. Chris is our friend, he has watched several of us get married and has seen our kids grow. For several years Chris' body hasn't cooperated to allow him to enjoy the products we make and ride. Keep in mind he finished 2nd and 4th at Leadville back in his prime with company rides were faster for it. So it became time to move on. When he decided to sell the company it was of the highest importance to him and his wife to find the right fit.
As a group we were involved with how the company was presented, what we stand for, who were are and the pride we take in our work each day. Brent gets this. He embraces it and he wants to live it. He rides a lot. Yes he is a businessman, a successful one at that. As many do, he woke up one day and realized there is more to life than the cooperate world and figured out an exit. Travelling the country with his family with a camper they came to Moots and took a tour and saw what we are about, and he asked. I was the first person he talked to. If I or anyone else here had second thoughts, there would have been plenty of noise. I can be noisy.
Everyone will speculate, that is what the internet is for right? I have spent a lot of time with Brent and you can chose whether to believe me or not, but he wants nothing more than to see us keep doing what we do. He has stood in front of us and made this clear to the entire company and I believe him. He is a good man who is a good rider who believes in US manufacturing and he wants to be part of it and to help us thrive. He bought the building so we are staying put. The first words out of his mouth this morning at our company meeting were "the most important thing I support is to maintain and elevate the quality of the work you do. This is our strength". Then we went around the room, all 23 of us stating how long we worked here and why we work here. Pride is hard to quantify, but that was a room full of it. This feels right.
If anyone has any questions, please email me. I don't go on here all the time, I knew this would bring out some folks, so don't think I am ignoring a comment. I have a job and I need to ride.

butch@moots

[beeatnik]

Butch, I like your rare earth metal style.

[texbike]

Please take a second to read this.
I think most of you know I have been here doing various things for a few years, 19 to be exact. There are a number of us who are long term employees who have taken great pride in working together to build Moots to where it is today. Chris, who owned the company for 20 years, really supported us to manage and run the company with the primary goal of building the best products possible, while being a business. Chris is our friend, he has watched several of us get married and has seen our kids grow. For several years Chris' body hasn't cooperated to allow him to enjoy the products we make and ride. Keep in mind he finished 2nd and 4th at Leadville back in his prime with company rides were faster for it. So it became time to move on. When he decided to sell the company it was of the highest importance to him and his wife to find the right fit.
As a group we were involved with how the company was presented, what we stand for, who were are and the pride we take in our work each day. Brent gets this. He embraces it and he wants to live it. He rides a lot. Yes he is a businessman, a successful one at that. As many do, he woke up one day and realized there is more to life than the cooperate world and figured out an exit. Travelling the country with his family with a camper they came to Moots and took a tour and saw what we are about, and he asked. I was the first person he talked to. If I or anyone else here had second thoughts, there would have been plenty of noise. I can be noisy.
Everyone will speculate, that is what the internet is for right? I have spent a lot of time with Brent and you can chose whether to believe me or not, but he wants nothing more than to see us keep doing what we do. He has stood in front of us and made this clear to the entire company and I believe him. He is a good man who is a good rider who believes in US manufacturing and he wants to be part of it and to help us thrive. He bought the building so we are staying put. The first words out of his mouth this morning at our company meeting were "the most important thing I support is to maintain and elevate the quality of the work you do. This is our strength". Then we went around the room, all 23 of us stating how long we worked here and why we work here. Pride is hard to quantify, but that was a room full of it. This feels right.
If anyone has any questions, please email me. I don't go on here all the time, I knew this would bring out some folks, so don't think I am ignoring a comment. I have a job and I need to ride.

butch@moots

Thanks for the post Butch. I wish you guys a TON of success under the new ownership! I'll be in Steamboat over the winter for a bit of skiing and hope to have a chance to stop by and see the birthplace of my Vamoots.

Ride'On!

Texbike

[FlashUNC]

Curious how you think it will change?

Its impossible to say at this point. But from Butch's comment above, the new owner seems to believe in where they are now and the general direction they're headed in. That doesn't mean over time he won't have his own ideas about how to grow the business or tweaks that may need to be made. I'm not suggesting you'll see Moots' in Target in two years, or that this will even be a negative.

Even leadership changes in this industry that were perceived as a negative at the time -- IF as a prime example -- have turned out to be great moves in hindsight.

But change is inevitable, just by the fact you're bringing in a new head honcho with his own vision for doing things. I've been through a couple leadership changes in my current job. Has the company changed its core mission? No. Have we changed to fit the perspective of the guy running the show and what we should emphasize, what we should de-emphasize and where we need to go in the future? Absolutely.

If everything is aligned, I imagine we'll look back at this as a great day for Moots. But even if its a wild success, there'll still be change.

[sw3759]

thanks Butch for taking the time to share your thoughts.i was a little surprised and curious when I saw the email from Moots earlier today re the sale.
lots of Moots lovers here at the Paceline .

[fuzzalow]

I am an optimist and I say that the Moots as we know it today will be fundamentally unaltered under its new ownership. Why? Because there is a resurgence and pride to niche products made in the USA from companies like Moots that have a reason for being because of just what they are, marquee products. It doesn't hurt that marquee products also enjoy greater margins than the typical big-box-bike manufacturer. But I doubt the new owner bought Moots as a vehicle to get rich - there are plenty of better plays to do that if he were just chasing money.

Corporate America is great but it always comes at a cost. Completely understandable that sometimes having a company to be proud of and makes things other than book entries might be a welcome home for a return to reality for the lucky few that are able to choose.

Best of luck and fortune to Moots and Mr. Whittington.

[scpknees]

All speculation should now be squashed. I'm all in for another moots someday soon I hope.

[Climb01742]

Every once in awhile, the stars and the right people align. As Butch's post lays out, this might be one of those times. I think the new owner deserves our open minds and best wishes. He and everyone at Moots have mine.

[Keith A]

Butch -- Thanks for taking the time to share what's going on at Moots.

[Matthew]

I appreciate the comments Butch. As an owner of two Moots that I love, I was a bit concerned when I clicked on this thread. Thanks for chiming in and squashing my fears. I wish you and the company many more years of success. Sincerely, Matthew.

[Johnnyg]

Interesting. Sounds like a bit of a vanity project...

Has there ever been a case when a bike manufacturer is sold and they do awesome afterward?
Yes Independent Fabrication

[velomonkey]

Yes Independent Fabrication

Not sure that is widely accepted. I will say that so far it seems IF isn't pulling a Serotta, or Fat Chance, or Litespeed or . . . .

[cat6]

No one is going to buy a company and not try to make their mark, I'm sure he's got some ideas for the future. Good or bad, time will tell, but staying the same is not going to happen.

[jlwdm]

Not sure that is widely accepted. I will say that so far it seems IF isn't pulling a Serotta, or Fat Chance, or Litespeed or . . . .

Really? IF would have died years ago without new ownership.

Glad to see the post from Butch and sorry to see the negative, speculative posts prior to Butch's post.

Jeff

[oldpotatoe]

So then that means it could be a bad thing that he's sold it. Perhaps Brent Whittington will not be so hands off.

Geee....been like 25 hours or so. I don't know. Butch and and all really have their stuff in one sock. AND they are all staying.

[oldpotatoe]

Please take a second to read this.
I think most of you know I have been here doing various things for a few years, 19 to be exact. There are a number of us who are long term employees who have taken great pride in working together to build Moots to where it is today. Chris, who owned the company for 20 years, really supported us to manage and run the company with the primary goal of building the best products possible, while being a business. Chris is our friend, he has watched several of us get married and has seen our kids grow. For several years Chris' body hasn't cooperated to allow him to enjoy the products we make and ride. Keep in mind he finished 2nd and 4th at Leadville back in his prime with company rides were faster for it. So it became time to move on. When he decided to sell the company it was of the highest importance to him and his wife to find the right fit.
As a group we were involved with how the company was presented, what we stand for, who were are and the pride we take in our work each day. Brent gets this. He embraces it and he wants to live it. He rides a lot. Yes he is a businessman, a successful one at that. As many do, he woke up one day and realized there is more to life than the cooperate world and figured out an exit. Travelling the country with his family with a camper they came to Moots and took a tour and saw what we are about, and he asked. I was the first person he talked to. If I or anyone else here had second thoughts, there would have been plenty of noise. I can be noisy.
Everyone will speculate, that is what the internet is for right? I have spent a lot of time with Brent and you can chose whether to believe me or not, but he wants nothing more than to see us keep doing what we do. He has stood in front of us and made this clear to the entire company and I believe him. He is a good man who is a good rider who believes in US manufacturing and he wants to be part of it and to help us thrive. He bought the building so we are staying put. The first words out of his mouth this morning at our company meeting were "the most important thing I support is to maintain and elevate the quality of the work you do. This is our strength". Then we went around the room, all 23 of us stating how long we worked here and why we work here. Pride is hard to quantify, but that was a room full of it. This feels right.
If anyone has any questions, please email me. I don't go on here all the time, I knew this would bring out some folks, so don't think I am ignoring a comment. I have a job and I need to ride.

butch@moots

Thanks Butch, "I can be noisy". like your style. I really get worn out when anybody puts Moots, the ownership change and 'serotta' in the same sentence. Apples and orangutans. Moots is in the 'do one thing and do it well' mode and will be. I don't worry about their future at all.

