Good discussion. My big gripe with the industry, and a lot of the media is the obsession with performance; whether aero, light weight, how to get fitter, improve your FTP, etc What about the ordinary cyclist who commutes, or goes to the shops, or even the tourer? They very rarely get a look in......
Well, you can do that with a well maintained 20 years old bike, or an affordable Decathlon/Walmart bike... My point is there is no value in it for the industry, or only very low margins. Better sell clothes and extra equipment in this case. On the other hand these racing bikes sell for $4000, $10,000, $15,000! and customers with that kind of money probably buy new ones on a regular basis! It's like luxury goods, that's where the big money is made, Bernard Arnault is selling Louis Vuitton, Dior, Moët, Hennessy, Tag Heuer, etc. (granted Musk is potentially richer, but that's only thanks to Wall Street investors, not from sales!)
What I hate is easy. While I love cycling tech I really couldn't care less about any form of bicycle racing. Yet 99% of cycling media is all about racing, and bike GPS can't even navigate properly because they are so focused on sensors, power meters and segments. It would be strange if all car influencers only talked about racing cars, but in cycling that is normal. Weird.
The road side of the sport is certainly still led by pro racing. The reason we focus on it is that this content performs best. That said, I think we still have plenty of excellent non-racing content. If there's something you want to see more of, let us know. We're always keen to know what our audience actually wants to watch. Liam
@@bikeradar Ah, so you're not really interested in serving cyclists in general. You just serve a small segment of the cycling population. Hmmm. You guys do know, right, that media likely has an influence, maybe a significant influence, on purchases and thus bikes that are sold. You guys really claim to honestly care about the average cyclist when you do virtually nothing for the average cyclist. When have you guys ever shown a commitment to pushing the industry to produce more entry-level bikes that are simpler and less expensive? I think the answer to that is obvious: you guys don't do that. At best you put forth only a perfunctory effort. You could do better, but you choose not to.
The industry focuses on racers because they will spend ££££ to chase a marginal performance improvement. Non-racers tend to be less gullible/profitable.
Great discussion guys, good job. But my rant here is about the leap that the industry took from spectacular rim brake bikes to disc brakes. I've been to France and Italy rinding my old Cervelo R5 with spectacular Bora Ultra wheels on snow and wet weather and the braking was flawless. Yes I'm a light guy , but the point is ; How much would cost me to have the same bike with Bora Ultra wheels , Dura ace and just as light ? Sure the discs are probably much better but to shut down completely that side of the industry makes no sense to me.
Barring UCI rule changes bike tech does seem to plateau and inevitably the fight for competitive marketshare forces companies to trickle down tech. Eventually I'm hoping things like hydraulic brakes and electronic shifting simply become the road bike standard once you break into 4 figure prices.
If the companies and the employees are really passionate about the sport and really care about the customers and making bikes better, how is it that seemingly the majority of bikes now come with totally integrated cable/hose routing? It might look cool--and that's questionable--but it also comes with a much higher service cost for those that don't do their own maintenance; much more faff for those that do their own maintenance; more proprietary parts; fewer sizes; fewer options on getting properly sized components on a new bike; crap sealing on headset bearings; more headset alignment issues (the ring of death on steerer tubes.....just ask Raoul Lucscher), etc? How is that making anything better for cyclists? Do these companies realize that only a minority of people riding these bikes are pros or racers? Sorry, your claims about companies aren't really congruent with reality.
Hi Robin, I think most bikes come with integrated cables/hoses these days because that's what a majority of riders want - ultimately, people are voting with their wallets on these things and if no one was buying them, then brands wouldn't do it. To be clear, I'm not saying I like this trend - I much prefer my Giant TCR with non-integrated cables to the latest model, for example. However, until people stop buying race bikes like the pros ride, bike companies won't stop making them - it's as simple as that, IMO. Cheers for watching, Simon
@@bikeradar , sure the fact is people are buying total integration, but that's all they get to see before they buy. How often do potential buyers see anything but totally integrated systems? How often is a bike with exposed cables and housing given a prominent position on your site or anyone else's? And how often do you folks or anyone caution people about the pitfalls of such systems? Rarely does anyone say, "If you don't work on your own bike, the cost of getting your bike serviced at your LBS is going to be a lot more than you think." No, instead you focus on bike weight, grams of drag saved, how pro a bike looks, or what pro rides it." There's a vanishingly small effort put forth to truly inform cyclists, especially people new to the sport, about such things. Again, media outlets like yours, have an influence on what people buy. Denying as much and saying "Well, it's just what a majority of riders want" is dishonest
@@robinseibel7540 I don't think it's fair to say we don't try to inform cyclists about this stuff - we published an in-depth feature on the very topic you're talking about late last year, for example: www.bikeradar.com/features/tech/the-truth-about-internal-cable-routing Likewise, when there were more non-integrated bikes being launched in the past, obviously we featured more of them on site / on our channel. If most of the new bikes are integrated, though, then ultimately that's going to be reflected in what we cover. Don't forget, we're not in charge of what bike brands decide to launch. Like I said, plenty of us here agree with the points you're making and have chosen to own non-integrated bikes for those reasons - and we often go out of our ways to say so! - but I do think it's a case of a majority of people voting with their wallets on this one. If it wasn't popular, I think brands would stop doing it. Cheers, Simon
Good discussion.
