Specialized Lays Off 8% of its Employees in "Organization Adjustment"
Specialized has announced that it is laying off 8% of its employees across the company.
A press release published on Wednesday revealed the Specialized layoffs would affect staff globally and included workers at company-owned retail stores in the U.S. and overseas. Bicycle Retailer found public fillings suggesting that the company was planning to lay off around 120 workers in the U.S.
The layoffs come after Specialized states the global economy is "changing faster than anticipated and rapid changes within cycling." The company claims this round of layoffs will allow it to be "adaptive, whilst still investing in innovation."
 | We are transforming the company around our purpose to Pedal the Planet Forward. Our priority is to better serve riders, retailers, and communities and to be the best place for our teammates to innovate and grow. The time is now to adapt to the current environment and ultimately led us to make some extremely tough decisions today. I want to recognize those teammates who departed and thank them for all their contributions, hard work, and dedication to Specialized. We are focused on ensuring that they are fully supported during this difficult time. It may be tough to see in the moment, but the future of cycling and the future of our brand is bright. |
This news follows Specialized ending contracts with ambassador athletes with a representative for the company telling VeloNews: "our social ambassador program is continuing to change with the needs of the rider, but it definitely isn’t going away."
Must Read This Week
486 Comments
Sit down, son. Be humble. You're a bike manufacturer - the world neither depends on you nor needs you in particular.
My ex would not use "amazing". She used "delicate dance", "new season", and the best/most over-used "teachable moment."
You've been in the PR game too long when readers can guess it's your work no matter the company that's hired you as a consultant. The email or text "did you write that...." means you're in a rut but don't know it.
Best of luck to the 8% because the 1% at Big S truly don't care.
www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2023/01/11/specialized-buys-former-pearl-izumi-building#.Y8Ab-T3MLIU
They have been doing radical things lately with acquiring, then turn around a ditch employees and riders + the hiring of of new riders. Kinda nuts if you ask me. The new CEO is like The Wolf Of Wallstreet.
"“We are evolving our organisation and reflecting these changes to make us faster, more agile, and better able to grow sustainably.
“These proposals would regrettably result in around 600 redundancies in the UK and 300 in the rest of the world. We are fully supporting those who are impacted..."
It seems Scott took the script with him.
Pinkbike reactionary Internet clownboys: Fully emotionally triggered.
www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2022/05/05/shimano-sells-pearl-izumi-sporting-goods-group#.Y8B9dj3MLIU
I think the lens to view this through is that they've likely got massive cash flow issues. Presumably all their money is tied up in inventory because the bike boom has cooled off - so they they'll have landed stock like it was going to be a 900 mil $ year when it turned out to be only a 500 mil year (or whatever number, I have no idea what their revenue is). Now they're paying to store all that excess inventory and got 2023 orders to pay for as well. Suddenly they got no cash because it's all tied up, so paying salaries and ambassadors and race teams is pretty painful and cutbacks seem necessary
www.bullshitgenerator.com
Your dogmatic statement is not true.
"We have sacked people because our updated business plan no longer needs them and we are a business with shareholders so our job is to make money. It's completely normal to behave like this in a relatively low-regulation capitalist economy. If you want a different type of society, economy or labour laws, vote differently. This is not our problem."
All the other ones we've tried kinda sucked.
Some of the layoffs might be from mismanagement at Specialized. I have no idea I don't work there. If you think mismanagement only happens under capitalism read up about nail factories in the USSR.
Most of this is probably related to the economic downturn we are experiencing. Ebbs and flows in economics is part of the human condition no matter the way your society is organized. In this specific instance, its mostly from misallocation of resources of central governments globally, and the War in Ukraine. These are not the fault of capitalism.
In the very worst examples of capitalism, the poorest of the poor are better than average under that "different type of society", and capitalist countries build walls around themselves to keep people out, not in.
But, for big companies with shareholders that are still turning large profits, we could for example have rules that say that if a company is still turning large profits and wants to make large scale redundancies, then it has to provide a longer notice period to allow people more time to find a good new role, rather than just any role, or maybe continue to pay their employees health insurance for a period post-redundancy.
That's just an example off the top of my head, my point is not the specifics of the law, it's that we do have a choice. Politicians get into power by telling us what we want to hear, we just need to make it clear we want to hear something else and then encourage more people to do the same, rather than spending our time doomscrolling. Rant ends
and yet people are calling for more regulation... great
The US standard of living is also not comparable to that of Norway or any of the Nordic countries. Household total consumption- everything added up from government benefits plus income plus retirement plus everything, ranks the Nordic Countries below every single US state except Mississippi.