[ldamelio]

Thanks Butch, "I can be noisy". like your style. I really get worn out when anybody puts Moots, the ownership change and 'serotta' in the same sentence. Apples and orangutans. Moots is in the 'do one thing and do it well' mode and will be. I don't worry about their future at all.

This - Serotta got caught in a no mans land with too much diversification of product. Custom metal frames are a narrow niche to begin with. They diluted their panache with the off the shelf frames. The off the shelf, in turn, were were by and large priced too high to sell and aiming at a non-existent niche in the day and age of carbon. Next, their carbon bike not only missed their traditional market but was very overpriced. Finally, they would build damn near anything a client or misguided fitter asked for, so there were a fair number going out with circus geometry that further diminished their credibility. In 1990, I lusted after one but couldn't afford one. By 2005, I didn't know what the heck they were anymore. This is the consumer perspective - from the interwebs, I understand that there were a number of business gaffes also.

In any event, from Butch's post, I'm reassured about the short and intermediate term future of Moots.

[weisan]

Thanks Butch pal for giving us some insight to the inside story.
Some of my pals here need to be cognizant or aware of their tendency to be skeptical or suspicious. We need to be slow or at least slower to judge until we have further evidence or back by solid data. Don't let your own insecurity or bias color everything that you see or read. A lot of things exist somewhere in the middle. Yes, the mass media and the news that we read everyday almost gives us the impression that we are living at the brink..and it's true, there are people and places where extremities are encountered or meted out unjustly and we should never be indifferent to their plight... but that doesn't immediately imply that it's true everywhere or for everyone.

I actually have a pretty good feeling after reading the press release. I don't have any insider information or personal acquaintance with the people involved but... I just feel good about it taking at face value.

[fuzzalow]

Of course, I have absolutely no knowledge as to the inner workings, intentions or strategy held by Mr. Whittington with regard to how he might handle the goals and direction of Moots. And neither do any of the contributors to this thread, save Butch to a limited degree, although it is fun to speculate.

Investors that buy companies are all over the map for what they might do afterwards. But this does not inevitably mean they must make their ownership known by changing things around brashly as a display of authority, or ego, or the misguided belief that they can revamp an already well-run business. It can be completely hands off as is often evident in Warren Buffet's acquisitions or it can be scorched earth as seen in Chris Hughes' disastrous ownership of The New Republic. Or somewhere in between.

I say this only because I agree with the sentiment of weisan-pal in the post above - I am in disagreement with the general sentiment of many of this thread that express a dim view of investment & investors as yet further machinations of rapacious, incompetent and destructive capitalism in a sentiment bordering on class warfare misapprehensions.

Give the man a chance.

[velomonkey]

in a sentiment bordering on class warfare misapprehensions.

Give the man a chance.

Just a little bit over dramatic.

[MattTuck]

Let's keep in mind that this forum basks in the background radiation of Serotta's explosion (implosion?)....

Yes, there are all types of owners and this transaction may be a good one for Moots... but the Serotta story is uniquely and singularly woven into the fabric of this particular place, and that shapes many people's views more than their views on capitalism.

[fuzzalow]

Just a little bit over dramatic.

I wrote it and put it out there. You can react and respond any way you like. There's no insight into anything more about what's behind your thinking, other than you gave a disparaging opinion of what I wrote.

No problem. Contribute in your own way and at your own level.

[fuzzalow]

Let's keep in mind that this forum basks in the background radiation of Serotta's explosion (implosion?)....

Yes, there are all types of owners and this transaction may be a good one for Moots... but the Serotta story is uniquely and singularly woven into the fabric of this particular place, and that shapes many people's views more than their views on capitalism.

Serotta, inextricably woven with the motivations, incompetence and travails of Ben is a cluster unto itself. That entire soap opera could not be reprised no matter how anyone else might try.

[yngpunk]

Just a little bit over dramatic.

This is fuzzalow...maybe a verbose and/or loquacious

[velomonkey]

I wrote it and put it out there. You can react and respond any way you like. There's no insight into anything more about what's behind your thinking, other than you gave a disparaging opinion of what I wrote.

No problem. Contribute in your own way and at your own level.

I think that was a long way of you saying I can say what I want. Thanks.

In an industry replete with buyouts of companies who make artisan goods where new management then broadened the product offering and sacrifce quality for the sake of higher margins to accuse those with trepidation of class warfare is at best over dramatic and disparaging - it's frankly a bit churlish, too.

As for me in this particular case, trust, but verify. We should all be so lucky to have purchased a small brand and turned into a national brand with a highly regarded product and then sold the company for a profit.

[fuzzalow]

This is fuzzalow...maybe a verbose and/or loquacious

HaHa! I prefer nuanced and comprehensive. But I'd also take the hit for verbose and/or loquacious too if you like. Sorta comes with the turf and depends who's reading (shrugs).

C'mon, gimme a break, you want endless posts that amount to a bunch a guys tellin' you what their favorite color is?

[Uncle Jam's Army]

Has there ever been a case when a bike manufacturer is sold and they do awesome afterward?

Yes, Moots. After Kent Eriksen sold it.

[fuzzalow]

I think that was a long way of you saying I can say what I want. Thanks.

In an industry replete with buyouts of companies who make artisan goods where new management then broadened the product offering and sacrifce quality for the sake of higher margins to accuse those with trepidation of class warfare is at best over dramatic and disparaging - it's frankly a bit churlish, too.

As for me in this particular case, trust, but verify. We should all be so lucky to have purchased a small brand and turned into a national brand with a highly regarded product and then sold the company for a profit.

Hey, you're expressing a point of view that I have no problem with. We're just talkin' here. I have reservations only about the portions of your views that wander into ad hominem for my position on the tone of prior posts, which imbued nothing pejorative to the persona of the posters themselves.

Hey, this isn't gonna presage a pile on or nod-nod wink-winks about Ignore List forum software functionality, is it? I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do anyway. Pull up a chair, we'll bat some ideas around, we'll have some fun.

[velomonkey]

Hey, you're expressing a point of view that I have no problem with. We're just talkin' here. I have reservations only about the portions of your views that wander into ad hominem for my position on the tone of prior posts, which imbued nothing pejorative to the persona of the posters themselves.



Imbued aside, you basically just said "I have no problem with what you said, but I have a problem with what you say" - you just added a bunch of other words around it.

As for you, the fuzz, I could never, ever quit you. Plus your bike is banging. You're a baller.

[fuzzalow]

Imbued aside, you basically just said "I have no problem with what you said, but I have a problem with what you say" - you just added a bunch of other words around it.

No, you missed it.

Attack my ideas all you want. Cool.

Calling what I wrote as over dramatic is a dig at me. Now I don't care one bit but you added nothing to the conversation other than to accuse me of melodrama.

Capish?

Oh, the exasperations in sharing common language. All fun & games velomonkey, your FF is baller too.

[echelon_john]

Group hug.

[texbike]

Big.Words.Make.Head.Hurt. Ouch!

[oldpotatoe]

Yes, Moots. After Kent Eriksen sold it.

That's a 'story' all onto itself also.

[AngryScientist]

how many people worked @ moots when kent sold, compared to now?

[velomonkey]

No, you missed it.

Attack my ideas all you want. Cool.

Calling what I wrote as over dramatic is a dig at me. Now I don't care one bit but you added nothing to the conversation other than to accuse me of melodrama.



Nope, nope my brother from another mother. You missed it. Again, this industry is replete with failed takeovers. So much so it's almost the rule. You said, these are your words, that at this point to speculate anything bad was class warfare.

I want to understand this: citing others as engaging in class warfare isn't disparaging, but claiming your argument as overly dramatic "adds nothing to the conversation." Bro, that makes no sense my man. Your logic falls flat.

You want to add to the conversation talk, specifically, how it might get better. Maybe we will get a ti-carbon bike. I dunno.

