Brand loyalty is BS.

[AndrewS]

Dovetailing on my '80s innovation thread and Cervelo response, added with a crummy evening and too much to drink, I'd just like to say that the idea of brand reputation is pure crap.

Several brands led the way from the postwar era of brazed, lugged frames into an era of tig welding, custom geometry, unusual materials and composite structures. How many of them are left? Litespeed and Lynskey are denigrated as second tier providers, Kestrel sells through Bikesdirect, Merlin pretty much doesn't exist and Aegis is a company that no one has ever even heard of. Fat City closed it's doors, Gary Klein, Gary Fisher and Keith Bontrager had to sell their souls to keep in business.

The companies that managed to keep their prices so remote that they forever seemed premium did fine, regardless of how much they actually stuck their neck out in the market. The brands that leveraged their enormous market share also did fine, avoiding offending any market segment enough to get them in hot water as they released uninspired renditions of their competitors finest R&D efforts.

My sense that all branding comes down to these days is a good story, the right numbers and a good enough product for not many people to be able to take you to task for your designs. Where the hell did Felt come from? Or Blue, BMC and Wilier? Why did we pay lip service to Specialized M2 frames, when they didn't do anything that any 6000 series frame couldn't do? Who makes the finest composite frame, and who's responsibility is it to decide?

My sense is that the great debates between models are illusions, buoyed by marketing and supported by the tendency of adults to recommend anything they've already spent money on. We are told that every year, performance and ride gets better and better. We are also told that a mid-1970s frame made of 531 tubing offers a ride that is still good enough to win pro races. The truth is that it can't be both. Either bicycle frame technology is marching forward, or it is dabling in new ways just to hold our interest. I, despite a lot of reading, riding and thought, have no damn clue what's going on. Being 145 pounds, I'm never going to know how bad a TVT is or how glorious a Cervelo may or may not be. Either way, I'm justifiably puzzled.

I wish Kestrel was still respected as the people who made everything else possible. I wish Trek and Specialized were treated as the jack-of-all-trades, masters of little that they obviously are. And I wish experience and long term dedication was worthwhile in companies that don't have to be at the apex of bicycle pricing to prove it.

So ends the sermon.

[1centaur]

Apple's brand means something today. It did not 20 years ago, and it may not 10 years from now. Sony and Mercedes used to mean something, but both are fading. Brand meaning fades with time and management changes.

Carbon outsourcing means profit for CF makers but brand degradation. Serotta's brand means something but maybe it means something different inside the company than to the average buyer. Brand value in the bike business can be crushed in 12 months (Mavic) but takes years to build. Personal reputation can be crushed in 10 minutes but takes years to build. Brand value is like a winning streak; it's difficult to keep winning in bike making.

Brand management takes amazing focus and insight. Bike makers often lack both.

[Charles M]

Moving production off shore right now boils down not only to profit but in some cases a better product.

Material focus is misguided.

Cannondale just moved production of the CAAD overseas and they were behind the curve, holding out a lot longer than most. Loads of metal fab are already there and have been for years.


A lot of the off shore production is allowing companies to build with material and features they couldn't afford to do domestically (in North America AND Europe). Not all companies are taking advantage of the benefits (Parlee are a good example of a company that is taking advantage) but most companies are starting to be a little more demanding.

Branding is what it is. A function of product quality, product relevance (development) and image management. Good at all three and you grow. bad at any one of them and...

[veggieburger]

"My sense is that the great debates between models are illusions, buoyed by marketing and supported by the tendency of adults to recommend anything they've already spent money on."

Nail on the friggin head. If I hear one more company vomit more shyt out about their "Quatrenamy butted zinc-doped super alloy" (read - aluminum) I'm going to scream.

Furthermore, if a bike company is going to move production from N America to China but not follow up with EITHER exceptional quality control OR a drop in price, I'm spending my dollars elsewhere.

Is the money spent on R&D, then the blueprints sent to "the client's own manufacturing facilities" in the far east? Nope. More often than not, a frame is picked out of a catalog, tweaked here and there, then fancy decals are applied. Marketing dollars are thrown at said bike, and we are made to believe that it's much stiffer laterally, yet more compliant. Riiiiight.

As an aside, props to Cervelo and Specialized (among a few others) who actually do a little R&D.

[jeo99]

You guys are scaring me! Way too much thought. Just get out and ride! The key to all this stress is having a hobby that hirts more.

:beer:

BTW, try an keep your money in the good old U.S.A. It is harder to do but it can be done.

[oliver1850]

.

[sevencyclist]

Pez, it's interesting to hear you say that Cannondale was behind the curve. One of the reasons I remained interested in their bikes for 20 years was that they built them here. I thought they did a great job in manufacturing, innovation, and marketing. Plus they were a great value. Now that they've quit US production, I'm much less interested in their product. It's just another brand name now.
Just as OP was mentioning, brand-name superiority is transient, and often in one's perceived value. Cannondale might not really be less likely to break than Giant, but it was American made so it was "better.". People were willing to pay a higher price for something because of perceived value. I was willing to pay for Richard Sachs because of my perceived value, and I am happy with it. Could a Giant ride just as nice or better? Maybe, but I can't say I have tried all Giants, Trek, Cannondale, Waterford, Serotta etc. I have ridden plenty, and my Sachs can match and supercede many of the best of them in my opinion, but that is subjective. I guess nationality of person who built the frames, or operate the apparatus to build the frame also matters to some. Not in my value, but everyone has their own value rating.

[AndrewS]

Cannondale just moved production of the CAAD overseas and they were behind the curve, holding out a lot longer than most. Loads of metal fab are already there and have been for years.
"Cannondale" is a word, not a company. The first company went broke and was bought out awhile ago, and the second iteration died and the name sold to Pacific Cycle of Wisconsin (who makes nothing in the US), who will now import Cannondale-ish bikes from the orient. To say that Cannondale "moved" their production overseas kind of misses the reality.

Anyone interested in French bikes? I hear Bikesdirect.com has some sweet "Motobecanes". They've moved production to Taiwan and their business office from France to Florida.

[spartacus]

"Cannondale" is a word, not a company. The first company went broke and was bought out awhile ago, and the second iteration died and the name sold to Pacific Cycle of Wisconsin (who makes nothing in the US), who will now import Cannondale-ish bikes from the orient. To say that Cannondale "moved" their production overseas kind of misses the reality.

Anyone interested in French bikes? I hear Bikesdirect.com has some sweet "Motobecanes". They've moved production to Taiwan and their business office from France to Florida.

So Cannondale has done a Raleigh?