It's in Cherokee, NC. They bought 3 from one owner & 2 from another shop owner.
So they're closing the one with the lowest profit. Doesn't make it a non-profitable store. The old owner may have kept it open to service his customers in the region who requested it and it's good marketing and customer service to have facilities in that area. Or maybe it did make enough money to keep him happy and his employees fed.
That doesn't matter to a board room looking to get their bonus though. I'm hoping some local business owner will see it as an opportunity to invest capital and open new accounts in Cherokee to keep a bicycle business present in the Cherokee Tribe. They don't need to live off Harrah's Casino royalty checks on that Reservation.
I don't disagree on the consumption figures either, but the Nordic states consistently outscore us (US/UK) on happiness of the population, social capital, social cohesion etc. so I suppose the question is whether GDP per capita or the like are actually the right KPIs for the type of society we want.
I'm not declaring a side here or pretending to have the answers, I'm just saying we have choices.
I do actually agree with your point (I specifically said big businesses in my example), smaller businesses absolutely need less regulation to allow them to stay nimble until they grow to a size where they can afford the teams (and costs) needed to cope with regulatory compliance.
But really that's not an argument against regulation per-se, it's just an argument against badly thought out regulation, or an unwillingness to adapt regulation once the laws of unexpected consequences have kicked in.
(PS you can see people's ages on their profiles)
i find that people who have a career, are/were married, have kids, own property, took out and paid off loans, pay for utilities, take care of their family and property tend to be more mature than somebody who hasn't reached those milestones, regardless of age
How do you define that US Standard of living, and what exactly puts it ahead of somewhere like Norway (just as an example, since it's already been mentioned)?
Let's see what that top tier income buys the average US household.
1. Life expectancy: US = 77 yrs, Norway = 83 yrs
2. Obesity as a % of population: US = circa 42% Norway = circa 18%
3. Percentage of GDP expenditure on healthcare: US = 18% Norway = 10%
4. Percentage of GDP expenditure on education: US = 5% Norway = 15%
5. Percentage of adults with degree level education: US = 30% Norway = 35%
6. Percentage of adults who can read (UN defined literacy rate): US = 80% Norway = 100%
7. Homicide rate per 100k: US = 5.07 Norway = 0.52
8. Percentage of population in prison per 100K: US = 505 Norway = 55
It goes on. I'm not sure that having the top level household income particularly equates with having the best set up, happiest or most productive society. And It's not a question of the 'number' of amount of regulation, it's about what sort of society those regulations are designed to create & enforce, and who benefits from those regulations.
I'd argue, for example, that many US regulations are geared around the hopes, wishes and desires of the corporations they're meant to regulate against (hence the massive corporate lobby industry in the US) whereas in some other Western democratic, capitalistic countries (such as those in Scandinavia) there is a comparative lean towards a form of certain social democratic ideals, where the rules & regulations tend more towards a general social benefit vs a more narrow focus corporate one.
If I'm not mistaken, I think that's what @woody25 was alluding to. Interesting debate for sure.
gotta complete the sentence Woody!
I don't know where this arrogance and delusion comes from in people, but holy crap....don't you think the shareholders and board are the people to decide who is worth what? last I checked, slavery is illegal, and thus everyone is employed at will. So what someone is willing to work for, or how much an employer is willing to pay someone, is between those two parties only. not you, not jealous people that lack the skills to make that much money.
just, sit down. be quiet, and let the adults work. your input is childish at best.
But I otherwise agree—just say it like it is. You hired too many people, built way to many bikes and didn’t foresee the side effects of massive government spending and inflation.
and number 4 is too high, we should lower it
and number 3, no freebies
‘@speed10: We vote with our dollar.‘
I used to think that, and I still do my best to support ’the good guys’ but truth is: voting against someone who has billions of votes isn’t going to work.
Unpopular opinion: historically speaking violence (and threats of violence) has been the only mechanism of major change. Buying American made crescent wrenches ain’t enough.
If you were smart, you took full advantage and made tons of money, to offset the future damage, that is now coming home to roost.
when the gov. prints money and spends it, what in actuality they did was levy a tax on anyone that has any amount of money, but they didn't have to put it up for a vote. So, it's taxation without representation....i.e. Theft.
clown world
is a ref/judge/government representitive less bad for taking a bribe than a company is for trying to influence them(while all their competitors are doing the same thing? bit of a prisoners dilemma really)
US: 360ish(no way to actually gauge, I just assume another 30 or so million illegals on top of the official number) million people from every corner of the planet and hundreds of different cultures
Norway: 5.5 Million highly homogenous and single cultural people.
