Let's say that the bike industry was ruled by beneficent communist dictators who got together and decided that bike makers could not charge more than the equivalent of (just to throw a figure out here) $4,000 USD for any kind of mountain bike, worldwide. To assist the process, a select group of industry leaders - both bicycle and parts makers - were invited to the undisclosed mountain top summit to advise the czars. Each was handed a written statement that the leaders' decision would not bound by fairness to industry, but rather to establish a reasonably affordable price for a top-performing mountain bike that was within reach of comrade enthusiasts and comrade competitors alike. These would not be cheap peoples' bikes for the masses. At the penalty of interment in a northern composite construction camp, or possibly death, industry members would be expected to compete fiercely to produce the best possible bikes - ones which would be stuffed with modern technology, like carbon frames, adjustable suspension, even electric drivetrains - all at the summit leaders' determined price.
To ensure that there would be no capitalist cheaters out there, racers and riders caught riding mountain bikes which had been upgraded with one-off prototypes or more expensive parts would be banned from competition for one season or face stiff fines. The Czars' reasoning may have been affected by the multiple shots of Snow Queen Vodka consumed after the summit's sumptuous, seven course meal, but the gist of the proceedings was that, after initially levelling the playing field, their decision would cause bike makers to struggle in earnest to innovate, because not to do so would be the kiss of death. Without recognizable innovations, everyone's range would appear to be the same. Price fixing would also ensure that sales of the new "high-end" mountain bikes would make up a much larger percentage of the marketplace, so bike and parts makers would have to be more quality conscious. It's not such a huge loss to recall five hundred Bugatti-priced uber-bikes because you rushed them out of the oven a few minutes early, but recalling ten or twenty thousand elite-level bikes is a financial disaster that few can afford.
So, say the Czars, the UHEMB (Universal High End Mountain Bike) price will quickly result in better-performing and more reliable mountain bikes for the world's elite riders. Now, everyone at the summit is waiting for you to return from the restroom, because it is you alone who will determine what the UHEMB number will be. Consider the present cost of component groups and the level of construction and quality that is available among today's better-performing bicycles. Weigh those factors against the needs of both elite-level racers and every day shredders and then set a price that you believe will produce a bicycle which can fulfill those roles and which also be an attainable goal for our sport's bike and parts makers. In short:
That will be my new Tattoo!
1. The demand for high end bikes has exploded. People want to ride the same bikes that the elite racers ride. This is something that just isn't possible in many sports. People cant go out and buy a $1,000,000 Honda motogp bike like Marc Marquez rides. But they can go buy a top of the line DH, Enduro, XC bike for $7-12k. The Demand for these carbon wonder bikes is going up and so the prices go up with it.
2. Bike technology is just getting better. IMO, a $3000 bike of today should be able to outperform a $6000 bike from 10 years ago.
I am never going to race professionally so I dont need the top of the line stuff. Give me middle ground $3k bikes with aluminum frames and wheels and I am a happy dude!
Frames though, frames are f*cking overpriced. I'm sorry, but if I can buy a complete bike for $3000, you should not be selling me the frame by itself (or maybe with the shock) for over $2000. I don't care how good the bulk component discounts are, you are not getting wheels, tires, fork, brakes, drivetrain, seat, seatpost, bars, headset, grips, pedals, cranks, chainguide, and whatever the hell else I missed for $1000... and that's not even assuming they actually make any money by marking up the components at all. And that's for aluminum frames!
If I can buy a carbon hardtail frame from china, for $450 (which they are still profiting off of) there is no way frames should be more than like $1500.. and that should be for a full carbon DH rig.
again, probably wishful thinking...
P.S. I just said that ceramic bearing thing as an example of price and marketing over quality of function and overall durability.
Hard to imagine where we'd even go from here, geometry wise, so yeah that'll probably plateau. Be nice to think the endless 'leaps and bounds' made in new standards would start to level out too but again that's probably wishful thinking. I remember when you could whack an old fork on a new frame and any old wheels or any of the above, starting to get the feeling that's being taken away from us, changing stuff around nowadays always seems to involve more than a small investment.
I hopped on my wifes bike for the first time in a year with an entry level air fork and threw up a little in my mouth.
I definately appreciate stiff wheels and nice hubs a lot more than i use to. They help a ton when climbing techy stuff at slow speed with a slack bike.
Choices...
