Originally Posted by
Road Fan
One of the comments previously was that the Brooks was poor value, meaning quality for price. The REI comparison says, I tried a bunch of low-price saddles hoping for high quality at low price, but the quality was always unsatisfactory. After several tries, the total price is at least that of a B17, without achieving its quality. If satisfaction is more related to quality than price, the Brooks is a good solution for satisfaction.
When looking for satisfaction, price may be a lot less important than quality. If you're looking for the best product to stock in your bike shop, value at minimum price with a warranty policy might be the best value system.
There are many value systems at play here. Yours is only one of them.
I wasn't meaning to be critical nor to take a shot at your "value system" - but your comment was confusing to me.
I can understand trying low priced saddles looking for a winner but am I correct in understanding that you did not return the saddles that you tried but did not like? REI has one of the most generous return policies in retail and it's routine in most LBS's that I know, as well as with on line retailers, and speciality suppliers of saddles to offer a trial and test period and especially for saddles. That is an important point to those who have a saddle that does not work well and are unsure of what to try - the industry, by and large, is set up to allow you to try saddles before you keep one.
If that is the situation, then buying all these saddles and having them not work and not returning them is not a comparison of cost equivalency to a more expensive Brooks. That would have just illustrated the point that you pretty much get what you pay for.
J.