Citing a well-deserved trepidatious crowd as engaging in class warfare offers nothing to discussion. I just called you on it and you didn't like it.

[soulspinner]

Yes, Moots. After Kent Eriksen sold it.

:) This place is getting nitpicky and life is too short. Good answer. I wish Moots well but for that money in ti(needing custom) they arent on my radar now...

[Ralph]

I'm sure the new owner didn't spend all that money with intent to destroying his brand. New owners usually plan to take a newly acquired company to a new level. Maybe they have necessary capital to make it grow. And sure....it may be a different company in future. It takes a lot more than avid bike enthusiasts to grow a brand.

[Bob Ross]

No one is going to buy a company and not try to make their mark, I'm sure he's got some ideas for the future. Good or bad, time will tell, but staying the same is not going to happen.

I just don't see why that would have to be the case. Perhaps this is why I'm *not* an entrepreneur, but if I saw a successful company with a solid business plan that was respected in the industry, profitable, admirably ethical, and made a badass product, I would buy it in a heartbeat and DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Just sit back and let the money & accolades continue to roll in. 'tain't broke, why fix it?

[eric01]

This was a good thread up until folks started going after each other. Butch's post almost made me go buy a moots. Always wanted one

[fuzzalow]

Nope, nope my brother from another mother.

I've got the brains
You've got the looks
Let's make lots of money

-Pet Shop Boys

[Mikej]

Maybe Daddy big money buckets will get the 'gaitor in the Tour.

[shovelhd]

For Butch and the Moots fans. I was the pit referee at the Night Weasels CX race this week, one of the events in what's known as Holy Week in the Northeast. It's a non-UCI event but it draws world class racers like Ryan Trebon, Gabby Durrin and Katerina Nash. Neutral support was provided by Shimano and Moots. They had 8 or so Moots neutral rides available. Time after time as a rider came in to request a neutral bike, their reaction was one of "Holy crap. You really want to lend me this beautiful machine?". The respect for the brand is clearly there amongst the racing community.

Best of luck to Moots in the future. The industry and the consumer needs them.

[texbike]

I'm sure the new owner didn't spend all that money with intent to destroying his brand. New owners usually plan to take a newly acquired company to a new level. Maybe they have necessary capital to make it grow. And sure....it may be a different company in future. It takes a lot more than avid bike enthusiasts to grow a brand.

I just don't see why that would have to be the case. Perhaps this is why I'm *not* an entrepreneur, but if I saw a successful company with a solid business plan that was respected in the industry, profitable, admirably ethical, and made a badass product, I would buy it in a heartbeat and DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Just sit back and let the money & accolades continue to roll in. 'tain't broke, why fix it?

The respect for the brand is clearly there amongst the racing community.


I think there's a TON of upside for Moots without corrupting what is there today. Let's be honest, WE know about Moots, but how much of the general public (even the cycling public) really knows about the company, its history, and its bikes? Among the cycling cognoscenti, it's a revered brand that has a distinct look and personality (that crazy, bike-riding alligator just screams fun!).

The reality is that Moots is a premium brand without the premium marketing. IMO, this leaves plenty of room to grow public awareness of the brand and thus sales/revenues. There's value there and a great opportunity to build on what has been accomplished to date.

Texbike

[velomonkey]

Maybe Daddy big money buckets will get the 'gaitor in the Tour.

oddly at the world championships last weekend the Shimano cars are all had Moots with Di2 on the roof racks. They had a shimano panel sticker on the down tube, but still had the gator badge.

[Mikej]

oddly at the world championships last weekend the Shimano cars are all had Moots with Di2 on the roof racks. They had a shimano panel sticker on the down tube, but still had the gator badge.

oh yeah I did see those.

[CaliFly]

If anything, this makes me want a 50cm Psychlo X (or Routt) even more. :beer:

[shovelhd]

oddly at the world championships last weekend the Shimano cars are all had Moots with Di2 on the roof racks. They had a shimano panel sticker on the down tube, but still had the gator badge.

See my reply in this thread.

[beeatnik]

I just don't see why that would have to be the case. Perhaps this is why I'm *not* an entrepreneur, but if I saw a successful company with a solid business plan that was respected in the industry, profitable, admirably ethical, and made a badass product, I would buy it in a heartbeat and DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Just sit back and let the money & accolades continue to roll in. 'tain't broke, why fix it?

Selling (marketing) $4000 rare metal frames at the dawn of the exotic materials revolution has to be one of the toughest gigs in retailing.

The Shimano neutral support partnership may offer hints as to the future direction of the company. Would be interesting to see sales forecasts.

If you're a marketing guy at Moots and know you're dealing with a mature or shrinking market and static sales, what's your response? New product, obviously. But is a bike like the Routt really differentiated? For the specialist, yes, but not for the average, affluent hobbyist. What's the correct play? An affordable Ti bike (hi Pronto)? A carbon-ti bike (true economies of scale)? There may be room for Moots to grow (if in fact that's necessary) but the .25% of the market they'll target will want either innovation or value.

[Climb01742]

If you're a marketing guy at Moots and know you're dealing with a mature or shrinking market and static sales, what's your response? New product, obviously.

That's one response, but not the only. Marketing is what do and I'd bet a sizable chunk of change that Moots could increase sales with exactly their current line-up. 'New' is a lazy person's marketing answer. There are lots of avenues beyond new.

[chiasticon]

oddly at the world championships last weekend the Shimano cars are all had Moots with Di2 on the roof racks. They had a shimano panel sticker on the down tube, but still had the gator badge.
shovelhd followed up on this but I'll note as well that at 2013 cyclocross worlds in louisville, there was a massive fleet of di2 equipped moots cross bikes for people to demo (though you couldn't ride the pro course, of course). this was after masters worlds were over, so I'm guessing they were neutral support bikes there as well. excellent marketing.

I don't have a real opinion on this moots sale, except to say that I hope it works out great for the employees first and foremost. they worked hard to get the brand to be able to be sold (which is quite something in and of itself), so they deserve to stay with it and be treated well. also, I've got a psychlox and love it. hope nothing *huge* changes about them, because it needs a brother!

thanks again to Butch for chiming in here and across the hall!

[shovelhd]

For a low volume semi-custom/custom build shop, why is growth important? Is the company publicly traded? If they have a steady business turning a steady profit then why do they have to grow?

[beeatnik]

^They dont need to grow; they need to not contract. That is to say they need to grow.

[texbike]

That's one response, but not the only. Marketing is what do and I'd bet a sizable chunk of change that Moots could increase sales with exactly their current line-up. 'New' is a lazy person's marketing answer. There are lots of avenues beyond new.

Agreed! I don't really see a need for additional models in the current line-up. What I do see a need for is more marketing and PR to spread the word. WSJ, NYT, etc articles profiling the company and products coupled with a campaign to have highly-followed blogs like The Radavist promoting the brand. Demo days at high-profile cycling events, etc. I'm willing to bet that one could double or triple current sales with the right marketing efforts.

Texbike

[bikemd]

Thanks Butch for sharing your insight in an honest and sincere post. Wishing the very best to a great Colorado company, and the creators of the best bicycle I have ever owned.
Looking forward to a bright future.

Mike

[velomonkey]

Agreed! I don't really see a need for additional models in the current line-up. What I do see a need for is more marketing and PR to spread the word. WSJ, NYT, etc articles profiling the company and products coupled with a campaign to have highly-followed blogs like The Radavist promoting the brand. Demo days at high-profile cycling events, etc. I'm willing to bet that one could double or triple current sales with the right marketing efforts.

Texbike

Radavist, no, not that please. Not sure NYT or WSJ is a panacea for sales, but I get what you're saying.

The market for hand-made metal bikes just isn't that big and, frankly, there are a lot of good builders - more so when there was a much larger market. Carbon at this point is just a massive amount of market. On a group ride last week there were 2 ti bikes, one was my Fire Fly - the other one was a Merlin from like 2001.

Moots does use a dealer network and I think I can say from my limited experience that Moots dealers are very pro Moots - it's not some random brand they carry, but a brand they love and the dealers serve as brand ambassadors.

If Moots cuts out dealers, which a lot of companies with much, much deeper pockets are doing - that's when it's gonna get interesting. Maybe it will expand, maybe not.

Like I said, I'm totally trusting right now, but will verify. I will edit my IF comments - not sure the new owner saved "the company" but he did save "the brand" and he did so in a way that he didn't saturate the brand and for that he should be commended. The distinction being "the company" had changes since employees needed to physically move - a small difference but a distinction nonetheless.

