Cannondale: ³It's a better quality, nicer weld, with more patents.²

On May 16, 8:38 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
[about Trek & Cannondale]

It's not a level playing field; the big guys have some huge advantages over
the LBS. That's one of the reasons shops support Trek so well. Trek doesn't
play games like that; if they overproduce something, it's offered to all of
their dealers at the reduced price. Everybody has the same rules. To be
competitive without having lots of slash & burn sales, they have to make
sure they've got a good product at a reasonable price, and they generally do
pretty well in that regard.

I'd think Trek's higher popularity also has something to do with Lance
winning seven Tours on them. If he'd ridden Cannondale, he'd have
been just as fast, I'm sure, and Cannondale's sales would be much
higher.

That's why Nike pays millions and millions to get Tiger Woods, Michael
Jordan, LeBron James, etc. under their wing. Lots of consumers aren't
very bright; they're easily influenced by those tactics.



Unfortunately, Trek can make exceptional bikes, but they don't quite have
the high-end helmet thing down. Giro is king there, with the best-in-class
style & graphics around. It's not about quality per se; the $39.99 Trek
Vapor is the "killer app" of helmets. But Giro somehow manages to make hard
foam with a thin plastic shell actually look like something someone would
pay $200+ for.

Hmm. As I said, lots of consumers aren't very bright; they're easily
influenced by those tactics.

- Frank Krygowski

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

Unfortunately, Trek can make exceptional bikes, but they don't quite have
the high-end helmet thing down. Giro is king there, with the best-in-class
style & graphics around. It's not about quality per se; the $39.99 Trek
Vapor is the "killer app" of helmets. But Giro somehow manages to make hard
foam with a thin plastic shell actually look like something someone would
pay $200+ for.

Taking this on a tangent, I see that the Vapor is only available on one
universal size. (I'm actually thinking I ought to get a new helmet, and
if I could get a good one for 40 bucks that'd be even better.) I guess
I just ASSumed that a helmet should be fitted to one's dome. It appears
Trek doesn't agree. Who's right?

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

"Nate Nagel" wrote in message
...
| Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
|
| Unfortunately, Trek can make exceptional bikes, but they don't quite
have
| the high-end helmet thing down. Giro is king there, with the
best-in-class
| style & graphics around. It's not about quality per se; the $39.99 Trek
| Vapor is the "killer app" of helmets. But Giro somehow manages to make
hard
| foam with a thin plastic shell actually look like something someone
would
| pay $200+ for.
|
| Taking this on a tangent, I see that the Vapor is only available on one
| universal size. (I'm actually thinking I ought to get a new helmet, and
| if I could get a good one for 40 bucks that'd be even better.) I guess
| I just ASSumed that a helmet should be fitted to one's dome. It appears
| Trek doesn't agree. Who's right?
|
| nate

Nate: We resisted the move to a single-size helmet with everything we had,
but in the end, it doesn't seem to have been such a bad thing. It's not
actually just a one-size offering, since they also have smaller shells for
both youth and women. They did drop a bit off the large end of folk that it
might fit though. Best bet is to simply try one on and see. Do keep in mind
that, while fitting a helmet isn't difficult, it still needs to be done. Not
much to it; adjust the straps so they come together just under the ears, and
turn the knob at the back to loosen or tighten. It will either fit
comfortably or not.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

"Paul M. Hobson" wrote in message
...
| SMS wrote:
| Perhaps, but all the top tier stores seem to have dropped them.
|
| What top tier stores are you talking about?
|
| I tried using their "Dealer Locator" on their web site, and I see that
| REI carries them, as well as some second tier shops.
|
| How do you know which LBSes qualify as top and second tier stores? The
| way you phrased all this, you really seem to be talking out of your ass.
| Seven out of the eight shops that deal with Cannondale in the Atlanta
| are quality LBSes, from what I gather.

The quality of shops for a given brand in a given area is going to be hugely
dependent upon the quality and long-term thinking of the local rep. Bicycle
companies with a high churn rate for reps are going to choose quick fixes to
their distribution issues (primarily selling more bikes!) rather than make
short-term sacrifices that will pay dividends down the road. This is one
area that Trek probably has it hands-down over the rest of the brands,
because there's an inherent stability within the organization that breeds
long-term loyalties. Reps tend to stay far longer than at most companies,
and management? Pretty much the same group of people for the past 20 years.