@deadtime pricecly, trek allready off the slightly higher end Project one, I think it's only a matter of time before they bring that down to their base models ... and rose offer exactly what your aiming for, you can change virtually anything on the bike for like no extra cost or like £7, such a good idea but unfortunatly it takes time to get a completely custom bike like that and therefore people will start complaining about time, and like with the cost thing, it's just cause they're impatient and ignorant
So if you're going to compare a dirt bike to a bike then do it right.
The 10-12k bikes everyone bitches about are THE top of the line racing machines, so in the dirt bike world your not taking about that $8500 dollar off the floor model. Supercross bikes can run into the 70K plus range.
We won't even bother going into scale of production- another hairy,bloody mound that once was a beaten horse.
I can't believe that any custom build would take more than 2 months to be delivered, from the time the order came in.
Let's be honest - the marketplace decides. Tight-fisted Germans won't pay more than 4K. Anglos & Swiss, on the other hand...
If you want me to pay 3/6/9 prices, I need a great experience, great advice, and great selection. Right now, I get better advice from online reviews and forum boards. This is why I buy online, and why Amazon and others are killing it.
I want the LBS to survive, but I don't buy my groceries in a cornerstore, I go to a Supermarket. Show me a professional shop with great customer service, prompt warranty service, in-store repair shop with fairly-paid mechanics, and very quick delivery of ordered parts, and I'll pay a premium for that.
Now how come I can't find that anywhere?
Finally, there is no such thing as a "fair" price for a mountain bike.
@GVArider - yes, they'll shake up the marketplace. I live in Bellingham, a town blessed with so many breweries and LBSs and coffee shops, it's downright ridiculous. I have found that rare LBS you talk about (in my case, Bikesport on Meridian) - the one that provides great service and good value, even if the LBSs get screwed a bunch by the manufacturers and big distributors. If my bike's in for repair, they often manage to keep me riding by making loaner/demo bikes available. If I need a part right away to replace something broken in a crash and salvage a road trip, they may pull something off one of the bikes in stock so I can ride. Do I get Chainreaction prices? No, but I get pretty decent prices, and fair rates on shop labor, and a lot of very thoughtful add-ons. I take pretty good care of my bike, but these guys usually manage to helpfully point out stuff that helps me keep my bike in good running order that I hadn't thought about before. These guys will continue to provide value to their customers - and will do just fine in that new world, thank you very much. That's not true of all LBSs, though.
If you've ever been to Dirty Fingers in Hood River - they're another great LBS. They also have a hilarious blackboard behind their service counter/bar (yes, they serve beer!). On that blackboard, there's all kinds of funny stuff about Walmart bikes, surcharges for people who need urgent service on bikes they bought over the internet, etc. Fact is, though - they provide services. If you buy online, unless you are willing and able to do all the work on our bike yourself, you still need service. A good shop will provide that. A bad shop will be too busy looking for short term gains and thus will choke on all that core attitude bullshit until they go out of business.
Retailers are of value to manufacturers by providing service and support to customers, doing local marketing, and all that good stuff - but mostly, they take inventory risk by carrying stock they're financially on the hook for. As a manufacturer, you fill your pre-season orders and build a little extra for in-season add-ons. Once the dealer's ordered the bike, the manufacturer is no longer at risk - they don't carry the inventory. I'm sure a lot of manufacturers are looking at what the direct guys are doing, and are thinking that selling bikes for more than normal wholesale but less then normal retail and cutting out the middle man seems really tempting - but what's keeping them from doing it isn't liability. YT is reaching out to shops to be service centers not to take care of liability concerns, but to create customer peace of mind regarding support post-purchase (where do I get it fixed? how do warranties get processed? etc.).
What I don't understand is why you need to spend close or more than 1000€ to get a hardtail with suspension that works and decent brakes. Some of the OEM forks are so bad that you'd be better off with a rigid one. Serious weight savings by going rigid too. But then... bikes that come spec'ed with rigid forks are actually more expensive than front sus hardtails. How is that even possible?
Tip to the industry - Make a hardtail with a 100-120mm RS XC32 air, deore brakes with 180 front rotor, own brand 60mm stem/750mm bars, decent 2.3 tyres, 1x10 with a wide range cassette. Design it around playfull geometry, not classic XC racing numbers. Make a bike that's controllable, safe and fun to ride. Price it for 600-650€ and sell a ton of them. Then next season keep the same frame and spec, just change the color to freshen things up. Keep it this way for a few years. Your model is now famous for being THE bike to get into the sport and you have created a well deserved brand following.
