Advocacy & Safety - profit free helmets?

I've already posted BHSI's estimate for what it costs to make a bike helmet http://bhsi.org/helmcost.htm.

Their estimate is about $4.85.

If this is close to being right, $50 a helmet generates a big profit and seems to be a big motivation to get people to buy them.

On another list, someone posted this website http://www.prorider.com/org/p70/Economy-Bike-Helmet/product_info.html that shows bike helmets for sale for $3.65!

http://www.prorider.com/org/images/10VRedC80.jpg

Is this too good to be true, or do you think competitors (like Bell or Giro) will buy them out to keep prices high?

Methinks they need to have better standards.

Better standards? They meet the same CPSC standards Bell does.

3 sizes, micro shell, 10 large vents, quick release buckles. Outside of $45, what's the difference?

Since cycling is such a safe recreation, comfort and style are the main factors affecting the decision on which helmet to buy.

I imagine part of the profit margin is set aside for legal costs associated with accidents - settlements and the like.

I imagine part of the profit margin is set aside for legal costs associated with accidents - settlements and the like.

from the BHSI site

"You have to buy legal insurance, run a headquarters office staff, Web site, all that other stuff. That adds probably another dollar. (Assuming you can sell 250,000 of a design)"

I'd pay the $25 for the extra comfort and aesthetics of a Giro Transfer; after all, I'm going to be wearing it every time I ride a bike.

btw:


$24.00 shipping cost will apply to orders of under 13 items.

shipping, if you order 36 helmets or more is $1.00 per helmet.

and keep in mind, I doubt this is entirely profit-free. Some one is still doing this for something.

On another list, someone posted this website http://www.prorider.com/org/p70/Economy-Bike-Helmet/product_info.html that shows bike helmets for sale for $3.65!


On that same site you can get a Snell certified helmet in a very nice looking purple!

I wonder why they don't have them in yellow. That's my favorite helmet color. More visible.

In selecting a helmet, I narrow it down based on fit and comfort/effectiveness of the retention straps. If I was in the market for a new helmet, I'd consider one of these.

Speedo

Better standards? They meet the same CPSC standards Bell does.



Methinks they need to have better standards.

__

Still looking at the gap in price from $3.65 to $50 and up.

I see this is part of the CNS (Children-n-Safety) program and is offered to Police depts, health depts, PTAs and other organizations to get helmets to bike riders.

Checked out some sites referring CNS and found much use of the 85% HI reduction claims.

It seems this is something that they can use to start people on the road to start buying $50 replacements

"It seems this is something that they can use to start people on the road to start buying $50 replacements "

Who are "they"?

Manufacturing costs are often the lowest on the list of all the costs associated with a product.

Who are "they"?

Manufacturers.

The irony is that in places where bicycles are a well accepted part of the transportation picture, not many helmets are worn by the bicycle riders.

I think the whole "need" for helmets is overstated in the US, and is a symptom of a larger problem. Rather then try make the rider more "bullet proof," perhaps we should instead make the roads safer.

I got my helmet for around $10-$20. IMO, since helmets are pretty much built to the same standards, there is usu little point in spending $50-$60 on one at the LBS, unless the ones available elsewhere don't fit or actually have ventilation issues.

There are reasons why people buy very expensive helmets over the cheap ones. Fit, ventilation, style. The fact that manufacturers sell helmets in all price ranges says they aren't forcing anyone to buy something they can't afford. I had a cheap Bell, replaced it with an expensive Giros, couldn't be happier.

There are reasons why people buy very expensive helmets over the cheap ones. Fit, ventilation, style...

The fact that manufacturers sell helmets in all price ranges ...

I'd say style ranks high on the list...

but do they sell them for less than $4?

Maybe the $45.00 discrepancy is for the extra styrofoam peanuts required to ship the larger sizes? ;)

I'd say style ranks high on the list...

but do they sell them for less than $4?

This doesn't either - its a minimum of $4.65 (w/ shipping) if you buy 750:eek: helmets, which I surely won't be needing anytime. The first article you posted states that walmart and other departments stores have helmets for $7 or so, which is most likely cheaper for all effective purposes than from that site you posted.

