Powered by Outside

Are bikes really worth that much $

PB Forum :: Bikes, Parts, and Gear
Are bikes really worth that much $
Author Message
flag mistercrabb
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 5:26 Quote
A little bit of GCSE business studies:

Basically, if a company is selling a £200 bike for £2000, then it will only be a matter of time before another company undercuts that cost (say, for £1900) to get a bigger share of the market for themselves. This happens all the time and continues until the sales cost is just slightly above manufacturing costs (eg £210).

That is why bikes are sold slightly above the production costs (design, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, shop expenses), because the prices will always fall to *roughly* the lowest possible point when there are 2 or more competitors in the market.

In other words, bikes are not overpriced.
flag evan547
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 5:29 Quote
gnarkore wrote:
evan547 wrote:
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
i see were your coming from but their is nowhere near the same technology or even durability put into bikes.

i mean, a bike is powered by pedals.



I firmly believe that the bikes really do cost that much. If you still don't think so, start naming people who have gotten rich in the bike industry. They are few and far between.

the founder of specialized is a rich man haha.

And Mr. Montgomery had a private jet, but as I said, few and far between.
flag Ozchuck
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 6:53 Quote
When I was drifting (drifting cars, as opposed to being homeless) I started in a car that cost me 4k.
Got around my local race track in about 45 seconds, and scored enough to qualify for a top 16 battle.
My mates car got around the track about 3 seconds faster, and got into a couple of top 8's.
His car was better, no doubt about it.
my car: 4k... his car... 20somethingk.
But when you wat better, thats what it takes.
heaps of cars owe their owners in excess of 50k, and its these guys who were routinely decimating the competition, usually with skill, but sometimes without!

I love this bicycle business by comparison.
You can get basically the same sort of bicycle world champions use for less than 10 grand. Sure, a $200 bicycle can also go "downhill", but damn, if you wanna win, you gotta fork out your cash. if the upgrades arent worth the money and you're getting raped by the companies, dont buy the gear and just rely on a kmart bike.
Then when you're bored of snapping things off your 50# build and hurting yourself you'll come to understand whats awesome about precision manufacturing.
flag evan547
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 6:58 Quote
Ozchuck wrote:
When I was drifting (drifting cars, as opposed to being homeless) I started in a car that cost me 4k.
Got around my local race track in about 45 seconds, and scored enough to qualify for a top 16 battle.
My mates car got around the track about 3 seconds faster, and got into a couple of top 8's.
His car was better, no doubt about it.
my car: 4k... his car... 20somethingk.
But when you wat better, thats what it takes.
heaps of cars owe their owners in excess of 50k, and its these guys who were routinely decimating the competition, usually with skill, but sometimes without!

I love this bicycle business by comparison.
You can get basically the same sort of bicycle world champions use for less than 10 grand. Sure, a $200 bicycle can also go "downhill", but damn, if you wanna win, you gotta fork out your cash. if the upgrades arent worth the money and you're getting raped by the companies, dont buy the gear and just rely on a kmart bike.
Then when you're bored of snapping things off your 50# build and hurting yourself you'll come to understand whats awesome about precision manufacturing.

But that's just it, the companies aren't making much money, it's just the cost of technology. There is no rape here.
flag
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 7:04 Quote
mistercrabb wrote:
A little bit of GCSE business studies:

Basically, if a company is selling a £200 bike for £2000, then it will only be a matter of time before another company undercuts that cost (say, for £1900) to get a bigger share of the market for themselves. This happens all the time and continues until the sales cost is just slightly above manufacturing costs (eg £210).

That is why bikes are sold slightly above the production costs (design, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, shop expenses), because the prices will always fall to *roughly* the lowest possible point when there are 2 or more competitors in the market.

In other words, bikes are not overpriced.

can happen
but youd be surprised how much margin there is in bike shops on certain items, others theres basically none
but bike parts are deffo worth the cash
cars are mass produced means HUGE bulk buying
flag mr-eric
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 15:13 Quote
Jwmbike14 wrote:
mr-eric wrote:
the bike companys also kinda hold a monopoly on the public, people are willing to pay that much because theres no other products of that high a standard and quality, now there are bikes that are just out of the question over priced, but there are bikes that are reasonably priced like brodie for example. ive been riding a brodie nemesis for years and love it, quality is amazing. look at a bike that is similer but over priced, lets say a yeti 4x, those are stupid expensve. what im saying is that your not gonna be able to get the parts you need unless your willing to scarifice alot
of $, which seems to me that alot of people do, i mean u dont see alot of people at whistler on a supercycle

once more, it may be stupid expensive. but what your not looking at is the engineering and MACHINING

look out the dropouts on the yeti. or posibly where the seat stays come together for the lower pivot. there is some crazy machining that your brodie does not have.
btu there still not worth that much, ive used a cnc machine and machined my own parts, not that f*cking hard, the labor it takes to do that is maybe worth $20, i agree that the welds are better but still.
flag yo13bo
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 16:39 Quote
Ozchuck wrote:
When I was drifting (drifting cars, as opposed to being homeless) I started in a car that cost me 4k.
Got around my local race track in about 45 seconds, and scored enough to qualify for a top 16 battle.
My mates car got around the track about 3 seconds faster, and got into a couple of top 8's.
His car was better, no doubt about it.
my car: 4k... his car... 20somethingk.
But when you wat better, thats what it takes.
heaps of cars owe their owners in excess of 50k, and its these guys who were routinely decimating the competition, usually with skill, but sometimes without!

