We also need to look at ourselves….. as long we are paying for such high price , they will continue to produce bike at very high price….. the ego of a amateur cyclist is very very high….. certainly here in Belgium ( I can’t speak for the rest of the world)
Hi there from Portugal! I am an avid cyclist, not a pro and far away from it. In my point of view the problem with overinflation is the fact that people continue to buy them wherever the price. So if every one stop buying the price will go down... supply and demand problem. If the demand goes down so is the supply prices!
Thank you for such a rational and balanced discussion! Ironically, my Colnago now costs me twice as much to service than my Ducati Superbike. Something doesn't make sense.
My first road bike was a '90 Schwinn for around $400, I upgraded to a used Ultegra equipped Cannondale for $700. In '94 I did a custom build Cannondale with Ultegra STI (brand new at the time) with custom laced Mavic Tubulars, with American Classic Hubs, Sweet Wing Cranks, for less than $2k. It was as fast as anything. I could have upgraded to Dura-Ace for maybe $300 more but it was not worth it to me.
When people say: „as long as we buy the overpriced bikes….“ I have to ask: why does everyone want to buy such expensive bikes and material ? Why does everyone dream of s-works, Pinarello and other 14k-bikes ? Where does the feeling of having to ride an expensive bike to belong to it come from ? It s just a game of: - (self)presentation - show what you have - show what you can afford - looking for the latest stuff - to be better than others - to be richer than others - only the best and the most expensive is good enough - the desire to belong to the „circle of cool“ The bike industry knows how to trigger emotions 😉
A bike with wider tire clearance is a good idea for the average rider. Is one thing disk brakes have helped. People are starting to pay attention to vibration loss and comfort. Is the best thing to happen in a long while
I have been trying to get into cycling and the local bike shop is trying to upsell very aggresively. I mentioned my budget and magically the budget option is not on the size I want but push me to try the expensive ones. On a shop I pressed how much time it would take to buy a bike not on stock, after the sales person telling me these are the ones they have here (more expensive), finally went to the computer to check the delivery time of the cheaper bike.... 2 weeks wait time! Was in disbelief I rather wait 2 weeks than go 1.000€ over my budget. Shop owner apparently doesn't understand that is supposed to give advice to what the new customer actually needs, not what he needs to get rid of due to purchasing expensive inventory and not being able to sell it.
I don't agree with the statement that disc brakes will get cheaper and disc brakes make the bikes expensive. It'll all get cheaper when there's new better stuff, however it not like bikes in general will start getting cheaper. Entry level bikes will never be below 1000 whatever currency again. Manufacturers realised they can charge 3000 to 4000 and more for mid range bikes and will continue to do so.
@igvabe’s-comment/post “if normal people shouldn't ride pro-bikes, then the UCl should not force pro-bikes to be for sale to the public. it's a vicious circle”: i agree with your point and i agree with the-point-of-view_you’re_looking-at-it-from, but there’s also this to think-about: ⬇️ • if the UCI doesn’t Obligate Bicycle-Component Manufacturers & Bicycle-Manufacturers to make-available-to-the-public the same things that Pro-Peloton Teams use, the Bicycle-Component Manufacturers & Bicycle-Manufacturers will use that as an excuse to make good components for Pro-Peloton people-&-teams and crap for everyone else. And they will justify their actions by saying “There’s no rule that says we can’t. / There's no rule that says we're not-allowed to”. Also: ⬇️ • the bicycle Pro-Peloton Teams use the-most-expensive components because they *CAN*. they are-provided an UNLIMITED budget by-their-sponsors. BUT at the same TIME they are EXTORTIONED to use their-SPONSORS’ equipment and no-one else’s. Even if their sponsors’ equipment SUCKS. [(]There have been alot of examples of Bicycle-teams using other Sponsors’ equipment that AREN’T their sponsors, and hiding the labels, black-sharpie-marker blackening-out the names, etc[)]. also: ➡️ IF the Pro-Peloton teams didn't-have a UNLIMITED budget, do you honestly-think they would use a component as-expensive as Dura-Ace? *No*. They'd use something like Ultegra. • Also: they use the-newest-stuff (& ie. the most--expensive stuff) because they CAN. Again: they have a *UNLIMITED* budget. If they couldn't-afford to use Electronic-Shifting instead-of Mechanical-shifting, they wouldn't. They would-use mechanical-shifting. If they couldn't-afford to use disc-brakes, they wouldn't. They would-use rim-brakes. If they couldn't-afford to use hydraulic--disc-brakes, they wouldn't. they would-use cable--disk-brakes (and/or preferably, rim-brakes, which are much--less-expensive than hydraulic disc-brakes, let-alone much--less-expensive than cable--disk-brakes). • ever-since the U.C.I. approved hydraulic--disk-brakes for use by the Pro-Peloton, bicycle-component manufacturers stopped-development of cable--rim-brakes and concentrated-only on hydraulic--disk-brakes. before that, bicycle-component manufacturers were--concentrating-on both hydraulic--disk-brakes and cable-actuated--rim-brakes. • bicycle-component manufacturers (and bicycle-manufacturers) always want-us-to-buy the-most-expensive stuff. (that-way they get the most [amount of money] short-term gains). they are so-damn-greedy that they-don't-care about Customer-Loyalty or making Top-Quality Products that Last-A-Long-Time. they want all that cash, FAST :-( . that's-why they're--focusing-on electronic gear-shifting, and getting--rid-of mechanical gear-shifting. (and are doing it subtly (and/or at [the very] least TRYING to do it subtly), so that people don't notice). we're going to be left-with Shimano Tourney, Claris, and Sora, and Shimano Acera, Altus, and Alivio, (and the no-model-name generic Shimano stuff), if they keep-up like this.