Trek is also highly unusual among the major players because they don't
require that dealers put in huge pre-season orders... for bike or parts. We
can order what we want, when we want it. The company actually discourages
dealers carrying too much inventory, because inventory sitting in boxes is
costing the dealer money. Money needs to "work" which means it needs to
"turn" (a "turn" represents how many times a given unit on the floor will
sell in a given year, so if always have two of something in stock and you
sell twelve in a year, you're getting six "turns" on the product).

Trek believes that a more-profitable dealer is going to invest more in their
business and their community (community investment=bicycle advocacy). Both
of those grow sales for bikes in general and Trek in particular.

Not every dealer is up for it though; what Trek expects, in return for
dealers not having to carry huge inventories at times of the year it doesn't
sell, is a large percentage of the dealer's business. Many of us "drink the
kool-aid" and buy into it, and many resist. Ultimately, the major brands
(the Big 3, which would be Specialized, Giant & Trek) all have the same
ideal store in mind- a store that carries only their brand (of the Big 3)
and purchases 70%+ of their bike inventory from them.

Can you be a "top tier" store without carrying one of the Big 3? Yes. Is it
easy? No. Most other brands lack year-to-year consistency, making it
difficult to assume that you won't have concerns about supplies and even
product quality from one year to the next. And if a store is into
cherry-picking from a whole lot of lines, there's no way they're going to
get anywhere near the quality of warranty effort & resolution as a store
that has more loyalty to a particular company.

This has strayed quite a ways from the original question.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: [stuff I snipped, but which was pretty good]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Mongoose here, which is another
Pacific/Dorel brand. They've tried to sell at both ends of the
market with the same brand, which is confusing -- and I wouldn't
guess works well at the high end of the spectrum.

Starting a brand high and then moving mass market is a classic
marketing strategy which I've seen in hair products [the high end
stuff starts out in salons with the secret-ingredient-of-the-year
then moves into supermarkets and drug stores -- older examples
include Jhirmack and Jerri Redding products], womens foundation
garments [new brands start out in Nordstroms, etc. and eventually
move to discount stores], luggage [Samsonite used to be a high end
only brand, long ago], etc. And, of course, there's consumer
electronics.

This can work out well for all concerned -- even the salons,
specialty stores and other high end places -- if there's a new
product pipeline once the original brand moves downmarket. So, when
herbal shampoo moved out of salons into grocery, there was aloe to
replace it. But if there's not an adequate pipeline, the high end
shops get hosed.

In essence, this is what happened to all those Schwinn shops,
although that story is much more complicated to summarize so simply.
Now Schwinn is just the "better" brand at Wal-mart. [You can still
get a top quality bike made by a Schwinn, but it will have a
"Waterford" decal.]

Shimano is really on the ball here. Shimano stands for a "quality"
drivetrain at all levels. At the high end it stands for "more
quality". If they make cheap junk, they at least don't put their
own name on it. This multiple positioning is probably easier for a
component maker [like Shimano or Intel].

--
Mike Kruger
"You have to be careful if you are reckless." - Richard M. Daley

Nate Nagel wrote:

Taking this on a tangent, I see that the Vapor is only available on one
universal size. (I'm actually thinking I ought to get a new helmet, and
if I could get a good one for 40 bucks that'd be even better.) I guess
I just ASSumed that a helmet should be fitted to one's dome. It appears
Trek doesn't agree. Who's right?

Not sure if it's still the case, but last time I bought a helmet
Specialized was one of the only ones available that still had Snell
certification. It was around $30 on sale for the Chamonix model. I
checked their web site, and the MSRP is now $50, and it's still Snell
approved. Their more expensive models are not Snell approved, presumably
because the design is such that they can't pass.

One thing you can be sure of that if a helmet is Snell approved the
manufacturer will use that in the marketing, so the absence of any
markings on the helmet, or logos on the web site, that show that it's
Snell approved is a pretty good indicator that it's not.

SMS wrote:
Nate Nagel wrote:

Taking this on a tangent, I see that the Vapor is only available on
one universal size. (I'm actually thinking I ought to get a new
helmet, and if I could get a good one for 40 bucks that'd be even
better.) I guess I just ASSumed that a helmet should be fitted to
one's dome. It appears Trek doesn't agree. Who's right?


Not sure if it's still the case, but last time I bought a helmet
Specialized was one of the only ones available that still had Snell
certification. It was around $30 on sale for the Chamonix model. I
checked their web site, and the MSRP is now $50, and it's still Snell
approved. Their more expensive models are not Snell approved, presumably
because the design is such that they can't pass.