[victoryfactory]

If you're looking to "connect" with a brand, go with a smaller local company
who still has some connection with their own name. Attend a NAHBS show.
There are plenty of builders to connect with.

Otherwise go with a bigger (mainly offshore) outfit that has a good R&D setup
and a good price/performance ratio and a good customer service rep and who gets good reviews from guys like Pez and forget about "brand loyalty"

Is a Cannondale still a Cannondale?
Is a Masi still a Masi?
is a Cinelli still a Cinelli?
Is a Litepeed still a Litespeed?

In 20 years will a Serotta still be a Serotta?

Mr Serotta is one of the few that has attempted to walk the line between "handmade" and "corporate" mostly successfully, I think.

I suppose a maker could choose to go down with the ship (Sachs)
but most companies go on and morph into a new entity.

I understand the brand loyalty thing. I know that feeling of identifying with the
name on the downtube. But it seems that one of the results of time and
success is a shift of operations in personnel, ownership and product.

Going with brand loyalty is a minefield. Don't be like those "American made"
car owners who are surprised when they find out that their car's tranny was made in
Germany in a joint venture between a English and Swedish company and
then bolted to a Mexican body in Canada by Serbian immigrants.

It's a new world.

VF

[victoryfactory]

[I] If I hear one more company vomit more shyt out about their "Quatrenamy butted zinc-doped super alloy" (read - aluminum) I'm going to scream.
.

Ha Ha Ha Ha

My favorite is the 'ole "Biaxially ovalized down tube"
(read - They squish the top of the tube in one direction to weld it to the
HT and they squish the bottom of the tube in the other direction to weld it
to the BB)

Not that it doesn't work, it was just an early over size tube shaping strategy.

VF

[Climb01742]

Dovetailing on my '80s innovation thread and Cervelo response, added with a crummy evening and too much to drink, I'd just like to say that the idea of brand reputation is pure crap.

Several brands led the way from the postwar era of brazed, lugged frames into an era of tig welding, custom geometry, unusual materials and composite structures. How many of them are left? Litespeed and Lynskey are denigrated as second tier providers, Kestrel sells through Bikesdirect, Merlin pretty much doesn't exist and Aegis is a company that no one has ever even heard of. Fat City closed it's doors, Gary Klein, Gary Fisher and Keith Bontrager had to sell their souls to keep in business.

The companies that managed to keep their prices so remote that they forever seemed premium did fine, regardless of how much they actually stuck their neck out in the market. The brands that leveraged their enormous market share also did fine, avoiding offending any market segment enough to get them in hot water as they released uninspired renditions of their competitors finest R&D efforts.

My sense that all branding comes down to these days is a good story, the right numbers and a good enough product for not many people to be able to take you to task for your designs. Where the hell did Felt come from? Or Blue, BMC and Wilier? Why did we pay lip service to Specialized M2 frames, when they didn't do anything that any 6000 series frame couldn't do? Who makes the finest composite frame, and who's responsibility is it to decide?

My sense is that the great debates between models are illusions, buoyed by marketing and supported by the tendency of adults to recommend anything they've already spent money on. We are told that every year, performance and ride gets better and better. We are also told that a mid-1970s frame made of 531 tubing offers a ride that is still good enough to win pro races. The truth is that it can't be both. Either bicycle frame technology is marching forward, or it is dabling in new ways just to hold our interest. I, despite a lot of reading, riding and thought, have no damn clue what's going on. Being 145 pounds, I'm never going to know how bad a TVT is or how glorious a Cervelo may or may not be. Either way, I'm justifiably puzzled.

I wish Kestrel was still respected as the people who made everything else possible. I wish Trek and Specialized were treated as the jack-of-all-trades, masters of little that they obviously are. And I wish experience and long term dedication was worthwhile in companies that don't have to be at the apex of bicycle pricing to prove it.

So ends the sermon.

you're mixing issues here.

a "brand" is a story. an authentic sets of principles adhered to over time that fulfill a human need.

a product isn't a brand. most companies begin with a product. someone can build something. most often, that product was created to solve a particular problem. it was specific, limited and had no greater aim or purpose than to answer a question. which is all great but it's hard to build an enduring company on a single product.

most products, and certainly most bikes, were first built by an engineer, a tinkerer, a "craftsman". their skill was mechanical and/or technical.

brands are built by visionaries, usually obsessed, usually pains in the @sses (see steve jobs). apple builds great products but they all spring from, or at least conform to, jobs' vision of what elegant, simple, powerful, intuitive, beautiful objects should be like.

nike began as a waffle sole that evolved into a sports philosophy that an ad copywriter distilled into three words: just do it.

patagonia began as hand-forged climbing hardware that evolved into YC's philosophy of not just exploring the wilderness but saving it.

here's why there are so few great brands. a) it's f*cking hard. b) it's so much easier to chase short-term dollars with a helter-skelter product strategy. c) sticking to principles is always hard. especially for people who are employees, who only share a paycheck, and whose job depends on sales robustness not brand purity. d) founders die or retire or are pushed out. and finally, e) a brand is 99% about saying "no". no, this isn't us. no, this isn't good enough. no, this is a short-term fix. no, this is a fad. no, this is the easy way. no, let's leave that money on the table. no, i'd rather grow slow.

brand and product are very different. founders and employees are very different. and a principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

[soulspinner]

Ha Ha Ha Ha

My favorite is the 'ole "Biaxially ovalized down tube"
(read - They squish the top of the tube in one direction to weld it to the
HT and they squish the bottom of the tube in the other direction to weld it
to the BB)

Not that it doesn't work, it was just an early over size tube shaping strategy.

VF

Ya my Teesdale steel had this at the bb/st junction over a decade ago. I didnt even know it was going to be there, forget knowing the term bi-axialed...... :confused:

[spartacus]

Is it winter already?

[dancinkozmo]

brand loyalty IS b.s.
...no brand gives a crap about me , they just want my money...why should i care if sony or benz or trek or any brand fades into obscurity ?

[ergott]

I wish Trek and Specialized were treated as the jack-of-all-trades, masters of little that they obviously are. And I wish experience and long term dedication was worthwhile in companies that don't have to be at the apex of bicycle pricing to prove it.

So ends the sermon.

It's funny that you **** on Trek when they are one of the few that still make their high end road bikes in the US. They weren't the first to produce a carbon frame, but they've kept the bike at the top of the offerings out there the whole time while keeping production here.

[Frankwurst]

Is it winter already?

Pre season. :beer:

[Dave B]

Does where a product is made make the experience of it less or more appealing?

Don't know. I am sure folks who lust after a colnago would love that it came form Italy with a super record 11 group made in Italy and all of the other Italian goodies.