[J. Anquetil]

I own seven or eight bicycles, including Pegoretti, Colnago, etc. No doubt my Moots (4/6 Ti) is the very best by far. I love my Moots. And I have another Ti frame coming. I believe that the way to improve what already is a top frame is by taking Ti to a next level. Lighter, smoother ride, lateral stiffness, better forks (even if carbon)... Moots ought to develop a Parlee Z1 in Ti. And do NOT go Serotta/Parlee crazy inflating the prices.

[oldpotatoe]

[QUOTE=beeatnik;1835086]

If you're a marketing guy at Moots and know you're dealing with a mature or shrinking market and static sales, what's your response? QUOTE]

Sales at Moots aren't static, their market isn't shrinking. If anything the 'rare earth metal' demand is higher because of the flooded carbon market.

Frames aren't $4000. They aren't going to do a 'bargain' ti frame nor mixed materials. In this Information Age, their goal is to get their story out there, continue to emphasize their really good dealer network, expand on that and continue to take care of that dealer network.

Bigger isn't better. Cheaper, low end isn't better. Carbon/ti blends sure aren't either. I think they know what to do and how to do it, only better, not bigger.

[oldpotatoe]

I own seven or eight bicycles, including Pegoretti, Colnago, etc. No doubt my Moots (4/6 Ti) is the very best by far. I love my Moots. And I have another Ti frame coming. I believe that the way to improve what already is a top frame is by taking Ti to a next level. Lighter, smoother ride, lateral stiffness, better forks (even if carbon)... Moots ought to develop a Parlee Z1 in Ti. And do NOT go Serotta/Parlee crazy inflating the prices.

Called the RSL. Carbon weight, superior ti ride, not stupid expensive.

[Uncle Jam's Army]

Called the RSL. Carbon weight, superior ti ride, not stupid expensive.

But BB30 :(

[oldpotatoe]

But BB30 :(

Me no like BB30 either but it is what it is.

[tuscanyswe]

Me no like BB30 either but it is what it is.

When you order a custom geo can you not order a custom (haha) threaded shell? Or is it not possible with those diameter tubes they use for the rsl? Or they just won't do it?

[happycampyer]

When you order a custom geo can you not order a custom (haha) threaded shell? Or is it not possible with those diameter tubes they use for the rsl? Or they just won't do it?

It's possible to order an RSL with a threaded bottom bracket. It takes away some of the stiffness, but it can be done. Doesn't require custom geo.

[SoCalSteve]

When you order a custom geo can you not order a custom (haha) threaded shell? Or is it not possible with those diameter tubes they use for the rsl? Or they just won't do it?

Never mind

[tuscanyswe]

It's possible to order an RSL with a threaded bottom bracket. It takes away some of the stiffness, but it can be done. Doesn't require custom geo.

Ah even better. Figured they would.

Id like to test ride an rsl for comparisons sake. I know you dident take to yours as much as you would have hoped, i wonder if i would if i were to get one.

In a distance future perhaps. I was just typing my email request to have my compact refinished this winter. 5 years gone and A LOT of miles, it deserves a little pampering. Funny thing was the frame wasn't registered to me yet, ···!? Luckily i still had that yellow little thing in my kitchen drawer so i think it should work out. Glad i asked!

[Climb01742]

I think Moots is in a very enviable position. And they achieved their success by following their own wisdom, not the conventional wisdom. There's smart, steady, incremental growth to be had, I think, by staying clear of the industry's conventional wisdom and trends. Moots being Moots, just being a bit louder, and a bit more available to be experienced by a carefully targeted customer and any new investment by the new owner will produce those three magical letters, ROI. Moots has the formula, I think. Just carefully turn the volume up.

[fuzzalow]

It's possible to order an RSL with a threaded bottom bracket. It takes away some of the stiffness, but it can be done. Doesn't require custom geo.

This may not be fair for me to say because things may have changed since I was in the market for a RSL in Spring '14. I spoke directly to Moots in making my inquiry in requesting a threaded BB which they refused. I am doubtful that at the time they had ever had anyone request it - it would have presented risks for them to pull it off given a completely different chamfering & realignment of large diameter tubes into the much reduced diameter of a threaded BB. So they didn't do it and I went to Eriksen.

I could not have done BB30 under any circumstance. So I've painted myself into a corner. Eriksen English threaded BB is just lovely. But I could understand why Moots wouldn't do it and the better thing to do IMO is not even to suggest an option which takes them away from what they must feel is an optimized design.

[happycampyer]

This may not be fair for me to say because things may have changed since I was in the market for a RSL in Spring '14. I spoke directly to Moots in making my inquiry in requesting a threaded BB which they refused. I am doubtful that at the time they had ever had anyone request it - it would have presented risks for them to pull it off given a completely different chamfering & realignment of large diameter tubes into the much reduced diameter of a threaded BB. So they didn't do it and I went to Eriksen.

I could not have done BB30 under any circumstance. So I've painted myself into a corner. Eriksen English threaded BB is just lovely. But I could understand why Moots wouldn't do it and the better thing to do IMO is not even to suggest an option which takes them away from what they must feel is an optimized design.Not sure how long it's been in effect, but an English bottom bracket is listed as an option on the various RSL models:

http://moots.com/wp-content/uploads/MOOTS-270_OptionsMatrix-2015.pdf

[oldpotatoe]

When you order a custom geo can you not order a custom (haha) threaded shell? Or is it not possible with those diameter tubes they use for the rsl? Or they just won't do it?

Yes but they don't really like to do that because of the size of the downtube.

[fuzzalow]

I think Moots is in a very enviable position. And they achieved their success by following their own wisdom, not the conventional wisdom. There's smart, steady, incremental growth to be had, I think, by staying clear of the industry's conventional wisdom and trends. Moots being Moots, just being a bit louder, and a bit more available to be experienced by a carefully targeted customer and any new investment by the new owner will produce those three magical letters, ROI. Moots has the formula, I think. Just carefully turn the volume up.

I agree with this. There is an overriding emphasis by posters throughout this thread of some driving desire for venture capital returns from an investment done in an ostensibly well run company. Which would therefore predicate a purchase price commensurate to that of a non-distressed asset. So the returns will be nominal growth proceeding from that base.

Given the global economic environment, there is likely not a driver towards a marked increase to interest rates in the near future. As such, it makes sense to align the returns expectation for the Moots investment to be aligned more along the returns found in a corporate bond, or perhaps more accurately ascribed, to that of a convertible bond. Therefore the existing returns may be perfectly acceptable in the present term relative to the current investment environment. There is no hurry to phase any accelerated growth plans as a means to augment returns. Which for Moots, is a good thing as all returns are viewed on a risk-adjusted basis.

Any investor is interested in growth. But in buying into a well run company places an emphasis on the prudence to also first do no harm.

[oldpotatoe]

This may not be fair for me to say because things may have changed since I was in the market for a RSL in Spring '14. I spoke directly to Moots in making my inquiry in requesting a threaded BB which they refused. I am doubtful that at the time they had ever had anyone request it - it would have presented risks for them to pull it off given a completely different chamfering & realignment of large diameter tubes into the much reduced diameter of a threaded BB. So they didn't do it and I went to Eriksen.

I could not have done BB30 under any circumstance. So I've painted myself into a corner. Eriksen English threaded BB is just lovely. But I could understand why Moots wouldn't do it and the better thing to do IMO is not even to suggest an option which takes them away from what they must feel is an optimized design.

Before I sold Vecchios in November of 2013 we had 2 I think that inquired about a threaded BB in a RSL. Moots never said no but explained they would recommend a PFBB30 because of the tube size.

A question, the resulting Erikson, was it more like a CR, a Vamoots or RSL?

[fuzzalow]

A question, the resulting Erikson, was it more like a CR, a Vamoots or RSL?

It is Eriksen's version of the current state of the art offering from him of a Ti race bike using his largest diameter tube sets and chainstay. Unlike Moots however, Eriksen does not offer the butted titanium tube sets available with Moots in their RSL model line. I really was keen on the pure state of the art quality of owning a Moots, especially being it would have been a long n' low custom geometry which would be very special in an RSL configuration. That bike woulda been hot!

I know some have reported the RSL as possibly too stiff and I myself have never chased stiffness as a frame quality to be lusted after. But stiffness wouldn't have bothered me however brutal it might be because I never viewed race bike comfort as solely a frame quality but as a combination of the frame & fit/position quality. So if that RSL would have been made correctly for my body weight I had every confidence it would have been just fine.

[beeatnik]

Sales at Moots aren't static, their market isn't shrinking. If anything the 'rare earth metal' demand is higher because of the flooded carbon market.