I know you can...
Hardrocks have been the trademark begginner bike for ages, at least where I live, but although they are affordable, spec is pretty crap most times. For me their success is that they look cool (to newcomers eyes at least) and mimic the graphic style of higher models so they actually look more expensive than they are.
Genesis were not cheap last time I checked (not sure).
On the other hand, my girlfriend sold a 2006 stumpjumper for 700$ and within an hour of putting the ad up we had like 10 people interested. There is a demand for good cheap bikes but they're more busy playing with wheelsizes instead of making stuff people actually want to buy.
If you are buying used, get the bike checked out before if you can.. Remember, you might be getting a good deal or you might be buying somebody else's headache. .
Now for £600 you will get an undamped suntour fork and mechanical disc brakes, and cheap SRAM gears = budget bike for traversing gravel paths and canal paths
value has gone in the low end, but in the mid range its never been better with Shimano Deore/ SLX and quality suspension forks / shocks.
Ended up getting a kona process 134 for 3k as it was pretty much the best bang for your bucks setup we could find. Her stumpy was 2.8k$ back then.
The geo is muuuuuch better than her old stumpy, she got a dropper and tubeless ready rims/tires too but the 2015 bike is 5pounds heavier, on a sektor and deore when the stumpy was on a talas with a mixed bag of slx/xt/xtr stuff. You could argue that the 2015 bottom rung stuff is probably better than the 2006 top shelf stuff but I can't help to feel that if you're going to pay 3k for a bicycle, it should be something pretty damn good, not just all the cheap stuff on a good frame.
Generally, something that's been priced at $99 USD has cost £99 GBP to a UK resident...
We have, are and will be getting ripped off!
Rant over... :-/
Some of these "direct to consumer" companies that have been mentioned can offer a lower price by cutting out a "turn" in the process of buying a bike. For those of us who can buy direct and need no form of service, this may be a way to save overall $$ on your bike and get more for the money. But if you can't fix you're own bike you will pay this back to your LBS in the long run because a loyal customer always gets preferential treatment from the LBS. There's no 90 day free service period offered at a direct to consumer point of sale.
BTW when compared to a dirt bike, a mountain bike is way cheaper to operate after the purchase (not accounting for your lift ticket costs which are optional). Dirt bikes need a lot of recurring care and when it goes really sideways your out-of-pocket costs can skyrocket. Ever blown a four-stroke 250? Yeah, that's a $4k repair. You should hear what the dirt bikers are complaining about... It used to be you could fix a two stroke top end for a few hundred dollars, now when you need a top end you're out $2k on the modern four-strokes. How many people on this forum have had a $2k bill to fix their bike??? And if it doesn't start it might as well be in the land fill because the fun is officially broken. Also, the premium dirt bikes that compare closer to the high end MTB's (Like a KTM) are more like $12k, the $8k comparison is to a stock Yami, Kawi, Suzuki that doesn't have near the level of suspension tech your modern DH bike has. That's why suspension upgrades are so prevalent in MX, a lot of your DH forks have better tuning and better parts than stock MX forks.
For people in the high end market, they are willing to do their research and work tirelessly to find the best deals. I think such dedication and effort needs to be rewarded. Although everyone would love a price cap, I don't think that's too realistic. Maybe even a 5-10% reduction in dealer cost, and 5-10% reduction in mark up would work.
However, the only viable solution I can dream up that might satisfy both manufacture and customer, is creating custom build options for bikes that are over $3000. An example is Trek's "Project One" program. Unfortunately this is only offered at the $8000+ price point, it is an excellent system that I believe would have tremendous success in the $3000+ price point. Sure, not all your favourite brands will be available, but it definitely comes closer to giving you the bike you want, for a better price, right out of the box. Less initial installation work, less research and shipping hassles, more convenience, and faster availability.
(To see what I mean by "Project One", follow this link... www.trekbikes.com/ca/en/collections/custom_project_one)
Having more individualized/customizable build kits sure would be great.
I certainly see where you're coming from, however, there is one problem. Individual shops have that sort of leeway if they choose to stock bikes from smaller, more independent companies. Unfortunately, from larger companies, it is rare to be able to get a frame set and keep the build under $3000.