If all of it are made in Asia, is that something that is going to hinder how it rides or take away form your experience on the bike?

I completely understand the desire to "buy American" and some folks really go after that experience, however does it change how the bike performs or operates? If it is about being loyal to the US, then purchase these things here at a lbs and support the people who support you.

I buy and ride IF...they are made here, but there are of course parts on both bikes that are made here or over seas. I guess to each their own, but loyalty to a brand is more important to me then where it is made. Cannondale used to be the bikes that broke all of the time. I have heard "Crack-n-fail" used to describe the brand more times then I care to. However, when production left the states the quality increased or better yet failure of the frames went down.

What gets me is that if it is cheaper to make overseas, then why are they still charging $6K to $8K for a complete bike. I call bs on that one!

[dekindy]

Wasn't there a study presented recently that indicated that cyclists and bicyclists have not gotten faster?

[oldpotatoe]

"We are also told that a mid-1970s frame made of 531 tubing offers a ride that is still good enough to win pro races."

It may not ride as well(subjective), not shift as well(subjective) but I just overhauled a 1972 Raleigh with Nuovo Record and once again was impressed by it's simplicity, straight forward design and ease of service. Yes it's not whizbang composite(It's 531), not magic lever muonted shifting and it has 'odd' gearing(52/34 rings) but gee, it works so well. It goes forward, the chain moves from gear to gear, the brakes stop, it disappears beneath one as you go ride from here to there. Even tho the grease was a yellow hard paste in the HS, BB and hubs, a cleaning and new balls and they feel like new.

I donno, I like mide 60s Alfas and Porsches also....And a beautiful 21 window WITH sunroof VW bus just parked in front of the shop....

[SamIAm]

you're mixing issues here.

a "brand" is a story. an authentic sets of principles adhered to over time that fulfill a human need.

a product isn't a brand. most companies begin with a product. someone can build something. most often, that product was created to solve a particular problem. it was specific, limited and had no greater aim or purpose than to answer a question. which is all great but it's hard to build an enduring company on a single product.

most products, and certainly most bikes, were first built by an engineer, a tinkerer, a "craftsman". their skill was mechanical and/or technical.

brands are built by visionaries, usually obsessed, usually pains in the @sses (see steve jobs). apple builds great products but they all spring from, or at least conform to, jobs' vision of what elegant, simple, powerful, intuitive, beautiful objects should be like.

nike began as a waffle sole that evolved into a sports philosophy that an ad copywriter distilled into three words: just do it.

patagonia began as hand-forged climbing hardware that evolved into YC's philosophy of not just exploring the wilderness but saving it.

here's why there are so few great brands. a) it's f*cking hard. b) it's so much easier to chase short-term dollars with a helter-skelter product strategy. c) sticking to principles is always hard. especially for people who are employees, who only share a paycheck, and whose job depends on sales robustness not brand purity. d) founders die or retire or are pushed out. and finally, e) a brand is 99% about saying "no". no, this isn't us. no, this isn't good enough. no, this is a short-term fix. no, this is a fad. no, this is the easy way. no, let's leave that money on the table. no, i'd rather grow slow.

brand and product are very different. founders and employees are very different. and a principle isn't a principle until it costs you money.

I run a brand protection division of a large corporation and I can tell you from my perspective Climb gets it big time and I guess with his advertising background he should! Good post.

[rugbysecondrow]

I run a brand protection division of a large corporation and I can tell you from my perspective Climb gets it big time and I guess with his advertising background he should! Good post.


I think the best and most successful example of branding is Rivendell. Whatever you think of the products or the brand, for those who DO buy into it, they really dig it and they are loyal. Rivendell used frames/bikes have a strong resale partially due to this branding, also due to a scarcity of some frames/short runs of frames that has created a stronger demand. A great combo IMO. The Rivendell brand still helps sell 1990s Bridgestone bikes that that GP touched/influenced, and often for a price much greater than the original purchase price...that is impressive. Rivendell sells a lifestyle product (think Harly Davidson) that once purchased, licenses the rider to a whole array of other products that another rider of a Trek could not pull off. To repeat, they don't sell bikes, they sell a brand. Trek, Cannondale and others sell bikes, bikes that are perceived by most consumers as interchangeable and of equal quality.

[wtex]

I run a brand protection division of a large corporation and I can tell you from my perspective Climb gets it big time and I guess with his advertising background he should! Good post.

Saw an Independent Lens show on PBS last night, apparently Just Do It originated with Gary Gilmore:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/business/media/20adco.html

[1centaur]

IMO, climb's version is one way that brand value is created and maintained, but it's not the only one. "Brand value" I view as a feeling about a brand that extends beyond the specifics of the product at hand and makes purchase more likely. Consumers want to buy that product because they believe the maker is not just delivering a product that is acceptable at the price, they're delivering something that's better, more carefully considered, part of a bigger whole, whether it's a philosophy of life or a vision of quality. Brand value can be an impression from the outside or it can be a defined vision that is effectively communicated, but in either case it exists in the consumer's mind or it does not exist. It's not a mission statement that lives within the company while the consumer is unaware of it. Sony created an impression of building more quality into their electronics by charging more and having features earlier and feeling less cheaply plastic than their competition. I'm not aware of a philosophy behind that, but the impression made people willing to pay more. They lost their way a little on that in recent years. Mercedes had the door thunk and the quality image in the US though not as much in Germany. It was excellent execution that made consumers believe whatever rolled down the line would be quality. Again, that's been reduced in recent years.

Asian bike outsourcing degrades brand image not because it decreases product quality but because the impression is that 3 factories are producing everyone's bikes for very little money. In contrast, a Sachs or Serotta is associated with being the best, being slow enough to be the best, and charging whatever it takes to be the best. While Bob Parlee has had some success in both execution (very similar to US production in feel) and messaging (Bob goes to Asia and really pushes them hard to produce Parlee quality), the end of Peabody-only production inevitably loosens the public's view, right or wrong, on what a high end bike maker in the US is. Ironically, Apple outsources production to anonymous factories and nobody cares, but that's because they did not start by building those products in Cupertino and then outsource. Unfair, but true.


BTW, I don't think Nike has much brand value. They produce a grab bag of whatever, their shoes have overglue runs and fall apart just as fast as the competition, and they're not at the forefront of athletic apparel innovation. They're just a big company, and have the brand name advantages that any big company would have over Joe Smith running shoes, but stick them on a shelf with Reebok and Asics and I think most people would be indifferent. "Just Do It" was a good slogan for a season, but Nike strikes me as a company that tries to create brand image at corporate meetings but fails past the company gates.

