When did tires get so expensive?

On 1/3/2011 3:53 PM, landotter wrote:
On Jan 3, 3:01 pm, wrote:
AMuzi wrote:

landotter wrote:

AMuzi wrote:

Meanwhile over at the Obama administration's Big Lie
Department, Stalin and Goebbels insist there is no inflation.

Bad hyperbole doesn't suit you.

Laugh or cry:http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cpi.pdf

Ds and Rs have been equally complicit in meddling with the CPI to
obscure the real cost of living "because those prices are volatile".
Ha! Excluding the "volatile" food and energy sectors basically means
that increases in prices of necessities (food, clothing, shelter, and
transportation) are not taken into account. They even shift the
goalposts around (which they call "hedonic regression") so that if
manufacturers add a new button to your TV, then CPI says it doesn't
cost any more, even if it does.

This isn't a Right vs. Left issue; it's the Money Party versus the
people. (The Money Party leans hard to the right, though.)

And if anyone wants to trot out the Trotsky and Stalin pejoratives, I
simply ask: name one industry that's become nationalized as
evidence...

When did Trotsky become a pejorative?

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
¡EL PUEBLO UNIDO JAMÁS SERÁ VENCIDO!

Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
This isn't a Right vs. Left issue; it's the Money Party versus the
people. (The Money Party leans hard to the right, though.)[...]

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
By any rational standard, the Democrats are a right-wing party.

I don't care about them enough to discuss it but I parted
with the Republicans when they turned left wing.

Are we both Tea now?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 1/3/2011 3:53 PM, landotter wrote:
On Jan 3, 3:01 pm, wrote:
AMuzi wrote:

landotter wrote:

AMuzi wrote:

Meanwhile over at the Obama administration's Big Lie
Department, Stalin and Goebbels insist there is no inflation.

Bad hyperbole doesn't suit you.

Laugh or cry:http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cpi.pdf

Ds and Rs have been equally complicit in meddling with the CPI to
obscure the real cost of living "because those prices are volatile".
Ha! Excluding the "volatile" food and energy sectors basically means
that increases in prices of necessities (food, clothing, shelter, and
transportation) are not taken into account. They even shift the
goalposts around (which they call "hedonic regression") so that if
manufacturers add a new button to your TV, then CPI says it doesn't
cost any more, even if it does.

This isn't a Right vs. Left issue; it's the Money Party versus the
people. (The Money Party leans hard to the right, though.)

And if anyone wants to trot out the Trotsky and Stalin pejoratives, I
simply ask: name one industry that's become nationalized as
evidence...

When did Trotsky become a pejorative?


I think he would win if he appeared on a ballot in any local
election here. Dead or not.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/3/2011 9:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:

Meanwhile over at the Obama administration's Big Lie Department, Stalin
and Goebbels insist there is no inflation.

The official inflation rate is often a very bad indicator of inflation.

This is not the fault of the Obama administration, it predates Obama by
decades. There have been various attempts to fix it, often politically
motivated. I.e. when housing was going up at a high rate, they took out
housing because they claimed that if you owned a home, your housing
costs were really not going up. They did this because companies who gave
raises partially based on the cost of living were objecting to the
inflation rate being so high, and SSI payments were going up too fast.

On 1/3/2011 10:19 PM, A. Muzi wrote:
Chalo Colina wrote:
[...]
This isn't a Right vs. Left issue; it's the Money Party versus the
people. (The Money Party leans hard to the right, though.)[...]

Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
By any rational standard, the Democrats are a right-wing party.

I don't care about them enough to discuss it but I parted with the
Republicans when they turned left wing.

When did socialism for the rich and social Darwinism for labor become
left-wing?

Are we both Tea now?

Coffee.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 1/3/2011 7:19 PM, Simon Lewis wrote:
writes:

I was out on a ride today with the spousal unit and two child units, and
daughter-unit blew a tire. I did a temporary fix with two (2) dollar
bills and proceeded to a nearby Performance Bike Shop. Got her a Ritchey
Tom Slick 26" x 1.4" which was $18 (less an 11% off promotion they were
having, so it was about $16). It's been a while since I bought a tire on
the spur of the moment, and was kind of surprised that the prices are so
high. On the Performance web site they have the Panaracer Urban Max for
$20, but while the picture shows 26" x 1.75" the drop down menu shows
26" x 1.25".


You think thats expensive for a premium product?

Christ on a bike. Where have you been hibernating?

The Q is more how she blew a tire. It#s almost unheard of. Is she fat?