Large companies which can provide the most support and, in many cases, are the safest route for most bike shops. Therefore, frame kits are generally from the top end and average $1500 and up. It is also more expensive to buy individual components, so only about 10% of customers are willing to take that route. I certainly agree that it adds great value, but from my experience so far, 90% of people needs instant satisfaction and don't see the logic in being patient and getting what they truly want.
If 20-30% of customers were willing to do such a thing, I think your idea would be the golden solution. I really wish I could offer that sort thing as a sales person, but in the market I work in, it's very rarely possible.
It appears our dear sport is striving, the number of bikes sold each year keeps growing as this even if manufacturer keep increasing prices. They don't really care we complain, they care we buy. So the situation will probably evolve this way until people can no longer afford bikes ( i mean price in genreral will be too high) and so their profit will decrease slightly. They'll then reduce prices and so on. The mountainbike market is still young, it'll take so time before it self-regulate.
And to all those who brag about their old/cheap bike. It's ok, it just mean you value the performance improvement less than the price difference. But hat if someone riding a klunker was to trash talk you because you ride an "overpriced" 2005 stumpy you bought used for 1500$? Even if you reckon riding a kluncker is fun, you'd certainly call him a fool. For you the difference between these two bikes is well worth the extra money. It is exactly the same for 10k superbikes.
And one last thing, it is not because top notch bikes prices skyrockets that you have to spend more to get equally performing parts.Since 2006 pricepoints of hypercars/ superbikes have been roughly increased by 100% ( 1m->2m / 6000€->12000€ ) and my parents didn't spend more when they bought a new. Yet the new one is far better better than the older one. It is something evryone should keep in mind as our eye is always attracted by things that shne and sometimes when we can't get that thing, we hate on it
To put things into perspective; i own a fully custom 2009 trek remedy 9.9 ( 3x9, 26in, 19mm wide rims, one of the first ks). I paid 7500 e for it. Today it can be considered as has-been, and it is true. I could probably sell it for 1500e. Would i love to ride a sc Nomad decked with enve? Hell yes! But i feel the improved performance isn't worth the extra buck. At the same, let's take a look at what i can get for the same price today. Well it took me some time to find exactly same pricetag but it appears you get a Canondale Jekyll Carbon Team. Which one do you think performs best?
- alloy frame
- alloy wheels
- alloy cranks
- top notch suspension
- top notch components.
Is it heavier than a more expensive setup? Obviously. But when blasting through a rough downhill track, I don't really notice a quality difference between top-tier and bottom tier anywhere but the suspension and the brakes, everywhere else I want cheap and reliable.
blog.artscyclery.com/ask-a-mechanic/shimano-road-components-where-to-spend-your-money
If you're really interested in keeping costs down for bikers, that would be an even better article (compare different level Shimano, Sram, Forks, etc.). But, I'm gonna bet you won't...
If high prices were not paid by anyone there would be no high priced bikes Simple. The market is a huge mix of people from "look at me" to i dont give a rats i just want to ride my bike. The industry sees this and makes a bunch of money from one group which potentially keeps the price down for the other. Overheads for a company need to be covered. If you can cover them by selling high / overpriced stuff to a small group of people that are happy to pay then the rest can maybe get better deals
Rant over....
Without XX1, we would never have X1. Without the Pike RCT3, we would never have the Pike RC. We need top-tier bikes that cost as much as cars, because without that spare-nothing R&D race to build those bikes we would still be riding rigid 3x7s.
I'd rather work hard and pay the going rate for the best stuff I can afford than live in a communist society. The free market dictates price and drives innovation. The trickle down effect brings the best technology to the masses and the top end incrementally improves.
If prices were set, there would be no innovation, there would be no "best". There would be no Ferraris and Lambourghinis. No Santa Cruz Nomads.
Stop moaning about prices. You don't have to have the very best. There are amazing bikes available for $3,000, which in two years time will have the same technology as today's $10,000 bikes. If prices were set, nothing would improve.
Suck it up. Capitalism rules.
This 450 MX bike has MILLIONS of R&D sunk into it, and while a bicycle is basically just a chassis, a motorcycle also has a M-O-T-O-R. In the case of this 450, it's a motor that's mass-produced, a lot of times warrantied for a certain time, and has a rear-wheel output of around 55hp (currently). To put out this kinda power RELIABLY, the previously-mentioned R&D is TRULY at the tip of the spear.
To cap it all off, this $9k 450 has more titanium, aluminum and magnesium than a comparably-priced mountain bike.
