Originally Posted by
acidfast7
Thank you for your commentary, however, it is invalid to use the exchange rate without a proper PPP comparison.
Also, the bicycle is quite bad value-for-money (quality for the money spent) unless one considers style in that comparison, which I did and which is why I purchased it.
Essentially, I went for style over function and paid a huge premium for it, which I knew going in.
Thus, your analysis of using a pricepoint to justify whether or not an item is a BSO is invalid with my example.
I agree with Acidfast7, he paid a lot of extra money for a
should have been inexpensive cheap bicycle. As he states he received the value that he paid for and is happy with the value received. Well done.
Conversely, the typical consumer of inexpensive "department store" bicycles (the majority of cyclists) would likely receive negative psychic or physical value from any of the racing/competition oriented features found on the more expensive bikes, (especially "road bikes") touted as
real bicycles by the Walmart/BSO bashers and LBS affiliated acolytes who seem to worship only products and esoteric components with appropriate brand name or price tag and with correct LBS (or better yet bicycle builder craftsman) provenance.
More than likely if the typical bicyclist was handed a "real bicycle" ("real" as determined by BF enthusiasts) the handlebars would be flipped and the saddle replaced the first day and the cyclist would be happier with it too; and the "serious Cyclists" would weep!
