The bike industry crisis

merc-blue said:
This isn't how it works, though. When I worked in a large, multi-brand (rider-owned and run) store, for every mid-spec alloy dual-suspension bike we sold, we sold 30 or 40 low-spec kids' hardtails.
Every $150 helmet we fitted, we sold 1 in 50.
Every $40 helmet we fitted, we sold 48 in 50.

Cashflow went into stock we sold, not stock we would like to sell.
We would keep a few mid-spec alloy dualies on the floor in the likely-to-sell size (no XS, maybe one XL), and a few Carbon roadies (52-58).
A few others out back, but nothing high-end, we would sell a few a year, but they would be to established customers.

The two shops I was involved in that closed both ran out of cash, had plenty of nice stock, but eventually the distributors pushed too far, and they closed. The irony is that distributors pushed them to take on the stock.

Cash flow is what is killing the industry.
Click to expand...
You just described why my model could win, the manufacturers send the demo stock, then sell it off when the new models arrive. There is no pressure to order thousands of bikes to get dusty, they're shipped directly from China/Taiwan/Vietnam/Germany etc..
 
I'm not sure that's how volume bike manufacturing works but happy to be wrong. My only experience with volume manufacturing is air conditioning. 30 years ago Carrier air conditioning Australia would place their order for the wall splits for the year. The factory would set up for the order and punch it out in a few days. the lines would then be reset for another regions orders. I assume it works similarly at the Merida factory. They take the annual order from Specialised etc and punch it out and then put the next brand on the production line and push those through. I assume it is only the low volume brands and the low volume factories that do multiple batches of frames each year.
 
Problem with retailing is holding stock vs. cashflow.

A certain brand (Trek...cough) want their ca$h immediately for stock - no ifs, not buts. I heard they put a shop into administration super quick (basically they wanted them gone).

Also I know the brands are pushing as much stock onto the distributors and they can, and are making the same demands for the cash.

This is why the web-based retail models make sense as it eliminates the distributors and retail shopfronts. Sorry for the people that like trying stuff on/fit etc.
 
Manufacturers cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Too many different models and too often making minor changes every 1-3 years eg different colours.
The tiny increments and every 5 - 8 years a major change eg tubeless tyres ,the new geometry ,ebikes , the next general electronic shifting ?
Of course the shops need different sizes.
Proprietary 'standards' are the worst though, huge research into something different that may be a dud but isnt shared with any other maker.
All these things are causing a huge shake out .
I realise that boom and bust is the capitalist model.
 
richie_gt said:
Problem with retailing is holding stock vs. cashflow.

A certain brand (Trek...cough) want their ca$h immediately for stock - no ifs, not buts. I heard they put a shop into administration super quick (basically they wanted them gone).

Also I know the brands are pushing as much stock onto the distributors and they can, and are making the same demands for the cash.

This is why the web-based retail models make sense as it eliminates the distributors and retail shopfronts. Sorry for the people that like trying stuff on/fit etc.
Click to expand...
This was the traditional model (or at least was when I worked in the industry).

You bring in as many bikes as you dare on the assumption that you'll sell more than 70% before your 90 or 120 (if you're lucky) day terms expire and cash flow becomes an issue.

The challenge is bring in enough to meet demand and run a fairly modest business, but not carry too much stock that you can't move and suddenly instead of selling Trek or Giant, the sign on the door changes to the aforementioned brands.

I don't really understand how independent distributors carry stock, let alone individual stores, against the integrated distribution and retail channels of trek / giant / specialized / advance traders & 99 Bikes etc.

*edited for a typo
 
Last edited:
pink poodle said:
No it isnt. The issue is obviously people not buying enough high end bikes and gear!
Click to expand...
This. I think people are dropping the status hierarchy because they've realised they've previously dropped a shitload of $$$ on high end parts/bikes and that nobody gives a f*#k what your ride. A $3000 Polygon will ride just as good, and sometimes if not better than a $10,000 Santa Cruz.
 
crooker said:
This. I think people are dropping the status hierarchy because they've realised they've previously dropped a shitload of $$$ on high end parts/bikes and that nobody gives a f*#k what your ride. A $3000 Polygon will ride just as good, and sometimes if not better than a $10,000 Santa Cruz.
Click to expand...
You mean "all the gear - no idea" is not cool any more? It was never cool!
 
richie_gt said:
You mean "all the gear - no idea" is not cool any more? It was never cool!
Click to expand...
Legit, you can use social media and influences for example, all riding nice bikes, top tier parts making you believe that you NEED all this shit.. And people fall for it, spend their hand earned cash while bike companies sit back like Tony Montana counting the cash they made.. To only fall from their high horse when people in the majority realise the thousands they spent didn't make them ride any better and flooded the 2nd hand market with bikes and parts to recoup some of their losses. If you got the coin and can afford it, good for you, but I'd say that group of people make up a small minority and that's not enough to keep the boat afloat.
 
crooker said:
A $3000 Polygon will ride just as good, and sometimes if not better than a $10,000 Santa Cruz.
Click to expand...