Frames aren't $4000. They aren't going to do a 'bargain' ti frame nor mixed materials. In this Information Age, their goal is to get their story out there, continue to emphasize their really good dealer network, expand on that and continue to take care of that dealer network.

Bigger isn't better. Cheaper, low end isn't better. Carbon/ti blends sure aren't either. I think they know what to do and how to do it, only better, not bigger.

I called the sales static because all the articles I've read in the last few years report the same numbers for sales. Sure, Moots have had its best year ever in 2012 (or 2013 or 2014), but that only means they sold an extra 50-100 bikes.

Just out of curiosity who are their top dealers.

For me, more so than being an owner, Moots is intriguing because they're unique in the industry (Industry). Once again, I'll state the obvious: it's gotta be the hardest job in the world sustaining their business model in the current bicycle retailing environment.

[Schmed]

This thread makes me want to order a Moots.

[aaronka]

Butch's post is excellent, one of the most forthright and transparent perspectives I've seen with regards to a private transaction. I remain a believer...

I love my Moots (Psychlo X) and hope they don't change what they are - it is a special product and it performs.

Said by someone seeking another Moots (compact road)!

[oldpotatoe]

I called the sales static because all the articles I've read in the last few years report the same numbers for sales. Sure, Moots have had its best year ever in 2012 (or 2013 or 2014), but that only means they sold an extra 50-100 bikes.

Just out of curiosity who are their top dealers.

For me, more so than being an owner, Moots is intriguing because they're unique in the industry (Industry). Once again, I'll state the obvious: it's gotta be the hardest job in the world sustaining their business model in the current bicycle retailing environment.

Vecchio's was number 3 in 2012 and 2013...don't know now.

It IS hard in this bike business environment(yes, obvious) but hardly the 'hardest job in the world', for Moots, IMHO. I'd say being a carbon frame maker, trying to foist molded carbon frames from where-ever, trying to compete with scads of flashy carbon frames from where-ever would be far harder.

Moots doesn't try to compete with 'them', they make 'them' compete with Moots. Besides, who are Moots' competitors? Those that make a range of all titanium frames? Who are comparable in size? Who use the same dealer network type sales?


Some guy with 2 employees who makes 75-80 frames a year, isn't really 'competition'.

[54ny77]

No kidding!

Vamoots SL in a 54 at a good price is one seriously elusive frame....

This thread makes me want to order a Moots.

[shovelhd]

^They dont need to grow; they need to not contract. That is to say they need to grow.

I disagree. A company does not need to grow to maintain sales volume. That can be done with simple marketing efforts, like regular dealer visits, test ride days, and simple promotions like bike shop movie nights. Now if you are talking about maintaining market share, that's a different equation with many variables.

[Schmed]

No kidding!

Vamoots SL in a 54 at a good price is one seriously elusive frame....

As Moots rider told me last month: "They can make you one - just call".

("good price" or "good value")? ;)

[54ny77]

oh no question on good value, am looking for good price (used)!

someday....but no rush.

the hunt is half the fun.

As Moots rider told me last month: "They can make you one - just call".

("good price" or "good value")? ;)

[Schmed]

For a low volume semi-custom/custom build shop, why is growth important? Is the company publicly traded? If they have a steady business turning a steady profit then why do they have to grow?

If you happen to have employees that never expect an increase in pay, then you don't have to grow. Otherwise, pay increases erode your bottom line, and the owner's investment and pay erodes right along with that bottom line.

Or, you can find ways to make the same product at a lower cost, or increase price.

[Climb01742]

Of all the business models in the bike industry, I actually believe that Moots has one of the ones best positioned to succeed. Many trends in both society and bikes are moving their way. They have a clarity and authenticity of their brand that's remarkable and appealing. And oh yeah, they make good bikes. Figuring out a low-budget conquest strategy as a marketer for Moots would be fun.

[pbarry]

Of all the business models in the bike industry, I actually believe that Moots has one of the ones best positioned to succeed. Many trends in both society and bikes are moving their way. They have a clarity and authenticity of their brand that's remarkable and appealing. And oh yeah, they make good bikes. Figuring out a low-budget conquest strategy as a marketer for Moots would be fun.

Are you suggesting a lower end/more affordable frame or frame line? Or targeting lower priced Ti manufacturers with marketing?

Moots should never weaken the brand with a low end model. Merlin tried this with the R something-- it had a CP TT and a mono stay SS assembly. They did not sell many, and I'd bet the tooling and R&D and additional run time made it a wash.

[J. Anquetil]

Moots rocks the world. And then you run into Kent Eriksen, the original crocodile. Ti frames are blessed with some superior builders. These guys are for real in a world of too much plastic, steel, aluminum, and hybrid... hype.

[J. Anquetil]

Are you suggesting a lower end/more affordable frame or frame line? Or targeting lower priced Ti manufacturers with marketing?

Moots should never weaken the brand with a low end model. Merlin tried this with the R something-- it had a CP TT and a mono stay SS assembly. They did not sell many, and I'd bet the tooling and R&D and additional run time made it a wash.

I agree. Moots is at the top of the heap. No need to go down. Less need to go price crazy like others of rather recent memory. I believe the way is maximizing the potential of the material.

[Climb01742]

Are you suggesting a lower end/more affordable frame or frame line? Or targeting lower priced Ti manufacturers with marketing?

Moots should never weaken the brand with a low end model. Merlin tried this with the R something-- it had a CP TT and a mono stay SS assembly. They did not sell many, and I'd bet the tooling and R&D and additional run time made it a wash.

No, not at all. Sorry for not being more clear. What I was referring to was a marketing effort for the brand/bikes that had a low or modest budget. Meaning, I think the brand can be grown without investing huge marketing dollars. Some dollars, yes, and a long-term commitment to communications and experiential marketing. I'd keep the price structure of the models pretty much where it is; don't go down the ladder, but equally don't go up it to old Serotta heights. Moots has a sweet spot, pricing-wise, I believe.

[fuzzalow]

For Moots to even attempt to sell into the lower tier of the market would be a mistake and the kiss of death on the brand. There is no logic to compete with the big-box-bike manufacturers in an competitive space that is not to Moots' comparative advantage. Any strategy even remotely suggestive of mass market with kill this company because the allure of high quality, made in USA goods plays to the perception and reality of excellence by American companies/workers. Not to slave-labor piece-meal, throw-away associations denoted with mass production.

Profitability for this type of company might better be pursued in internal efficiencies, if any, and marginal profitability optimization across the product line, if any. I'm assuming the company is well run so the obvious low lying fruit has already been looked at and maximized.

[Climb01742]

Keep your skirts on, ladies. No one is suggesting a low price, mass market strategy. Read carefully and I'll endeavor to write more clearly. Deal?:beer:;):)

[fuzzalow]

^HaHa! Hey, I'm a finance guy not a marketing guy. So I'd be the first to admit I don't know ding about how to convince people to buy things. I know what I like and the rationalizations behind my own self delusions in buying stuff pretty good though!

Looking forwards to reading interesting views.

[Climb01742]

^HaHa! Hey, I'm a finance guy not a marketing guy. So I'd be the first to admit I don't know ding about how to convince people to buy things. I know what I like and the rationalizations behind my own self delusions in buying stuff pretty good though!

Looking forwards to reading interesting views.

Fair enuf. And I know diddly about finance, as my net worth sadly attests. I can earn it, just can't seem to grow it.;)

[mg2ride]

Please take a second to read this.
I think most of you know I have been here doing various things for a few years, 19 to be exact. There are a number of us who are long term employees who have taken great pride in working together to build Moots to where it is today. Chris, who owned the company for 20 years, really supported us to manage and run the company with the primary goal of building the best products possible, while being a business. Chris is our friend, he has watched several of us get married and has seen our kids grow. For several years Chris' body hasn't cooperated to allow him to enjoy the products we make and ride. Keep in mind he finished 2nd and 4th at Leadville back in his prime with company rides were faster for it. So it became time to move on. When he decided to sell the company it was of the highest importance to him and his wife to find the right fit.
As a group we were involved with how the company was presented, what we stand for, who were are and the pride we take in our work each day. Brent gets this. He embraces it and he wants to live it. He rides a lot. Yes he is a businessman, a successful one at that. As many do, he woke up one day and realized there is more to life than the cooperate world and figured out an exit. Travelling the country with his family with a camper they came to Moots and took a tour and saw what we are about, and he asked. I was the first person he talked to. If I or anyone else here had second thoughts, there would have been plenty of noise. I can be noisy.
Everyone will speculate, that is what the internet is for right? I have spent a lot of time with Brent and you can chose whether to believe me or not, but he wants nothing more than to see us keep doing what we do. He has stood in front of us and made this clear to the entire company and I believe him. He is a good man who is a good rider who believes in US manufacturing and he wants to be part of it and to help us thrive. He bought the building so we are staying put. The first words out of his mouth this morning at our company meeting were "the most important thing I support is to maintain and elevate the quality of the work you do. This is our strength". Then we went around the room, all 23 of us stating how long we worked here and why we work here. Pride is hard to quantify, but that was a room full of it. This feels right.
If anyone has any questions, please email me. I don't go on here all the time, I knew this would bring out some folks, so don't think I am ignoring a comment. I have a job and I need to ride.

butch@moots

Thanks for the info.

