ortcutt

No, not at all. This is fascinating! I'll never stop scratching my head over the way GP inspires so many polemics. (Check out the thread over at 41 on his steel-fork/carbon-fork "swap" offer.)

It seems to me that his detractors, as represented on this thread, emphasize a single complaint for two different reasons. The complaint is that his frames and bikes are overpriced. The two reasons are (1) that excellent used/"vintage" lugged steel frames are available for considerably less money; and (2) that other manufacturers and bespoke framebuilders offer bikes that are just as good for a lot less money, or that are custom-tailored for little more.

Now, I salute the bargain hunters of this world, like KonAaron Snake, who know a good deal when they see it and have the knowledge, interest, and spare time necessary to spec out a quality used frame. And I salute the "green" impulse to buy used. But it should go without saying that even among cycling enthusiasts, such people are in a distinct minority. And some posters on this thread seem to believe that it is clearly a "better" -- more rational -- use of one's time and resources to become a knowledgeable buyer and restorer of used bikes, rather than to plop down more cash for a quality bike that looks pretty and "retro." And that's far from obvious to me. In fact, it seems more like snobbery masquerading as consumer advocacy. And there are other reasons one might cite for buying new: e.g., preserving a market, hence a sphere of activity, for builders of lugged-steel frames.

As for those who regard Rivendell's price/quality ratio as clearly inferior to that of other manufacturers of new bikes, it seems that they're partly right. If you don't care about where and how your parts are sourced -- country of origin, labor standards, balance-of-trade issues, etc. -- then go Taiwanese or Chinese, by all means. My wife and I ride Surlys; we love them; and GP admires Surly's products too, along with various offerings by the big manufacturers (Trek and others). But as is well known, he won't sell Chinese products. Period. He even regrets having mistakenly sold a batch of tape measures made in China (having been misled by their American-flag decorations.) Maybe the neoliberals among us want to skewer him for that. But in any event, I don't see anyone pressing the "free trade" argument very hard.

As for the availability of custom work by bespoke framebuilders: great. If you have specific ideas you want realized in a one-of-a-kind project, hooray. But I don't see how the availability of alternatives to Rivendell is an argument against liking what they do, in fact, offer.

However, there are darker suggestions on this thread, to the effect that Petersen is deliberately marking up his products so as to generate "snob appeal." Now, none of us can make him open the company books, so we'll never "know"; but this sounds to me like sheer, malicious fantasy. It's vastly more plausible that his bikes are expensive because his plant, materials, and labor are expensive. Which returns us to the question: Are you willing to pay more for a bike that's produced under GP's chosen conditions?