[ergott]

Here's a question for you all.

How many of you wouldn't fork up the cash for a new Serotta, but will gladly wait and find a used one for sail for half or less?

Most people look for a deal and will nickle and dime their way into one when they can.

You can't be upset at the companies that reduce production cost to keep prices down. I haven't heard of a singe bike company CEO in the Fortune 500.

[Climb01742]

IMO, climb's version is one way that brand value is created and maintained, but it's not the only one. "Brand value" I view as a feeling about a brand that extends beyond the specifics of the product at hand and makes purchase more likely. Consumers want to buy that product because they believe the maker is not just delivering a product that is acceptable at the price, they're delivering something that's better, more carefully considered, part of a bigger whole, whether it's a philosophy of life or a vision of quality. Brand value can be an impression from the outside or it can be a defined vision that is effectively communicated, but in either case it exists in the consumer's mind or it does not exist. It's not a mission statement that lives within the company while the consumer is unaware of it. Sony created an impression of building more quality into their electronics by charging more and having features earlier and feeling less cheaply plastic than their competition. I'm not aware of a philosophy behind that, but the impression made people willing to pay more. They lost their way a little on that in recent years. Mercedes had the door thunk and the quality image in the US though not as much in Germany. It was excellent execution that made consumers believe whatever rolled down the line would be quality. Again, that's been reduced in recent years.

you're right. a brand is a place inside of a person that a company "owns". it is a piece of real estate in our psyche. on the most fundamental level, a brand can only live inside a consumer. but, and this is a huge but, it can only live there if it has first been "lived" by the company and its products, and then, somehow, communicated to the consumer, by experience or media.

it's often hard to quantify "brand value" but i once saw a perfect example. once while working on a car account, i saw a research slide. it was in the early 90s, when lexus was new and trying to challenge MB. the slide charted ad spending by lexus and MB, and overlayed the spending on sales figures. what did the slide show?

when lexus spent, its sales spiked. when they went "dark", sales fell. when MB spent, its sales were steady. when they went dark, their sales were steady. lexus was building a brand. MB had a brand. MB sales were based on nearly a century of brand experience, so temporal ad buys impacted awareness, not sales. MB was maintaining. lexus was building. lexus "bought" sales by spending. today, it would be fascinating to see if the roles have been reversed.

BTW, at the time, Lexus was spending 3X what MB was, but MB out sold lexus. that is brand value.

[Dekonick]

brand loyalty IS b.s.
...no brand gives a crap about me , they just want my money...why should i care if sony or benz or trek or any brand fades into obscurity ?

Not necessarily true. For the most part you are correct, but there are brands that DO care about their reputation... take Serotta for example. On more than one occasion they have gone above and beyond to make things right. The ti quill stem issue, the fork dropout deal... they did not have to actively pursue replacement and/or repair but did. They have also taken bikes back for repaint and found rust in a top tube (where internal cable routing was often used) then gone and replaced the top tube free - along with a free re-paint. This is NOT a requirement by contract, but a BRAND staying true to an earned reputation. Serotta has earned my loyalty and I will remain so as long as they stay true.

Rant over - I am going to carve pumpkins then go ride my bike. :D

[jeo99]

Going with brand loyalty is a minefield. Don't be like those "American made"
car owners who are surprised when they find out that their car's tranny was made in
Germany in a joint venture between a English and Swedish company and
then bolted to a Mexican body in Canada by Serbian immigrants.

It's a new world.

VF[/QUOTE]

It is in-fact a new world! American car companies are forced to go offshore to compete in an unfair market(thank-you China)(and Japan) or go out of business without Abama help. But what does Globalization really mean? Does it mean that the rest of the world lives the life we live? Or does it mean that we will live the way the of rest of the world, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. And lets not forget the middle-class. It is eroding away. Look at any economic data in the last ten years in the U.S. for the middle class. Have you lost your job? Do you think your kids will live the life you lead? If you think that is O.K. fine, welcome to Globalization. Am I a protectionist? Yes and proud of it. I for one have not given up on the American craftsmen! I have given up on the American marketer and sales B.S. If you want true Globalization lets contract out (of course to the lowest bidder,China) to make all the arms for our military. Better yet contract the entire military operations out so our sons and daughters can stay safely home and we save big money.
Now ask me how I really feel. Sorry, just my rant as I get tired of this global crap.

:crap:

[HenryA]

"a "brand" is a story. an authentic sets of principles adhered to over time that fulfill a human need."

This is "brand" at its best or ideal version. Its what the agency says when they're selling it. And sometimes its even real.

The real truth in most of day to day life is that "brand" is something to whore out -- real fast and real hard. Its usually done by someone with a sharp eye for opportunity. The checks gush to the bank for a while and the sharp guy or gal gets slapped on the back and congratulated for their genius. Then the money flow slows down and finally stops when they've squeezed most all the blood out. Later, the carcass gets passed on to someone else who thinks they see another drop of blood or two left.

You'll be doing yourself and the world a huge favor by looking past the BS and trying to see what's underneath. Fake "branding" needs to be seen through for what it is.

.

[I Want Sachs?]

it is very interesting that many on this forum equate Asia with poor quality and American made with good quality. Many on this thread are also mentioning decline of Mercedes as a brand. Interesting to note that this decline seems to correlate with moving their production to US.

[AndrewS]

It's funny that you **** on Trek when they are one of the few that still make their high end road bikes in the US. They weren't the first to produce a carbon frame, but they've kept the bike at the top of the offerings out there the whole time while keeping production here.
My opinion of Trek is more about WHAT they offer, which to me as always been mostly uninspired, but that is just opinion.

As far as them "keeping production here", the only Treks still made here are 6.0 level Madones and the equivalent. Every 5 series bike on down are made overseas, so the only domestic manufacture are their bikes that start at $4000. When I was a Trek dealer in the '90s, domestic Treks started at $500.

By contrast, Specialized, who we think of as all overseas production, has built some of their highest end frames in the US, too. I'd say the contrast is weakening.


While some of you have taken the title and run with it, my major point was simply that bicycle consumers are fickle, and have very short attention spans. When you get what you want - fair price for the newest technology, you praise the brand to heaven. But the moment their tech seems even slightly less fashionable, everybody bails.

The models for avoiding this seem to be having so much stuff that you can absorb model sales failures, or pricing your goods so high that they become unquestionably premium (which speaks to Ergott's second post). The reason Gucci can sell a quartz watch for $3000 is similar to the reason why IF can sell a straight guage Ti frame for $4000.