You have given this forum something it has been missing for a few years now!

Another bike company for us to tell how they should run their business!:banana::banana::bike:

[1centaur]

When I was in undergrad, we had a professor who was ex Harvard Business School and he asked us if a business must either grow or die. Our instinct as 20-year-olds was no, but his as a 50-year-old who actually knew something of the world was yes.

If I was a wealthy ex-telecom exec buying Moots because I like the product and the company, I would remember that lesson. I might be willing to lose a little bit of personal money for the hobby of owning Moots for a few years, but I would be worried about the employees and the brand fading if I just encouraged the status quo. My instinct is to agree with Climb and say there are ways to grow that don't include line extensions that could damage the brand. However, for that to be true I'd have to know how many more bikes of exactly the sort they are producing could Moots produce before the quality was impacted. Are they at 60% capacity utilization or 100%? If 60%, then the growth answer comes from better marketing without disrupting the brand (and frankly part of the brand seems to be the journey to discover it, since it is so NOT in everyone's face). But if it's closer to 100% then growth comes only by expanding capacity or improving the efficiency of existing capacity and that's where mistakes can be made.

Why grow or die? Because your competition is growing or dying, and when they grow they become more able to dominate you. Because inflation happens and your employees need to be paid more and you can't just raise your prices forever while competitors keep their prices down. The irony is that sustainability IS growth unless everybody else is in status quo, and they are not.

[velomonkey]

When I was in undergrad, we had a professor who was ex Harvard Business School and he asked us if a business must either grow or die. Our instinct as 20-year-olds was no, but his as a 50-year-old who actually knew something of the world was yes.


Right there. That's it. The 25 year old welder making $14 an hour in 7 years will have kids, a mortgage, retirement and future college payments on his mind - he can't be earning $14 an hour anymore even though his skill and output are, basically, static.

So unless Moots goes the way of Logan's Runs or the band Menudo and cans welders after a certain age, they gotta earn more money to pay more money - that's growth.

[oldpotatoe]

Right there. That's it. The 25 year old welder making $14 an hour in 7 years will have kids, a mortgage, retirement and future college payments on his mind - he can't be earning $14 an hour anymore even though his skill and output are, basically, static.

So unless Moots goes the way of Logan's Runs or the band Menudo and cans welders after a certain age, they gotta earn more money to pay more money - that's growth.

Butch started out as a welder, he's now president...and welder.
Some just want to be the welder, even at $14 an hour(bet it's higher than that). Like Moots, up or out needn't be the only path.

[Climb01742]

When I was in undergrad, we had a professor who was ex Harvard Business School and he asked us if a business must either grow or die. Our instinct as 20-year-olds was no, but his as a 50-year-old who actually knew something of the world was yes.

If I was a wealthy ex-telecom exec buying Moots because I like the product and the company, I would remember that lesson. I might be willing to lose a little bit of personal money for the hobby of owning Moots for a few years, but I would be worried about the employees and the brand fading if I just encouraged the status quo. My instinct is to agree with Climb and say there are ways to grow that don't include line extensions that could damage the brand. However, for that to be true I'd have to know how many more bikes of exactly the sort they are producing could Moots produce before the quality was impacted. Are they at 60% capacity utilization or 100%? If 60%, then the growth answer comes from better marketing without disrupting the brand (and frankly part of the brand seems to be the journey to discover it, since it is so NOT in everyone's face). But if it's closer to 100% then growth comes only by expanding capacity or improving the efficiency of existing capacity and that's where mistakes can be made.

Why grow or die? Because your competition is growing or dying, and when they grow they become more able to dominate you. Because inflation happens and your employees need to be paid more and you can't just raise your prices forever while competitors keep their prices down. The irony is that sustainability IS growth unless everybody else is in status quo, and they are not.

Very much agree. Where many businesses come up short is defining for themselves the right kind of growth, the speed of growth, the volume of growth and the source of that growth. All revenue isn't equal. Some is dumb. The best kind is smart, focused, honest to a company's ethos and character. I've been in too many meetings where growth, any growth from anywhere, was the end unto itself. But that's why if I was the new owner of Moots, I'd be psyched. The foundations of smart, philosophically organic growth are there, I think. And unlike many consumer categories, the cost of communicating to their target audience and retailers doesn't require deep pockets. Rather, some deep thinking and planning and targeting in the strategic phase.

[velomonkey]

Butch started out as a welder, he's now president...and welder.
Some just want to be the welder, even at $14 an hour(bet it's higher than that). Like Moots, up or out needn't be the only path.

The $14 an hour number is a place holder - the point is the worker's pay needs to increase. Yea, Butch started as a welder and is president - how old is he. Unless he's in his 60s he's gonna be president for a while so that upward mobility is shut off. However, if Moots grows welders can then grow into SVP roles.

The article about Fat Chance closing back in the early 90s - those welders were making minimum wage and the bikes were sold at a premium (and Chris hadn't paid some of them in months). Honestly, I wouldn't have thought a premium product like a slim chance would have a welder welding my bike at a minimum wage - and yet Chris STILL couldn't figure out how to stay afloat.

I will say about IF - the owner added to his portfolio of other companies (bags and what not) then moved them into a location where he owned the building and had other businesses within the building. Sure some of the employees left cause of the move, but the brand was intact and the brand hasn't suffered and lives on and the product we get today is arguably as good as it was prior.

Hand built bikes aren't good slow long-term money companies. There is no real tipping point to increased profits - at least carbon the mold is the big upfront cost - so sell to the tipping point and profits increase exponentially. With Ti you got costs of amortized goods (welding stuff), labor (welder) and then materials (ti). There is really only 2 areas of improvement: output of the production and cost of materials. If they buy more ti, they will get ti at less and profits can go up. (there are other things like deposits for orders which the money could be invested, but that's small).

What makes Sachs, Sachs, is that you knew your bike was gonna be made by Richard (he has the newer thing, but I'm talking Sachs). I'd argue, for now, that firefly is in the same boat - you know Jamie is gonna cut your tubes, Tyler is gonna weld it, Brandon is gonna finish it and Kevin is gonna fit you. Vanilla workshop has done great, as has seven, as has moots at making a good product where you don't know who made it (to a lesser extent Hampsten, too).

With Zanc, you know it's him who did it - should he add a welder it's gonna be something all together different - some succeed, like above, and a lot fail.

[ldamelio]

Sachs - newer thing??? It's still just Richard. Ain't nothing changed there.

[velomonkey]

Sachs - newer thing??? It's still just Richard. Ain't nothing changed there.

Sachs Silca pumps - never touch Rich's hands, but $400 could leave your hands :banana::banana::banana:

[ldamelio]

Richard has co-branded schwag and toys with others for years - Bailey Works bags, RS Cinelli tape, spesh water bottles, etc. Nothing new there. Only hands that touch the bikes are his and Joe Bell.

[CunegoFan]

I wonder how much larger Moots can grow without affecting its cachet.

[J. Anquetil]

He holds a degree in Accounting from University of Arkansas at Little Rock.

[fuzzalow]

Fair enuf. And I know diddly about finance, as my net worth sadly attests. I can earn it, just can't seem to grow it.;)

Yeah, there's that old quote from my folk hero and sage Warren Buffet that goes something like the first most important thing is to not lose investment principal. With the second and third most important things being referring back to the first most important thing.

C'mon, everybody loses something sometimes. The trick is don't lose it all. Warren's lessons go akin to making an investment approach in hitting singles and not swinging for home runs because just by being in the game long enough and consistently enough, every once in a while you can hit the home run.

Your comments on not taking an foolishly aggressive tack for Moots is dead on. They built the brand wisely and sure as hell aren't gonna throw that away chasing alpha returns.

[pdmtong]

For Moots to even attempt to sell into the lower tier of the market would be a mistake and the kiss of death on the brand. There is no logic to compete with the big-box-bike manufacturers in an competitive space that is not to Moots' comparative advantage. Any strategy even remotely suggestive of mass market with kill this company because the allure of high quality, made in USA goods plays to the perception and reality of excellence by American companies/workers. Not to slave-labor piece-meal, throw-away associations denoted with mass production.