GTFO with any kind of comparision there.
name another country with better upward mobility...
lastly, not everyone, nor even a lot, of people can be "wealthy" in any society. that just isn't how it works. let's say having 10,000,000 dollars was the threshold of "wealthy". what happens when we give 50% of the population 10 million dollars? I am not even going to answer this for you, as I think you will see the folly in your thinking...
Any politician should be required to wear a jacket that has patches of the corporations/donors that funded his/her campaign, with the $ amount below the corporate/donor logo. Logo size would be dependent on $ amount contributed. Heck, even NASCAR doesn't hide who sponsors the driver, and is more transparent than elected officials.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Social_Mobility_Index
This of course is not based on wealth, but other factors, as wealth does not equate to happiness.
If you want to focus on wealth as the be all end all, The US is LAST, in regards to wealth distribution of the G7 countries.
www.newstatesman.com/chart-of-the-day/2022/09/uk-second-most-unequal-g7-country
immigrants tend to be better off than native born americans, as long as they're legal, of course
"the general distribution of wealth in the US is better than any country on the planet."
Not quite following this one (been a long day). Do you mean that the total national GDP is more evenly distributed amongst the populous, or that money flows from richer to poorer better in the US, or something else entirely?
"name another country with better upward mobility..."
Doesn't upward mobility potentially suggest a starting point of high inequality, and if so, is that necessarily a good thing? A flatter income distribution, where everyone was 'middle class' would have lower social mobility but also less people in poverty?
"lastly, not everyone, nor even a lot, of people can be "wealthy" in any society."
You could perhaps argue it's not about how many people are wealthy, but rather less people being poor? The median income for the US is say $70k. If everyone earnt that, had good schools to send their kids too and some time to spend helping their kids learn etc. then those kids grow into a more work force. That improves productivity, GDP rises and everyone gets a bit richer?
@Mtbdialed: "The general distribution of wealth in the US is better than any country on the planet." It's not even in the top 100 in terms of income equality. I'm not sure if you're aware, but there are metrics and stats on this. The upward mobility trope was created to make every sucker in the US think they can and will make it big one day, thus keeping them docile in the face of corporate exploitation. And it's one hell of a drug, as you've proved.
"lastly, not everyone, nor even a lot, of people can be "wealthy" in any society. that just isn't how it works. let's say having 10,000,000 dollars was the threshold of "wealthy". what happens when we give 50% of the population 10 million dollars? I am not even going to answer this for you, as I think you will see the folly in your thinking..." These are just words fired up into the air like confetti. You should probably pick up that mic you dropped and come up with something tangible based on methodical research, such as that conducted on the topic of universal basic income (which you probably believe amounts to heresy). It wouldn't take $10m per capita to solve a lot of issues.
your final link there is a good one to highlight how numbers and stats can be made to come to whatever conclusion one would like. The first mistake that article makes is erroneously focusing the defintion of "equality". I didn't mention "equality" but "distribution". Different things. all those countries had "equality" which equates to everyone being close to as poor as everyone else. The US has wealth distribution.....meaning, there is more money(By a f*cking lot) spread across a much larger segment of the population.
there also has to be rich people to incent the not rich people to try and be rich, lest you have absolutely zero economic activity and then everyone has nothing(wouldn't be poor, because relatively, everyone is the same....starving to death).
there is no absolute ideal, you can have your opinions, but it's just that. My opinion is you let water seek it's own level, with zero outside influence(governemnt picking winners and losers).
last two years we have data for - 2020 (11,297) and 2021 (12,053) canadians immigrated into the US (table 2, www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2021)
i couldn't find official number for americans immigrating canada, but news stories quote about 10k a year - which is still less than americans emigrating to canada. taking into account about 10x larger population of the US, and simple conclusion is - a canadian is about 10x more likely to immigrate the US than the other way around
"Immigrants tend to be better off than native born americans" Really?
There are A LOT of statements being created out of thin air here. The bedrock of populism.
I won't add anymore.
Come and visit!
Here's an ideal-people who work full time get paid enough that they can feed and house their families and don't become bankrupt for minor medical emergencies.
Good job the government did'nt bail out the banking sector......or ford........or boeing.......or Pharma. Zero outside influence, they stand on their own.
and what is the income inequality like in qatar? since you're bringing up qatar and complaining about income inequality in the US...
and yes, really. the poorest people in the US are native born
and where do people from the entire world come to get treatment when they can't get that treatment in their own country?
From what I've read....Germany.
And yes, we are having issues with healthcare in Canada, with those who can afford it going to other countries for attention, because private industry lobbied governments hard, who in turn cut spending in the early 2000's on healthcare so that the public would start to think that private healthcare is a viable solution.
Follow. The. Money.
urgent care clinics are unheard of there.
germany, sure - you're grossly misinformed. more medical patents in the US alone than the rest of the world combined - and everybody benefits from that
private is the way to go, 10 times out of 10
all of the worlds wealth comes SOLELY via human labor. it is the one true currency. if you can deliver more value from your labor than your neighbor, you are wealthier than they are.
I'm not going to @ everyone to replied to me, but I'll try to make a general reply here:
Yes, $$ does not equal happiness. But we are talking economics here, and certain economic styles generate better economic outcomes. The best way to maximize happiness across time, from the data thats available, is to be religious, get married, have lots of children, and spend more time outdoors. This of course doesn't apply to everyone, there is no single metric that will apply to everyone, but thats why we should strive for a freer society so people can pursue their own paths towards happiness.
It is a myth that Nordic countries are the "happiest countries on earth". They are very far north and have huge problems with seasonal depression, alcoholism, and suicide. Also, until recently, had little immigration, a homogenous society, and have a collective population of 25 million- half that of Canada. Its very hard to measure happiness, but Brazilians seem to be the happiest people on earth, despite Brazil having so many socio-economic problems they can't all be listed.
These "percentage of GDP spent on X" measurements are meaningless, because people make choices that are different. In the USA, people put a high priority on teeth, and spend much more on orthodontics than Europeans. You could say that Europeans are filthily losers who don't care about their teeth, or you could say they aren't so vain and as long as its not a medical problem they'd rather have good wine and more vacations.
Someone said Americans take on average "1 week of vacation a year". This is absolutely incorrect. The average time taken is 20 days for Americans. Whether this is paid PTO or not doesn't matter. The more PTO you have, the lower your wage is. Nothing is free, and Americans have higher wages.
Americans do elect to take fewer vacation days that Europeans, so what? Americans prefer a higher income, and by choice make that trade. Why is that bad? This is mostly independent of the economic system.
All the comparisons on what Americans spend on things isn't a final metric of consumption. Thats why Total Household Consumption, while not perfect, is the best metric. It accounts for purchases and benefits received. Americans end up getting more stuff than Nordics do when all things are accounted for.
On the subject of healthcare, the most non-capitalistic sectors of the US economy are 1. Financial Services (wall street) 2. Healthcare 3. Education . These are also the most unequal, lowest performing, and most socialist parts of our economy.
"Rule of Law (property rights, freedom from corruption); Limited Government (fiscal freedom, government spending); Regulatory Efficiency (business freedom, labor freedom, monetary freedom); Open Markets (trade freedom, investment freedom, financial freedom)"
www.statista.com/statistics/256965/worldwide-index-of-economic-freedom
Guess what: They rank the Nordic countries as less regulated than the USA.
It was really straight forward.
healthcare, infant mortality, moms dying in labor, leisure time, time in nature, police killings, prison complex, half of most budgets either go to police or military etc etc
think we can all agree that everybody should be treated as an individual, and not one size fits all. american system (in general, not talking about healthcare here) favors high achievers, european model favors mediocrity. and that's fine, just please don't push it on us
and the service rich people provide is job creation. I wouldn't say I am rich, but I am doing alright....my labor and risk taking with my money, directly feeds around 2 dozen people via the jobs I provide. so you know, the alternative if no one took their capital and created jobs, would be death via starvation I guess?
1. Your anecdotal evidence of a tiny section of European healthcare does not prove anything about the multiple different models in place across the continent, some of which are very good, some less so (usually due to underfunding by governments that fetishize the US's survival-of-the-fittest approach).
2. "Favors mediocrity"... Where to start? What does this even mean? We're not that obsessed with money for money's sake and uh... teeth? Europe is not the homogeneous 2D world you think it is.
Yes, the USA spends more on military than pretty much the rest of the world combined. The military is a classic example of why socialism leads to poor economic outcomes. No matter how much money you spend on something, it will never get better or increase in efficiency. No matter how small your government program starts off as, it will ballon until it has a budget in the billions (trillions in our case)>
However Infant mortality is high because in the USA we count babies who die within minutes of birth as being born, while in most European municipalities that is counted as a stillbirth.