The mistake premium brands make is offering the public what it wants - a less expensive model. Then the brand becomes suspect and everybody loses interest. The best thing Serotta can do for itself is to continue to price its products like they do, and avoid any sort of bargain frameset. The reason Cervelo is getting out of online sales is that they don't want to be tomorrow's Kestrel, Klein or Litespeed. In my opinion, more than half of the branding equation is price, and how the relative wallet damage affects perceptions of real value.

[jeo99]

it is very interesting that many on this forum equate Asia with poor quality and American made with good quality. Many on this thread are also mentioning decline of Mercedes as a brand. Interesting to note that this decline seems to correlate with moving their production to US.

Mercedes is here because it is cheaper to build here than Europe. Plus they used the hugh cash reserves that Chrysler had when they bought them to finance those models! The same can be said for BMW and shortly Volkswagen who failed miseably years ago in Pennsylvania. I dealt first hand with Asian suppliers. Japan is good and Korea is very good. I will not agree that to be the case in China. Not fair to lump all Asia.

;)

[Charles M]

you're right. a brand is a place inside of a person that a company "owns"


I agree 99% but would say it's a place that's rented. You can evict that brand for a lot of reasons. And depending on the person, it can range from easy to impossible to rent that space...


So Cannondale has done a Raleigh?


No, and they didnt to a Motobecane either. :rolleyes: Cannondale were never reduced to naming / brand rights only, and the suggestion of that shows a deep and empty well of industry knowledge.


I know People that have been at Cannondale throughout the companies many changes, from the Montgomery days, pre moto, that are still there. Key people that are good at what they do.

Cannondale are still very good at product design and development and they're still very good at production. The fact that the production is not in the US is different that saying they dont control it quality of product.

In fact they are so good that other leaders in the bike industry consult with them on things ranging from components and chain rings to frames.

People should put what ever value they want on production location. That's all good! But saying they were reduced to the same level as Motobecane is pretty stupid.


[[Originally Posted by AndrewS
I wish Trek and Specialized were treated as the jack-of-all-trades, masters of little that they obviously are. And I wish experience and long term dedication was worthwhile in companies that don't have to be at the apex of bicycle pricing to prove it.

So ends the sermon.]]


It's funny that you **** on Trek when they are one of the few that still make their high end road bikes in the US. They weren't the first to produce a carbon frame, but they've kept the bike at the top of the offerings out there the whole time while keeping production here.


Trek are another company that have staff that have been around for a VERY long time.

While TREK they may not be everyone's brand of choice, they have certainly earned their place. They donate to cycling advocacy on a level that is several times the total revenue of a few of our favorite smaller builders combined.


That's not a swipe at smaller builders at all, as smaller guys is where my money and time go... But the comment against Trek smacks of the same lack of practical industry knowledge as in comparing Cannondale with Motobecane.

[oliver1850]

.

[oliver1850]

.

[AndrewS]

I don't think anyone believes any more that the country of manufacture dictates quality. I think preferring certain countries or domestic production comes down to two issues:

1. Trade protectionism. Something less than 1% of bicycles sold in the US were made here. Trade protection is a sketchy concept, since we want to sell overseas, too, but there comes a point when you become personally complicit in exporting your home country's wealth to lands that you don't really even like.

2. The connection between design and production. Everybody always wants to show you their computer models. But I believe the best bikes are still designed and built in house, where a slightly different ride can be found that same day. Obviously, this isn't necessary for the majority of bikes whose characteristics were well understood 30 years ago, but when you are selling bare frames for several thousand dollars, it is comforting to know that refining the design didn't take conference calls and interpreters. But the age of expensive compression dies does mean that a hand made prototype is not the same thing as what comes out of the mold, so maybe it doesn't matter when we're talking about the majority of shaped carbon frames.


Apologies to all about Cannondale - they still have an office in PA. I misunderstood the people I was talking to at Pacific when this was first starting.

[Climb01742]

I agree 99% but would say it's a place that's rented.

funny. out on my bike, i wished i had written exactly that. ;) own is the ideal. rent is the reality.

[djg]

brand loyalty IS b.s.
...no brand gives a crap about me , they just want my money...why should i care if sony or benz or trek or any brand fades into obscurity ?

I dunno. Why should you care if your favorite restaurant folds and disappears? I mean, it's not the death of a loved one, or a civilization, and life goes on. But maybe you liked the place and maybe you liked what they did there. And maybe you had some sort of relationship with some of the folks who worked there, even if they weren't your BFFs, or true loves, or your kids. To the extent the folks at the restaurant do something distinctive and appreciated, maybe you'd miss it if it were gone.

I like the Serotta brand. I tend to like their bikes. I've bought several. I've liked other bikes too, and life would go on -- my own little personal thing with cycling would go on -- if Serotta were to close doors. Still, I think it would be a darn shame.

Really big companies? The personal aspects of the business relationship start to get attenuated. I don't know anybody at Sony. OTOH, folks might be BMW buffs, or Porsche buffs, or fans of Ford trucks, and they find value where they find it.

[1centaur]

The Mercedes/Lexus example was excellent. I'll remember it.

One tiny quibble - where brand starts. If we agree that brand exists as an impression in the consumer's mind, I'd argue that there's no reason to believe that impression started with a plan/vision/philosophy at the manufacturer. Sometimes companies are wise to figure out what impression they have unintentionally created and then adopt that as their brand after the fact. I bet you've seen a lot of companies spending time or money pushing a brand image that conflicts with the existing brand image. Sometimes that's necessary (i.e., if the brand image is poor), but sometimes it's ego. If a company is lucky, it gets a good brand image after making some good choices in products/service and then can adopt the image and reinforce it.

To AndrewS's original point, I think brand value is tough in the bike business because reinvention is a way of life for manufacturers and the frame is not the product, the frame with other people's components is the product. To the extent people like to say material doesn't matter and weight doesn't matter, the frame becomes something that does the job without breaking and looks good. Hard to build meaningful brand image around such a limp core in a mass produced, outsourced item. Even if material and weight matter, there's plenty of material competition at any given weight point. Reviews on line are mostly glowing, reviews by ex-racers in magazines are not very helpful. Between the best and the average there is only subtlety about which people disagree - consensus is hard to tease out.

[RPS]

Regardless of what the correct definition of a “brand” is, in my opinion it represents different things to different people. I personally equate a brand with trust. The emotional stuff discussed by many means very little to me – or so I think :rolleyes: . I know to others the emotional connection can mean a lot but not to me.