Profitability for this type of company might better be pursued in internal efficiencies, if any, and marginal profitability optimization across the product line, if any. I'm assuming the company is well run so the obvious low lying fruit has already been looked at and maximized.

Moots cranks what 1500 or so frames/year? So they are doing great, right? Hmmm not os fast.

Are they at capacity production for the plant?
Are they still making things people want?
Are their process and production efficiencies met?
Are they getting best price on materials?
Is human capital utilization high?

Is the pipeline robust?
Can time to market / order placed to customer riding time as best as it could be?

The ti market is small. Moots excels at the stock size portion of that market and cedes the custom size portion (which arguably is larger since everyone wants to feel "special") to FF, IF, Seven, Kent.

Lets face it - they dont compete (price) when the buyer needs a tweak.

C'mon...when is the cinch post that accommodates 7x9 coming?

Standard tapered HT on CR and RSL a closer step towards staying in synch with what the carbon market is schlepping.

Figure out a way to drop the price on the bead blast logo'ing and stems.
I bet the marginal elasticity is pretty high...take it down a notch and volume goes way up.

Oh, and whoever put Serotta into this conversation., be assured the only thing the companies have in common is state of the art mfg facilities. Beyond that its simple. one made products no one wanted, the the other makes products enough people want

[jlwdm]

Moots cranks what 1500 or so frames/year? So they are doing great, right? Hmmm not os fast.

Are they at capacity production for the plant?
Are they still making things people want?
Are their process and production efficiencies met?
Are they getting best price on materials?
Is human capital utilization high?

Is the pipeline robust?
Can time to market / order placed to customer riding time as best as it could be?

The ti market is small. Moots excels at the stock size portion of that market and cedes the custom size portion (which arguably is larger since everyone wants to feel "special") to FF, IF, Seven, Kent.

Lets face it - they dont compete (price) when the buyer needs a tweak.

C'mon...when is the cinch post that accommodates 7x9 coming?

Standard tapered HT on CR and RSL a closer step towards staying in synch with what the carbon market is schlepping.

Figure out a way to drop the price on the bead blast logo'ing and stems.
I bet the marginal elasticity is pretty high...take it down a notch and volume goes way up.

Oh, and whoever put Serotta into this conversation., be assured the only thing the companies have in common is state of the art mfg facilities. Beyond that its simple. one made products no one wanted, the the other makes products enough people want

Seems like over the years a lot of people wanted Serotta's products.

Jeff

[pdmtong]

Seems like over the years a lot of people wanted Serotta's products.

Jeff

True. But they couldn't keep it going. Anyone wanna spend $8000 for a meivici? Hence their demise. Price not aligned with percieved value. Early days awesome. Late days out of touch

[Mikej]

Why don't they figure out how to get people their bikes faster- or a dealership in stock hotline so you can get a stock sized production bike without the custom wait.

[fuzzalow]

Moots cranks what 1500 or so frames/year? So they are doing great, right? Hmmm not os fast.

Are they at capacity production for the plant?
Are they still making things people want?
Are their process and production efficiencies met?
Are they getting best price on materials?
Is human capital utilization high?

Is the pipeline robust?
Can time to market / order placed to customer riding time as best as it could be?

The ti market is small. Moots excels at the stock size portion of that market and cedes the custom size portion (which arguably is larger since everyone wants to feel "special") to FF, IF, Seven, Kent.

Lets face it - they dont compete (price) when the buyer needs a tweak.

C'mon...when is the cinch post that accommodates 7x9 coming?

Standard tapered HT on CR and RSL a closer step towards staying in synch with what the carbon market is schlepping.

Figure out a way to drop the price on the bead blast logo'ing and stems.
I bet the marginal elasticity is pretty high...take it down a notch and volume goes way up.

Oh, and whoever put Serotta into this conversation., be assured the only thing the companies have in common is state of the art mfg facilities. Beyond that its simple. one made products no one wanted, the the other makes products enough people want

You make some perfectly reasonable points here. And the thing is is that I can't know anything enough about Moots' current operations to address those points. And I am assuming that Moots is a reasonably well run company where there is not an ongoing flaw to their operations that is unmitigated risk or might be fatal to their operations. And frankly, those internal processes and flows are not really what the crux of what I was trying to discuss concerning Mr. Whittington's new ownership of Moots. I was trying to make the point contrary to some of the tone of posts that view new ownership as a negative event and which might lead into a damaging revamp of Moots as being spurred on by some form of predatory capitalism.

Butch's response in this thread would allay some of those fears about the motivations and intentions of Mr. Whittington but we shall see how things develop in the fullness of time.

I'm speculating that some of what was driving the purchase of Moots was a desire to diversify some of Mr. Whittington's assets into a longer term income producing asset that would provide returns that would outperform returns achievable in the current low interest rate environment. The purchase of the real estate on which Moots is situated would support the minimal generation of an income stream for that purpose. All the rest of the growth potential lies in the branding and production upside inherent in Moots itself. Hence my earlier assertion that the investment was functionally equivalent to investment to a corporate convertible bond. And coming at Moots from that perspective as an investor disqualifies unreasonable expectations for outsized returns in forcing Moots into some aggressive growth plan that may well seem discordant and out of step with both the bike industry at large and also Moots' placement within the industry.

I am speculating with the rest of you on this and I'm sayin' that there may not be any drastic revamp of Moots or a change to the Moots' historic approach and positioning in the market in the near term. Of course stasis cannot be in force for any business and Moots will have available both Mr. Whittington's fresh set of eyes view into Moots as well as possible financial resources held by Mr. Whittington, although I'd discourage internal financing because it changes Mr. Whittington's risk/return profile.

Finally, for something outta left field I'd SWAG that the ownership of Moots might have cost less than $1.5M, including the real estate. $500K for the land/factory building, $200K for the fixtures and the remainder ~$700K for the brand, intellectual properties and the purchase price cost multiple on Moots historical earnings and profitability structure. As a cycling aficionado, I would sure like to see the books and assorted financials on a company like this. So I am guessing on this with absolutely nothing to stand on. Moots has a very defined spot as a bike company and an American brand that has stability and upside provided they do not try to be something they are not.

All this is just talk and fun n' games.

[pdmtong]

Couldn't agree more with the Fuzz.

I don't see the move as negative. at the daily process level I hope they get a fresh look to make this marginal improvements I mentioned. Everyone could be better and some times it just takes a catalyst to step back and look

This could well be an inflection point to take moots up some more notches.

The macro picture that Fuzz articulates is how I see it too. I don't see fire and death. I hear angels and see sunshine

I would love to see behind the scenes because this kind of stuff is interesting to me. More so when the business aspect intersects with the sport I love.

[Climb01742]

If Fuzz's purchase price guestimate is in the ballpark, another advantage the ongoing concern may have is no debt service. If the company was bought with cash, and debt isn't pressuring choices, then patience and smart growth could be easier to practice. Debt service can be cruel.

[malcolm]

Moots is an interesting brand to me. They are great beautifully built bikes. I had a second hand road frame years ago from when Eriksen was still there. It was as nice and good riding a Ti frame as I've ever had.

I just recently bought a Ti mtn bike and looked closely at moots, but when time to plunk down the cash came. I went with a small builder, one man shop. It was a bit cheaper but cost wasn't the issue. I think I just wanted something that was more mine and while spending that kind of money I felt better supporting a one man shop.

[J. Anquetil]

Moots is an interesting brand to me. They are great beautifully built bikes. I had a second hand road frame years ago from when Eriksen was still there. It was as nice and good riding a Ti frame as I've ever had.

I just recently bought a Ti mtn bike and looked closely at moots, but when time to plunk down the cash came. I went with a small builder, one man shop. It was a bit cheaper but cost wasn't the issue. I think I just wanted something that was more mine and while spending that kind of money I felt better supporting a one man shop.

Same here. Kent is the father of the beast.

[hockeybike]

Oh, and whoever put Serotta into this conversation., be assured the only thing the companies have in common is state of the art mfg facilities. Beyond that its simple. one made products no one wanted, the the other makes products enough people want

I wonder if this is even true. Wasn't part of Serotta's problem that they went too far into the state of the art? Bought a bunch of tooling that necessitated selling x frames at price y? Don't necessarily need the latest and greatest tooling to create the frames and make a profit.

[velomonkey]

I wonder if this is even true. Wasn't part of Serotta's problem that they went too far into the state of the art? Bought a bunch of tooling that necessitated selling x frames at price y? Don't necessarily need the latest and greatest tooling to create the frames and make a profit.


