Retem

motobecane and mercier went to **** in the early 80's as did most greats of the bicycle world you have to think about this when you buy a bike
an aluminum kinesis frameset is still made in Taiwan weather it is sold under the trek, giant, jamis, fuji, eai name or dare I say motobecane

stop holding on to the past stop romanticizing over what things used to be things change modern hemis aren't american they are german

get over it man maybe they should bring back peugeot so then every bike would be an improvement from their last few years of production

9Rings

" A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

-William "I am not a shill" Shakespeare

Retem

too bad they smell like **** to me

iamtim

Yes, quite frequently. You seem to be missing my point.

Many people are up in arms because of the Bikes Direct re-branding using names of old companies that are no longer in business. Theoretically, that's the same thing that Schwinn is doing. As is GT and Diamond Back and Mongoose and all the others. Why is it such a sin for Bikes Direct to do this, but not for the owners of Schwinn and all the rest? What is it about Bikes Direct that makes their use of a fairly common and customary practice so hate-worthy?

That's what I'm trying to get at.

bonechilling

I would guess that most people either thought that way, or else they don't know or don't care. Those who do care make up an infinitesimally small fraction of potential buyers, and even many of them have bought the bikes.

At best, there are probably a few dozen people who WON'T buy the frames because of the branding, and those people probably ride Rivendells anyway.

timmhaan

oh, i see. sorry. you're right - Schwinn, D'Back, and Mongoose, etc. seem to get away much easier than BD.

9Rings

And the Rivendell Quickbeams are re-branded Panasonics, aren't they?

Oh the humanity!!!

bonechilling

I think we should all stop saying "rebranding," because whether they stick a Fuji logo or a Windsor logo on it, it's just "branding." There's no "re" about it.

Retem

now we're just talking in cirles I covered this two pages ago

ya know that iro we all love and the new affinity that some people like are maxway frames the affinities are made on the same jig as the older khs flite 100 with the forward sloping tt

9Rings

OK.


I bought a Kinesis bike. I opted for the "Windsor Hour" paintjob, instead of the "Fuji Track" paintjob.

And I paid $200 less because of the choice of paintjobs...

iamtim

Way easier. Look at the recent thread about the Schwinn Madison. I stopped following it after a few posts (because I want a Madison and can't get one so it hurt... deep down where it hurts the most, heh) but how many people took up arms at the current company using the name Schwinn, or calling the bike the Madison? How many people got all rabid because it's obviously a branded frame from some factory overseas?

I just don't grok the hypocrisy there. I keep wondering if like... Bikes Direct also owns baby-eating dingos or something.

iamtim

*nod*

iamtim

HAH!

Retem

I was meaning their aluminum and carbon bikes
I beleive the windsors are maxway

Gordiep

Nicely put.

lotek 

ok, a few points if I may.
1) cut the namecalling, just because someone disagrees with your opinion doesn't make them
a dip****. And I might remind you all about the quidelines against namecalling. ok, enough said about
that.

2) As someone who primarily stays in the C&V forum (cranky&vintage) I have some definite feelings
about reusing old names. One example I know of personally is a person stating "Motobecane they had
really nice bikes back when I was in school" (or whatever), and this is true. the problem is that the motobecane that they recall isn't the same manufacturer as the new motobecanes they are looking at.
For me it's all a question of brand recognition, and BD trading on recognition of a marque that they represent in name alone. They have no connection to Motobecane, Windsor or any other of the marques they have resurrected (bought the rights to the name).
And that's not to say that the bikes that BD are selling are good, bad or indifferent. I think they offer
a lot of bang for the buck, I just question their trading on the past name.

marty

HotTamale

i heard the bike forum is just a re-badged chicago fg forum.

bonechilling

+1

crtreedude 

Buying the rights to the name - isn't that the same as buying the company and moving manufacturing to another country? It is pretty naive it seems to me to think any brand remains the same. There were a lot of old brands that started off good, and then, probably due to some MBA type, cheapening the components to cash in on the reputation until of course it was learned that they were doing it.

But, if BD is producing a good product - what is the issue of using the name? If they bought the name, aren't they just continuing the same standards - if they are of course.

If you want to complain that the brand has been cheapened - fine and good - but that the brand has changed hands - very few brands DON'T change hands.

bikesdirect_com

This statement is totally false
What does that say about you?