I trust a great brand will offer quality, safety, durability, long-term value, etc… depending on what it is. I expect more of a branded product and will pay an incremental cost for it because of that trust – meaning I’m taking less of a risk buying that branded product. And because of the greater expectations I am loyal to certain product brands – Samsung TVs, Honda cars, Coca-Cola, etc…

Likewise I’d trust a Serotta more than I would a no-name branded bike – whether American or foreign. It’s not like it will keep me warm at night, nor will I hang it on the wall as art. I just want a bike to ride. Any value I connect to a bicycle brand has to represent deliverables, not a warm and fuzzy feeling.

[Climb01742]

One tiny quibble - where brand starts. If we agree that brand exists as an impression in the consumer's mind, I'd argue that there's no reason to believe that impression started with a plan/vision/philosophy at the manufacturer. Sometimes companies are wise to figure out what impression they have unintentionally created and then adopt that as their brand after the fact. I bet you've seen a lot of companies spending time or money pushing a brand image that conflicts with the existing brand image. Sometimes that's necessary (i.e., if the brand image is poor), but sometimes it's ego. If a company is lucky, it gets a good brand image after making some good choices in products/service and then can adopt the image and reinforce it.

we're agreeing but just using slightly different words. a "brand" begins within a company, but sometimes it begins as a "business" strategy or as a "product design". it begins when a company does something right. customers notice. and it evolves.

sometimes, a business strategy leads to a brand strategy. other times, a brand strategy shapes a business strategy. some are unearthed after the fact. some are there at the beginning. many roads to mecca.

but i think we can agree that it is, really, two sides of the same coin. companies take actions. consumers value those actions, positively or negatively, and form an impression of that company. good companies then react to those impressions. and consumers evaluate those reactions. round and round it goes. the sum total of those actions+valuations is a brand.

and yes, the worst thing a company can do is try to project a brand image that is contradicted by their actions. today that's more true than ever. there are too many ways today for the truth of a company's actions to come to light. the truth is ultimately any company's brand.

[ergott]

Quality is not a where it's a standard. You can get quality anywhere you are willing to pay for it.

[I Want Sachs?]

Mercedes is here because it is cheaper to build here than Europe. Plus they used the hugh cash reserves that Chrysler had when they bought them to finance those models! The same can be said for BMW and shortly Volkswagen who failed miseably years ago in Pennsylvania. I dealt first hand with Asian suppliers. Japan is good and Korea is very good. I will not agree that to be the case in China. Not fair to lump all Asia.

;)
exactly! We tend to equate cheaper labor with poor quality. so cheaper US labor makes inferior quality cars than Europe? In Korea's case, their labor is still cheaper than US, but I personally do not think inferior in quality. similarly for Taiwan with their quality being as good as US if not better at a cheape labor price. (This is the space where most of higher quality carbon frames occupy.) China is anothere story. (This is where cheaper bikes reside.) It is hit or miss, so the inconsistency is viewed as inferior. although Apple seems to be able to make their Chinese affiliates perform.

[sg8357]

If you don't want to buy brands you can buy from people instead.

I can have a personal relationship with a person, not so much
with the theological construct of a bunch of highly trained brand managers.

[Rueda Tropical]

Most manufacturing countries are capable of making excellent products. IF that's what the requirement is. It depends on the clients priorities. It seems a high percentage of buyers of Chinese manufacture are interested in maximizing margins. They don't go to China to get the best quality product. They go to get the cheapest.

That is not to say the Chinese are not capable at this point of producing many products equal to Japan, Taiwan, Germany or the US (they currently have the most advanced electric car battery in the world), but their "brand" was not built on that. So there clientele has self selected for how cheap can you make it and how much can I mark it up?

I've had more then a few clients who were getting products made in China who did not give a crap if the product performed at all. All they cared about was the potential margin and the sales spiel.

[dancinkozmo]

If you don't want to buy brands you can buy from people instead.

I can have a personal relationship with a person, not so much
with the theological construct of a bunch of highly trained brand managers.


yes !!!!

[Pete Serotta]

you're mixing issues here.

a "brand" is a story. an authentic sets of principles adhered to over time that fulfill a human need.

a product isn't a brand. most companies begin with a product. someone can build something. most often, that product was created to solve a particular problem. it was specific, limited and had no greater aim or purpose than to answer a question. which is all great but it's hard to build an enduring company on a single product.

most products, and certainly most bikes, were first built by an engineer, a tinkerer, a "craftsman". their skill was mechanical and/or technical.

brands are built by visionaries, usually obsessed, usually pains in the @sses (see steve jobs). apple builds great products but they all spring from, or at least conform to, jobs' vision of what elegant, simple, powerful, intuitive, beautiful objects should be like.

nike began as a waffle sole that evolved into a sports philosophy that an ad copywriter distilled into three words: just do it.

patagonia began as hand-forged climbing hardware that evolved into YC's philosophy of not just exploring the wilderness but saving it.

here's why there are so few great brands. a) it's f*cking hard. b) it's so much easier to chase short-term dollars with a helter-skelter product strategy. c) sticking to principles is always hard. especially for people who are employees, who only share a paycheck, and whose job depends on sales robustness not brand purity. d) founders die or retire or are pushed out. and finally, e) a brand is 99% about saying "no". no, this isn't us. no, this isn't good enough. no, this is a short-term fix. no, this is a fad. no, this is the easy way. no, let's leave that money on the table. no, i'd rather grow slow.

brand and product are very different. founders and employees are very different. and a principle isn't a principle until it costs you money. :banana:

[HenryA]

If you don't want to buy brands you can buy from people instead.

I can have a personal relationship with a person, not so much
with the theological construct of a bunch of highly trained brand managers.

+100

[rounder]

"To AndrewS's original point, I think brand value is tough in the bike business because reinvention is a way of life for manufacturers and the frame is not the product, the frame with other people's components is the product. To the extent people like to say material doesn't matter and weight doesn't matter, the frame becomes something that does the job without breaking and looks good. Hard to build meaningful brand image around such a limp core in a mass produced, outsourced item. Even if material and weight matter, there's plenty of material competition at any given weight point. Reviews on line are mostly glowing, reviews by ex-racers in magazines are not very helpful. Between the best and the average there is only subtlety about which people disagree - consensus is hard to tease out.[/QUOTE]"

I really like this thread discussion, but it seems to revolve around big manufacturers. When it comes to small bike builders who do what they do to build a brand i like Richard's philosophy (and believe that other builders share it)..

The lug is not the frame.
The geometry is not the frame.
The alignment is not the frame.
The material is not the frame.
The frame is the frame.

[1centaur]

For e-R the man is the brand; which I think is true for small builders in general. The Smoked Out section of VS illustrates that well.