LOL, no not fat at all. The old tire was a Nashbar Streetwise 26 x 1.25.
The sidewall failed in two places. I don't remember how old the tire
was, but I think it was at least eight years old, and maybe the rubber
just deteriorated. Still plenty of tread left. The bicycle is used
pretty much every day to go to school, but only for maybe 4 miles a day.
I changed the front tire today as well to another Ritchey Tom Slick 26"
x 1.4" and it was a good time to put on the new front wheel with a
Shimano dynamo hub.

?
"Martin Riddle" wrote in message
...
"Bill Sornson" wrote in message
...

If you think 16 bucks for a quality, proven, name-brand tire is expensive,
then hold on tight once Cap 'n Tax and other Nanny State over-stepping
regulations (that couldn't pass legislatively, even last four years) take
hold. Once gas hits $5 or more, /everything's/ going through the roof.
(Gee, who will THAT hurt the worst?)

BS (not)

***
"Are old tires worth any carbon credits?"

OMG! I have a HUGE pile of twisted old relics in my garage (OK, in the
dining room too).

Gore owes me!!!

On 1/3/2011 12:55 PM, bfd wrote:

These prices are a bargain! If price is a concern, just be glad you
are not in the market for a fancy dancy 700x23 tire, were you can
expect to pay anywhere from $40-80+ EACH!

Think about a complete bicycle that sells for around $500. The tires on
that bicycle almost certainly cost the manufacturer only a few dollars
each. These are not fancy tires of course, but neither are they the
bottom of the line tires found on a $69 WalMart bicycle. I suppose $16
was a fair price for the Ritchey Tom Slick tires considering the various
mark-ups along the supply chain, but don't fall into the trap of
believing that a product that often sells for wildly inflated prices is
a huge bargain when it sells for a reasonable price.

It's too bad that the whole bike shop business model is so screwed up.
Bicycles, which require assembly, fitting, unsubsidized warranty
repairs, and which are expensive to stock in so many different sizes,
have a relatively small mark-up, while parts and accessories and
clothing, which require less labor to sell, and which you can charge
customers labor charges if the item requires installation, have very
large mark-ups.

On 1/4/2011 5:07 PM, Bill Sornson wrote:

"Are old tires worth any carbon credits?"

OMG! I have a HUGE pile of twisted old relics in my garage (OK, in the
dining room too).
[...]

You can tack them to the wall to make the Olympic symbol or the Auto
Union symbol.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On Jan 3, 5:19 pm, SMS wrote:
On 1/3/2011 12:55 PM, bfd wrote:

On Jan 2, 6:58 pm, wrote:
I was out on a ride today with the spousal unit and two child units, and
daughter-unit blew a tire. I did a temporary fix with two (2) dollar
bills and proceeded to a nearby Performance Bike Shop. Got her a Ritchey
Tom Slick 26" x 1.4" which was $18 (less an 11% off promotion they were
having, so it was about $16). It's been a while since I bought a tire on
the spur of the moment, and was kind of surprised that the prices are so
high. On the Performance web site they have the Panaracer Urban Max for
$20, but while the picture shows 26" x 1.75" the drop down menu shows
26" x 1.25".

These prices are a bargain! If price is a concern, just be glad you
are not in the market for a fancy dancy 700x23 tire, were you can
expect to pay anywhere from $40-80+ EACH!

Sounds like Performance was a deal then. Maybe I'll go back and buy some
more Ritchey Tom Slick tires.

I had a choice of four places close enough to go to buy a tire on
Sunday, REI, Wal-Mart, Off Ramp, and Performance. REI was the closest,
but I remembered that REI had a limited and expensive selection of tire.
Off Ramp and Performance are on the same block, and I've had good
experiences with both of these companies, but I recalled that
Performance had a very large tire selection, including their own brand
of CCTs (cheap Chinese tires).

If I had to pay $80 for a 700x23 tire, I wouldn't. I usually buy tires
at brick and mortar stores, but if the least expensive B&M store tire
were $40 then I'd find another B&M store or order online. There's 11
different Panaracer 700-23 tires from $17-35 at ebikestop.com, and some
even less than that (out of 98 different 700-23 tires).

I was just out in the garage looking at the Miyata on the stand
(recent quill stem thread had me checking for corrosion). (That's a
sweet hadlebar stem on that bike, BTW.) It has 700x23 Vittoria Rubino
Pros (the rear has a nasty cut that holds with a foil boot). I so
want to try 700x25 Vittoria Diamontes (or whatever they're called) on
it, but that's gonna be at least a 'C' note. (Maybe I get a pair of
Corsa's for about the same someday.)

(Do I win the parenthesizing contest? :-)