1 - There has never been 1 shill post about bikesdirect on bikeforums.net - ever - period
2 - I have never paid anyone to post anything on this or any forum {I have offered some customers special discounts as I thought they were great supporters of our biz - but I have stopped that in a desire to not show the appreance of pay-for-play}
3 - I do advertise on bikeforums.net all the time. Who supports the forum more than BD?

If you are willing to make completely false statements with no evidence of backup, is there a name for what that makes you? Does it have something to do with pants on fire?

~~~~

I do not know why I made this post
or even how I found this thread

I was doing a search saw this
and forgot I had already posted on it

Maybe it was all that time travel stuff from seeing new Star Trek last night
Sorry, I bought this back up

bratton

rarebird

I know people don't like the using of old reputable bicycle companies by a company with a bad reputation,

but is that a valid complaint?

depends.

BD engages in shady and misleading advertising not just "spiritually" by cashing in on reputable brand names they've bought, but by engaging in shady and misleading advertising practices in fact, not emotionally or whatever. They break the rules they claim to follow as BBB members and the laws protecting consumers from these practices flagrantly, laws we wouldn't need pestering us if it were not for their kind.

Example:

Limited Qtys ONLY $1799
LIST $2895

Sub 20lbs* DiscBrakes
Motobecane 2009 FLY Team
XTR 27 Speed
SID Race 100mm
FSA Carbon Crank
Avid Elixir Disc
Ritchey WCS

Limited quantities at special factory direct prices.
Save OVER 60% off MSRP.
Brand new offroad racing 2009 model. ORDER NOW

FREE SHIP* TO THE 48
Only $1799
Order Now Click Here
LIST $2895

More Incredible
Road Bike Deals! Click Here


That's off their webstore today.

The bike was never listed at $2895.

It was never sold by a competitor to BD at, above or below the MSRP. The MSRP is either false, a figment of BD imagination, or intentionally inflated, either practice intends to mislead and either sees BD establishing the MSRP while implying otherwise by using it in the ad. Check it out, a guy paid the "reduced" amount in June of 2008. https://www.mtbr.com/cat/bikes/xc-har...8_1527crx.aspx

It has not been reduced 60% and this advertisement is specifically wrong and misleading, purposefully so.

Not just by your standards, but by BBB standards (they have their new business name as BBB members, since Jan. 01, 2009, still have unresolved complaints under their other names) and by the laws of the land, laws other bike manufacturers and dealers adhere strictly adhere to thereby treating their customers with at least a modicum of respect. Especially when compared to these practices at BD, most bike companies are pretty up and up.

I'm pretty sure that bad and false business practices regarding their ads, service and product are behind most complaints about BD, they burned a friend of mine who bought a mtb, a "2009" with parts from 06, 07, etc but no mention of the older model parts in the ad. He let it go but will never buy there again.

Here's the text of the BBB Code they agreed to when thy became members in (NOT) good standing earlier this year. Note the clear and obvious violations in most every BD ad. BOLD indicate new section, and new violation.

Comparison with own former selling price

1. The former price should be the actual price at which the advertiser has been currently offering (see below (2) the merchandise immediately preceding the sale, on a regular basis, and for a reasonably substantial period of time.
2. Offering prices, as distinguished from actual former selling prices, have frequently been used as a comparative to deceptively imply a saving. In the event few or no sales were made at the advertised comparative price, the advertiser should make sure that the higher price does not exceed the advertiser's usual and customary retail markup for similar merchandise, not an inflated or exaggerated price, and is one at which the merchandise was openly and actively offered for sale, for a reasonably substantial period of time, in the recent, regular course of business, honestly and in good faith.
3. Descriptive terminology often used by advertisers includes: "regularly," "was," "you save $_____ ," and "originally." If the word "originally" is used and the original price is not the last previous price, that fact should be disclosed by stating the last previous price, or that intermediate markdowns have been taken, e.g., "originally $400, formerly $300, now $250"; "originally $400, intermediate markdowns taken, now $250."

Comparison with current price of comparable merchandise sold by the advertiser or by others

1. The comparative price should not exceed the price at which the advertiser or representative principal retail outlets in the market area have been selling the comparable merchandise immediately preceding the advertiser's sale, on a regular basis and for a reasonably substantial period of time. Such comparisons should be substantiated by the advertiser immediately prior to making any advertised comparisons.
2. In all such cases, the advertiser should make certain that comparable merchandise is similar in all respects and of at least like grade and quality.
3. Descriptive terminology often used by advertisers includes: "comparable value," "compares with merchandise selling at $ ," "equal to merchandise selling for $_____ ."