1,000,000% bullshit. There is a huge difference in ride quality between bikes and it all stems from the build quality. Most people will get a bike, ride it then have a cry about something not working so they take it to a shop. The untrained guy in the shop does whatever he does and says it is fixed then you get the same problem on the next ride. It's a viscous circle and until you get tools and learn the in's & out's of maintaining your own gear then you'll never appreciate what makes a bike great. To use the brands you've said as a suggestion: Polygon frames aren't geometrically designed to create a ride feel specific to the discipline you're riding. They're made to reduce the amount of material and labour so they can make money. They aren't good at one specific genre of riding and have way too much variance in how well & tight the parts fit. You buy it online, you fumble fist fuck putting it together then you ride it hoping it'll handle those gnarly blue trails then you chuck it on the council pick up pile 'cause she's done. A Santa Cruz (and most other top level frames) are built specific to what you're riding and are made so the bits you bolt on fit well and fit without sloppy gaps for your parts to rattle out. They're designed to ride well and they ride a megafuckton better than the mass produced rubbish that you pay less for. And believe it or not, they're cheaper to buy because they are shit.
 
Asininedrivel said:
My culture is not your source of mockery.
Click to expand...



Dozer said:
1,000,000% bullshit. There is a huge difference in ride quality between bikes and it all stems from the build quality. Most people will get a bike, ride it then have a cry about something not working so they take it to a shop. The untrained guy in the shop does whatever he does and says it is fixed then you get the same problem on the next ride. It's a viscous circle and until you get tools and learn the in's & out's of maintaining your own gear then you'll never appreciate what makes a bike great. To use the brands you've said as a suggestion: Polygon frames aren't geometrically designed to create a ride feel specific to the discipline you're riding. They're made to reduce the amount of material and labour so they can make money. They aren't good at one specific genre of riding and have way too much variance in how well & tight the parts fit. You buy it online, you fumble fist fuck putting it together then you ride it hoping it'll handle those gnarly blue trails then you chuck it on the council pick up pile 'cause she's done. A Santa Cruz (and most other top level frames) are built specific to what you're riding and are made so the bits you bolt on fit well and fit without sloppy gaps for your parts to rattle out. They're designed to ride well and they ride a megafuckton better than the mass produced rubbish that you pay less for. And believe it or not, they're cheaper to buy because they are shit.
Click to expand...
This.

The tolerances, design and build quality of something like a Polygon is (usually) less than a premium brand.

Not to say all expensive brands have good quality control, but they certainly have more margin with which to allow for better QC.
 
Asininedrivel said:
My culture is not your source of mockery.
Click to expand...
+1. I want that new Forbidden flat-bar gravel bike more than I care to admit.
PressRelease_Photo_02.jpg
 
Dozer said:
1,000,000% bullshit. There is a huge difference in ride quality between bikes and it all stems from the build quality. Most people will get a bike, ride it then have a cry about something not working so they take it to a shop. The untrained guy in the shop does whatever he does and says it is fixed then you get the same problem on the next ride. It's a viscous circle and until you get tools and learn the in's & out's of maintaining your own gear then you'll never appreciate what makes a bike great. To use the brands you've said as a suggestion: Polygon frames aren't geometrically designed to create a ride feel specific to the discipline you're riding. They're made to reduce the amount of material and labour so they can make money. They aren't good at one specific genre of riding and have way too much variance in how well & tight the parts fit. You buy it online, you fumble fist fuck putting it together then you ride it hoping it'll handle those gnarly blue trails then you chuck it on the council pick up pile 'cause she's done. A Santa Cruz (and most other top level frames) are built specific to what you're riding and are made so the bits you bolt on fit well and fit without sloppy gaps for your parts to rattle out. They're designed to ride well and they ride a megafuckton better than the mass produced rubbish that you pay less for. And believe it or not, they're cheaper to buy because they are shit.
Click to expand...
I agree.

Sure there is diminishing returns the more expensive you go, and there is a price point where you aren't gaining much more than wank factor, but working with nice high end components more often than not is a so much nicer experience.
I've had a few friends with Polygons and while they are pretty good bang for you buck, things like pivot bearings and bottom brackets, just weren't that flash. But you buy what you can afford. #lifeistooshorttorideshitbikes

beeb said:
+1. I want that new Forbidden flat-bar gravel bike more than I care to admit.
PressRelease_Photo_02.jpg
Click to expand...
That's probably as close to a gravel bike as I would go. Probably would make an alright bike packing bike.
 
Dozer said:
1,000,000% bullshit. There is a huge difference in ride quality between bikes and it all stems from the build quality. Most people will get a bike, ride it then have a cry about something not working so they take it to a shop. The untrained guy in the shop does whatever he does and says it is fixed then you get the same problem on the next ride. It's a viscous circle and until you get tools and learn the in's & out's of maintaining your own gear then you'll never appreciate what makes a bike great. To use the brands you've said as a suggestion: Polygon frames aren't geometrically designed to create a ride feel specific to the discipline you're riding. They're made to reduce the amount of material and labour so they can make money. They aren't good at one specific genre of riding and have way too much variance in how well & tight the parts fit. You buy it online, you fumble fist fuck putting it together then you ride it hoping it'll handle those gnarly blue trails then you chuck it on the council pick up pile 'cause she's done. A Santa Cruz (and most other top level frames) are built specific to what you're riding and are made so the bits you bolt on fit well and fit without sloppy gaps for your parts to rattle out. They're designed to ride well and they ride a megafuckton better than the mass produced rubbish that you pay less for. And believe it or not, they're cheaper to buy because they are shit.
Click to expand...


Polygon put their stickers on a reasonably good slope style bike.

I have assembled all the santa Cruz bikes ive owned.

Who doesnt enjoy a little candle light touch of the fumbly fist?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top