@@reoencarcelado5904 thanks for your reply, just note that i am not for or against that UCI rule, i was only pointing out how the bikes that are available to the public is a direct consequence of that rule. in formula 1 they do the total opposite, nobody can afford or ride an F1 car, but if the UCI would allow prototype race bikes, it could have other benefits for the public (check this out: th-cam.com/video/SF0DHYW-HOM/w-d-xo.html). I do not agree that without that rule, manufacturers would only make crap for the public. (Mercedes makes good F1 and normal cars). The quality of the bike will depend on the demand of the public -Afterall, that' s where the money comes from.... I agree that pro riders have to use what their component-sponsors tell them to use, though some teams with non-bike-component sponsors, do pick and choose what they think is best for performance. I don't really get the point you are trying to make? Are you saying that there would only be low quality stuff available for the public without the rule? I think, there would actually be a shift in more user friendly high quality sport-bikes, with focus on durability and comfort ( and yes, still expensive- a bit like the titanium bike market we have now). I think people would finally discard of the idea that they NEED the same stuff as the pros (54t chainrings, 13speed 10-28 gears, superlight bikes, slammed stems, ... i would even say: get rid off the drop handlebars!)
@@igvabe just look at other industries/parts/areas where the-company/that-particular-industry says “there’s no rule that says we can’t” as justification for their crap / their shitty behavior / their tom-foolery.
A $15k bikes for an avg. riders is no different than a Rolex watch it's a luxury buy and I see nothing wrong with it. I certainly can get a high percentage of my performance from a beater bike just as I could from a beater car, but I chose not to and my priorities are riding nice bikes and nice cars, not drinking expensive wines, gambling or stay in exotic hotels in exotic destinations. Bottom line is to stop with the sour grapes. Earn you money honestly and spend it how you wish.
This is quickly becoming the “GCN sucks and we’re awesome” channel. It’s getting a little weak and preachy, tbh. I love you guys. I would hate to see you become self-righteous vultures.
It’s great to hear a really honest and forward thinking debate . I’m sure you guys could have went on for hours . Totally agree with everything you say and feel the industry is ripping the very heart out of cycling . GCN seems to very careful on what they say on there programmes now compared to when you could call it cutting edge . You guys have a totally different spin on what is happening today and applaud your honesty. My number one channel for everything cycling 🚴♀️
How the hell can bicycle tech be as expensive as motircycle tech? Show me a bicycle with a six access I.M.U and abs. Show me a bicycle with ride by wire and cruise control. The best tech on a bicycle is still pretty simple in comparison and to argue otherwise is idiotic. The reason a simple to make bicycle is so expensive is cycling culture allows it. As cyclists we need to just stop buying bullshit tech until the price drops.
Volume plays a significant part - cant do the process as efficiently on a carbon layup Vs a motorbike or even a car production line in the same volumes and the bigger the volume the lower the cost
Yep, bang on, 100% agree with everything that was said in this video. The only thing that worries me is,... on the subject of 'leasing bikes' after they are handed back and a new one is issued, the 3 year old ones will be sold on, as with cars at the end of the lease. So even more 2nd hand bikes flooding the market.
So true, cycling industry is being so wasteful and greedy at a time we're told we should cut our carbon footprint. How is this allowed? The consumer will be blamed by governments for this but it is clearly corporate greed.
5:30 it's true that R&D should be spent for average users, but cycling culture is such that pretty much everybody who's cycling for sports wants the TDF stuff. It's not just the industry, it's cycling culture as a whole, the industry isn't the only actor. I bought a Look 765 Optimum+, all I wanted was a bike that is light enough, has a comfortable geometry, good tire clearance, and is built like a tank but somehow I feel like I have to justify not having a bike that weighs less than 9kg.
I have seen a few clips from his podcast with this mechanic guy by now, and each time the only thing I can think if is the quote by Edward the Longshanks from Braveheart, "Who is this person who speaks to me as though I needed his advice?" And what is up with his accent? What is it?
definitely. if you are trying to get a decent bike for not too much money you're out of luck. there's barely any choices, and the ones you can get are only available in boring or ugly colors and have groupsets that are halfbaked or need maintenance way too often. and then as a consumer you see those nice electronic groupsets with reliable hydraulic brakes and gears that don't have a cable that needs adjusting every so often etc. ofcourse it feels shitty
1. You can buy a reasonably priced bicycle. They exist. Nobody needs to buy a $15,000 bike except those who choose to 2. Costs have gone up. Raw materials, cost to ship those materials, cost to make the components, costs for labor, costs to ship the finished bike, and costs at the store level. Brands don't make a ton on the lower end bikes, they make it up on the dream bikes 3. More people are cycling, demand is up and that always pushes costs. I repeat, nobody needs to buy a 12 speed di2 carbon aero race bike with ultra light wheels. You can get a aluminum or steel bike brand new and electric isn't "cheap" but it has become reasonable. City commuters can justify the price with what they save in gas or transit costs. We're in a better place now than back in early 2000s
Basically when people say bikes are overpriced what they are basically saying is the bike I want is more than I want to pay. You can buy excellent bikes from Decathlon for under £500. Even entry level from expensive brands are about £50 a month for a year on cycle to work. I guess I’m saying is cycling is basically as expensive as you want it to be. I love the tech and I love the lifestyle so I don’t regret 1 penny of the thousands I’ve spent. Cheaper than liposuction what ever you spend.
Yes….“the bike i want is more than i want to pay“^^ And on all channels and from all directions, marketing tells you which bike and which material you have to ride to belong to it. And people want to belong to it. It s a game of marketing and emotions.
People in the best economics are saying bicycles are overpriced think about people in India or any mass population country these cycles are only a dream for us, only the super elite can own.
If someone wants to pay high price for a bike or anything else, let them. Whether it’s appropriate for their skill level or not. Yes they are over priced. But manufacturers aren’t pricing potential buyers out. People price themselves out by not being able to afford them. It’s real simple, get a better job. Further your education. Work more hours. Work for a promotion. OR be smarter and honest with yourself as an athlete. Do you really need this up-grade? Probably not. My last two bikes are used and they don’t slow me down at all. And I’m very happy with them.
It's very simple, go buy a Whiskey carbon fork for 800 dollars and then go buy a Toseek Carbon fork for 100 dollars...hide the logo and challenge ANYONE to tell which is which Hint: it's the same factory producing it..one has a Western Brand name and one could argue support blah blah blah...it's a fork....break it 5x before it costs you 5x as much for the same exact product. The average rider doesn't need or even want a race bike with a lower stack than saddle height. Trek, Giant etc should focus on making endurance/hybrid bikes for under 1k with decent components.
Reflecting on the issues of cost and rapid technological advancements in professional cycling, I propose a two-pronged solution inspired by practices in other sports like Formula 1. Firstly, the UCI could impose a price cap on professional road bikes, say at $5,000. This would encourage manufacturers to focus on creating quality, affordable bikes rather than continually pushing the boundaries of expensive technology. Secondly, borrowing a principle from Formula 1, we could require teams to use a specific bike model for a fixed period, like an entire season. This approach would level the playing field, making the competition more about the riders' skills and strategies rather than their equipment's price tag or technological superiority. Such a combination of a price cap and fixed-period bike models could revolutionize professional cycling. It would make the sport more accessible and environmentally friendly, reduce the financial burden on teams, and refocus the sport on the core elements of athletic performance and competition strategy. This could be a significant step towards making professional cycling a more equitable and sustainable sport. As I share thoughts, profit is not a bad word and is needed, and GCN got the brunt of it, rightly so, but the problem is consumption for consumption.
Most people are pretty awesome consumerist slaves and will spend because they're scared, insecure and very worried about what others think. Have you heard of the narcissism of the small differences? This is when a person has something others don't to differentiate themselves from those people. So, expensive and exotic. The human species has some fatal flaws.
How many of those $15-20k bikes do they sell? Not many, I'm sure. Everyone acts like those are the only bikes on the market and if we want to ride, we're forced to pay those prices. The UCI says bikes that are raced must be available to the general consumer, so they make a few that are actually designed for pro racers, and put them on the market so they meet the UCI requirement. The automobile industry does the same thing. There are plenty of bikes available at all kinds of price points. The problem arises when people want those highest priced bikes and can't afford them or can't justify spending that kind of money on them. So they point to the manufacturers and cry "greed" when a perfectly good bike, possibly one better suited to their needs, is available for substantially less. Think 15 grand is too much for a bike? Me, too. Don't buy one.
For one, "10 speeds" used to be called "racing bikes". You can't buy a Formula One car and drive it on the road (and in fact, the average person couldn't get it out of the garage without stalling or crashing it if he could), but you can buy a bicycle "just like the one your hero rides". Those are always the top (expensive) end and there are enough immature, insecure people out there, who will never race, added to those with more money than brains, to fall for it. Racing is only big business in order to sell stuff and apparently it works.
I saw that video. My main thought was that they were comparing top-end bicycles to low-end motorcycles, which is an absolutely silly and useless comparison. The subject of that video was solely to get views and stir up nonsensical controversy. It seems to have worked as you discussed it here.
I think when youre looking at a motorcycle. It also depends on what sort of motorcycle... if youre going for a sporty one that makes use of a lot of carbon fiber and fancier alloys to make it lighter/stronger etc then I can see why something would cost so much. But if youre talking about your bang average motorcycle or moped. A lot of it can be machine made where there might be someone at the end of the production line to put in finishing touches. A lot of engine blocks are cast iron or cast aluminium and those things can also be machine made although some factories might have a few guys around to keep an eye on production because youre basically working with molten metal and things can go wrong quite quickly if things are left unsupervised. Really its the R&D and possible re-tooling of machines to manufacturer a completely new design that might eat up a lot of money. But you'll recoup your money back really quickly If the one one that you spent a $1mil building a mould that can produce 1mil units per day, you're probably well on the road to make your money back. Building a second or third mould will probably cost little to nothing as all of the R&D has already been spent making the first one so its just copy, paste then multiply.
So how about UCI making a rule that only bikes with a lower pricetag than idk 3000 or 4000 pounds are allowed to race? Actually Vitus is advertising the Vitesse Evo and ZX1 Evo models as Gran Tour ready bikes costing around 3-4000 pounds.
Its the same with all other men's toys. "If you buy a 5000 bucks camera, you will make better pictures." - Nonsense. Why buying an pro-bike with a Dura Ace if you aren't a pro-cyclist? It's a waste of money. Check the 2nd-hand market, which will be THE big opponent to all those fancy brands. Cycling will demise as a passion (or hobby/trend...) for a lot of people and they'll sell their bikes for much less than what they've payed for. It has started already. Bought a S-Works Roubaix in full carbon with Di2-Ultegra and high end FFWD-tyres for a fraction of the cost it was sold when it came out. An old bike isn't a bad bike, don't forget that. It is not a bloody iPhone, that gets outdated very fast.
Why do you need 12 gears? Hmm, I have won a race on fixed gear and beaten lots of people on 8sp in off road races in terrible conditions that screw up 11 speed set ups. So much innovation is pointless , disc brakes in time trials 😂😂 , why? And a lot of the mega expensive stuff people buy is just bling and showing off , it'll go wrong and be a massive pain. My gears won't work, my battery is dead... oops. To be honest; we were happy Shimano gave us the bail out friction option on early indexing for when the rear mech got clobbered. For most purposes simple tech is best and often just as quick.
IS not disc brakes ... GCN stands on a plateau ... they can see bikes have 5 figures ... over 10 000 us or pounds ... there is real no reason to justify that money on a bike... WAIT! there is.. economy and teory of economy explain why and is not gains... is theory of centers and the exclusive that some bike manufacturers claim and actually are... and is really wrong ... but is how economy works and that is why maketing is bad because a utility thing like a bit get on a bubble and somewhere somehow will pop.
Who cares about 8 or 9 speed? The problem is the current top tier prices, because they dictate what the mid tier costs. Cheaper low tier is not what we need. When it comes to groupsets we have "fake" mid tier products anyway. They develop products which are the same, but heavier and definitely not cheaper to produce. Rival and Apex is nearly the same and production wise it would be cheaper to produce just one of them.