Leisure time isn't apples to apples, if you read my previous comment, you'd see that Americans on average choose to work 1-2 more hours per week than Euros and take fewer vacation days because they prefer higher income. Why is someone elses choice a bad thing?
i have a bunch of anecdotal evidences such as this one, and they're backed up by stats. compare waiting times for any healthcare service between any european country vs US, and you'll see what i'm talking about.
i also have a lot of experience with american healthcare system, and thank god, it's far from horror stories i've been hearing before coming here. a diagnostic service that my daughter needs is available only in the US and finland, nowhere else.
EVERYONE i know who lives in europe always goes PRIVATE if they can afford it. EVERYONE.
favoring mediocrity means heavily subsidizing laziness/poor people so that they can comfortably live, which in turn incentivizes such behavior. safety net should be there to help you out short term, not to support a lifestyle. when somebody works their ass off, and they net just a bit more than somebody who doesn't work, it makes them not want to work as hard, generally speaking.
and teeth... i never brought up that topic, that was another user here, but it is a fact that americans do have nicer looking teeth than europeans
it was brought up as an example. Americans choose (actually, government regulation favors corn over all other food, and lied to us with a 30 year propaganda campaign saying butter and meat are unhealthy, but thats another topic) to live very unhealthy lifestyles compared to Western Europeans, and subsequently have to spend more on healthcare. Americans also choose to get medical intervention to treat disease rather than adjusting lifestyle habits. This isn't because of the economic system, its because of the culture. I'll be the first to admit that we have a serious problem with over-consumption of vegetable oils, sugar, ultra refined processed flour, sweet drinks, etc. If we ate more animal fat, olive oils, complex carbohydrates, and less sugar, our healthcare costs would drop dramatically.
I don't see a correlation there - neither what constitutes a crime or whether that crime is treated through punishment, rehabilitation or both are fundamental tenants of a particular economic philosophy?
Wouldn't a history of ghettoisation and an approach of incarcerating people for drug offences, rather than targeting the causes of drug use (which often relate to poverty / inequality) be a larger factor in the US?
public is good enough for treating a cold, or broken bones, simple stuff, and that's good enough for most people as they won't need other services. when you need an actual specialist is when things start falling apart.
i know people in france and italy (wife's family) who hate their public healthcare. sure, it's possible that they would hate american healthcare even more, but the point is nothing is perfect, and in more than one way american healthcare is measurably better than western european healthcare systems
Government - assisted suicide is now the 5th leading cause of death for our friends to the north.
it's funny, actually it's sad, but their stats are gonna look great - look at all these people we've successfully treated
In the 80s a bunch of socialist countries had their doctors pressure expectant mothers to just have abortions at the slightest sign of even a small health issue with the unborn baby, and what do you know "socialized health care" produced healthier babies with a lower infant mortality rate!
the same system was in place there too, and i don't know anyone who didn't have supplemental coverage. pretty much it was a must have to get anything done.
i know one family that lives in france (besançon), and they claim that they pay a lot for for their medications and that 'free' coverage is nowhere near enough for their needs (we're talking about an middle aged couple here, diabetics, one is retired on disability). i believe you when you say that people try to make full use of 'free' healthcare - more than if they had to pay directly out of their pockets, which leads to a lot of resources being wasted. not just in healthcare, it's the same way with every other govt run program. everybody is more generouse with somebody else's money.
my dad used to be die hard socialist, but even he admits that there is no reason to go public if you can avoid it. he's a small business owner, so he pays a lot more for coverage than my mom, who is a nurse.
i guess what i want to say is that i'm glad that you're happy with your healthcare. hope it stays that way. our healthcare - knock on wood - has been way better than expected so far, and unfortunately we're using it A LOT.
somehow all these debates end up in which country is better, but it's rarely apples to apples comparison, and it mostly comes down to personal preference.
MAID was never brought up apart from the family member inquiring about it.
Now, family doctors, elective surgery, and emergency room visits are another story; In the past 20 years, all these things have deteriorated, especially in BC. there are waits of 3-6 months for knee and hip surgeries. Wait times in Emerge are 3 hours+ unless you're bleeding out, and even then they may be too long. There is a concerted effort to change this, but as to what the cause is, I really don't know. Is it a case of some very business friendly government cutbacks to social programs in the early 2000's after being lobbied by private health care so that the public starts to demand a private system? Was it the college of physicians not admitting enough doctors? was it the lure of a higher paycheque to the south? I don't know. I hope we do find out and ameliorate the situation. Anyway, really good viewpoints here, and I sure would like to live in the US to get some first hand experience. Hope everyone has a good weekend and gets out for a ride!
www.linkedin.com/posts/deborah-belles-23b7902_yep-this-girl-is-spot-on-activity-7018442188833386496-OR1C?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios
Nah, I kid. I bet if we met in person we'd get along great and I wouldn't be an obnoxious jerk.