My big gripe with the industry, and a lot of the media is the obsession with performance; whether aero, light weight, how to get fitter, improve your FTP, etc
What about the ordinary cyclist who commutes, or goes to the shops, or even the tourer? They very rarely get a look in......
Well, you can do that with a well maintained 20 years old bike, or an affordable Decathlon/Walmart bike...
My point is there is no value in it for the industry, or only very low margins. Better sell clothes and extra equipment in this case.
On the other hand these racing bikes sell for $4000, $10,000, $15,000! and customers with that kind of money probably buy new ones on a regular basis!
It's like luxury goods, that's where the big money is made, Bernard Arnault is selling Louis Vuitton, Dior, Moët, Hennessy, Tag Heuer, etc. (granted Musk is potentially richer, but that's only thanks to Wall Street investors, not from sales!)
What I hate is easy. While I love cycling tech I really couldn't care less about any form of bicycle racing. Yet 99% of cycling media is all about racing, and bike GPS can't even navigate properly because they are so focused on sensors, power meters and segments. It would be strange if all car influencers only talked about racing cars, but in cycling that is normal. Weird.
The road side of the sport is certainly still led by pro racing. The reason we focus on it is that this content performs best. That said, I think we still have plenty of excellent non-racing content. If there's something you want to see more of, let us know. We're always keen to know what our audience actually wants to watch. Liam
@@bikeradar Ah, so you're not really interested in serving cyclists in general. You just serve a small segment of the cycling population. Hmmm. You guys do know, right, that media likely has an influence, maybe a significant influence, on purchases and thus bikes that are sold. You guys really claim to honestly care about the average cyclist when you do virtually nothing for the average cyclist. When have you guys ever shown a commitment to pushing the industry to produce more entry-level bikes that are simpler and less expensive? I think the answer to that is obvious: you guys don't do that. At best you put forth only a perfunctory effort.
You could do better, but you choose not to.
The industry focuses on racers because they will spend ££££ to chase a marginal performance improvement. Non-racers tend to be less gullible/profitable.
I enjoyed this honest discussion and hear your "insiders" experience of the cycling industry.
Great discussion guys, good job. But my rant here is about the leap that the industry took from spectacular rim brake bikes to disc brakes. I've been to France and Italy rinding my old Cervelo R5 with spectacular Bora Ultra wheels on snow and wet weather and the braking was flawless. Yes I'm a light guy , but the point is ; How much would cost me to have the same bike with Bora Ultra wheels , Dura ace and just as light ? Sure the discs are probably much better but to shut down completely that side of the industry makes no sense to me.
Great episode 👍
Barring UCI rule changes bike tech does seem to plateau and inevitably the fight for competitive marketshare forces companies to trickle down tech. Eventually I'm hoping things like hydraulic brakes and electronic shifting simply become the road bike standard once you break into 4 figure prices.
If the companies and the employees are really passionate about the sport and really care about the customers and making bikes better, how is it that seemingly the majority of bikes now come with totally integrated cable/hose routing? It might look cool--and that's questionable--but it also comes with a much higher service cost for those that don't do their own maintenance; much more faff for those that do their own maintenance; more proprietary parts; fewer sizes; fewer options on getting properly sized components on a new bike; crap sealing on headset bearings; more headset alignment issues (the ring of death on steerer tubes.....just ask Raoul Lucscher), etc? How is that making anything better for cyclists? Do these companies realize that only a minority of people riding these bikes are pros or racers?
Sorry, your claims about companies aren't really congruent with reality.
Hi Robin, I think most bikes come with integrated cables/hoses these days because that's what a majority of riders want - ultimately, people are voting with their wallets on these things and if no one was buying them, then brands wouldn't do it.
To be clear, I'm not saying I like this trend - I much prefer my Giant TCR with non-integrated cables to the latest model, for example.
However, until people stop buying race bikes like the pros ride, bike companies won't stop making them - it's as simple as that, IMO.
Cheers for watching, Simon
@@bikeradar , sure the fact is people are buying total integration, but that's all they get to see before they buy. How often do potential buyers see anything but totally integrated systems? How often is a bike with exposed cables and housing given a prominent position on your site or anyone else's? And how often do you folks or anyone caution people about the pitfalls of such systems? Rarely does anyone say, "If you don't work on your own bike, the cost of getting your bike serviced at your LBS is going to be a lot more than you think." No, instead you focus on bike weight, grams of drag saved, how pro a bike looks, or what pro rides it." There's a vanishingly small effort put forth to truly inform cyclists, especially people new to the sport, about such things.
Again, media outlets like yours, have an influence on what people buy. Denying as much and saying "Well, it's just what a majority of riders want" is dishonest
@@robinseibel7540 I don't think it's fair to say we don't try to inform cyclists about this stuff - we published an in-depth feature on the very topic you're talking about late last year, for example: www.bikeradar.com/features/tech/the-truth-about-internal-cable-routing
Likewise, when there were more non-integrated bikes being launched in the past, obviously we featured more of them on site / on our channel. If most of the new bikes are integrated, though, then ultimately that's going to be reflected in what we cover. Don't forget, we're not in charge of what bike brands decide to launch.
Like I said, plenty of us here agree with the points you're making and have chosen to own non-integrated bikes for those reasons - and we often go out of our ways to say so! - but I do think it's a case of a majority of people voting with their wallets on this one. If it wasn't popular, I think brands would stop doing it.
Cheers, Simon