I love this bicycle business by comparison.
You can get basically the same sort of bicycle world champions use for less than 10 grand. Sure, a $200 bicycle can also go "downhill", but damn, if you wanna win, you gotta fork out your cash. if the upgrades arent worth the money and you're getting raped by the companies, dont buy the gear and just rely on a kmart bike.
Then when you're bored of snapping things off your 50# build and hurting yourself you'll come to understand whats awesome about precision manufacturing.
+1 if you think its a ripoff, you obviously dont need it! but as the sport progresses people are requiring stronger and lighter bikes just for them to get over an obstacle and not die, riding one of those 500 dollar bikes after riding my bike i can barely stand it! the more you spend, the bike feels better, its lighter, stronger, and as for spinning theres no competition
flag morse-code
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 17:02 Quote
It's supply and demand, there's not as high a demand for bikes, so less are made and therefore cost more.
flag max-tooltime-imus5
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 19:33 Quote
Jwmbike14 wrote:
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
gdawg wrote:
Dude you have to realize that the demand for these high end bikes is very low in relation to a standard motorized vehicle or even a low end Supercycle. Should we expect companies like Ferrari to lower their prices for their cars? Think of these high end bikes as the Ferrari's of the bike world.

this makes more sense to me.

yes. i guess it would make more sense. if you don't understand suspension design, engineering, and especially machining.

and obviously don't know your bike well. nor do you know motorcycles very well.

see to understand the question your asking means you have to have some sort of knowledge about technology.

look at the internals of a motorcycle mastercylinder! they are straight forward piston with a resivor. look at juicy elixers. with a tabered mastercyclinder. meaning it moves more fluid initially then it does later on, making a strong yet modulating brake.

the ANSWER IS IN MY WRITING. its technical and machining aspect.

and in the end makes more sense then the ferrari explanation. because a ferrari is just as much advanced like our bikes. look at the machining and time going into building a ferrari engine. we are talking about the same stuff!

a ferrari will never be cheap, not because of demand. but because of the cost of the high end materials, the engineering, and the high end and precise machining!

same as the brake comparrison! take a piston out of a 2007 honda civic and compare it to any ferrari. the machining on the ferrari will be emaculate.

i don't quite understand how that explanation doesn't make sense? someone help?

your explanation does make sense. his just makes more sense to me. dont get mad.

but technology does not nessesarily translate to a higher price.

look at computer for example.
flag davemud
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 20:12 Quote
When you look at the cost of a motorcycle compared to a good quality bicycle You think, the bike doesn't have an engine but look how close to the price of the motorcycle it is...

I haven't priced a new MX bike recently so don't jump on me I'm just saying there is a lot more to a motorcycle because of the engine so why are the bikes so much? Its not about monopolies or margins its about volume.

Cars or motorcycles are made in much higher volume so the cost per unit is comparatively lower then for bicycles. Bike industry companies also have to buy materials at market value and because they buy in smaller volumes they pay a higher price per unit than the bigger companies.

To find the best deals in the bike industry you typicaly have to go to the biggest companies. They buy in larger volume, they get a lower price and therefore they can sell at a lower price and still make the same margin and sometimes even better.

In Canada a 2009 Giant Reign 1 at about 2900.00 compared to the Trek Remedy 7 at over 4000.00. Same type of bike same level of spec but with different parts. You may think Trek is big and compared to most bike companies they are but not compared to Giant.

Giant is the biggest bike company in the world, they have their own aluminum foundry and they buy more parts than anyone else and that gives them a big advantage in pricing.

In 2009 prices will go up because the cost of materials went up and in Canada our dollar went down.
flag yo13bo
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 20:43 Quote
bikes cost alot because everyones lazy or lives a long way from work, which sucks for pretty much anyone into bikes
flag Gsnickets
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 20:51 Quote
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
technology does not nessesarily translate to a higher price.

look at computer for example.


yes it does. there are countless hours of research that get passed down the line the retooling of a machine, new CAD codes, prototypes to make sure the stuff works. A super high tech computer still costs a shit ton more than a crappy one, so your example makes no sense because the high tech computer is way way way more expensive than an entry level one.
flag shreddermcgee
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 20:55 Quote
you shouldn't ask yourself if the bike is worth it, you should be asking if the fun you'll have with it is worth it.
flag max-tooltime-imus5
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 20:57 Quote
Gsnickets wrote:
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
technology does not nessesarily translate to a higher price.

look at computer for example.


yes it does. there are countless hours of research that get passed down the line the retooling of a machine, new CAD codes, prototypes to make sure the stuff works. A super high tech computer still costs a shit ton more than a crappy one, so your example makes no sense because the high tech computer is way way way more expensive than an entry level one.

obviously you are misunderstanding me...

my point is that even in a low tech computer their is much more technology put in.
flag davemud
Posted: Jan 7, 2009 at 21:00 Quote
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
Gsnickets wrote:
max-tooltime-imus5 wrote:
technology does not nessesarily translate to a higher price.

look at computer for example.


yes it does. there are countless hours of research that get passed down the line the retooling of a machine, new CAD codes, prototypes to make sure the stuff works. A super high tech computer still costs a shit ton more than a crappy one, so your example makes no sense because the high tech computer is way way way more expensive than an entry level one.

obviously you are misunderstanding me...

my point is that even in a low tech computer their is much more technology put in.

A different type of technology since it is such a different item maybe but not necessarily more than a bike. A lot of tech goes into just the materials alone in a bike, like hydroforming and the alloy mix for example.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.014721
Mobile Version of Website