This doesn't either - its a minimum of $4.65 (w/ shipping) if you buy 750:eek: helmets, which I surely won't be needing anytime. The first article you posted states that walmart and other departments stores have helmets for $7 or so, which is most likely cheaper for all effective purposes than from that site you posted.

if you buy 750 helmets @ $3.75, shipping is free. If you buy 180 @ $4.35, shipping is free.

The $4 cost is for groups to get people wearing them.

I don't think the $4 is for profit. I think $4 is about what a helmet costs to make. These are just teasers to generate future sales at enormous profits.

We bought 100 helmets from them last year to give away, and plan on doing it again this year. CNS sells to nonprofit groups, including some other local groups that give their helmets away too. I'm not sure if they make any profit from doing this or not, but the helmets don't look cheap or flimsy (we gave them to kids, and both the kids and parents liked them)- but I'm going to stick with my $50 helmet I bought before I resumed riding.

back in the early 90's both my kids received free helmets from a police run bicycle safety event.

A couple of years later I saw them for sale in stores for about $40.

I'm sure these are the same helmets people buy for about $50. It's just that I'm guessing they're being distributed at cost as promotion. It just re-enforces my thoughts that helmets are very inexpensive to make and when you pony up more cash for them, it's pure profit.

Our store used to sell ProRider helmets at one point, years ago. (Around '99-2000). They're decent enough helmets. Nothing fancy, but not uncomfortable or anything. If you go to their main site, you can buy a helmet that looks like the normal $40-$50 Bell/Giro/Trek, etc (complete with Turn-Loc-type adjuster) for $19.95 w/free shipping. Each additional helmet is $14.95.

http://www.prorider.com/outlet/p130/Bike-Helmet-with-Turn-Ring/product_info.html

Look at it this way; your $46 of "pure" profit subsidizes the helmets that go to police groups, charities, etc.

Since helmets are mostly optional items, they are sold at what the market will bear. If nobody bought $150 helmets, there would soon be no $150 helmets on the market.

That helmet shown above looks like something from the 70's; I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the company got a hold on the old molds from a 70's design and is using them till they break to make those helmets. They look heavy, hot, and the shell on the outside is probably barely glued on. Fit is probably not so good but good enough.

Profit is not a bad thing; it brings new companies into a market, which drives competition and lowers costs. Profit drives innovation, and innovation leads to better designs at lower costs.

I look at things from a practical perspective. It looks like it costs $4 to make a helmet. Personally I wouldn't want to pay much more than what it costs to make a helmet to buy a helmet. There are others who'll pay much more to buy one and all that extra money is a great motivator for companies to sell them at the price they can get, not at the price they need to survive.

Make something for $4, sell it for $40? Make a "premium" product for $6, sell it for $100? Who wouldn't want that kind of return?

have you shopped for shoes lately? helmets can't hold a candle.

Our store used to sell ProRider helmets at one point, years ago. (Around '99-2000). They're decent enough helmets. Nothing fancy, but not uncomfortable or anything. If you go to their main site, you can buy a helmet that looks like the normal $40-$50 Bell/Giro/Trek, etc (complete with Turn-Loc-type adjuster) for $19.95 w/free shipping. Each additional helmet is $14.95.

http://www.prorider.com/outlet/p130/Bike-Helmet-with-Turn-Ring/product_info.html

um honestly, I wouldn't compare that helmet with a $24.95 (w/ free ship) Giro (http://www.amazon.com/Giro-Transfer-Sport-Helmet-Universal/dp/B000BNZ40C/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1232165131&sr=1-5) - the white one, at least, much less a $40-50 bell/giro/trek.

um honestly, I wouldn't compare that helmet with a $24.95 (w/ free ship) Giro (http://www.amazon.com/Giro-Transfer-Sport-Helmet-Universal/dp/B000BNZ40C/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1232165131&sr=1-5) - the white one, at least, much less a $40-50 bell/giro/trek.

yet they pass the same safety certification

I think the whole "need" for helmets is overstated in the US, and is a symptom of a larger problem. Rather then try make the rider more "bullet proof," perhaps we should instead make the roads safer.
Talk to the average adult in America, and you'll realize it wont be safe until cars and bicycles drive themselves...