One thing you can be sure of that if a helmet is Snell approved the
manufacturer will use that in the marketing, so the absence of any
markings on the helmet, or logos on the web site, that show that it's
Snell approved is a pretty good indicator that it's not.

Interesting post.

I found this:

http://www.smf.org/

http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90...90C_B-95C.html

which seems to indicate that *only* those helmets on the list are
certified. Interesting reading.

I'm guessing that the CPSC standards are less stringent than the Snell
standards? I guess if I'm going to wear a silly looking lid it might as
well work if required.

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Nate Nagel wrote:

I found this:

http://www.smf.org/

http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90...90C_B-95C.html

which seems to indicate that *only* those helmets on the list are
certified. Interesting reading.

I'm guessing that the CPSC standards are less stringent than the Snell
standards? I guess if I'm going to wear a silly looking lid it might as
well work if required.

CPSC is self-certification.

I'm sure there's never been a study comparing accident death and injury
rates of Snell approved helmets versus CPSC approved helmets. There's
probably a very narrow window where it would make a difference.

On May 17, 10:34 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:


I found this:

http://www.smf.org/

http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90...90C_B-95C.html

which seems to indicate that *only* those helmets on the list are
certified. Interesting reading.

I'm guessing that the CPSC standards are less stringent than the Snell
standards? I guess if I'm going to wear a silly looking lid it might as
well work if required.


Snell uses a drop height that's 10% higher than CPSC. That difference
is almost certainly insignificant. Both tests are laughably weak,
with Snell's only marginally less weak.

Snell periodically buys helmets and tests them. CPSC relies on
companies fear of selling an illegal product.

Snell makes money off every Snell-certified helmet. CPSC does not.

It's absolute fantasy to think that a Snell hat would "work" when a
CPSC on would not. It's like putting a sweater over your bulletproof
vest - because you're afraid someone might shoot you with a howitzer.

Helmets are bump protectors, period. When they "work" at all, it's
just to prevent a bruise. And the long and pleasant history of
bicycling, with billions upon billions of cyclists, proves that even
bump protection is not needed.

Instead of reading Snell's advertising, consider reading a site that
exists for the science, not to make money. Visit http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

Try not to be such a gullible, fearful fashion slave.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 17, 10:34 pm, Nate Nagel wrote:


I found this:

http://www.smf.org/

http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90...90C_B-95C.html

which seems to indicate that *only* those helmets on the list are
certified. Interesting reading.

I'm guessing that the CPSC standards are less stringent than the Snell
standards? I guess if I'm going to wear a silly looking lid it might as
well work if required.



Snell uses a drop height that's 10% higher than CPSC. That difference
is almost certainly insignificant. Both tests are laughably weak,
with Snell's only marginally less weak.

Snell periodically buys helmets and tests them. CPSC relies on
companies fear of selling an illegal product.

Snell makes money off every Snell-certified helmet. CPSC does not.

It's absolute fantasy to think that a Snell hat would "work" when a
CPSC on would not. It's like putting a sweater over your bulletproof
vest - because you're afraid someone might shoot you with a howitzer.

Helmets are bump protectors, period. When they "work" at all, it's
just to prevent a bruise. And the long and pleasant history of
bicycling, with billions upon billions of cyclists, proves that even
bump protection is not needed.

Instead of reading Snell's advertising, consider reading a site that
exists for the science, not to make money. Visit http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

Try not to be such a gullible, fearful fashion slave.

- Frank Krygowski

HA!

you obviously have not looked into my closet lately.

Seriously, I'm just trying to make an educated purchasing decision. It
seems like helmets are de rigeur in my area; I'm about the only person I
see on any given ride not wearing one. Plus, there's TONS of traffic in
my area, so the thought of having a little extra safety equipment,
within reason, isn't ludicrous.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to replace the Porsche with an SUV
just to get airbags and some "road hugging weight," but good lights and
a helmet are not a bad idea.

Speaking of lights, I got my package from DealExtreme yesterday with the
lenses someone here recommended, I'll check 'em out tonight to see if
they make an acceptable (to me) headlight, if it's not raining. (I just
got back from a quick spin to the LBS to get a new lock; it was a
beautiful ride out, and rather moist coming back.) I just wish I wasn't
blind without my glasses; makes riding in the rain a little less
pleasant than it needs to be.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel