Said the guy on the 11th page of a thread chronicling the impending demise of Campagnolo in the bicycling marketplace

You stated:
What mistakes did Campy make that they didn't move on from? It's a simple question.

What’s your answer to the question?

Perhaps you'll get a clue if you read the first 11 pages of the thread.

Have a nice day

Surely you could give us one example of the mistakes Campy made that they didn't move on from?

Their documented willingness to basically leave the OEM market, and their de-emphasis of entry-level road group sets would be two things I would say they haven’t moved on from.
And I say this while rgecognizing that they recently said entry level is coming back, because we should first see what their interpretation of entry level is.

I wouldn't call those mistakes that they didn't move on from, because they actually moved on from something they viewed as unsustainable, i.e. they decided to get out of markets where they weren't very competitive. I think it would have been appropriate to label those "mistakes they didn't move on from" if they had continued to chase those markets.

And I think this entire slap fight argument boils down to how each of us views what the issues are for Campy. If someone agrees with Campy's decisions, then they wouldn't see moving away from OEM and entry level products as a mistake to begin with, so they definitely wont recognize Campy not going back to doing those things as a mistake.
Meanwhile, others who think those reasons are in part why Campy is struggling, then they will see those as examples of mistakes Campy has not moved on from,

So when there isnt even agreement on what are mistakes Campy has made, it will not be possible to agree on what Campy hasnt moved on from.


What is your opinion on all this? You have certainly countered a ton of comments and views from others, but I havent seen your stated opinions on this topic. I read the first 9 pages, but have largely skipped the last 3 pages of slapping, so if you clearly stated your view then I apologize for missing it.
- Is this a sign of Campy's eventual demise?
- Is laying off 40% of staff concerning for Campy?
- Will Campy return to viability, and if so, how?

My opinion is that this version of the annual "Campy is doomed" thread has no more merit than any of the earlier threads.

clearly campy should work with ducati, who is bringing out a line of bicycles

I certainly hope that the bikes are an appropriate compliment to their $40K motorcycles. Or maybe the $80K ones.

Yeah, that certainly is a potential outcome- prior threads discussing and documenting struggles lacked merit, a thread about how 40% of the company's staff is fired also lacks merit, and Campy isnt doomed.
Yup, that is certainly possible. Perhaps Campy was doomed, but axing 40% of its employees will help delay the doom and give the company time to turn things around.
There are certainly possibilities beyond 'Campy is doomed'.

Or maybe laying off 40% of staff is just another step, and its a long slow walk towards doom.

When it cant even be agreed on what mistakes Campy has made, it isnt likely that there will be agreement on if this is another step towards doom or if its a meritless prediction.

I love this term "slap fight". It really describes what inevitably goes on with some of the topics. People just go back and forth in an almost comical way. Just can't let it go and move on with life. Thanks!

Thanks for that amazing input. Quick to denigrate other posts and make cheap shots, glad you are offering your best to this thread.

To survive, they need to look forward, develop the next generation of superior market-leading components, and reinvest in reinforcing the halo brand through racing sponsorship and top-tier OEM specification. Start sponsoring influencers and product placement where active consumers gather information. Introduce market-leading introductory-priced groups that are noticeably better than the competition to serve as a gateway for new entrants to the sport and build brand loyalty. Move on from the past and focus on future customers, not on appealing to legacy ones. Look what SRAM was able to do with a similar approach, surpassing Campagnolo in road market share within 5 years of entering the market. All this will take money and strong leadership; with Campagnolo being family-owned, outside help will probably be needed. This industry is littered with premium brands that are now little more than names, yet a few have remained market leaders through excellent management and vision. For example, Masi and Raleigh, and compare them to Colnago and Condor.

Someone else stated their opinion and asked for mine, so I responded to them. End of story.

Translation: “I can’t answer the question.”

Sad.

This is a masterclass in avoiding accountability for what you say by simply saying everything. "Their bicycle tech is 50 years behind, and so what they should do is, you see, make a pedal-powered Moon rover and land it on Mars. Yeah, that's the ticket!"

Yikes! Glad you selectively summarized some of my posts to support your irrational response.

The middle excerpt was clearly a sarcastic response to the numerous posts lamenting that Campagnolo had lost its way once it stopped making silver components and began adopting modern tech. My favourite was the recommendation that even cable-actuated shifting was a step too far, and they should return to mechanical lever-actuated shifting. I am sure you picked up on this, especially since you edited the complete response out of context. Perhaps you were one of those customers of years long past who cannot accept that the sport and its equipment have moved on, saddened by the loss of big chrome bumpers and fins on the rear quarter panel of your Chevrolet.

My other two quoted comments align if read in their entirety rather than selectively cut from the body of the respective responses. The solution I proposed will require extensive financial and human resources, along with visionary leadership, which Campagnolo has not exhibited since Tullio Campagnolo passed away in the early 80s. Firing 40% of your workforce, as well as being family-owned, with its inherent limited access to the capital needed, I stick by the odds of them returning to viability, which are very slim. Even if sold, the new purchaser will need to be committed to investing significant resources into the turnaround, rather than a brand sellout, as with the previously mentioned Masi, Raleigh, etc.

