|
Originally Posted by gregf83
(Post 18327487)
the difference in performance between the 18.000 bike and the 5000 bike is negligible to non-existent to me.
|
Originally Posted by skye
(Post 18327591)
ftfy
|
:popcorn:
|
Originally Posted by gregf83
(Post 18327487)
I'm sure the Prada bag is nice as well but these type of luxury goods are always going to be subject to counterfeit since the difference in performance between the 18.000 bike and the 5000 bike is negligible to non-existent. A large part of the value is based on 'looks' which are relatively easy to copy. It's a little more difficult to copy an iPhone or a Porsche which also have high margins but are a few orders of magnitude more difficult to copy.
|
|
Not all knock offs come from China and the attraction isn't always a cheap price. Sometimes it's rarity. I bought what was advertised as a NOS Dura Ace One Bolt stem (HS-7400) for my '84 Paramount build this summer from an eBayer out of Eastern Europe (can't remember if it was Poland or Croatia). When I got it it came in funky packaging and just did not look quite right. I had another HS-6400 stem that came in it's original packaging so I compared the two and it was fairly obvious the Dura Ace stem was a knock of because it had casting flash (I thought these were forged?) inside the bolt holes and the threads were poorly made. Luckily eBay forced the seller to refund my money YAY!
|
Originally Posted by gregf83
(Post 18328699)
Your just quibbling. Relative to the automotive or computer world the differences are negligible to anyone. If you spend 3x the amount of an average car you get a substantial performance boost. Hard to make that same claim for a McClaren bike.
|
Originally Posted by skye
(Post 18325721)
Your underlying argument is that these items do not cost nearly that much to produce, so why should the consumer pay so much for them? The problem with that argument is that the cost of production is not, and never has been, the sole determiner of price. Marketing sizzle accounts for much of it, but certainly not all. Extremely high-quality goods also perform better, if perhaps only marginally, than their lesser-cost competitors, and that difference may be sufficient for someone sensitive to minor differences in quality.
For example, I have been known to pay upwards of $400 for a new fountain pen. Ridiculous, especially when I can scarf a free pen from the bank. I didn't pay that much because it was a name brand with sterling reputation (though it was, and for good reason), but because in this digital age, I write quite a bit with my pens, and am extremely sensitive to their nuances. That pen wrote like nothing I've ever held in my hands, and I bought it immediately. Did it cost anywhere near $400 to produce or market? Hell no. But its quality, and my dependence on its function, made it worth that much to me. Same with an $18k bike. You or I may not notice a difference; to others, it may be like lightning. |
Originally Posted by BigAura
(Post 18321301)
It doesn't alarm me because I'm not interested in a McLaren frame or a Prada bag. Bicycles shouldn't be $18,000, and handbags shouldn't be $2000. People who buy real ones or people who buy fakes are both getting ripped-off IMO.
Originally Posted by skye
(Post 18325721)
Your underlying argument is that these items do not cost nearly that much to produce, so why should the consumer pay so much for them? The problem with that argument is that the cost of production is not, and never has been, the sole determiner of price. Marketing sizzle accounts for much of it, but certainly not all. [/b]Extremely high-quality goods also perform better, if perhaps only marginally, than their lesser-cost competitors, and that difference may be sufficient for someone sensitive to minor differences in quality[/b].
For example, I have been known to pay upwards of $400 for a new fountain pe … but because in this digital age, I write quite a bit with my pens, and am extremely sensitive to their nuances. That pen wrote like nothing I've ever held in my hands, and I bought it immediately. Did it cost anywhere near $400 to produce or market? Hell no. But its quality, and my dependence on its function, made it worth that much to me. Same with an $18k bike. You or I may not notice a difference; to others, it may be like lightning.
Originally Posted by BigAura
(Post 18326502)
Nope. I was merely stating my opinion (ref: IMO) that $18,000 is an absurd amount for a bicycle and $2,000 is absurd amount for a handbag. And now I'll add that $400 is an absurd amount for a pen.
If you're looking for an underlying argument it's---> consumer greed (ego) is being exploited by both the original marketeers and the copycats. BTW: I'll grant you that there might be some that can discern & appreciate minute differences in these ultra-luxury items but for most it's what they've been told by the people selling them ego-fulfillment.
Originally Posted by gregf83
(Post 18328699)
Your just quibbling. Relative to the automotive or computer world the differences are negligible to anyone. If you spend 3x the amount of an average car you get a substantial performance boost. Hard to make that same claim for a McClaren bike.
Originally Posted by skye
(Post 18329819)
I hate to tell you this, but (a) nobody elected you to decide what is important, and (b) you are assuming others suffer from your perceptual limitations. Maybe you ought to put your massive ego down for a little bit, it must be tiring to carry around with you everywhere.
Originally Posted by BluesDawg
(Post 18329321)
:popcorn:
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
(Post 18147340)
See these threads from this summer for opposing points of view:
”Are expensive bikes necessary? (Moral conundrum.) My new $7,000 bike and the futility of justifying the price to the average person. I once read this definition on BF of a really nice bike, "Lighter than a f@rt, and more expensive than a divorce."
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
(Post 18286579)
… The naysayers just don’t believe a bike such as mine is worth it, though likely haven’t had enough saddle time on one to appreciate it.
To those disbelievers, and to the OP, my response is, at least I have no buyer’s remorse over what I may be missing… |
To quote BD,:popcorn
|
Maybe I'm jaded, but I'm not a bit surprised that Buycycling put out an article like that. Their priority, after all, is to protect the established manufacturers. I doubt that they have any writers on their staff, and the editors' only job is to make sure the glossy Trek ads aren't right next to the glossy Giant ads. Is counterfeiting a problem? Yes, and it always has been. But when you give your designs to a foreign factory to save on labor costs, you make it easier for that stuff to happen.
|
MOD NOTE: Let's keep the personal attacks out of this and stay on topic, please.
|
Originally Posted by skye
(Post 18329819)
I hate to tell you this, but (a) nobody elected you to decide what is important, and (b) you are assuming others suffer from your perceptual limitations. Maybe you ought to put your massive ego down for a little bit, it must be tiring to carry around with you everywhere.
Fake watches, bikes, purses etc have been with us for a long time and one guy tolling away at Specialized isn't going to stop them. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:17 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.