For Giant or Specialized, the frame is the frame too. For buyers in either case, how the frame became the frame is very important to how the brand impression is created. The larger the maker the greater the difficulty of conveying the thought/care/passion that goes into the frame. If Bob Parlee started making frames in Asia and never said a word about it, his brand image would not be what it is after well timed articles in the right places described how he made sure what he learned in Peabody was being done in Asia. Similarly, Serotta's factory video and Time's magazine profiles on self-weaving carbon and using women to apply decals because they are more precise than men are vital to humanizing, and thus increasing the consumer connection with, the manufacturer.

[veggieburger]

To be quite honest, I don't mind buying products from Asia. If the quality is good (sometimes it is, sometimes not so much) and it suits my need, no problem. I'll also buy a bicycle made in the US or Belgium assuming it's good quality and it suits my needs.

What pi$$es me off is when the price doesn't reflect a lower production cost and/or the manufacturer somehow tries to convince me that this new item is vastly superior to last year's model. In other words, don't treat me like an idiot. Cino Cinelli no longer owns the company. Maybe Ugo DeRosa spends more time sipping bitters on the back porch than tinkering in the workshop. I get it, companies change.

However, in the end I would rather buy from an unapologetic Asian bike builder who makes a decent frame than (for egs) an Italy-based company who makes sure 43.5% of the painting takes place on European soil so they can slap a "made in Italy" badge on a Taiwanese bike. My $.02.

[oldpotatoe]

AndrewS-"The mistake premium brands make is offering the public what it wants - a less expensive model. Then the brand becomes suspect and everybody loses interest. The best thing Serotta can do for itself is to continue to price its products like they do, and avoid any sort of bargain frameset. The reason Cervelo is getting out of online sales is that they don't want to be tomorrow's Kestrel, Klein or Litespeed. In my opinion, more than half of the branding equation is price, and how the relative wallet damage affects perceptions of real value.
Reply With Quote

The market is full of examples like this. Baby Benz 190, 'Peoples' Porsche 914, Rolex quartz watches...

I'd say do one thing and do it well. If you want to be high end, do that well.
I think Campagnolo should dump Centaur and Veloce..do Chorus in all aluminum, then Chorus, SR, SR Ti and dump the rest.

But in spite of my Tattoo, they don't listen to me.

[SEABREEZE]

The reason most if not all brand bike companies are now in the orient, is to stay competitive from a financial perspective, the smaller custom house that remains in the US fills another niche, more likely the folks who are frequent subscribers to bike forums. The masses for the most part are not even aware of the smaller custom builders, they relate and rely on BRAND NAMES...

To the bike Conosur, brand and marketing may be BS, but to the masses, it means much more. Sence of quality, reliability, longevity,style, it all depends how good a job, the marketing team, does there job..

It relates to there personal knowledge, which the masses lack, compared to the bike conosur...

[johnnymossville]

Brand loyalty isn't total BS. When I lived close by, I used to buy milk from my Uncle's dairy farm because I wanted to support his business and I liked the milk. Sometimes I buy a particular brand of car because I have relatives that work in the factory that makes them, and I want to help them continue having a job, and I like the vehicles.

If you buy a product because you like the logo more than the next guy's, it might be shallow, but there's nothing wrong with that. It's your money I won't tell you how to spend it. That's what politicians do.

There are a million reasons to buy or to not buy one particular brand over another. It all depends on what matters to you.

[Pete Serotta]

Brand loyalty isn't total BS. When I lived close by, I used to buy milk from my Uncle's dairy farm because I wanted to support his business and I liked the milk. Sometimes I buy a particular brand of car because I have relatives that work in the factory that makes them, and I want to help them continue having a job, and I like the vehicles.

If you buy a product because you like the logo more than the next guy's, it might be shallow, but there's nothing wrong with that. It's your money I won't tell you how to spend it. That's what politicians do.

There are a million reasons to buy or to not buy one particular brand over another. It all depends on what matters to you.
:) Pete

[EDS]

[I]Is the money spent on R&D, then the blueprints sent to "the client's own manufacturing facilities" in the far east? Nope. More often than not, a frame is picked out of a catalog, tweaked here and there, then fancy decals are applied. Marketing dollars are thrown at said bike, and we are made to believe that it's much stiffer laterally, yet more compliant. Riiiiight.

Which reputable brands do this?

[Pete Serotta]

AndrewS-"The mistake premium brands make is offering the public what it wants - a less expensive model. Then the brand becomes suspect and everybody loses interest. The best thing Serotta can do for itself is to continue to price its products like they do, and avoid any sort of bargain frameset. The reason Cervelo is getting out of online sales is that they don't want to be tomorrow's Kestrel, Klein or Litespeed. In my opinion, more than half of the branding equation is price, and how the relative wallet damage affects perceptions of real value.
Reply With Quote

The market is full of examples like this. Baby Benz 190, 'Peoples' Porsche 914, Rolex quartz watches...

I'd say do one thing and do it well. If you want to be high end, do that well.
I think Campagnolo should dump Centaur and Veloce..do Chorus in all aluminum, then Chorus, SR, SR Ti and dump the rest.

But in spite of my Tattoo, they don't listen to me.

well said :banana: :banana: and I do not have a tatoo nor hair :D PETE

[Ralph]

Mercedes is currently advertising "why buy a Camry when for the same amount of money you can drive a Mercedes" (C Class I guess). That sure makes the owners of hi end Mercedes feel good.....knowing every $500 a week secretary can drive a vehicle with same name as theirs. I think BMW has done the same thing.

I used to buy hi end cars. Before I retired....it went with the job. But stopped that some years ago. Now just buy what my needs require. Expensive cars just a sign of debt (or wasted cash), not of "success" (for most), if that's important to you. If you want to make a statement....buy a jet.

Good point about Campy. Keep products first class, charge accordingly, and keep the image high and one of being exclusive. Businessees who attempt to compete on price only are destined to fail. Campagnolo does not have the resources to compete with Shimano and Sram on price with entry level products.

[phillybill]

I lean towards local and US frame builder anymore... I prefer steel frames and do not fit the mass market frames that well.

[jeo99]

Well stated particularly: "It all depends on what matters to you" If contributing to the economy of your neighbors matters to you, just maybe your neighbors will return the favor.
:beer:


Brand loyalty isn't total BS. When I lived close by, I used to buy milk from my Uncle's dairy farm because I wanted to support his business and I liked the milk. Sometimes I buy a particular brand of car because I have relatives that work in the factory that makes them, and I want to help them continue having a job, and I like the vehicles.

If you buy a product because you like the logo more than the next guy's, it might be shallow, but there's nothing wrong with that. It's your money I won't tell you how to spend it. That's what politicians do.

