Deflection at it's best. You are starting to remind of Karine Jean-Pierre trying to answer questions from the press about classified documents.

He wouldn't have to if you understood economics. :lol:

Like you understand the history of carbon and titanium bikes like Kestrel and Litespeed? Who did they copy?

I'm not calling you stupid. I'm calling you uninformed. There's a difference.

It's okay to not understand something; but if you're ignorant on a topic but still spout off on it, you should expect some pushback.

The fact that no one (in this thread) agrees with you, and that many have argued with you, should be meaningful to you.

Why are you infatuated with these two brands? Nothing special about them. Just another run of the mill bike company like hundreds of others out there.

You didn't answer my question after you stated Litespeed and Kestrel were copies. Of what?

Geometry wise they probably copied numerous other bike manufacturers out there regardless of the materials they used or were the first to use. Nothing special about either of them.

So you don't know a damn thing.

LOL. I admit I don't follow them with a cult like status like you. But unlike you've demonstrated in this thread...I know quite a bit.

We shouldn't have to point out that you are cherry-picking examples that are the exceptions, not the rules, in their industries.

So basically, you have turned this argument that your original claim about direct to consumer brands faltering or vanishing is obviously generally not true into a claim that no other model exists?!

So your response to catching you out on a really stupid mistatement is misdirection?

Sorry, but your inability to make a coherent argument is just glaring.

And the "too big to fail" thing was an absolute faceplant--it basically means that the costs of failure to other actors like banks and government are so high that they will prop up the otherwise failing entity. Empires fail, Soviet Unions fail, PanAm failed, the Penn Central failed, size itself doesn't prevent failing.

I covered that with him earlier and even provided a link to the Wikipedia page on TBTF. Strangely, though, I don't think that Kontact is interesting in learning anything, even when he's completely misusing and misunderstanding a pretty common term.

After the great crash of 2008 and the bailing out of so many large firms (AIG, Bear Stearns, General Motors, etc), I thought that most adults understood the term "too big to fail." I especially would've thought that a business genius like Kontact would understand it. But I continue to be amazed on bf.

Of course, the irony is that he's suggesting that the term refers to firms that are too well-financed to fail...When the term actually refers to firms that can (and would) fail without government bailouts.

Basically, the Kestrel and Litespeed things are complete red herrings, they have nothing to do with his argument that DTS is a losing strategy. Kestrel was an early innovator in carbon, and like early innovators often do, it faltered as better-financed operations began competing with it. As to Litespeed, the whole brand was based on being the best titanium bike in the world at a time when there was less and less interest in titanium. NOne of this is attributable to adopting a DTS strategy, the brand prestige was wearing thin already.

https://www.bikeradar.com/features/what-is-titanium/

So Before there were Lynskey frames there were Teledyne Titanium frames...

Forget Kestrel and Peugeot, carbon composite bicycles started with Carlton, in 1971 | Bike Boom

Several companies made carbon fiber bicycles in the 1970's, with Raleigh showing a prototype in 1971 which never came to market. And while it was a lug and tube frame, Greg LeMond did win Le Tour in 1986 on a carbon fiber bike.

https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/openc...n/objects/2587

One of the earliest monocoque bicycles was the Spacelander which was made in 1960.

So...once again Shlomo the wise is shown to be correct: there is no new thing under the sun.

Quote where I say or even suggest no other business model exists.

You are clearly cherry picking portions of the thread.

Especially considering the 'might be "too big to fail"' was addressed several different ways. But I get it: Haters gotta hate. You're doing a great job of being valueless.

Litespeed was the first company to produce a titanium road bicycle out of 3/2.5 alloy, which prevented the failures Teledyne was known for. They also were the first to offer a threaded Ti BB shell. At their heyday they produced the worlds lightest framesets.

Kestrel was the first successful one piece carbon bicycle frame, and pioneered the first successful and widely utilized carbon fork.

I did, you were responding to it--first quote of 2.

And they went to dtc long after they lost their prestige as premiere brands. Your claim of causation is ridiculous.

Nope. Clearly there are builders you go and visit and a host of other models. I was comparing two that are worthy of contrast. Your assumption that this implied only one is idiotic when there are two being discussed and others left unsaid.

I'll let you back that up with the sales numbers by year. Any time.

Nahh, sick of your stupid rabbit holes. Ignore list time.

What kills me is the owner of an obscure brand is going on a bike forum with his brand name and a picture of his product, and then lecturing cyclists about branding (poorly) in a truly obnoxious manner.

Negging one's potential customers is an interesting branding plan, but I'm not playing along anymore.

And what makes it all obnoxious? The four trolls following me around with little to say more than "you're out of touch". Vacuous.

Bailed out Bear Stearns?...