List prices

"List price," "manufacturer's list price," "reference price," "suggested retail price," and similar terms have been used deceptively to state or imply a saving which was not, in fact, the case. A list price may be advertised as a comparative to the advertised sales price only to the extent that it is the actual selling price currently charged by the advertiser or by representative principal retailers in the market area where the claim is made.

Such a comparison should be substantiated by the advertiser immediately prior to making any advertised comparison.

Factory to you," "factory direct," "wholesaler," "wholesale prices"

The terms "factory to you," "factory direct," "wholesaler," "wholesale prices" and others of similar import have been the subject of great abuse in advertising. They imply a significant saving from the actual price at which identical merchandise is currently being offered by representative principal retailers in the market area, or where identical merchandise is not being offered, from comparable values in the market area. Such terms should not be used unless the implied savings can be substantiated and the terms meet all of the requirements below.

1. The terms "factory to you," "direct from maker," "factory outlet" and the like should not be used unless all advertised merchandise is actually manufactured by the advertiser or in factories owned or controlled by the advertiser.
2. The terms "wholesaler," "wholesale outlet," "distributor" and the like should not be used unless the advertiser actually owns and operates or directly and absolutely controls a wholesale or distribution facility which primarily sells products to retailers for resale.
3. The terms "wholesale price," "at cost" and the like should not be used unless they are the current prices which retailers usually and customarily pay when they buy such merchandise for resale.

Sales

1. The unqualified term "sale" may be used in advertising only if there is a significant reduction from the advertiser's usual and customary price of the merchandise offered and the sale is for a limited period of time. If the sale exceeds thirty days advertisers should be prepared to substantiate that the offering is indeed a valid reduction and has not become their regular price.
2. Time limit sales should be rigidly observed. For example, merchandise offered in a "one-day sale," "three-day sale," "this week only," sale should be taken off "sale" and revert to the regular price immediately following expiration of the stated time.
3. Introductory sales should be limited to a stated time period, and the selling price should be increased to the advertised regular price immediately following termination of the stated period.
4. Price predictions advertisers may currently advertise future increases in their own prices on a subsequent date provided that they do, in fact, increase the price to the stated amount on that date and maintain it for a reasonably substantial period of time thereafter.

Lowest price, underselling claims (no other dealer sells BD, they cannot claim lowest price, underselling ANYONE)[/b]

Despite an advertiser's best efforts to ascertain competitive prices, the rapidity with which prices fluctuate and the difficulty of determining prices of all sellers at all times preclude an absolute knowledge of the truth of generalized underselling/lowest price claims. Advertisers should have proper substantiation for all claims prior to dissemination; unverifiable underselling claims should be avoided.

Asterisks

An asterisk may be used to impart additional information about a word or term which is not in itself inherently deceptive. The asterisk or other reference symbol should not be used as a means of contradicting or substantially changing the meaning of any advertising statement. Information referenced by asterisks should be clearly and prominently disclosed.

"Discontinued"

Merchandise should not be described as "discontinued," "discontinued model," or by words of similar import unless the manufacturer has, in fact, discontinued its manufacture, or the retail advertiser will discontinue offering it entirely after clearance of existing inventories. If discontinuance is only by the retailer, the advertising should indicate that fact, e.g., "we are discontinuing stocking these items."


I could go on but I've become bored


Fact is, if they were not just some losers selling cheap frames with factory seconds and overstock parts, the FTC would shut them down. You know that the BBB has not visited their site armed with any actual knowledge of their products or they would NOT be members.

Mike Spratt is a cheat and a bad person, that's it. He's fleecing you by convincing you through unethical and illegal methods that you are getting a value you are not in fact getting. This applies even if you don't feel like you were ripped off.

Sorry.

rarebird

That's a load of sweet self righteous crap, I doubt you're that bum Mike Spratt, so what do you think now that you've gone all holier-than-thou accusing people of lying and it turns out you were lying to do that?

What's that like, nub?

rarebird

And for everyone who can't read a long post. All it is is direct proof of illegal and unethical behavior by the bums at BD, nothing they can even begin to claim isn't true.

Smoke=fire

bikesdirect_com

I have posted my name and where to find me.
Would you be so kind to do the same?

Mike Spratt