There are a million reasons to buy or to not buy one particular brand over another. It all depends on what matters to you.

[fourflys]

Mercedes is currently advertising "why buy a Camry when for the same amount of money you can drive a Mercedes" (C Class I guess). .

because it makes the C class owner feel good that he or she is driving a Mercedes rather then a Camery (no offense to Camery owners)... when I park my C class next to an Accord or Camery, I just like the looks of my C better... now, having said that I have no delusions that my C is anything near an S class or even an E...

I would imagine if someone rolls up to a charity ride on their Colnago CLX, they probably have a bit more of sense of satisfaction than the guy next to them on the similar priced Trek or Specialized... nothing wrong with either bike, some people just like the former better... maybe it's smugness, but it's what people like...

BTW- I've owned Accords and my wife currently has an Accord coupe... My '06 C class is head and shoulders above the Accord in terms of technology and refinement IMHO... and I also paid less for the C than a new Civic would cost (bought used)...

[Charles M]

because it makes the C class owner feel good that he or she is driving a Mercedes rather then a Camery (no offense to Camery owners)... when I park my C class next to an Accord or Camery, I just like the looks of my C better... now, having said that I have no delusions that my C is anything near an S class or even an E...

I would imagine if someone rolls up to a charity ride on their Colnago CLX, they probably have a bit more of sense of satisfaction than the guy next to them on the similar priced Trek or Specialized... nothing wrong with either bike, some people just like the former better... maybe it's smugness, but it's what people like...

BTW- I've owned Accords and my wife currently has an Accord coupe... My '06 C class is head and shoulders above the Accord in terms of technology and refinement IMHO... and I also paid less for the C than a new Civic would cost (bought used)...


You stop in tour C class and, given recalls for brakes from Honda and Toyota... Maybe they dont ;)

I would own a car from any of the three... their brand "rent" is paid up for a while.

[sjbraun]

Fourflys wrote:

"I would imagine if someone rolls up to a charity ride on their Colnago CLX, they probably have a bit more of sense of satisfaction than the guy next to them on the similar priced Trek or Specialized..."

No wild assumptions being made here.
The guy on the Trek might feel very satisfied with his bike. Are you suggesting that satisfaction is tied to the brand or do you just think a CLX is a better bike than a Madone?

[bobswire]

Brand loyalty isn't total BS. When I lived close by, I used to buy milk from my Uncle's dairy farm because I wanted to support his business and I liked the milk. Sometimes I buy a particular brand of car because I have relatives that work in the factory that makes them, and I want to help them continue having a job, and I like the vehicles.

If you buy a product because you like the logo more than the next guy's, it might be shallow, but there's nothing wrong with that. It's your money I won't tell you how to spend it. That's what politicians do.

There are a million reasons to buy or to not buy one particular brand over another. It all depends on what matters to you.

Being a "blue collar" guy all my life, FORD. First car I ever owned was a 1959 Ford Fairlane and probably the last car I'll ever own is my present Ford Explorer. In between I've owned at least a dozen autos but Fords have been
my work horses.
Smokers are by and large "brand" loyal and so are alcohol consumers, whether that be beer , wine or hard liquor.

[Bob Loblaw]

Brand loyalty can be a mistake if it means your mind is closed. There are a lot of nice bikes out there. If you hone in on one brand (or country or vintage), you might be missing out on the chance to own something truly sweet and satisfying. There are a lot of nice bikes out there. A lot of nice cars and watches too.

BL

[zap]

snip

... when I park my C class next to an Accord or Camery, I just like the looks of my C better... now, having said that I have no delusions that my C is anything near an S class or even an E...



Actually, the new E Class is very much like the current C class. Crawl around the cars and you will find pieces with matching part numbers.

The previous 211 E-Class had more in common with the S class.

Signs of on going struggles to produce quality machines at competitive prices.

[fourflys]

Fourflys wrote:

"I would imagine if someone rolls up to a charity ride on their Colnago CLX, they probably have a bit more of sense of satisfaction than the guy next to them on the similar priced Trek or Specialized..."

No wild assumptions being made here.
The guy on the Trek might feel very satisfied with his bike. Are you suggesting that satisfaction is tied to the brand or do you just think a CLX is a better bike than a Madone?

maybe a bit of an assumption, I guess I was just trying to say that most people like to have something that's not as common... people like name cachet, otherwise there wouldn't be whole stores dedicated to Coach purses...

just my opinion...

[dancinkozmo]

...

[sjbraun]

"I guess I was just trying to say that most people like to have something that's not as common..."

Now that statement I get.

Steve- riding a Pegoretti, a Look, a Waterford, and soon a Velo-Orange

[fourflys]

"I guess I was just trying to say that most people like to have something that's not as common..."

Now that statement I get.

Steve- riding a Pegoretti, a Look, a Waterford, and soon a Velo-Orange

that's really all I meant... I'm certain the Trek/Spec./Giant is just as fine a bike as the CLX, just a bit more common...

Chris- riding a Litespeed, Van Dessel cross... :D

[sevencyclist]

Is common good or bad?

If you think more highly of a bike that fewer people ride, does that mean if you are in an unfamiliar town, you would go to a restraurant that is not busy over one that has lines waiting to get in?

Somehow car companies like to achieve the best selling car in America status, figuring that will sell more cars.

If Specialized advertising x is the best selling suspension mountainbike in America, or Trek advertising y is the best selling road bike in America. Would that make you more likely to buy or avoid the bike.

For forumnites, probably avoid, but for average buyer, that might be a plus.

[firerescuefin]

Is common good or bad?

If you think more highly of a bike that fewer people ride, does that mean if you are in an unfamiliar town, you would go to a restraurant that is not busy over one that has lines waiting to get in?

Somehow car companies like to achieve the best selling car in America status, figuring that will sell more cars.

If Specialized advertising x is the best selling suspension mountainbike in America, or Trek advertising y is the best selling road bike in America. Would that make you more likely to buy or avoid the bike.

For forumnites, probably avoid, but for average buyer, that might be a plus.


The person that spends time and posts regularly on this forum is in the tail end of the bell curve. I am regularly shocked when coming across someone riding a high end bike who knows relatively little about their bike....just had the money to drop on something on the high end.....they're certainly going to purchase a Specialized/Trek ...because that's what they see on TV the once a year they watch cycling. If you asked them about Parlee...they would probably think it was the new bistro that opened up dowtown. I laugh at forum members (and myself) reading these discussions because we are the Dungeons & Dragons crowd of the bike world...which is one of the reasons I am so glad this place exists....you all complete me ;)