With my less than 1000€ bike, which I find very expensive (and is the most expensive bike I've ever bought), and seeing all the "correct" bikes you can get ranging from 4-500€ all the way to 10k+ I would not say that the bike market is overpriced but that cyclists have luxury tastes and bike brands market and profit on that. I am under the impression that cyclists would not buy lower price bikes with the same qualities. The price is low or medium ? Must not be a good bike. And there is also a wide range of price for similar specifications. Saturday I was on a gravel ride with a few people, a person had a 2500€ Stevens gravel bike, it wasn't even a carbon frame, the groupset was not that high end, same as on my bike (I have a mix of Shimano GRX400-600-800), only the wheel sold with the bike were a bit better. Maybe the paintjob was better I don't know, mine has 6000km and has been on rough terrain all year round and it has not bulged. 2.5x the price for an imperceptible (if real) difference.
Racingbikes are incredible overpriced. You get an Mtb with Discbrakes and 12 speed for 800€. If you want to have the same at a racingbike you pay over 1300€. And Discbrakes are not new. I ride them since 1999.
Google is also fucking us in the a**. You're not hearing any creator complaining about it though. The sport has changed. Jimmy only wants electronic groupsets on his bikes. Come on. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy expensive bikes. I'm kicking the ass of people on Pinarellos with my Decathlon Triban RC500 in Thailand. They dropped $10,000 for a brand new bike when I paid $250. Rich people are gonna spend their money anyway. I prefer them to spend $10k on a bicycle than on a fucking truck of a car.
You guys are way more practical than the elitists at GCN. The majority of people riding bikes are NOT racers, so why is the media & manufacturers promoting these wonder-bikes when they cost a fortune to buy? Must be the money!! Simple formula. Convince people that they have to have a bike that's as light feather & as aero as a razor blade & they will buy it if they can.
Marketing ain«t the fucking problem at all, they spend so little money on marketing. It's R&D and pure greediness, also brands like mmr, bh, cippolini, cinelli, they don't do shit in marketing and sell their frames for those same 5k, just because they can
Amateur cyclists don't need high quality bikes, they might want them but that's more down to prestige than usage. Shimano Tourney would be more suitable for a high percentage of amateur road cyclists as they generally ride on the hoods, something I've noticed frequently while out on the road but Shimano 105 or another manufacturers equivalent is more desirable.
No way Tourney is suitable. It's cheap , damages easily, not long lasting. Claris or Tiagra is the minimum for length of component life and user friendly.
What about such lunacies as „groupset of the people“ Apex AXS from SRAM, that is anything but attainable for an average Joe? And to add injury to insult, on most European markets, the Rival is actually cheaper even if it is supposed to be a tier up. And let us not get started on such things as Shimano taking their MTB Deore 12 speed, changing the pull ratio and rebadging it as „all new GRX“. We are expected to pay dearly for products that are way more fraud than they are an actual development. In bikes as in anything else, it has become an act of selling you illusions of importance and grandeur.
It is over priced, by a big margin. If r&d is that expensive they should fire the the r&d teams. If you stand back and look at a bicycle it is still the same as when Eddy won his first Tdf. (Simplified). Stop using the development argument some improvements are not improvements it is just the same as the previous year group set just cosmetic changes and marketing bs.
Not your first go at GCN. GCN are living rent free in your heads lads. Let’s have positive content. We are a small community so let’s lift each other up.
I ride old 90s mtbs and a 1950s 3 speed, built to last.. the 50s thing gets raced in time trials for a laugh, placed 10th out of 15 in a Xmas race... haha. I race seriously on a 1980s road bike, superb climbing machine, just not aero. As a mechanic I despair with crappy disc brakes and why do we have 11 speed????? Ffs
Oh piss off. Disc brakes are amazing. 11 speed exists for a reason. It enables smaller jumps between gears and works really well. You don't get to decide where technology stops.
So much BS… First off, the motorbike you can buy for $14k is NOT the equivalent of an SL8 - that would be a motoGP bike costing maybe $2M. Second, if you think $14k is too much for a bicycle - DON’T F-- BUY IT. So much entitled whining. Since when can you have whatever you want at any price you like?
Amateur cycling will have a slow death if prices keep inflating. A cycle will purely be a method of transport rather than an enthusiasts sport. Prices are ludicrous and it’s killing the sport as it’s no longer affordable for Joe Public. Greed, pure greed.
I disagree. Most motorbikes arent made of carbon fiber, and made to be as light as possible. Most of the expensive bikes are racing bikes, designed for maximum performance. A BMW M 1000RR is about $35,000.
We also need to look at ourselves….. as long we are paying for such high price , they will continue to produce bike at very high price….. the ego of a amateur cyclist is very very high….. certainly here in Belgium ( I can’t speak for the rest of the world)
Hi there from Portugal! I am an avid cyclist, not a pro and far away from it. In my point of view the problem with overinflation is the fact that people continue to buy them wherever the price. So if every one stop buying the price will go down... supply and demand problem. If the demand goes down so is the supply prices!
Thank you for such a rational and balanced discussion! Ironically, my Colnago now costs me twice as much to service than my Ducati Superbike. Something doesn't make sense.
GCN has some entertaining content. Just don't buy everything they advertise.
My first road bike was a '90 Schwinn for around $400, I upgraded to a used Ultegra equipped Cannondale for $700. In '94 I did a custom build Cannondale with Ultegra STI (brand new at the time) with custom laced Mavic Tubulars, with American Classic Hubs, Sweet Wing Cranks, for less than $2k. It was as fast as anything. I could have upgraded to Dura-Ace for maybe $300 more but it was not worth it to me.
When people say: „as long as we buy the overpriced bikes….“
I have to ask: why does everyone want to buy such expensive bikes and material ?
Why does everyone dream of s-works, Pinarello and other 14k-bikes ?
