Wait, what? But I thought that it's far too expensive for young racers to enter the sport. :lol:

You inspired me to look up the registration fees for my first few races of this year -- all gravel. $75, $80, and $85. (Those are for the longest distances -- all 100+ miles. Shorter distances cost less.) And yeah, where they have juniors categories, their fees are much lower.

Honestly, the registration fee is the last thing I consider when deciding whether to enter a race. Even at double those prices, the cost is trivial, relatively speaking.

Some are reasonably priced. I did the 103 a few years back but it was also less than $59.

https://www.bikereg.com/the-bear-100

Did this last year. Real reasonable...

https://www.bikereg.com/hungrybear100


These are resonable also...

https://wemseries.com/registration/

I can't say you are wrong but I'm frugal and have a self imposed limit on what I'm willing to pay for things. I have taken 1st, 2nd and 3rd in a handful of races over the years but not many. Which means I'm not going to pay $150 to enter a race when I know the odds of me winning one of the high dollar prizes is very low. I'll save the $150 and just ride the course for free a different day.

Bikes my limit is $5k and that is pushing it but I do have one bike that was $5200. The rest fall between $2500 and $4000

Even with my other hobbies (fly fishing and guitar) I have a limit. There are $1000 fly rods out there but I have yet to pay more than $400 for one. Guitars...$2k is my max even though there are plenty of $5k - $10k guitars out there.

I like to call it each person’s “squeal point” and we all have one. I take issue with those who like to impose theirs as the correct number. Unsure if the correct term is narcissistic or plain arrogance.

It always strikes me as a childish inability to understand that different people have different priorities and budget constraints.

It seems to pop up most often on this forum when talking about the prices of cycling attire. And it’s always someone who’s never worn a decent jersey or pair of bibs who is insisting that anyone who pays more than $X is a fool.

Anyone who rides more than a discount store bike is a fool

I just look at it as being pragmatic. Not narcissistic or arrogant. Just because you can afford something doesn't mean you should. And bikes, cycling attire and many products we buy all have a point of diminishing returns.

Take this Trek Domane for example. Retail $3700 currently on sale for $2900. 105 groupset. Carbon frame. Aluminum Wheels and Bar. Another $1000 gets me china wheels and carbon bar turning it into a sweet ride for about $4k given the current sale price.

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b...ode=black_grey

So why would I spent $12k on this for "upgrades" that wouldn't even be tangible to the average cyclist?

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/b...Code=white_tan

I'm not one to tell folks how they should spend their money but I often do think when I see someone spend that much money on a bike (or many other products) that they have more money than brains. It's just not practical.

They may have more money than you, and/or they may have different priorities than you.

I've written this before on bf, but I'll repeat it: In my actual in-person life, I'm rarely asked how much I spent on a bike -- and when an acquaintance does ask, and I tell them, the person is never surprised and never scolds me. My friends and acquaintances know how much I ride and race, they see me commuting around town on a bike, and they have an idea how much money we have - in fact, they may know exactly how much income we earn. (Due to my wife having a prominent job, people can look up her salary on the internet.)

It's only here on bf that anyone tells me I'm foolish for having spent $7500 on a bike or $200 on bibshorts. People with more money and/or more interest in something will find it rational to pay more for some of those diminishing returns.

I usually think they have some good brains or at least a career that pays them well and they can afford the luxuries and excesses. I also privately in my head thank them for helping to prove out the bleeding edge technology that will eventually filter down to my price point.

I'm even smarter: I married someone with more brains.

We all have our squeal points. :innocent:

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...c186c73a3.jpeg

Intellect has little to do with wealth, or for the desire to possess material things. People are complicated.

Judging others is best approached with a strong dose of humility.

If you would have told me when I graduated that at one point in my life I would have more money than brains, I wouldn’t have believed it. I have a blessed life and based on your logic I have achieved that benchmark.

What is practical is highly individual, based on use case and budget. Some might argue that even a modern 105-equipped bike is frivolous and unnecessary. Depending on one's budget, that might be true. On the other hand, I prefer the features and peformance of Ultegra Di2. It's not a great financial burden to afford it, and I spend a good portion of my waking hours on the bike, so I'd argue that my bike choice is the most pragmatic.

I don't know if I have more brains than money or vice versa or if I don't have enough of both. Here's what I do know:

The Trek Checkpoint that I bought new last fall makes me happy. The 37 year old Trek 800 parked next to it also makes me equally happy. And the 2017 Giant Cypress parked on the other side of it that I bought in 2017 makes me happy too. Life is too short not to have things in your life that make you happy. And if something makes you happy I think it's a practical choice.

