A source of long and heated debate during the KS launch and since on this thread. Not only is the bike titanium, but it is also complex in design and manufacture. The frame and forks alone seem to have more components than a full built full suspension mountain bike. Many believe the price is too low, even suggesting Helix must therefore be a scam.

Broadly, the counter view has been as follows:
- Ti tubing is not so expensive in and of itself
- the high costs of working and welding Ti, requiring lots of time from highly skilled labour, a significant driver of the price of Ti frames, are ameliorated by in house production and templating and automation of much of the manufacturing process including all welding
- the standard components specced are not particularly high end
- if the bikes are marketed directly, there is no middle man taking a cut
- Helix is clearly priced to compete with Brompton and the manufacturing process is set to scale so the business plan may be prioritising volume over margin

I hope I'm wrong here about the pricing, I really do but facts are facts. Seattle Cycles Ti folding bikes are going for $5,500 and I'm sure if Brompton had a full Ti bike we would be looking at nearly the same pricing. Even Chinese Ti parts are not that cheap. I keep thinking of the line in There Will Be Blood when Daniel Plainview tells his son We'll give them quail prices for the farm instead of oil prices. I believe that these are quail prices .

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...c22f115626.jpg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...693e251df1.jpg
This as an example is my wifes TI SEVEN S&S coupled custom made frame bike. Uses 24 inch wheels and will fit in a small case and technically a bike that can be taken apart and folded it you will. This bike cost over $5500 in 2009 and was a custom build as she is a small person. Roger

Instead of going through the discussion about pricing once again it would probably be sufficient for those who want to start it to read through the thread from start - I highly doubt that there are any new arguments that have not already been mentioned in this thread already. The outcome of this discussion until now was btw. that there are basically three groups of people:

- group one believes Peter is mad, has no clue what he is doing, the whole thing is fake, the bike is way too cheap to become real and it never will.
- group two believes Peter may have been naive to a degree in the beginning but learned and learns his lesson and that - if the Helix will become reality - prices will have to go up
- group three believes Peter did his math and, while the Helix is cheap for a Ti-folder, it will work out and the price is the result of clever production and part of a marketing strategy and we defintively do not know enough about his business calculation to be able to judge.

Until now not one single person has changed it's group driven by the discussion about pricing in this thread as far as I can judge. So overall the discussion seems a bit pointless and it seems even more pointless to start it again from scratch. Worth noticing is for once that there seems to be no group that considers the Helix to be too expensive :p and secondly that group one seems to loose the ground they are standing on, based on the latest news from Helix.

Berlinonaut's entirely on point post nws, the word custom surely gives you a clue that you are comparing apples and frangipane tarts?

berlinonaut, incisive as ever but where would opinion forums be if people started not sharing their opinons just because they were insufficiently informed, their arguments had been made before and/or they make not a jot of difference to other's opinions?

Thanks and once more you are absolutely right. Still one thing that strikes me is that someone enters a thread that is going on for years and years, writing the 1495th post (!) in it, saying the most obvious thing possible about the Helix "the base prices seem a little low for Ti frame bikes." and obviously assumes that not a single person has ever had that brilliant, unique thought for the whole 3.5 years that this adventure is running now. And then the party starts once again, with the same people posting the same arguments they already posted multiple times over the course of the last years in the very same way, thankful for the opportunity to post them one more time. In total ignorance of the recent developments that happend since the last time they posted them. Interesting mechanism but possibly something I will never get my head around. :)

:lol: I assume/hope that there are always new people finding this thread and discovering the Helix. Seems a little unreasonable to expect them to go back through the whole thread (though in not doing so, they are of course depriving themselves of the chance to enjoy one of the great sagas of the modern age). 1495 posts is alot of history to go through before daring to post an off the cuff thought. As for those of us who trot out the well worn arguments in welcome, surely even you have occasionally enjoyed the sound of your own voice?

Generally, big Internal Gear Hub proponent here. That said, here's a 47 page, 696 entry thread titled 'Shimano Alfine 11 - Longer term reliability' from our friends at CTC:

https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=64432

I'd specify the derailleur drivetrain, but that's just me. If you go for the Shimano Alfine 11, make sure it's the latest, improved SG7001-11 release (if Helix purchased the hubs some time back, they probably won't be).