Where does the feeling of having to ride an expensive bike to belong to it come from ?
It s just a game of:
- (self)presentation
- show what you have
- show what you can afford
- looking for the latest stuff
- to be better than others
- to be richer than others
- only the best and the most expensive is good enough
- the desire to belong to the „circle of cool“
The bike industry knows how to trigger emotions 😉
I’d be happy if they gave me the refund they promised on the unfulfilled GCN+ subscription. GCN say talk to apple, apple say talk to GCN…..
don't just be angry, DON'T BUY those bikes, stop flexing
A bike with wider tire clearance is a good idea for the average rider. Is one thing disk brakes have helped. People are starting to pay attention to vibration loss and comfort. Is the best thing to happen in a long while
I have been trying to get into cycling and the local bike shop is trying to upsell very aggresively. I mentioned my budget and magically the budget option is not on the size I want but push me to try the expensive ones. On a shop I pressed how much time it would take to buy a bike not on stock, after the sales person telling me these are the ones they have here (more expensive), finally went to the computer to check the delivery time of the cheaper bike.... 2 weeks wait time! Was in disbelief I rather wait 2 weeks than go 1.000€ over my budget. Shop owner apparently doesn't understand that is supposed to give advice to what the new customer actually needs, not what he needs to get rid of due to purchasing expensive inventory and not being able to sell it.
I don't agree with the statement that disc brakes will get cheaper and disc brakes make the bikes expensive.
It'll all get cheaper when there's new better stuff, however it not like bikes in general will start getting cheaper.
Entry level bikes will never be below 1000 whatever currency again.
Manufacturers realised they can charge 3000 to 4000 and more for mid range bikes and will continue to do so.
if normal people shouldn't ride pro-bikes, then the UCI should not force pro-bikes to be for sale to the public. it's a vicious circle
@igvabe’s-comment/post “if normal people shouldn't ride pro-bikes, then the UCl should not force pro-bikes to be for sale to the public. it's a vicious circle”:
i agree with your point and i agree with the-point-of-view_you’re_looking-at-it-from, but there’s also this to think-about: ⬇️
• if the UCI doesn’t Obligate Bicycle-Component Manufacturers & Bicycle-Manufacturers to make-available-to-the-public the same things that Pro-Peloton Teams use, the Bicycle-Component Manufacturers & Bicycle-Manufacturers will use that as an excuse to make good components for Pro-Peloton people-&-teams and crap for everyone else. And they will justify their actions by saying “There’s no rule that says we can’t. / There's no rule that says we're not-allowed to”.
Also: ⬇️
• the bicycle Pro-Peloton Teams use the-most-expensive components because they *CAN*. they are-provided an UNLIMITED budget by-their-sponsors. BUT at the same TIME they are EXTORTIONED to use their-SPONSORS’ equipment and no-one else’s. Even if their sponsors’ equipment SUCKS. [(]There have been alot of examples of Bicycle-teams using other Sponsors’ equipment that AREN’T their sponsors, and hiding the labels, black-sharpie-marker blackening-out the names, etc[)].
also: ➡️ IF the Pro-Peloton teams didn't-have a UNLIMITED budget, do you honestly-think they would use a component as-expensive as Dura-Ace? *No*. They'd use something like Ultegra.
• Also: they use the-newest-stuff (& ie. the most--expensive stuff) because they CAN. Again: they have a *UNLIMITED* budget. If they couldn't-afford to use Electronic-Shifting instead-of Mechanical-shifting, they wouldn't. They would-use mechanical-shifting. If they couldn't-afford to use disc-brakes, they wouldn't. They would-use rim-brakes. If they couldn't-afford to use hydraulic--disc-brakes, they wouldn't. they would-use cable--disk-brakes (and/or preferably, rim-brakes, which are much--less-expensive than hydraulic disc-brakes, let-alone much--less-expensive than cable--disk-brakes).
• ever-since the U.C.I. approved hydraulic--disk-brakes for use by the Pro-Peloton, bicycle-component manufacturers stopped-development of cable--rim-brakes and concentrated-only on hydraulic--disk-brakes.
before that, bicycle-component manufacturers were--concentrating-on both hydraulic--disk-brakes and cable-actuated--rim-brakes.
• bicycle-component manufacturers (and bicycle-manufacturers) always want-us-to-buy the-most-expensive stuff. (that-way they get the most [amount of money] short-term gains). they are so-damn-greedy that they-don't-care about Customer-Loyalty or making Top-Quality Products that Last-A-Long-Time. they want all that cash, FAST :-( .
that's-why they're--focusing-on electronic gear-shifting, and getting--rid-of mechanical gear-shifting. (and are doing it subtly (and/or at [the very] least TRYING to do it subtly), so that people don't notice).
we're going to be left-with Shimano Tourney, Claris, and Sora, and Shimano Acera, Altus, and Alivio, (and the no-model-name generic Shimano stuff), if they keep-up like this.
@@reoencarcelado5904 thanks for your reply, just note that i am not for or against that UCI rule, i was only pointing out how the bikes that are available to the public is a direct consequence of that rule. in formula 1 they do the total opposite, nobody can afford or ride an F1 car, but if the UCI would allow prototype race bikes, it could have other benefits for the public (check this out: th-cam.com/video/SF0DHYW-HOM/w-d-xo.html).
I do not agree that without that rule, manufacturers would only make crap for the public. (Mercedes makes good F1 and normal cars). The quality of the bike will depend on the demand of the public -Afterall, that' s where the money comes from....
I agree that pro riders have to use what their component-sponsors tell them to use, though some teams with non-bike-component sponsors, do pick and choose what they think is best for performance. I don't really get the point you are trying to make? Are you saying that there would only be low quality stuff available for the public without the rule? I think, there would actually be a shift in more user friendly high quality sport-bikes, with focus on durability and comfort ( and yes, still expensive- a bit like the titanium bike market we have now). I think people would finally discard of the idea that they NEED the same stuff as the pros (54t chainrings, 13speed 10-28 gears, superlight bikes, slammed stems, ... i would even say: get rid off the drop handlebars!)