No offense, but,
A: You don't become a superpower by being benign
B: How do you explain the second Gulf War? There was absolutely no reason to invade Iraq the 2nd time, and between 100,000 and 600,000 civilians died and the country now lies in factions.
C: "the modern age of global trade...exists 100% due to the freely given might of the US Military" There were definitely Faustian bargains involved in every single conflict.
I'd say the world could use a lot less fighting and struggling about now. I'm tired of seeing young people sent to maim and kill other people to settle the disputes of bigoted old men.
Humans are apes, no matter what anyone wants you to believe and our basic tendencies towards aggression will not be tamed until we start dealing with everyone's favourite hormone, testosterone. Some human cultures have found moments of relative peace, but rarely more than about 80 years which is generationally a cycle. We're around that point now, where the last generation to experience war (in the west) is fading and we're in the grips of decadence, based on years without true struggle and therefore little reference as to just how bad things should be and how amazing we have it now. So we fight over triviality, which inevitably leads to societal instability as our ego responds to sustained torment. You can see this with identity politics and its effect on western liberal nations. We've lost any sense of real objective truth between groups (what's a woman, forced vax ethics, climate is a crisis?). Amicable separation, or strong rule imposed on those who dissent from the powerful, seem like the only two realistic outcomes. I doubt there will be unity until there's a obvious unavoidable catastrophe to unite against.
-Happy Friday!
www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada-performing-more-organ-transplants-from-maid-donors-than-any-country-in-the-world-1.6234133
here's a fun fact for you: Women have more testosterone in their system then they have estrogen! go ahead, look it up...
If you were sensible over the past 2 years all will be good, you made some extra profit and dolled out the overtime / paid your existing staff a bit more, maybe turned business away so not to exceed realistic capacity.
If you went all out and expanded thinking this would last forever, then you are probably a little bit shagged unless you have some big cash reserves - the smaller guys will feel it the most of course.
Euphoria was short...
Better to be in that position than have a warehouse full of engines they have already paid for that nobody wants to buy.
I imagine the £12k ebikes will still sell out though like always.
Specialized could have hundreds of shareholders or investors, or none.
I agree that large brands often care little about people / needing to move staff on when things contract but they absolutely do care about their numbers for longer than a quarter, unless they are trying to fail of course.
Lots of larger brands will have priced this in - anyone that things Specialized didn't forecast a post covid contraction are mental.
edit:// but I do understand what you're saying.
Used to think this was temporary but now not so sure. This might be the new supply chain moving forward which will just force companies to automate to make up for the lack of labor. Will be interesting to see what happens over the next 10 years.
So if there is that much money being dumped into donuts, think where else companies are spending billions to get rid of human capital.
Few other points
-There are like a 1/3 less of generation x versus millennials. Labor gap is only gonna get worse,
-China has developed and is no longer cheapest to manufacture things so supply chains need to move to other countries,
-corporations take their tax breaks and do stock buybacks investing in technology. The 2018 beak specialized got basically covered all their Covid bullshit. Not to mention the PPP loan they probably got from the government.
Only way to make things better is to buy less shit and keep it longer. The only way companies make any meaningful changes is if people stop buying their product.
With automation and AI we will all be able to sit in our pants and jut eat the donuts on universal basic income ;-)
Large companies like Boeing , Genie , Amazon etc.. have the money and clout to basically buy all available inventory in the market and screw all the small business guys.
And it’s ot just the industry but it makes a difference on what is being paid for goods. Farmers waiting 10 months for a motor and then having three price increases while they were waiting for the motor helps no one but the corporation. That is why We have to pay so much for vegetables right now. It’s way more expensive to farm or operate equipment than it was three years ago.
Good luck man, sounds like we both need it
Oil is a commodity, a little different to a factory making toasters.
“Only way to make things better is to buy less shit and keep it longer. The only way companies make any meaningful changes is if people stop buying their product.”
Quoted for truth. And just to add- I want to keep things longer and have them be serviceable. It’s the inevitable fact that there are a finite amount of resources available and recycling is a lossy process. Make things to last and make them serviceable. Honestly it’s a world my parents (in their 70’s) lived in. Things were designed to last and to be repaired. Now they are made to have a life span approximately slightly greater than the warranty period or the next product cycle and are unserviceable or parts are unavailable.
