Mountain bike marketing is a balancing act, and companies are constantly trying to find the recipe that will attract the attention of savvy riders in a positive way. Those efforts don't always turn out as planned, and in this week's episode we delve into the hits and misses that we've seen over the years.
Brian Park and Sarah Moore have both spent time in marketing departments, and James Smurthwaite has probably watched more mountain bike advertisements than anyone on the planet, so there was no shortage of good and bad examples to pull from. Remember when RockShox made it seem like you'd need a pro license to purchase a Vivid Air shock? Or when Giant released a whitepaper extolling the virtues of 27.5" wheels? We do.
THE PINKBIKE PODCAST // EPISODE 54 - BEST AND WORST MTB PRODUCT MARKETING March 17th, 2021
From compelling to cringy, we go over some of the MTB marketing hits and misses over the years.
Featuring a rotating cast of the editorial team and other guests, the Pinkbike podcast is a weekly update on all the latest stories from around the world of mountain biking, as well as some frank discussion about tech, racing, and everything in between.
Put your feet up and enjoy the comments section.
Ok, I relent. I made a mistake and used objective, where subjective would be more appropriate. I think you should take the time to go back and re-read the review & comments and then you may get a better sense of where this is coming from. I stand by my statement of TLD acted like adolescent Americans shirking accountability for their actions. It even bled through in the “apology” email they sent me. If a company is going to act like that if they get less than stellar perfect review after an ad campaign saying “you will never want to take it off,” it is a company that is driven by ego and does not deserve my business. That is all.
Honestly I think some brands just get so used to over-the-top, gushing reviews full of hyperbole, that a “this is a decent product, 7/10” review feels like getting dragged. I’d definitely give an A3 a shot.
Not even sure if it's real, and don't care either way.
Been looking at 94 acres in Pennsylvania with 400ft vertical. It's a pipedream but fun to think about.
I already live a half block away from several miles of well developed but unsanctioned trails and struggle to get out because of inability to manage my time. So having many multiples of acres of completely undeveloped land is probably a recipe for not riding my bike ever. I just hate driving my car to be able to ride my bike.
They seem to have geo listed for their Honeymaker. Did they have a change of philosophy, or was it a different manufacturer?
There were also MULTIPLE newly created accounts singing praise for the company located where the company was based, which were banned by vital mtb because they were all created by the same ip address in colorado
and then Mullet dragged Foes racing through the mud, causing someone from Foes to call out the Mullet guy on being a complete asshat
The problem is that kind of undermines Specialized's whole brand philosophy and also the Stumpjumper is one of their most popular models by far. Maybe they were trying to reach a different consumer base with this bike without damaging their existing customer base - hence not releasing many details to the mtb media and pushing out a campaign only on social media.
In short the reason you were left out Kaz is because they didn't want you buying one?
The part of this theory I don't really get is who was this 160mm trail bike aimed at? Maybe those local shredder kids that have all the skills but can't pay the bills?
Trek: we just signed vali and loris
I get the feeling overmarketing is a thing and it is sometimes really annoying.