The £100 bike

[PBancroft]

And 6 months later...they're not using that stupid gimmicky, overwieght bike because its cream crackered because of poor quality components, or because its just a plain shoddy bike.

I think the idea's fantastic BTW and i think it could be done.

I think that's a sales issue. When I was at college (about 12-13 years ago) I bought a £70 Apollo.... yes, I know. Shoot me now. But I didn't know any better, and more importantly I couldn't afford any better. The sales guy sold it to me as their cheapest full-sus bike, and made it sound like a good thing. Y-Frame bikes were all the rage, and so they sold BSOs that looked a bit like them.

With the right marketing, an appealing design (I get that the Vitamin is a good bike, I'm just not sure it looks attractive enough) and the optional extras at point of purchase, like on a car, I reckon a decent no-frills bike could be a goer. The trick with marketing would be to change the desirability. Nobody wanted an eBook reader two years ago, and now they're all the rage.

 

[Norm]

Nobody wanted an eBook reader two years ago, and now they're all the rage.

I still don't want one but I agree it's about the marketing. Full sus bikes get the attention in the stores

 

[Smokin Joe]

You all miss the point though.

There are hundreds of sub £100 bikes out there already, and they appeal to people who want a bank holiday toy or something to nip to the shops on. The people who buy them care as much about bikes as they do about fridges and they won't be interested in whether it will still be serviceable in ten years time because they are not buying one as a long term investment. Very few enthusiasts would bother with a low end machine so there is really no market for something with a poverty spec.

 

[gbb]

You all miss the point though.

There are hundreds of sub £100 bikes out there already, and they appeal to people who want a bank holiday toy or something to nip to the shops on. The people who buy them care as much about bikes as they do about fridges and they won't be interested in whether it will still be serviceable in ten years time because they are not buying one as a long term investment. Very few enthusiasts would bother with a low end machine so there is really no market for something with a poverty spec.

That concurs with my observation, they'll only appeal (generally) to low mileage/occasional cyclists. Nothing wrong with that either...but perhaps for that reason, thats why its a waste of time producing a 'good' £100 bike...because the potential buyers know or care little about bikes, so they'll still go for the full sus rubbish...cos it (supposedly) looks good.

It's definately all about turning round peoples perceptions...i think there'd be as much effort required to do that as actually produce the bike.

 

[mac1]

That concurs with my observation, they'll only appeal (generally) to low mileage/occasional cyclists. Nothing wrong with that either...but perhaps for that reason, thats why its a waste of time producing a 'good' £100 bike...because the potential buyers know or care little about bikes, so they'll still go for the full sus rubbish...cos it (supposedly) looks good.

It's definately all about turning round peoples perceptions...i think there'd be as much effort required to do that as actually produce the bike.

+1 I think you would need to do that in order to create any demand in the first place. It's all about utility riding to begin with.

 

[e-rider]

the 'real' cost of making a £300 bike isn't more than £100 - the rest is just profit for the manufacturer, distributor and retailer.

although, bear in mind that the cheap labour costs in the far east are verging on slavery; we can only 'afford' to buy such bikes easily because someone somewhere is working for peanuts and living in poverty.

Buy a north American/west Europe made frame with Japanese or Italian components and you can sleep easy at night - probably cost £1400 minimum though.

 

[cyco2]

Bicycles...The main thing about anything that is made today is that no matter how good the original is when it comes to producing it in numbers the manufacturers will always reduce it to its lowest common denominator. Like, they will go all out to produce a £100 bike today but tomorrow they'll start swapping bits to make more profit. The originator is taken out of the pot for the interests of the investor. So, what you get is a load of rubbish.
The principle of mass production now is to produce lower quality rubbish. Example....The electronic parts industry could not afford to do that because the capital investment is enormous. But knocking out bits for bikes is easy.

 

[mac1]

the 'real' cost of making a £300 bike isn't more than £100 - the rest is just profit for the manufacturer, distributor and retailer.

although, bear in mind that the cheap labour costs in the far east are verging on slavery; we can only 'afford' to buy such bikes easily because someone somewhere is working for peanuts and living in poverty.

Buy a north American/west Europe made frame with Japanese or Italian components and you can sleep easy at night - probably cost £1400 minimum though.

didn't realise the Japanese did componentry? Also, what's the score wrt labour conditions/wage in Taiwan - apparently there's a lot of cycling manufacturing expertise - not just labour costs

 

[mac1]

Bicycles...The main thing about anything that is made today is that no matter how good the original is when it comes to producing it in numbers the manufacturers will always reduce it to its lowest common denominator. Like, they will go all out to produce a £100 bike today but tomorrow they'll start swapping bits to make more profit. The originator is taken out of the pot for the interests of the investor. So, what you get is a load of rubbish.
The principle of mass production now is to produce lower quality rubbish. Example....The electronic parts industry could not afford to do that because the capital investment is enormous. But knocking out bits for bikes is easy.

see, I thought mass production/profit at the cost of quality was very much in the past, at least for the name brands - if something's rubbish it won't last. The technological advances in mass production means that quality is just, well aeons above what it was say, in the 1970s.

 

[snailracer]

IMO I don't think the actual hardware is an issue. Supermarket/Argos bikes are cr@p because they are badly assembled. I have reassembled several "BSO's" for myself, relatives & friends and they run OK.
OK they ARE heavy, but then so is a Pashley. They are all comfortable. Tyres are knobbly but that is not necessarily wrong - especially in snow!

 

[e-rider]

Taiwan was initally used because of the cheap labour. Becasue it became a bit of a hotspot for Alu bike frames it developed a certain degree of expertise and quality and labour costs have steadily increased over the years.

Many large manufacturers are now moving away from Taiwan to find cheaper labour in Thailand, Cambodia and China.

Japanese components? er SHIMANO

 

[Hover Fly]

A while back some Taiwanese minister or other said they couldn't compete with PRC labour costs so the focus in Taiwanese industry would go from cheap copies towards high quality. Just like Japan previously.

 

[Smokin Joe]

IMO I don't think the actual hardware is an issue. Supermarket/Argos bikes are cr@p because they are badly assembled. I have reassembled several "BSO's" for myself, relatives & friends and they run OK.
OK they ARE heavy, but then so is a Pashley. They are all comfortable. Tyres are knobbly but that is not necessarily wrong - especially in snow!

Therein lies the problem.

Take the time to assemble and check them properly and there goes the £100 price tag.

 

[Black Sheep]

A friend while at uni bought a £70 probike
Ridgid steel mountainish bike that has been given nothing but abuse for 7 years

When it's working it is ridden, when it isn't working it's dragged to the bike shop and the minimum spent on it

It's done the coast to coast and the pennine way fully laden without problem. Still on it's original wheels, think gears might be wearing our now from what he said the other day

My 1968 Carlton that I re built about 3 years ago has had no maintenance in that time except for replacing brake pads. The odo shows 2000 miles as it used to be my only transport.
Don't think I've had a puncture in that time!

 

[Smokin Joe]

A friend while at uni bought a £70 probike
Ridgid steel mountainish bike that has been given nothing but abuse for 7 years

When it's working it is ridden, when it isn't working it's dragged to the bike shop and the minimum spent on it

It's done the coast to coast and the pennine way fully laden without problem. Still on it's original wheels, think gears might be wearing our now from what he said the other day

My 1968 Carlton that I re built about 3 years ago has had no maintenance in that time except for replacing brake pads. The odo shows 2000 miles as it used to be my only transport.
Don't think I've had a puncture in that time!

Boy, are you gonna regret saying that