Everything is ‘the matrix’ or something.
I mean, why wouldn't they? Obviously people are willing to pay, why not get that money?
very simply, supply and demand.
so at the end of the day, the cause of the price increases lies squarely at the feet of the government for inflating the currency.
Feels don't run a business. And being a sulking wagie pointing fingers at CEO's will never make you richer.
Companies like Specialized will ride it out but the smaller companies that did this and, worse yet, borrowed and leveraged to meet demand are completely screwed.
Hindsight is always 2020. But there's no excuse when the car companies (who are large enough and connected enough to be in on the plan) were showing the bike companies all along what to do.
"My position was eliminated at Specialized Bicycle Components and with it, my employment",
he had been with the company more than 4.5 years.
Didn't see posts of others, yet.
On BRAIN, these two Specialized related news articles are directly below each other on the home:
www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2023/01/11/specialized-buys-former-pearl-izumi-building#.Y7_t-HbMIQ8
Great timing, same day communication of massive lay offs & purchasing a 55,000 square-foot building for 15million
CEO: Jones? You have something to say?
Jones: Uh, yes sir, we can't lay off 8% of our workforce. That would be crue-
CEO: You're right, Jones. We can't. After all, The Big S just did and that would open us up to a lawsuit for intellectual theft! 9% it is!
Jones: But, sir, I mean-
CEO: You're a genius, Jones!
My feeling is that this is less "we overhired" and more "we brought on too many employees via acquisition and now need to let some go".
As for bad decision making, you aren't wrong though, smaller brands in particular seemed to think this whole thing was going to continue and started expanding/growing/hiring expecting that. Dumb business decision and it'll probably cost them in the long run esp with their brands being pushed out by Trek and Specialized buying shops.
freakonomics.com/podcast/are-m-b-a-s-to-blame-for-wage-stagnation
Strange Message. If yout business is struggeling just say it but dont try to sell it as everything is fine
www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2023/01/11/specialized-announces-8-staff-reduction#.Y7_5G6RlBzA
8% of workforce is very significant
"We need all you manufacturers to invest in increasing your capacity so we can keep riding this boom"
-Some dude at Spec (2021)
-Some dudes in Taiwan (2021)
It hurts my head thinking about how many “leaders” had their head in the sand and couldn’t see that the pandemic was altering buying habits, which couldn’t last forever.
They act slowly because (take your pick):
• They are optimists in general and expectthings to get better.
• They feel a moral responsibility to their staff and keep paying them, although they can’t afford ALL of them.
• They don’t actually look at their numbers or they don’t look often enough..
• Pride,ego,or stupidity gets in the way.
• It’s easier to do nothing than act.
focustaiwan.tw/business/202212140015?fbclid=IwAR0gtQ_rn4oDKPSq9nVNKRzXwYxwp4edqeXqJIuP7i2c3TGJH6t4aRqQjtI
If Giant is asking for a payment extension from suppliers you know there's a lot more downsizing to come.
It's gonna be rough for the trade for a good couple of years. Hopefully this will put the brakes on the consolidation and corporatization of the industry (Trek and Spesh seem in a race to to McDonaldsfy retail) and knowledgeable and passionate independant shops can carve out a niche supplying and servicing enthusiasts again.
What I mean by that is the £1000 bike sale and associated accessories etc - the kind of stuff that sold to people who were bored during Covid and wanted to take up biking.
Been told by someone in one of the more fashionable bike brands that sales are still good but they hear stock levels for the lower end stuff is now absolutely huge and as you say the only way forward is to cut prices and try and shift the stock.
Personally I am think it will only be rough if you reacted to the covid boom with fast expansion and didn't predict the ultimate slowdown - shops / manufacturers that took things slowly and worked overtime or were happy to turn some business away will ultimately be absolutely fine as they return to pre-covid business levels.
I'd be less bitter and able to chalk it it up to experience if I thought we made bad choices but sometimes you do everything right and still lose.
I dont think the worst of it has hit yet either, with so much inventory to shift shops left with product they paid full price on are going to find it tough selling until it runs out.
Price increases are a combination of inflation of everything, everywhere (Shipping, raw materials, staff, rates etc etc) and the desire to increase profit when demand is very high.
Sale prices are not long term price reductions, they are a method of shifting inventory or getting through low demand periods - I can almost guarantee we wont be seeing brands lowering their RRP by any great amount moving forward, especially as most of their costs have not reduced.