Berlinonaut, while I may or may not agreet with some of your posts, I think the groups section, while by no means incorrect, could be redefined a little, as follows:
- group one: hard headed business men/accountants who have seen this sort of thing before and judge the owner to be naive, has no clue about financial reality let alone manufacturing. The project is doomed, but the fire sale could be interesting.
- group two: speculators who believes the owner is naive but, assuming the bike appears, is worth mounting a takeover bid when the Helix becomes reality as the selling price will kill the company. They plan on buying the company, moving the production to Taiwan, and selling the bike at a more realistic price under their own brand name.
- group three: enthusiasts who know little about exconomics; aren't interested whether the project is viable or not nor marketing strategy, but, most importantly, believe. This goup comprises people who post here, the cycling enthusiasts.

Written with tongue in cheek, by the way, and a touch sadly, having worked with companies in all three groups, the best of which was the third.
.

Well, I just clustered the opinions whereas you additionally judge on the profession, the knowlege and the attitude of the people that have that opinion. I would call this highly speculative and not dare to do that. And in opposite to you I do not judge on the people. Plus you miss out the people that were crying out loud that the whole thing is fake and a scam. I.e. I definitively doubt that group one consists of "hard headed business men/accountants", neither exclusively nor to a relevant degree. I'd rather say seems mainly to consist of people with a strong, very vocal opinion. In the end we're on the internet - nobody know's who's a dog and who's human (to quote a famous very old comic). :p

Berlinonaut, tongue in cheek !! Caricatures maybe, but judging?? Never!

P.S. You do not judge on people ?

Accessories
 

For the bike touring enthusiasts among us: I got an interesting update from Peter concerning accessories. Once production stabilizes, they are going to turn to the promised set of accessories, aiming at the third quarter.
As to trailer support: since the helix features its own unique rear hub endings that will not take a trailer, they are going to offer some universal adapter that will sit somewhere near the hub and take hitch balls and other common trailer attachment.
The helix is confirmed to fit into the radical design chubby 4 trailer, which is good news for me. In the past I traveled abroad with Brompton, using this trailer as bicycle case for transport. Airlines normally allow 23kg per suitcase. With the trailer weighing 6kg and the my fully-accessoried Brompton weighing 13.5kg, that leaves a meagre 3.5kg to squeeze some equipment in. With a fully-accessoried helix, I expect a gain of 2kg, which, for bike-touring, is significant!

Well, there is also a large group 4 of those who do not care or tangentially care about the bike and outcome, but who venture into the thread for its drama and appreciate twists and turns as adding value :thumb:. They also wait like vultures to see whether the story ends up with some long-lasting moral. There may be some overlap of group 4 with others.

And then there is the tiny tiny group (maybe just me, lol) that takes the progress and success of this project as a sign that my long-delayed crowdfunded item may someday also get delivered, lol. It's almost a religious experience ;-) And, yes, I'm also here for the drama, haha.

There is also a group of "disinterested" outsiders watching this thread, and sincerely HOPING for a happy ending to those who have vested interest in these,

But...the drama and the uncertain outcome are the entertainment in their own right (since the internet never fails to entertain if not inform/mis-inform!)

I believe some competitors are also interested & want Peter to fail.

Thanks,
Yan

I am with the group 2, and actually think Peter and his believer were totally clueless.

Cheap Chinese titanium frames (non-folding) usually cost around $600-700. Add cheap drivetrain and cockpit parts then its pure bill of material will easily exceed $1,000. And you cannot sell the assembled bike at $1300 if the part prices already exceeds $1,000. Also folding frame is much harder to make. Chinese titanium Brompton clone frameset costs around $2,000. I have also found that some Chinese builders copied the Montague folding frame in titanium (amazing work indeed) and are selling one at $1,400 without fork. Those builders did not need any R&D because they simply copied existing frames; But Helix need iterations of testing, testing and testing which all adds up over time.

So here's my 2c
-IF peter outsourced the frame to Chinese titanium builders (which I think he should have) the frameset and fork would cost AT LEAST $2,000. Then the retail price of the full bike would be $4,000-$5,000 range.
-The only way to (somehow) meet the claimed price is to use cheaper material (cro-mo or aluminium) and mass produce in existing big factories - in short, let Dahon or Pacific make the bike.

