Don't call it a comeback - Serotta

[Burnette]

Originally Posted by texbike

Honestly, there isn't much else there to differentiate them...

Texbike

If it was my money, I would only be in for the front first quarter of what's in the ship container. After I got my money I would run, because every sale after that first 25% will be very hard to come by. Once the fans are gone, there's nothing left to sell on.

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by texbike

Honestly, there isn't much else there to differentiate them...

Texbike

+2

Feels like a channel strategy searching for a business strategy.

[Kontact]

I honestly think the LBS model is the reason some brands have flourished while so many others that went direct have not. Cervelo even switched from direct to LBS only not so many years ago. What happened to Litespeed and Kestrel when they went direct?

People might want to buy direct, but giving into that desire devalues brands.



How many times has Serotta gone in or out of the bicycle business?

[HenryA]

What is the basis for all the negativity here?

[Burnette]

Originally Posted by HenryA

What is the basis for all the negativity here?

If you think this thread is harsh, beyond this board is a worlds they will face that is truly harsh. And Ben is well aware of it. Hey, it's a tough row to hoe. What a saturated industry. And you had better believe that Ben and crew have asked of themselves these questions and thought of everything that we have wrote here already. And they think they can make it. But trust, they are well aware of the odds and we only speak of the hurdles they face.

They've got a narrow window here and either it lights or it doesn't. This is business. It doesn't matter what anyone feels, it only matters if it sells.

I wrote this below in post #5. Think about the buyer who knows doesn't know Serrota and read that last paragraph. It's not being negative, its the market they're trying to swim in.

Burtnette

Ben is right that direct sales is the way to go. Canyon is here and Trek and the rest have added staff to also go in that direction.

Where Ben will struggle is where all businesses do. With just a name and nothing else to really differentiate yourself, once you sell to those who are already in the bag, you are left bare in cut throat market where cost reigns supreme.

With direct sales a person sits at a computer and compares specs and price. The big brands have scale so regular price will be cheaper from day one with way better name recognition and a marketing arm to promote it. During sale off season they dump inventory too, so Ben's window is very narrow.

It's the three years rule. Anything he gets right now will be off of those who remember Serrota. Once those orders are filled the phone stops ringing and he has to compete with Cannondale, Trek, Specialized, Argon, BH, Bianchi, BMC, Calfee, Canyon, Cervelo, Cinelli, Crumpton, Colnago, De Rosa, Eddie Merckx, Felt, Firefly, Focus, Fuji, Giant, GT, Independent Fabrication, Jamis, Kirk Frameworks, Kona, Lightspeed, Lynsky, Marin, Moots, Motobecane, Orbea, Pinarello, Santacruz, Seven Cycles, SOMA Fab, Somec, Time, Tommaso, Waterford Precision Bicycles, Zanconato, Zukas Cycles...

[Benjamin]

Interesting interview and I wish Ben the best. I did some contract work for him a number of years back and he's a great guy who made great bikes.

I think high-end aluminum bikes are going to be a tough row to hoe. No price point was mentioned, but these are going to be expensive.

Agreed that aluminum is better than ever, and a great aluminum frame with a carbon fork, post, and cockpit, and wheels rides well and feels good (not as good as CF imo). An aluminum bike with this spec also tends to be $4k.

Not many people drop $4k on a bike, and those who do are probably overwhelming looking for carbon.

Conversely, a 2k carbon bike with a lower parts spec may be heavier, not shift as nicely, etc, but it's going to ride damn good, make a good platform to upgrade, feel fancy, and that's a pretty convincing value prop.

Agree that bike choice is more complex than it needs to be, but that's a problem for lower priced bikes. When you're dropping lots of cash on a machine where so many deep and personal preferences are involved, the paradox of choice isn't a problem.

Who knows, there may be a sweet spot in there - something like a $2600 kickass frame with Ultegra, carbon fork, post, cockpit, and some half-decent wheels?

Then again, considering you can buy a carbon Canyon with Ultegra for that price...

Direct to consumer sales are definitely the way to go. Smart move on Ben's part. The bike industry is so rife for disruption. Lack of innovation, antiquated sales model, fear of the internet. Canyon is going to be the company that eats the lunch of Cannondale, Trek, Specialized and who knows who else.

Not to say the new won't be successful, and it doesn't have to be huge to be a sustainable small business, but it's a tough spot.

[ravdg316]

From my read of the Serotta Design website, Ben's new copy make him seem like he's bluffing -- leveraging his brand to sell aluminum bikes at a large margin. This directly contradicts my feelings on Ben's previous marketing efforts -- Serotta catalogs in the late 90s/early 2000s demonstrated why Serotta was the best in concrete ways. They discussed tubing technologies, geometries and materials with honesty and clarity.

I've ridden multiple Serottas in the past couple years and they were all 17-22 years old. All purchased used between $400 and $900 for frame/fork/headset. I've ridden newer bikes, far more expensive bikes, bikes bikes with disc brakes and bikes with tapered head tubes, but Serotta seemed to have reached some sort of pinnacle in terms of their frame design. In fact, I never thought much about frame design until I rode my first Serotta. Note that I never had a reverence for the brand prior to owning one because I was too young when they were at their peak, and that I purchased my first Serotta here on the forums because it had rack eyelets and lugs at a low price point.

