Sangetsu

This thread brings to mind the Leica camera company. At the end of the second war, Germany lost all the patents it had previously owned. Prior to the war, the Leica camera was considered to be the finest 35mm camera made. It was used by professionals and well-to-do enthusiasts, it was far too expensive for ordinary people to buy.

Anyway, after the war, and Leica having lost their patents, copies of their cameras began being produced around the world. Quite surprisingly, many of these copies were superb, and performed even better than the original Leica. But of course Leica did not sit around and cry about the situation. They introduced a very high quality and highly improved version of their traditional camera. But it was not different enough to see significant sales, so Leica went back to the drawing board and came up with an incredibly innovative, state-of-the-art camera, the M3. This became the ultimate tool for 35mm photographers for a decade.

Of course the M3 was quite expensive, and was a very exclusive product, which increased it's desirability. Over the years the M series has evolved a little, and the company has seen a few difficult periods, but it is still going strong, and has seen good sales in recent years.

Brompton has some of the same mystique as Leica, and shouldn't be afraid to face competition if and when it arises. Such competition will require them to build better bikes more efficiently, which can only benefit those of us who want the best bike possible.

keyven

Exactly what I've been saying. Competition is the lifeblood of innovation - AMD vs Nvidia, Apple vs Android (Samsung mostly), Coke vs Pepsi - no matter how incredible your product is, there should be something to challenge you to take it to the next level. Even if a solid competitor enters the ring tomorrow, Bromptons could continue to leverage their fame and "mystique" for a few more years before they'd be forced to innovate or lose the marathon.

The most recent case in my mind is Nvidia's painfully slow roll-out of their high-end products with barely any threat from AMD. They could take it slow and keep prices artificially high without any pressure to moderate. Even though I was angry with Nvidia at their price-gouging, I was hard-pressed to ignore them as AMD cards had publicized heat and stability problems up the wazoo. It's not that Nvidia did not do their due R&D, but without a viable threat, why should they push out new stuff at reasonable prices?

Besides that, almost every industry has faced competition from low-life patent/copyright-infringement fiends, and in most cases, the winners are consumers and the industry in general. Why should Bromptons be any different?

fietsbob

what has Happened.. the Crankset is now better a forged spider .. brake lever is improved ..

the 3 speed shifter is mich easier to use than the old Sturmey trigger shifter ..

Now the BWR & BSR hub is custom made for Brompton double wall rims with a rear specific angled nipple hole .


lots of little things , frame is still Sound.. hinge plates were Butt welded , now its a stronger reinforced joint using a Cast hinge ..
that not only better but allows a volume speed up, to meet demand around the world.


London is still an expensive place to manufacture things .. compared to China, in particular..

keyven

I agree. Building bikes in the USA and UK are very expensive propositions compared to China, but it's also a smart marketing strategy. The cost is passed to the consumer, and can be marked up to the nth degree because well, it's made in the UK/US! To be fair, it's a sound and admirable business strategy. However there's no way to know if Brompton is holding a large cache of minor improvements just to leak them out on a biennial basis. Why should they introduce 10 new improvements (ie. show their hand) - on the 2015 model when they could milk them over 2 or 3 iterations.

I remember when World of Warcraft om 2008 still had the most expensive monthly subscription - US$15 a month - when they started charging people money for mounts and pets. People started protesting in disgust. At that point they had about 7,500,000 active subscribers, and were making 15x7.5m = US$120,000,000 a month!

Nonetheless, a portion of supporters used the defense that server maintenance and having an army of technical advisors and administration were not cheap in the USA, before Blizzard themselves revealed the cost to them was in the realm of $200,000,000 over four years, at which point they have already earned $5,400,000,000 ($5.4 Billion). So not only were they making A TON off their subscriptions, they were also making incredibly good money - pure, unadulterated profit - off the side, with fanboys defending their greed to the death.

Granted this is a extreme example, but it shows just how easy it is to manipulate public expectations. WoW had barely any viable competition, and therefore, no need to moderate their pricing or take risks to improve their services. Thereafter, I choose never to make bold assumptions in favor of companies already making good money - they can certainly fend for themselves.

Do we, even if we can afford it, need to make the rich even richer? I have a child I rather pass my money down to, than a multi-billionaire developer.

Hermespan

I don't understand why patents even exist. If I am living in the forest and build a better lean-too shelter my neighbour Neanderthals will copy it if it is more leak-proof, faster to make, whatever. So what? Some will experiment and make it even better. A restaurant makes a good soup. People figure out the recipe and copy it. Why should industrial design be any different?

keyven

The system is certainly imperfect but patents are important to give individuals and companies the confidence to dedicate resources towards innovation, knowing their hard work will be protected if and when it succeeds.

Of course, unscrupulous humans have discovered loopholes and are taking advantage of the system (like Apple) by collecting patents of every single silly little thing - without using them - just to hobble their competitors, or launch a lawsuit.

"Green Pick-up-call Button"? Patented. "Small wobble each time you swipe the screen"? Patented.

The guys who thought they were being smart when they did this should be lined up and shot in the head.