^^^^ Correct. Sorry, for all the talk that's gone on (and Fuzz good job) there are substantial finanical elements missing. Tooling is no laughing matter. If your current crop of welders are at capacity and you bring on more welders the cost of the labor isn't the risk, it's the requirements on the tooling side which are in no way trivial. It's both an upfront cost and an ongoing cost. Balancing that plus demand is tricky. Add to that carbon fames, caron/ti frames, steel, lugged steel all of which require different skill sets and different tools to make the frame any company is looking at significant cap risk.

Add the dealer network in there and it's whole other layer of financial trickery.

[aaronka]

On the financial side, here is another quick swag / guestimate. Just fun and games, but the purchase price is always an intriguing topic to me...

Assume 1500 frames per year (as was cited earlier in the thread) at $3K per frame = $4.5M annual gross revenue

Assume 15 hours labor per frame (no idea if this makes sense so jump in framebuilders to validate) = 22,500 labor hours per year = 10.8 full time workers and assume $100K per worker fully burdened cost = $1.1M in labor plus the depreciation cost of the equipment so lets say $3M of equipment on a 5 year life so $600K per year depreciation, and add another $750K for the cost of tubing and materials ($500/frame). That equals = $2.45M in cost of goods.

Which equals $2M in gross margin or 45%.

Then figure headcount for sales and marketing and general management of 12 (could be very wrong here) so $1M plus costs for marketing and selling of another $200K. Plus building costs and maintenance and supplies and computers and website of lets say $200K. So maybe $1.4M+ all-in of operating expenses.

That equals ~$600K or so in Operating income and $1.2+ in EBITDA.

So the purchase price if $1.5M would have been a screaming deal, assuming either the Revenue and/or the profitability estimates were correct. As that would represent less than 1x Revenue and less than 2x EBITDA. My understanding of valuations in this space is that you would normally see at least levels closer to 1x+ Revenue or 5x+ times EBITDA.

Welcome any thoughts on this :beer:

[fuzzalow]

Welcome any thoughts on this

Lotsa things go into pricing. And the firms that can do it best, smartest, most accurately and fastest put themselves in a position to do well for themselves and their clients.

So what ever you decide as the means to derive a number is what it is, there is no singular way to do it and the intellectual mosaic called upon to formulate this is almost by definition the output and by-product of intellectual capital.

As a matter of fun & conversation, some of these factors were part of my Moots mosaic:

Companies like Moots are constrained by what they can sell and not by what they can produce therefore cannot value from the bottom up but by the top down
Moots is a small to medium manufacturing concern selling into a niche leisure-time industry. Therefore cannot evaluate Moots as a stock but merely as a small business
Limited upside with no mass market potential without destroying the brand

I honestly didn't think about SWAGing Moots valuation for more than a minute - after all we kinda know bikes here. I think the valuation and the multiples are nowhere near what a Moots fan and a cycling buff thinks stuff is worth. Without looking at the financial books, we'll not be privy to know. So I guessed.

As been said, all fun n' games.

[54ny77]

It's good to be a gentleman framebuilder owner.

Godspeed on continued success of the Moots brand. :beer:

[pdmtong]

I wonder if this is even true. Wasn't part of Serotta's problem that they went too far into the state of the art? Bought a bunch of tooling that necessitated selling x frames at price y? Don't necessarily need the latest and greatest tooling to create the frames and make a profit.

only commenting on their capability, not their practice.

[jlwdm]

The bicycle frame business is difficult. You can be a very successful frame builder working from your home and still not make a great living.

As you try to expand to be a bigger company there are many challenges, and if you increase your fixed costs during good times you are going to get hurt during the bad times. Over time one of these down cycles can be the death of the company.

Unless you are one of the big companies selling bikes or frames is a very tough business and not one I would like to be in. You have to have a passion for it.

Jeff

[Mikej]

On the financial side, here is another quick swag / guestimate. Just fun and games, but the purchase price is always an intriguing topic to me...

Assume 1500 frames per year (as was cited earlier in the thread) at $3K per frame = $4.5M annual gross revenue

Assume 15 hours labor per frame (no idea if this makes sense so jump in framebuilders to validate) = 22,500 labor hours per year = 10.8 full time workers and assume $100K per worker fully burdened cost = $1.1M in labor plus the depreciation cost of the equipment so lets say $3M of equipment on a 5 year life so $600K per year depreciation, and add another $750K for the cost of tubing and materials ($500/frame). That equals = $2.45M in cost of goods.

Which equals $2M in gross margin or 45%.

Then figure headcount for sales and marketing and general management of 12 (could be very wrong here) so $1M plus costs for marketing and selling of another $200K. Plus building costs and maintenance and supplies and computers and website of lets say $200K. So maybe $1.4M+ all-in of operating expenses.

That equals ~$600K or so in Operating income and $1.2+ in EBITDA.

So the purchase price if $1.5M would have been a screaming deal, assuming either the Revenue and/or the profitability estimates were correct. As that would represent less than 1x Revenue and less than 2x EBITDA. My understanding of valuations in this space is that you would normally see at least levels closer to 1x+ Revenue or 5x+ times EBITDA.

Welcome any thoughts on this :beer:

No I also thought 1.5 million was way too low- most buyouts are 13 times EBITDA - I would guess north of 10 million- assuming debt - they probably have 2 million in tubes and machinery and building alone - mandrel ti butting and swagging in house is around a 300k machine. Best of biz to them, hate to see it go south. I thought they had over 20 employees?

[1centaur]

No I also thought 1.5 million was way too low- most buyouts are 13 times EBITDA - I would guess north of 10 million- assuming debt - they probably have 2 million in tubes and machinery and building alone - mandrel ti butting and swagging in house is around a 300k machine. Best of biz to them, hate to see it go south. I thought they had over 20 employees?

I look at deals all day. Most deals are NOT 13x EBITDA! Multiples can be from 3x to 15x depending on a lot of things I will not belabor. Small companies without strong growth consistently sell for 4-6ish times, all else being equal.

[pbarry]

1,500 units sounds high to me, as do the labor costs and tooling values mentioned above. Subtract 30% from those estimates, and you'll be in the ballpark. Materials cost might be 10-15% low, quibbling. Just guessing, but I'd bet the whole shebang went for $2.5-3M or so. Still a solid deal.

[happycampyer]

No I also thought 1.5 million was way too low- most buyouts are 13 times EBITDA - I would guess north of 10 million- assuming debt - they probably have 2 million in tubes and machinery and building alone - mandrel ti butting and swagging in house is around a 300k machine. Best of biz to them, hate to see it go south. I thought they had over 20 employees?

The only tubes that are butted are for the RSL models, and they are butted by Reynolds in England. Moots cuts the tubes, ships them to Reynolds, Reynolds butts them, then ships them back. This is part of the premium that Moots charges for an RSL over a Vamoots (or other non-RSL model).

[oldpotatoe]

On the financial side, here is another quick swag / guestimate. Just fun and games, but the purchase price is always an intriguing topic to me...

Assume 1500 frames per year (as was cited earlier in the thread) at $3K per frame = $4.5M annual gross revenue

Assume 15 hours labor per frame (no idea if this makes sense so jump in framebuilders to validate) = 22,500 labor hours per year = 10.8 full time workers and assume $100K per worker fully burdened cost = $1.1M in labor plus the depreciation cost of the equipment so lets say $3M of equipment on a 5 year life so $600K per year depreciation, and add another $750K for the cost of tubing and materials ($500/frame). That equals = $2.45M in cost of goods.

Which equals $2M in gross margin or 45%.

Then figure headcount for sales and marketing and general management of 12 (could be very wrong here) so $1M plus costs for marketing and selling of another $200K. Plus building costs and maintenance and supplies and computers and website of lets say $200K. So maybe $1.4M+ all-in of operating expenses.

That equals ~$600K or so in Operating income and $1.2+ in EBITDA.

So the purchase price if $1.5M would have been a screaming deal, assuming either the Revenue and/or the profitability estimates were correct. As that would represent less than 1x Revenue and less than 2x EBITDA. My understanding of valuations in this space is that you would normally see at least levels closer to 1x+ Revenue or 5x+ times EBITDA.

Welcome any thoughts on this :beer:

Moots doesn't get $3000 per frame, the retailer does.

They own their building. $200,000 per year is way high, IMHO.

[pdmtong]

Moots doesn't get $3000 per frame, the retailer does.

They own their building. $200,000 per year is way high, IMHO.

Huh? If the frame is $4,000 retail moots should get $3,000 and the dealer $1,000 Or something along hose lines depending on the split