@@igvabe just look at other industries/parts/areas where the-company/that-particular-industry says “there’s no rule that says we can’t” as justification for their crap / their shitty behavior / their tom-foolery.
A bike should only cost £10,000 if it can make you a cup of tea!
hey man, i said i take sugar. it's hard to find a good tea making bike these days - bah
A $15k bikes for an avg. riders is no different than a Rolex watch it's a luxury buy and I see nothing wrong with it. I certainly can get a high percentage of my performance from a beater bike just as I could from a beater car, but I chose not to and my priorities are riding nice bikes and nice cars, not drinking expensive wines, gambling or stay in exotic hotels in exotic destinations. Bottom line is to stop with the sour grapes. Earn you money honestly and spend it how you wish.
Cycling has become a status symbol. "Look at what I can afford..."
Exactly
Apple iphone philosophy: create a want, don't fill a need.
This is quickly becoming the “GCN sucks and we’re awesome” channel. It’s getting a little weak and preachy, tbh. I love you guys. I would hate to see you become self-righteous vultures.
44 hours for £3,500 also includes the materials, upkeep of the machinery, costs of the factory, business rates, heating etc…
It’s great to hear a really honest and forward thinking debate . I’m sure you guys could have went on for hours . Totally agree with everything you say and feel the industry is ripping the very heart out of cycling . GCN seems to very careful on what they say on there programmes now compared to when you could call it cutting edge . You guys have a totally different spin on what is happening today and applaud your honesty. My number one channel for everything cycling 🚴♀️
How the hell can bicycle tech be as expensive as motircycle tech? Show me a bicycle with a six access I.M.U and abs. Show me a bicycle with ride by wire and cruise control. The best tech on a bicycle is still pretty simple in comparison and to argue otherwise is idiotic. The reason a simple to make bicycle is so expensive is cycling culture allows it. As cyclists we need to just stop buying bullshit tech until the price drops.
I’m sure I’ve seen this video before??
Ah, I’ve worked it out
Volume plays a significant part - cant do the process as efficiently on a carbon layup Vs a motorbike or even a car production line in the same volumes and the bigger the volume the lower the cost
Dump on GCN for clicks. Nevermind, you wouldn’t have an audience if GCN didn’t create cycling TH-cam first.
Yep, bang on, 100% agree with everything that was said in this video. The only thing that worries me is,... on the subject of 'leasing bikes' after they are handed back and a new one is issued, the 3 year old ones will be sold on, as with cars at the end of the lease. So even more 2nd hand bikes flooding the market.
So true, cycling industry is being so wasteful and greedy at a time we're told we should cut our carbon footprint. How is this allowed? The consumer will be blamed by governments for this but it is clearly corporate greed.
5:30 it's true that R&D should be spent for average users, but cycling culture is such that pretty much everybody who's cycling for sports wants the TDF stuff. It's not just the industry, it's cycling culture as a whole, the industry isn't the only actor. I bought a Look 765 Optimum+, all I wanted was a bike that is light enough, has a comfortable geometry, good tire clearance, and is built like a tank but somehow I feel like I have to justify not having a bike that weighs less than 9kg.
I have seen a few clips from his podcast with this mechanic guy by now, and each time the only thing I can think if is the quote by Edward the Longshanks from Braveheart, "Who is this person who speaks to me as though I needed his advice?" And what is up with his accent? What is it?
definitely. if you are trying to get a decent bike for not too much money you're out of luck. there's barely any choices, and the ones you can get are only available in boring or ugly colors and have groupsets that are halfbaked or need maintenance way too often.
and then as a consumer you see those nice electronic groupsets with reliable hydraulic brakes and gears that don't have a cable that needs adjusting every so often etc. ofcourse it feels shitty
1. You can buy a reasonably priced bicycle. They exist. Nobody needs to buy a $15,000 bike except those who choose to
2. Costs have gone up. Raw materials, cost to ship those materials, cost to make the components, costs for labor, costs to ship the finished bike, and costs at the store level. Brands don't make a ton on the lower end bikes, they make it up on the dream bikes
3. More people are cycling, demand is up and that always pushes costs.
I repeat, nobody needs to buy a 12 speed di2 carbon aero race bike with ultra light wheels. You can get a aluminum or steel bike brand new and electric isn't "cheap" but it has become reasonable. City commuters can justify the price with what they save in gas or transit costs. We're in a better place now than back in early 2000s
Basically when people say bikes are overpriced what they are basically saying is the bike I want is more than I want to pay.
You can buy excellent bikes from Decathlon for under £500.
Even entry level from expensive brands are about £50 a month for a year on cycle to work.
I guess I’m saying is cycling is basically as expensive as you want it to be.
I love the tech and I love the lifestyle so I don’t regret 1 penny of the thousands I’ve spent.
Cheaper than liposuction what ever you spend.
Yes….“the bike i want is more than i want to pay“^^
And on all channels and from all directions, marketing tells you which bike and which material you have to ride to belong to it.
And people want to belong to it.
It s a game of marketing and emotions.
Sram force and winspace slc or their aero bike, if that tickles you more, and their carbon wheels, you don't need anything more
People in the best economics are saying bicycles are overpriced think about people in India or any mass population country these cycles are only a dream for us, only the super elite can own.
If someone wants to pay high price for a bike or anything else, let them. Whether it’s appropriate for their skill level or not. Yes they are over priced. But manufacturers aren’t pricing potential buyers out. People price themselves out by not being able to afford them. It’s real simple, get a better job. Further your education. Work more hours. Work for a promotion. OR be smarter and honest with yourself as an athlete. Do you really need this up-grade? Probably not. My last two bikes are used and they don’t slow me down at all. And I’m very happy with them.
buy secondhand, got 2016 fuji granfondo,hardly used carbon, 11 speed for £300
It's very simple, go buy a Whiskey carbon fork for 800 dollars and then go buy a Toseek Carbon fork for 100 dollars...hide the logo and challenge ANYONE to tell which is which Hint: it's the same factory producing it..one has a Western Brand name and one could argue support blah blah blah...it's a fork....break it 5x before it costs you 5x as much for the same exact product.