I am not sure whether
a) Peter didn't know this
b) knew everything but lied to people to get money.

All these Chinese titanium copy of Brompton or Montague are very low volume production, these guys do not try to reach a low price for them, its not comparable to what Helix wants to do i.e.a much bigger volume cheap titanium bike.

Production price depends of the production quantities.that will depend of the sales.

And it is impossible to predict what the sales will be because nobody knows how good or how bad Helix is: does it ride well, is it comfortable, is it reliable...

Now, honestly, with such a complex design as Helix and the lack of experience of Peter, the chance of being technically first time right seems to me very low !

I moved from Group 1 to 2, although I guess I always said if it happened at all it would be at double the KS prices. The big change for me is I believe it will happen now; a couple years ago I was sure he was a quack who would disappear with no bikes produced.

Perhaps you put too much stock in those mirthful pix of his supposed mini-skirted gold digging
gal pal. The info available back then was just too realistic & cromulent to have been a ruse.
And the payment schedule was leisurely...unlike the typical Nigerian prince scam.

I'll be getting the finest folding commuting-road-gravel-travel bike in the world in July.
(Of course, the schedule could slip. But I'm patient.)
Congrats to all who purchased theirs.
Be safe out there.

I'm somewhere between group 3 and group 2.

I believe i will get, within a few weeks to months, a well designed, engineered and manufactured titanium folding bike with a rare attention to detail for the all-in sum of $1,600 plus shipping and applicable local taxes. He has said this will be so and I believe him because of the evidence on the backer portal of progress made and because my assessment of Peter based on the information available and behaviour observed is that his is a man of principle and integrity.

Wrt the bike, I hope it is a great ride, practical to use as a folder and does not have any fundamental flaws/safety issues or longevity issues, but only time will tell whether those hopes are realised.

I have no idea how much the bike costs to produce at what volumes, what the final retail pricing will be, what the distribution model will be etc. etc but I've previously posted my thoughts and speculations on this. Jipe's observations on the representativeness of 'cheap' ti frames from China very well articulate my own views. None of the comparators seem particularly valid or accurate and they do not take into account automation of frame welding.

I have read that Peter has run his own small scale manufacturing business / machine shop and done web dev on the side. He has had at least one previous attempt at bringing a bike design to market with manufacturing out of Taiwan and this did not work out for reasons unknown. I also have read (posts from Peter and David Hon) that he rejected an offer from Dahon to license and manufacture his original design.

I have observed that he has produced an awsome and truely innovative bike design, raised >$2m to bring it to market, persevered through a long process of establishing what looks to me to be a very impressive manufacturing capability for a much improved and matured version of that design, iterated through many prototypes.

I assume he has learned a great deal through that process including about how much it will cost to produce the bike and he has had several opportunities to revise market expections on retail pricing since the KS campaign. The pre-order pricing was certainly higher than the KS pricing. The most recently declared retail pricing is higher again at $2,200. I believe that Peter is not stupid or duplicitous. I cannot see how it serves him to deliberately low-ball the final retail price and he has had enough information to make a good fist of pricing. He has said things which are reassuring about his awareness of the need for and approach to fiscal responsibility and despite having overrun by 3+ years, does not seem to have run out of money.

I have also observed that Peter prioritises perfection over timeliness, appears to be wildly optimistic in his estimating and is not so great at stakeholder management. I worry that some of the characteristics that make him a great inventor, designer and engineer will handicap him as a businessman and that he does not have all the skills/characteristics he needs to fulfil that role. I worry that the awsome design and manufacturing capability will not be enough to make a success of the business, that whatever business case he has will not pan out and that he may not have considered all the aspects of running a business vs making a product. I worry that he may not be able to find or work with the right people to round out the capabilities his business needs.

However, he has got this far doing things his way despite many challenges and setbacks (some self inflicted). I choose to believe in him. I believe he more than deserves my support and it costs me nothing.

Perhaps I thought the actual thoughts I said I thought in this thread. There's no need to presume my thinking on the subject.

Radical!

I also said - numerous times - I hope I'm wrong and everybody gets their bikes. Sometimes it's good to get it wrong.