I remember reading about how SRAM had equipped one of their rider's Pikes with DLC('Diamond-Like-Coating') stanchions, and when asked if they had plans to equip customer Pike's with same, responded that doing so was WAY too expensive.
Kawasaki has been selling 250 and 450cc mx bikes since 2007 I wanna say, with DLC Showa and Kayabe forks, and since 2004 on their 600 and 1000cc SS bikes.
The irony here is, SRAM sells WAY more forks than Kawasaki does, and makes a TON more money on 'em.
A bicycle that sells for $9k costs the dealer roughly $4500+/-, while a motorcycle that retails for the same, costs the dealer roughly $8200+/-.
I'm not saying bicycle dealers should get screwed the way motorcycle dealers do, but there's definitely a HUGE amount of room between what it actually costs to produce and distribute bicycles, and what the dealers pay for 'em, to start backing away from the totally INSANE prices we're expected to pay now-days for a decent MTB.
That's my $.02
Simple economics. And Marketing.
That said If I was given a choice 1) No bike at all or 2) $600 bike...............I'd take that $600 bike and ride it like it was stolen! We have to keep in mind that there is a vast majority of the world that have no access to bikes at all. I'm just happy as bloody hell I get to ride my bike 8 months of the year, while other simply do not have that option.
By the way, why does a Devinci Spartan carbon or an Evil Uprising cost much less than a Nomad Carbon but still you don't see them around?
However, for my Reign, a quality derailleur (XT shadow +) makes a big difference from an SLX, especially with the improved clutch (trust me i switched). Brakes may not be as essential on this bike (hence the SLX) but again, suspension is critical.
As for OP topic, i think that the very top end bikes are in a reasonable price range considering the R&D that goes in and the limited market for bikes. Talking to several different shops in the area, it seems that they dont sell nearly as many complete bikes as you'd think, and often are sitting on "new model" bikes that devalue every year on the shelf. So while $8000+ seems crazy, unless youre a high-caliber racer, it pretty unnecessary IMO.
1300 frame (sale from last year alloy model)
1000 forks
600 drivetrain component
500 wheels component
200 cockpit component
400 seat component
frame and suspension..always come first for me...if i get a higher price for them..i'll cut down the budget for
other component (cockpit and seat must be lower)..
and..no...higher than 4000
Then I went to the Sea Otter Classic. Stopped by the Rock Shox booth to get my forks tuned. They upgraded my fork damper to the RCT3 version for free! Less than $3000 and I think I have a pretty bitchin' bike....
Personally, I almost always buy my parts and gear used because I think I get far more value that way. Yes, the stem and handlebars may be a little scratched but at $20 it's a steal compared to the $100+ bars on ChainReaction.
I've also been doing a lot of shopping around for a road bike. I've spec'd a number of custom builds, and new bike prices are actually quite reasonable for what you're getting. Mountain biking, and road riding at the "pinkbike level" are boutique sports. Even here in Vancouver! I know a lot of people, and only my hardcore mountain biker friends have relatively new full suspension bikes (newer than 3 years). Mountain biking has one of the largest barriers to entry due to the amount of equipment needed to get started.
With such a small market, top-notch bike manufacturers need to make up more of the costs with shorter production runs; not to mention if you want a bike from a small boutique company.
Like other people have said, don't complain that Ferraris cost too much. Buy yourself a BMW. Or if you're the original poster, buy yourself a Lada.
Well, of course it all depends, where would a bike under this limit have to be "competitive"? A steel hardtail in the world singlespeed championships, or a carbon full suspension bike in the DH world cup? Or shall both cost the same?
However, I want to see new inventions out there, research, and technology progressing, so, of course, there can be no limit.
*read for 5 minutes
"Yep"
www.pinkbike.com/photo/12199928
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also dabble with motocross products so what sort bugs me is the price difference between some of this stuff ... MX boots have 5,6 times as much material as a pair of MTB shoes yet they fetch the same price, often cheaper.. motocross lubes and oils are always cheaper by volume .. waaaay cheaper sometimes... and if you think about the prices of a motocross bike vs a high end DH rig, there's a shit load more product you getting WITH AN ENGINE!!! on a MX and yet, prices are still pretty dang close.