Winfried

According to Wikipedia, Andrew Ritchie patented his design on 15 April 1981:
"Following the expiry of the Brompton patent, Brompton Bicycle's legal actions against Neobike/Grace Gallant have all been brought on the basis of copyright- and industrial design-law."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brompton_Bicycle

Since the patent expired, I guess any manufacturer is allowed to build a bike that folds the same way as a Brompton, but must just make sure it looks different enough that it can't be mistaken for a Brompton, such as by building a frame that doesn't look like the original.

If that is correct, why is Dahon still struggling with a Brompton-like folding bike? Is it because they prefer to use aluminum instead of steel? Is it because they'd rather automate frame building instead of building them by hand like they do at Brompton?

Or for that matter, why has Giant not even tried yet, considering it has even more engineering and financial means? Because they think the market is too small for that kind of bike?

The reason I ask, is that people often bulk at the Brompton pricetag, but would be interested in the same type of bike for €$700-800, ie. a Brompton at half the price.

fietsbob

this being brought to life again, there was a guy who mostly complained about his, whiie touring SEA,

on it.. its in the Archives

foldingdroid

Nice thread. Informative.

Winfried

This is not a complaint but a question: Why?

Brompton is currenttly selling over 50.000 bikes a year and is aiming at the 100.000 mark by 2020, even though its bikes are a bit pricey for most people. So this is proof that there's demand for a compact folding bike for use in the city.

And since the patent expired quite a few years ago, why are the big boys still unable/unwilling to take the Brompton, improve it, build it in China, and offer it at around $€700-1,000?

At this point, we know of two Brompton knock-offs in carbon (Chedech, and Hummingbird), so they're even more expensive than the Brompton.

jur

Photos of a Chinese knock off have been shown. It it a close copy of the basic Brompton but such low quality that I wouldn't want one even for free.

Winfried

The question remains: Why can't the big boys (Dahon and Giant come to mind) come up with an improved Brompton?

There is a paying demand, there is a model to copy, they have the engineers, they have the money. And still nothing after all those years since the patent expired. I don't get it��™.

Diode100

This discussion has been going on for the ten years or so I have been a member of this forum, in which time no serious Brompton contender, let alone killer has emerged, and Brompton have gone from strength to strength, despite not heeding the dire warnings posted on here on a regular basis. Perhaps the boys in Brentford do actually know what they are doing. Perhaps the market sector world wide is just too small for the big boys to play catch up and still make a profit.

reppans

There's a corporate pride/copycat factor... it's kinda like if you wanted to buy a particular car, or paint your house a particular color, but suddenly your next door neighbor did exactly that, you might chose something else.

You need a big established manufacturer to make it cost effective and trustworthy, yet the bigger the manufacturer, the more inherent corporate pride there is against a shameless copying.

Winfried

But then, it's not like the Brompton is without issues a competitor could solve, such as ****ty paint, so-so brakes, two speed levers, a derailleur that stops working with just a bit of rain/mud, etc.

In that case, it wouldn't be a "shameless copy", but an actually improved bike.

Reminds me of the debate in the 70's about Japanese cars/motorcycles.

Diode100

Paint, brakes, levers, derailleur, these are all things that could be addressed in the after market with no need for anyone to copy anything.

Diode100

That right, what they need to do is employ designers and engineers who can produce a better product from scratch. Any fool can copy, but Where are the next generation of innovators, like Messers Moulton, Bickerton, Ritchie, Hon, and the fellows who did the Stridas, Birdys, Swifts, Mezzos ?

Azreal911

Pretty much spot on and no big bike company would want to pump out a copycat. It would be pretty shameful to them and their business image and last thing they want is everyone here lumping them together as a chinese copycat brand. They have reputations to uphold and to do it on folding bikes which would probably be a very tiny percentage of their overall sales isn't worth it to tarnish the name.

invisiblehand

I think the market is too small for a big player to get involved. From an article about a year ago, I think Brompton sells about 50K bikes but they want to double that over the next few years. Judging from some of Dahon's efforts, I'm guessing that the savings are less than initial thoughts. Perhaps buyers would save a $200-300 dollars.

Remember, if a new company jumps in, Brompton might respond by lowering prices somewhat making entering the market risky.

invisiblehand

Judging from other bikes -- consider the Raleigh 20 copies -- if other manufacturers can easily enter the market, they'll gladly enter to make a profit.

Diode100

Is there actually a thriving market for R20 copies ? The only ones I've seen here in the U.K. Were circa �400, which when you consider that originals are readily available in varying states of repare from �30 is quite expensive.

Diode100

Im keeping my eye on this basket case, I think the winning price will be an interesting indicator of Brompton resale values :-

Brompton Folding Bike. Needs TLC . WILL POST | eBay

invisiblehand

My quick answer to the "thriving market" question is, "Not anymore." But the point is that companies largely care about profit rather than pride such that if there was a market for another mass-produced Brompton, we'd probably have one by now.

foldingdroid

Maybe the big companies are doing well or quite well so as not to bother copying or imitating.

Winfried

What about improving a bike that has known weaknesses?