Oh and are controlled by the nanny state.


That and if I rode everywhere at 10mph I would be fine without a helmet either.

Yes, helmet companies make a profit. Welcome to America. How much of a profit? Who knows (not sure if Bell, who owns Giro, is publicly owned). I'm guessing it's somewhat more than Mother Teresa's orphanages and somewhat less than Exxon-Mobil.

Yes - helmet companies have a vested financial interest in getting more people to buy helmets. That has little to do with whether helmets are effective safety devices or not. Just because Bell makes money off of helmets doesn't automatically invalidate all of their claims about the effectiveness of helmets.

That's like saying if Philip Morris suddenly decided to donate all cigarette profits to charity, then we could finally believe all of the tobacco industry drivel about how cigarettes aren't that dangerous. After all - if Philip Morris isn't making any profit, what incentive would they have to lie to the public?

Your beef is really with safety advocacy organizations like CPSC and BHSI and whether they are in the pockets of the helmet industry (which they have stated not to be, whether you choose to believe that or not).

yet they pass the same safety certification

I wasn't referring to the safety certification - I was talking about the appearance and features, both of which I think the (relatively) cheap(er) Giro does better on.

I wasn't referring to the safety certification - I was talking about the appearance and features, both of which I think the (relatively) cheap(er) Giro does better on.

Irrelevant if the Giro doesn't fit your head. Which, if you're like half of the US and have a round head versus a narrow head, it doesn't. (Which is why I thought Bell buying Giro was a perfect combination.)

What "features"? It's a helmet. You wear it and look like a dork no matter what kind it is. If I didn't work at a shop, I'd have a $20 helmet instead of a SweepR. Might as well look like a dork who doesn't waste his money....

Aside from all of that... isn't it odd that not many people can name one person who has been brain damaged because of not wearing a helmet? How did all of us older people survive when we were kids?

Yes, helmet companies make a profit. Welcome to America. How much of a profit? Who knows (not sure if Bell, who owns Giro, is publicly owned). I'm guessing it's somewhat more than Mother Teresa's orphanages and somewhat less than Exxon-Mobil.

I will agree that some company's profits are excessive not so much in the end (usually they don't break that high on individual item profits), but a lot of it gets absorbed by useless fluff jobs in corporate and super-delegation of work.

Some of the differences in cost as you climb the price ladder are for better retention/fitting systems, straps, fastening system, additional/extra padding and lighter/better quality materials.

I imagine the cost of a $50 helmet, when it is all said and done, including fixed costs over and above cost of materials and labor, is probably right around $20-25.

It seems this is something that they can use to start people on the road to start buying $50 replacements

That was part of the intent we had when we gave them to kids, to get them in the habit of wearing a helmet when they ride. Most kids are going to be kind of hard on their helmets anyway, and getting them something sturdy that wasn't too uncomfortable was what we were looking for. I did give one away to a guy wearing a tee shirt advertising a Harley dealer who wondered if he should wear it when he's on his motorcycle - I just couldn't pass up that opportunity.

...Your beef is really with safety advocacy organizations like CPSC and BHSI and whether they are in the pockets of the helmet industry (which they have stated not to be, whether you choose to believe that or not).

I'm not sure if CPSC is a safety advocacy organization, but the BHSI sure is in the business of promoting helmet use.

I'm not sure if the BHSI is in the pocket of the industry or not. I do know along with some bad information on their site, they have lots of good information.

I do have a beef with a number of lobby groups that try to get helmet laws passed. I know a few of them are sponsored by helmet manufacturers. A direct conflict of interest.

I agree that it is a conflict of interest for any corporation with a profit motive to be involved with legislation. However, as long as Bell Helmets (or whoever is sponsoring the bills) uses data and studies from reputable independent 3rd party testing organizations, then it does not matter who is citing the data (whether it be Bell or some grassroots consumer safety group).

If the data is bunk and/or cooked (e.g. studies from tobacco company research labs in the 70's) and cannot be independently verified and tested, then that is a problem.

...If the data is bunk and/or cooked (e.g. studies from tobacco company research labs in the 70's) and cannot be independently verified and tested, then that is a problem.

This is often the case.