Speaking of "volume", this sport of mountain biking and specifically the categories of riding we're talking about (DH/FR) are EXTREMELY FRINGE in terms of participation. We are a minority within the bicycle industry and when comparisons are drawn to other products (Like Dirt Bikes) that seem to pack a lot of technology into that same price, the topic of volume needs to be addressed. The volume of units produced in the DH/FR category are very small, many times just barely meeting a MOQ to produce. When even the minimum volume to justify a production run yields slow sales and eventually closeout pricing, the business model is destined to fail. When your a small group like we are, you have to pay a premium for the equipment.
Pricing for bicycles is next great travesty after US Healthcare Costs. There is no sane reason that a bicycle costs as much as a 250 cc motorcycle. The economics of cycling are out of tune with reality.
For example, if Specialized start asking $5000 for an an Stumpjumper FSR Comp, then they would lose too much market share to justify the price hike. So they find a price that a decent amount of people are willing to pay and that's the price. Turns out the fair price for brand new Stumpjumper FSR Comp Evo 650B is $3,400(www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/mountain/stumpjumper-fsr). If people weren't buying that bike, it would either be 1) price lowed or 2) not manufactured in the first place. Because lots of people think $3400 is a fine deal, the bike is priced at $3400.
Personally, I don't like paying $3,400 for a bike, so in 2014 I bought a used 2012 Stumpjumper FSR Comp EVO for $1,600 in close to new condition!! I spent $150 on pedals, wide bars, and a short stem, and got what I consider to be an incredibly awesome bike for $1,750. Sure it doesn't have the latest greatest wheel size or a carbon frame, but who cares, because it's fun as hell and it's performance amazingly well.
If it was really easy to make a really cheap high performance bike, someone would be doing it right now. If it was possible to mass produce a bike that MSRP'd at $1500 but delivered the performance of today's $5k bikes, then somebody would have done it and made a killing. Turns out its damn expensive to make bikes increasingly lighter but higher performing at the same time. Consumers have spoken and people buy up new gear at feverish rates: New wheel sizes, automatic seatposts, ultralight carbon frames, fancy drivetrains, $250 derailleurs that will be smashed on rocks in a few months time!!!
I've never bought a bike new and can't imagine ever doing so. I buy used aluminum bikes with the geometry I like, install appropriate sized handlebars and stems, and if I want to increase performance further I upgrade suspension. But it's very entitled to think it's "not fair" a company won't deliver you every fancy-gadgety piece of technology at price you desire.
But I want to hear from Mr. Cunningham himself: What do you think is the "fair price" for a mountain bike? What exactly is "not fair" about about Specialized choosing a price and thousands and thousands of people choosing to buy a bike at that price?
Drive Train: I don't care about an expensive drive train as it gets trashed after 6 months anyway.
Suspension: Good quality basic suspension is what is needed, most people don't need lock out or propedal etc. Also coil forks work well and are cheap.
Wheels: Don't skimp on rims, wheels that buckle at the first rock are pain in the arse.
Brakes: Big rotors are a riders friend. Most riders don't need anything more that that.
This begs the question, when is a company considered "too big" ?
the industry just gave the finger to 90% of the user base with the 650b train. very doubtful they care what we think msrp should be...
But of course, bikes would suck donkey balls w/said communist approach as mfgs would shut down
Components like stem and handlebar should be roughly the same cost for whichever size is wanted.
I wouldn't waste money (£200) for a seat post to go up/down by pressing a button, or for some CNC-machined anodised bling component. I also wouldn't spend the extra £1000 for a carbon fibre frame from an Alu one. £2500 max (4000 usd) seems fair to me.
For anything without a motor, more than $5,000 is just fvcking stupid. For anything without a motor or an internally geared trans, anything over $3,000 is just fvcking stupid. It's a fvcking bicycle FFS.
Anyone has any right to ask w/e they want for their products though. There will be a rich enough moron out there to buy your overpriced status symbol bicycle just like there's a myriad of morons out there buying Gallardos & Veyrons for the same trivial reasons when much better cars can be had for much less scrilla.
The problem lies in capitalism - people feel that because mass manufactured products with a relatively high level of technology inside them (ie iphone) are fairly cheap to get hold of, something like a bike should also be fairly cheap. This isn't the case - bikes are made in much smaller runs - more money, and because they shift comparatively few of them, the margins need to be much bigger.
Again, more of a case of people feeling they deserve to pay nothing for a quality product, rather than people being ripped off.
:::fistpumps because everyone else chose that:::
oh wait...