Because of my newfound love for Serottas (two of my three bikes are Serottas), I'm still curious about Ben's new frames in spite of his ad copy. Somewhere on his site, I would love if he directly answered the following:

How are these bikes better than the ones from Ben's former brand? What specific changes in technology and ideas have been implemented? Why a brand new aluminum or steel frame from Serotta Designs versus an older Legend with similar equipment for half the cost? What's Serotta Design Studio's current thinking on tapered Colorado tubing and do his new bikes use any of his old technologies? Why would someone still loving and enjoying lifetime frames from Serotta built 20 years ago NEED to buy a new frame from Serotta Design Studio?

I'm hopeful that the text as currently written on the site is merely a placeholder for more detailed copy that Serotta was known for. Those catalogs have taught me a lot. Educational copy is good both for Ben's brand and for SEO.

[Burnette]

Inventory dumps are real too. I remember in 2015 Cannondale did a fire sale on Hi-Mod Evos, I almost bought one. A quick search found it again in 2016, this time Specialized started the fire:
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/retai...s#.WmFJ5WyWzIV

Now that Canyon has entered, price erosion will occur and profit margins will shrink, that's why the other brands have to go direct too, to cut out shop's take to match Canyon's prices and keep profits steady. So, prices will come down. Good for us. Bad for Ben. The inventory dumps will happen again, always do. Bad again.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by HenryA

What is the basis for all the negativity here?

i dont see any of this as negative IMO. i think the fact that in 2018, even now, when the Serotta name is mentioned on this forum, it still generates pages of comments. that is, again IMO an overwhelmingly net positive for Serotta. when trying to get a footing again, i think any press is good press, and there are clearly still a lot of people interested in at least discussing Ben's business and the bikes he puts his name on.

i think it's a mistake to hastily judge critical thinking as negativity.

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

i dont see any of this as negative IMO. i think the fact that in 2018, even now, when the Serotta name is mentioned on this forum, it still generates pages of comments. that is, again IMO an overwhelmingly net positive for Serotta. when trying to get a footing again, i think any press is good press, and there are clearly still a lot of people interested in at least discussing Ben's business and the bikes he puts his name on.

i think it's a mistake to hastily judge critical thinking as negativity.

I'd second this. If anything, it's a sign people still care deeply about the bikes made with the name Serotta attached to them. And folks may want to handwave any criticism here as Internet keyboard warrioring, but there's lots of folks here with real expertise. Never mind that they are, frankly, the easiest customer base possible for the new outfit to win over. As Burnett mentioned, any concerns in this thread are nothing compared to the realities of a wider and less forgiving customer base.

Re: aluminum, not sure why he's not hitting hard the Low and Rock Lobster segment of the market. Serottas were race bikes. Get these new ones out there under folks who, yanno, race. And post to Instagram, and proselytize the brand. $4k alloy bikes to MAMILs ain't gonna go too far.

[beeatnik]

Originally Posted by false_Aest

Hmm one interesting thing as I re-read the article:

He doesn't like the notion of have a bike specific to gravel and he doesn't seem to recognize that, for a good portion of the gravel/exploring crowd, it IS about "turning a ride into an excursion."

A semi-related anecdote:

I spoke to someone intimately involved in designing the Serotta forks (because we were considering having a new fork designed from the ground up) -- apparently Ben wasn't really into a fork that would fit tires larger than 25mm and it took a little bit of wrestling to convince him to get to 25 -- he wanted 23mm.

To me that seems pretty discipline specific.

Who knows how impressionable or gullible the wider market is and how hard the Big Brands will push to change the riding habits of the average enthusiast; one thing is clear, tho, cats who used to be into Serotta or anything Serotta-affiliated want tractor tires on their bikes. Wonder if Ben S. is aware of that shift.

[dumbod]

Originally Posted by jmoore

"Looking back over my years in the business, most of the time the decisions I made because it felt right to me, without particularly worrying about how well it would be received, usually were the most successful things I did. I’ve had to remind myself of that."

Hooo-boy.

I wish an MBA student would do a thesis on the history of Serotta and where the missteps were that led to the downfall. Would be fascinating to read.

I agree that an objective history would be fascinating but objective histories don’t exist. All humans take too much credit for their successes and too little responsibility for their failures. Serotta has often cited the 2008 downturn as the primary cause of the failure. Is that true? In the words of Rocky Rococo, “Maybe yes, maybe no.” We’ll almost certainly never know.

[pbarry]

PF30 on the alloy frames..

[weisan]

The word "relationship" appeared 12 times in that interview

fit 10
customer 7
change/changing 7
end user 5

Does Ben like Asian food?

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Ti Designs

'Cause your average internet jockey knows so much about fitting and bike set-up...

Funny, but true. Some shops have it nailed, a lot don't..BUT anybody sitting at their computer ordering one of these things will be an 'expert'..

I remember when we were dealing with serotta fit 'studios'...they would do the fit, write it up but not give it to the customer..they would send this 'Rx' off to serotta to decipher. To force the customer to buy a serotta..after a few customers 'insisted' on the info(one husband really 'INSISTED"), they got it from the cold, dead fingers of the serotta guy...silly.