As a supposed economist... yer not doing all the math (which I assume is on purpose), and you are not considering how much free cash the typical family has floating around (which I assume you are doing on purpose), and in the above post you brought up that 6k bike I mentioned and linked it to startup costs (which I assume you are doing on purpose).

Lets consider other sports - soccer, baseball, basketball... courts and fields seemingly everywhere, teams and leagues seemingly everywhere, most schools have said programs, equipment needs are limited - typically a set of shoes and maybe a mitt or shin guards... and some league fees. Yet, there are parents that can't afford these simple sports...

Cycling:
-one needs a decent/reliable bike* that fits**. A used bike is +/-$500 - probably needs stuff like tires, tune up, brakes. If someone has a little more funding and goes new - race quality is starting out around 1500-2k.
*if they don't crash and destroy the bike, they need A bike. But like my son, on his new to him used CF Fugi road bike - first time out, major smash up/cracked frame, destroyed wheels, parts destroyed and medical bills
**Like my son - between the time we started his MTB racing season and his first race - his bike no longer fit. So guess what - we needed a new one in a hurry.
-Helmet, gear, kit
-League fee's - $350 for the season, plus race fees.
-Bike maintenance and parts replacement
-Travel. Unlike most of the other sports - MTB trails and practice are not in the field behind the school. 60 miles round trip for every practice (some kids on the team travelled further). 60 miles round trip for us to ride outside of practice.
-Races - travel fee's, in many cases overnight fee's. MTB is OK around here, races fairly close by. Road and gravel - not so much.

Easy 2 grand plus for one 4 race "season". Wanna race all year round or do multiple disciplines? Double or triple that.

**-My point about the 6k bike - for the last frigging time - wasn't that a 6k bike is required for a new cyclist, it was making an example about Trek, which is valid to this thread, on how essentially their entry level race bike at the time was 6k. I was not saying in any way that is what a kid needs to start - made it crystal clear, but y'all keep droning on and on and on and on about it.**

Now my point - the one that keeps getting sidestepped. Cost of entry into the cycling/racing/sporting world is cost prohibitive for a large swath of the population. You can try to deny it, spin it - whatever - you are just making noise to make noise. This FACT in no way helps the bike industry make new customers for their products. They are not doing much to relace the aging population that can afford the higher priced bikes... and its a shame overall for the sport we love.


And yes - kids that show up to MTB races on their budget beater bikes are faced with kids showing up on Project Ones or Sworks machines that cost well over 8-10k. My point to make racing more affordable and level for juniors, give more people access, promote more kids into the sport, open more doors - is to make cycling more affordable for the masses. Put a cap on the bikes allowed to be raced, encourage more teams at the HS level...

In short - get more kids on bikes. I can't even believe that I have to argue that with some folks... especially economists.

Plus, many schools and independent sports leagues hold fundraisers to pay for the kids' equipment, travel fees, and miscellaneous costs. I can't recall the last time I saw a cycling league do the same.

"Supposed"? If I were gonna have a pretend occupation, I'd be an astronaut. Also, you're confusing economics with household finance.

As for the rest of your post: I skimmed it. It seems to be your usual mish-mash of grievances and made-up numbers. I especially enjoy the intimation that the cost of replacing your kid's wrecked bike is somehow a typical cost of racing.

I hope you realize that there are plenty of ways to get into racing, and many of them don't have to be so expensive. Hell, I was a grown adult when I started racing, and even adjusting for inflation I didn't spend as much as you're claiming is required. By the same token, I knew this rider quite well during his formative cycling years and have kept in touch since then; I can tell you that he didn't spend the kind of money you're talking about, and it doesn't seem to have impeded him. He showed up to his first crit on a hand-me-down Trek and little else -- and after lapping the field (twice, if I recall correctly) was immediately upgraded to Cat 4.

But...whatever. You've demonstrated that you're going to believe what you want to believe, and are immune to any new info or viewpoints.

Talk about click-baiting…. Yet there is another term which comes to mind with such a comment.

Soccer, baseball, basketball are pretty cheap at a rec (recreational) level, but one you get above that (comp team, traveling teams) it gets really expensive.
In my area, Northern California, the best players in soccer are on non school teams. they may also be on high school teams. Pretty much the same for Baseball.

agree 100% get kids on bikes is a good thing

I have a friend that wrecked his car on the way home from his first bike race -- don't forget to factor that into the 'typical' cost of getting into racing.

I'm with someone that has more brains and more money (lawyer). :lol:

All those words and you got "disposable" income wrong. Disposable income is that which disappears every month to unavoidable expenses like rent, mortgage, car payment, insurance, food, etc. Discretionary income is what's left over that YOU decide how it's spend. Up to your discretion.

If you’re going to correct someone, you should not then turn around and give a different incorrect definition.