Bikes are products, not a market people trade in.
bikes performance vs price is better than ever, you don’t need to buy the £15k model you know, the £2.5k model is a fantastic bike.
You can’t compare a model now to a model 10 years ago, the same as with cars.
Now I’m not saying the ‘industry’ isn’t motivated to make a profit, that’s what business do even though it seems to be a dirty word if bikes are involved but suggesting we will see a ‘market correction’ like you are talking about the cost of natural gas is dog turds.
-Someone who's watching it across a couple companies from the inside
However, I wonder how many smaller companies benefitted from this.. They sold everything they had, but they weren't high enough on the ladder to get an excessive amount of inventory or they were conservative in buying because they have never been able to buy much...
That said, man oh man, Specialized could write a new version of "How to Win Friends and Influence People".
Not.
There is also a misconception that jobs have to last forever. A lot of jobs that have been eliminated would have been contract positions 10 years ago, but laws now require companies to hire more full time employees. This wouldn’t have made the news if the big S simply didn’t renew contracts with staffing companies.
Would you avoid this brand because of the treatment of the laid off employees?
I'm all for voting with my feet but I do wonder if this sorta thing is enough to make me avoid buying one of their bikes.
You know, because I'm a shallow hypocrite who rails against capitalism but loves buying new shit.
Also, any public traded company in the US needs to inform shareholders. Usually the press releases are short, dry and buried under a bunch of other news.
I once worked for a privately held company, in Texas, and they laid off tons of folks all the time without any announcements to the public.
.....god comments like this one make me want to hurl. Taken directly from the BS "Standard Corporate Nifty Woke Sayings" book.....blah
I would excel in PR/Marketing, but that is also lame.
go take a nap my man. peace.
Working at a shop, I had no idea how long we would be open. Luckily, we were able to stay open the whole time. The companies got creative with staffing and stayed open at a minimum capacity. But, even under normal circumstances, the industry doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to keep up with a shift in demand like we saw. If someone had the foresight about 18 months earlier, new factories could have been built and brought online.
What I saw was as lower priced bikes sold out, the price of entry kept going up... Eventually, all that was left was the high end bikes...
I bet anyone that suggested that with a 12 month plus lead time to get bikes that interest would drop off, they would have been laughed out of the room..
Pinkbike Classifieds as of now has XC,Trail, Enduro, Downhill, Dirtjump Complete bikes = 28,394. Frame only in these categories is 2649. E-bikes is 2084. Grand Total of 31,502.
Yes, all of these are not necessarily bikes competing with brand new designs, but overall they do pull away from the new bike purchases and even building up a bike becomes waaaaay cheaper than buying new. I have a 2019 Yeti Sb 130. Yes the new Sb 140 is sweet, but do some shopping and you'll find at a 50% price of a new bike minus sucky CA sales tax, then you're looking at 60% off. This is going to get interesting!!!
(I don't actually know what I'm talking about, but I just blame everything on the supply chain now; forgot to take the garbage out? "Supply chain issue, honey!"
Forgot your anniversary? "Supply chain issue"
Late for work? "Supply chain issue")
That said, Specialized trying to spin this as some sort of reimagining vaguely related to the environment or planet is just insulting - particularly to those most affected. I mean, a lot of people got triggered by Musk's approach to Twitter layoffs, but I think he has the right approach. Better to just be upfront about it. You're being laid off b/c we've run the numbers, and we have to cut your job.
I have never had a Specialized (new anyways) and never will
What BS! No surprise it was going to SUCK with the new CEO Scott Maguire coming from DYSON.
Hopefully a slowdown will improve pricing.
And all successful companies have to over-hire and then let go of the excess that either don't perform or they just don't need. If you don't like it, start your own business and do better.
It's a business, not a charity.
Thankfully the economy is strong, and they should be reemployed shortly if they so desire.
It sucks, but having been through 6 layoffs in my relatively short career (both being laid off and having to choose who on my team I have to get rid of), it is the reality of business. Those people never would have had the jobs had the company not decided to roll those dice.
SHOULD BE CHEAPER.......CAN'T GET MUCH CHEAPER THAN LAYING OFF 8% OF THEIR STAFF.!
I WONDER, WHAT IS THE ACTUAL MANUFACTURING COST OF AN S-WORKS ENDURO.???????!!!!!!!
Specy also testing a showroom/Apple store model in certain markets. Go look at the bikes and if you want one, they'll bring it in for you from a warehouse.
Are the likes of Canyon and YT actually much cheaper these days?
It’s planned but probably got bigger this year with the e-bike sales numbers finally running out of steam …
Join Pinkbike Login