You may have an emotional affinity for the brand as a long-time cyclist; however, the ostrich-in-the-sand approach to their challenge won't cut it, and neither will shooting the messenger. To accomplish a lasting turnaround is precisely what you were mocking, equivalent to the lunar program. What I outlined is based on the playbook for how SRAM surpassed Campagnolo in just 5 years; however, that maneuver has been played, and attempting it again will be almost impossible for a company with a depleted workforce, severe financial restraints, and questionable visionary leadership from the current family owners.

The difference this time around is that Campy themselves are saying they are in deep. How hard is it to take them at their own word?

I don't read their statement as them saying they're in dire straights, but that they are taking steps to avoid ending up in dire straights.

So... I am NOT an expert on the bike market, at any level.

However, I have seen auto companies chase only the segments where they make high profits, abandoning entry level, low cost cars. This is short-term thinking, with exec bonuses based on their stock price. And it's killed them in the long run. Not if every car company made junky cars in that segment, but when you have companies that produce cars of high quality and durability in the entry level segment, they build brand loyalty that way, and it shows, customers are more likely to buy another of their cars as they move up in affluence. It finally got to a point where the companies got leadership that said, "If we can't build and make a profit on small cars (entry level), we'd better learn how." And that's when the companies started to turn around, for the better.

Yet many companies depend crucially on marketing the exclusivity of their products. A New Yorker article on the creative marketing approaches used in the vodka industry (where, as the writer pointed out, the marketing had to be creative, because all vodkas taste pretty much the same) included this anecdote:

The writer was walking through an airport with the head of an advertising firm that had just landed the Absolut account when they happened on a very heavy guy wearing a too-small Absolut T-shirt. The advertising exec whipped out his wallet and bought the T-shirt on the spot for fifty bucks, explaining that he collects them.

He told the writer that the first thing he was going to do was eliminate sales of all such hoi polloi-level branding products.

I find it funny that the loudest people who complain about Campagnolo stuff, don't use Campagnolo stuff, and have for the most part never used it.

Oh yeah…as I said upthread, Campy get targeted for hate because American people don’t know how to pronounce it, think they can’t afford it, and think it’s for elitist cycling snobs. That really offends their populist sensibilities, so they rally around the Toyota of components, Shimano.

You notice it’s never SRAM posited as the Campy antithesis, always Shimano.

It’s a weird dynamic, but very real. In my case, it was SRAM whose stole Campagnolo’s seat at the table with wireless. As one of the dying breed of guys who builds up bikes from framesets more often than buying complete bikes, SRAM’s fully wireless was more attractive in terms of ease of use.

I really think that Campagnolo misjudged the way the market was developing in the way of how bikes get built. I suspect the Asia production shift didn’t scare them as it should because they held onto the dying idea that shops would be selling framesets and buyers speccing the kit they wanted. Rightly, Campagnolo presumed people would always choose Campagnolo in a good percentage. They failed to see that choice was going out the window.

The big brands leveraged deals with Shimano to turn bike shops into company brand stores, and the indie shops who used to carry and sell a variety of small brands and bits disappeared. Less buyer choice in terms of brands and components coupled with a technological imperative to integrate design and develop new standards formats all worked to land Campagnolo in the hard spot they’re in.

We’re now squarely in the DTC realm; Canyon have blown that wide open. Supply chain is therefore more critical than ever, since there is no intermediate bike shop between producer and customer. I think this may present a lifeline for Campagnolo if the can find a partner builder to strike a deal with. We’ll see. The tariffs issue and trade silo-ing is creating new opportunities because EU brands may be forced to turn away from their traditional, American market. Campy’s already got a subsidiary in Japan, production in Taiwan… Who knows.

I wouldn't doubt it.

I personally know of several small makers of hand-made cookware of top quality. The supply is limited, so they instantly sell out on items, to the point that some have a lottery, winners get to buy. The stuff is great quality, but hard to buy also inflates the price. Just like Hermes Birken bags.

On the other hand, the diamond industry has tried for nearly a hundred years to convince consumers that diamonds are rare, and a good investment, both of which are untrue. There are massive amounts of diamonds in storage, bought up quickly by the diamond cartel to maintain prices. Bought at retail prices, you would have a difficult time selling that diamond to any dealer at 10% of the price you paid the dealer who sold the diamond to you. Plus there are now artificial diamonds that are plentiful.

Titanium bikes used to be exotic, now not. Carbon fiber composite bikes used to be exotic, now not.

The difference in the above? The cookware is actually handmade, each piece different. Hand-hammer-forged blue steel skillets.

Everything else can be mass-produced, and prices fall as more makers enter the market. Unless the original maker prices the product from the start, at a price that will be competitive, 5 years down the road. That's called establishing a protective moat in pricing. Pricing it from the start, as high as possible for most profit, "premium pricing", means competitors can easily undercut that price and still be profitable.

My perception is that people started leaving Campag when Shimano came out with Dura-Ace. (right/wrong?) If Campag were to again sell beautiful designs, and it was successful, it wouldn't be long before Shimano offered the same. So now, I'm not sure that Campagnolo can survive with only premium, up-market products. Phil Wood is still in business selling a premium product, but they are really, really small, my perception is, run by a handful of people.

So I dunno the answer. I think at the very least, Campag should be willing to supply high-quality bike makers.