The average rider doesn't need or even want a race bike with a lower stack than saddle height. Trek, Giant etc should focus on making endurance/hybrid bikes for under 1k with decent components.
Reflecting on the issues of cost and rapid technological advancements in professional cycling, I propose a two-pronged solution inspired by practices in other sports like Formula 1. Firstly, the UCI could impose a price cap on professional road bikes, say at $5,000. This would encourage manufacturers to focus on creating quality, affordable bikes rather than continually pushing the boundaries of expensive technology. Secondly, borrowing a principle from Formula 1, we could require teams to use a specific bike model for a fixed period, like an entire season. This approach would level the playing field, making the competition more about the riders' skills and strategies rather than their equipment's price tag or technological superiority. Such a combination of a price cap and fixed-period bike models could revolutionize professional cycling. It would make the sport more accessible and environmentally friendly, reduce the financial burden on teams, and refocus the sport on the core elements of athletic performance and competition strategy. This could be a significant step towards making professional cycling a more equitable and sustainable sport.
As I share thoughts, profit is not a bad word and is needed, and GCN got the brunt of it, rightly so, but the problem is consumption for consumption.
Most people are pretty awesome consumerist slaves and will spend because they're scared, insecure and very worried about what others think. Have you heard of the narcissism of the small differences? This is when a person has something others don't to differentiate themselves from those people. So, expensive and exotic. The human species has some fatal flaws.
How many of those $15-20k bikes do they sell? Not many, I'm sure. Everyone acts like those are the only bikes on the market and if we want to ride, we're forced to pay those prices. The UCI says bikes that are raced must be available to the general consumer, so they make a few that are actually designed for pro racers, and put them on the market so they meet the UCI requirement. The automobile industry does the same thing.
There are plenty of bikes available at all kinds of price points. The problem arises when people want those highest priced bikes and can't afford them or can't justify spending that kind of money on them. So they point to the manufacturers and cry "greed" when a perfectly good bike, possibly one better suited to their needs, is available for substantially less. Think 15 grand is too much for a bike? Me, too. Don't buy one.
For one, "10 speeds" used to be called "racing bikes". You can't buy a Formula One car and drive it on the road (and in fact, the average person couldn't get it out of the garage without stalling or crashing it if he could), but you can buy a bicycle "just like the one your hero rides". Those are always the top (expensive) end and there are enough immature, insecure people out there, who will never race, added to those with more money than brains, to fall for it. Racing is only big business in order to sell stuff and apparently it works.
I saw that video. My main thought was that they were comparing top-end bicycles to low-end motorcycles, which is an absolutely silly and useless comparison. The subject of that video was solely to get views and stir up nonsensical controversy. It seems to have worked as you discussed it here.
I think when youre looking at a motorcycle. It also depends on what sort of motorcycle... if youre going for a sporty one that makes use of a lot of carbon fiber and fancier alloys to make it lighter/stronger etc then I can see why something would cost so much.
But if youre talking about your bang average motorcycle or moped. A lot of it can be machine made where there might be someone at the end of the production line to put in finishing touches. A lot of engine blocks are cast iron or cast aluminium and those things can also be machine made although some factories might have a few guys around to keep an eye on production because youre basically working with molten metal and things can go wrong quite quickly if things are left unsupervised.
Really its the R&D and possible re-tooling of machines to manufacturer a completely new design that might eat up a lot of money. But you'll recoup your money back really quickly If the one one that you spent a $1mil building a mould that can produce 1mil units per day, you're probably well on the road to make your money back. Building a second or third mould will probably cost little to nothing as all of the R&D has already been spent making the first one so its just copy, paste then multiply.
So how about UCI making a rule that only bikes with a lower pricetag than idk 3000 or 4000 pounds are allowed to race? Actually Vitus is advertising the Vitesse Evo and ZX1 Evo models as Gran Tour ready bikes costing around 3-4000 pounds.
Yes we need more durable and affordable bikes and components but planned obsolescence and pushing out new gear means maximum profit.
Imho Cycling popularity is rising, it causes shortages, and shortages increase prices. Iron 883 is 🔥
Its the same with all other men's toys. "If you buy a 5000 bucks camera, you will make better pictures." - Nonsense.
Why buying an pro-bike with a Dura Ace if you aren't a pro-cyclist? It's a waste of money.
Check the 2nd-hand market, which will be THE big opponent to all those fancy brands. Cycling will demise as a passion (or hobby/trend...) for a lot of people and they'll sell their bikes for much less than what they've payed for. It has started already. Bought a S-Works Roubaix in full carbon with Di2-Ultegra and high end FFWD-tyres for a fraction of the cost it was sold when it came out. An old bike isn't a bad bike, don't forget that. It is not a bloody iPhone, that gets outdated very fast.
Why do you need 12 gears? Hmm, I have won a race on fixed gear and beaten lots of people on 8sp in off road races in terrible conditions that screw up 11 speed set ups.
So much innovation is pointless , disc brakes in time trials 😂😂 , why? And a lot of the mega expensive stuff people buy is just bling and showing off , it'll go wrong and be a massive pain. My gears won't work, my battery is dead... oops. To be honest; we were happy Shimano gave us the bail out friction option on early indexing for when the rear mech got clobbered. For most purposes simple tech is best and often just as quick.
GCN is getting more like grand tour rather than a bike relatable show …
GCN are capable of being excellent. But, oh boy, are they ever capable of being absolutely dreadful.
IS not disc brakes ...
GCN stands on a plateau ... they can see bikes have 5 figures ... over 10 000 us or pounds ... there is real no reason to justify that money on a bike... WAIT! there is.. economy and teory of economy explain why and is not gains... is theory of centers and the exclusive that some bike manufacturers claim and actually are... and is really wrong ... but is how economy works and that is why maketing is bad because a utility thing like a bit get on a bubble and somewhere somehow will pop.
Who cares about 8 or 9 speed? The problem is the current top tier prices, because they dictate what the mid tier costs.
Cheaper low tier is not what we need.
When it comes to groupsets we have "fake" mid tier products anyway. They develop products which are the same, but heavier and definitely not cheaper to produce.
Rival and Apex is nearly the same and production wise it would be cheaper to produce just one of them.
I do 😎, who ever need more gears is just weak
@@GT-sc5sk lol more gears doesn't mean more range 🤦🏻♂️
Set a cap on what you're willing to pay for a road bike, and stick to it. And if you really want value for your money, buy used.
I'm starting to believe that if you have to pay for the top end equipment, it's not meant for you.
With my less than 1000€ bike, which I find very expensive (and is the most expensive bike I've ever bought), and seeing all the "correct" bikes you can get ranging from 4-500€ all the way to 10k+ I would not say that the bike market is overpriced but that cyclists have luxury tastes and bike brands market and profit on that.
I am under the impression that cyclists would not buy lower price bikes with the same qualities. The price is low or medium ? Must not be a good bike.
And there is also a wide range of price for similar specifications.
Saturday I was on a gravel ride with a few people, a person had a 2500€ Stevens gravel bike, it wasn't even a carbon frame, the groupset was not that high end, same as on my bike (I have a mix of Shimano GRX400-600-800), only the wheel sold with the bike were a bit better. Maybe the paintjob was better I don't know, mine has 6000km and has been on rough terrain all year round and it has not bulged. 2.5x the price for an imperceptible (if real) difference.
Racingbikes are incredible overpriced. You get an Mtb with Discbrakes and 12 speed for 800€. If you want to have the same at a racingbike you pay over 1300€. And Discbrakes are not new. I ride them since 1999.
When you mentioned the Sportster I unsubscribed and threw my phone against the wall
Google is also fucking us in the a**. You're not hearing any creator complaining about it though.
The sport has changed. Jimmy only wants electronic groupsets on his bikes. Come on. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy expensive bikes. I'm kicking the ass of people on Pinarellos with my Decathlon Triban RC500 in Thailand. They dropped $10,000 for a brand new bike when I paid $250.
Rich people are gonna spend their money anyway. I prefer them to spend $10k on a bicycle than on a fucking truck of a car.
You guys are way more practical than the elitists at GCN. The majority of people riding bikes are NOT racers, so why is the media & manufacturers promoting these wonder-bikes when they cost a fortune to buy? Must be the money!! Simple formula. Convince people that they have to have a bike that's as light feather & as aero as a razor blade & they will buy it if they can.
Marketing ain«t the fucking problem at all, they spend so little money on marketing. It's R&D and pure greediness, also brands like mmr, bh, cippolini, cinelli, they don't do shit in marketing and sell their frames for those same 5k, just because they can
Amateur cyclists don't need high quality bikes, they might want them but that's more down to prestige than usage.
Shimano Tourney would be more suitable for a high percentage of amateur road cyclists as they generally ride on the hoods, something I've noticed frequently while out on the road but Shimano 105 or another manufacturers equivalent is more desirable.
No way Tourney is suitable. It's cheap , damages easily, not long lasting. Claris or Tiagra is the minimum for length of component life and user friendly.
Tourney is too bad, need sora claris
Tiagra is dog shit. I wore away the paint on the shifters in under a year.
What about such lunacies as „groupset of the people“ Apex AXS from SRAM, that is anything but attainable for an average Joe? And to add injury to insult, on most European markets, the Rival is actually cheaper even if it is supposed to be a tier up. And let us not get started on such things as Shimano taking their MTB Deore 12 speed, changing the pull ratio and rebadging it as „all new GRX“. We are expected to pay dearly for products that are way more fraud than they are an actual development. In bikes as in anything else, it has become an act of selling you illusions of importance and grandeur.
Gcn is nothing but a commercial for expensive bikes.
It is over priced, by a big margin. If r&d is that expensive they should fire the the r&d teams. If you stand back and look at a bicycle it is still the same as when Eddy won his first Tdf. (Simplified). Stop using the development argument some improvements are not improvements it is just the same as the previous year group set just cosmetic changes and marketing bs.
Financial reset is coming soon… Which will hopefully normalize everything
Not your first go at GCN. GCN are living rent free in your heads lads. Let’s have positive content. We are a small community so let’s lift each other up.
💯👌🤝
I ride old 90s mtbs and a 1950s 3 speed, built to last.. the 50s thing gets raced in time trials for a laugh, placed 10th out of 15 in a Xmas race... haha.
I race seriously on a 1980s road bike, superb climbing machine, just not aero.
As a mechanic I despair with crappy disc brakes and why do we have 11 speed????? Ffs
Oh piss off. Disc brakes are amazing. 11 speed exists for a reason. It enables smaller jumps between gears and works really well.
You don't get to decide where technology stops.
@@richardhaselwood9478 more triggered than Sturmey Archer .
@@steveprice9737 What, you're upset I called your idiotic comment out?
@@richardhaselwood9478 top trolling you must be a clever shimanobot .
So much BS…
First off, the motorbike you can buy for $14k is NOT the equivalent of an SL8 - that would be a motoGP bike costing maybe $2M.
Second, if you think $14k is too much for a bicycle - DON’T F-- BUY IT.
So much entitled whining. Since when can you have whatever you want at any price you like?
Amateur cycling will have a slow death if prices keep inflating. A cycle will purely be a method of transport rather than an enthusiasts sport. Prices are ludicrous and it’s killing the sport as it’s no longer affordable for Joe Public. Greed, pure greed.
I disagree. Most motorbikes arent made of carbon fiber, and made to be as light as possible. Most of the expensive bikes are racing bikes, designed for maximum performance. A BMW M 1000RR is about $35,000.
Worry less about GCN and focus on yourselves. Looking petty