1.Engine
2.Race Tactics
3.Wallet

It doesn't take much alteration of a product design to skirt "exclusive design" terms and conditions. Some cosmetic changes, maybe some dimensional changes, a few grams here and a few there...pretty soon you have a half dozen derivative, generic frames that gets rebadged by a dozen bike companies.

And I am not talking about "black market" CF frames. I'm talking about the bikes sold by Performance, BD, Pedal Force, etc. Those companies aren't spending money on pro teams, endorsements, advertising, or distribution channel support. That's why they offer comparable products at lower prices.

This is a good post and it speaks to my question. The Douglas at Colorado Cyclist is a prime example of what I am referring to. A lot of people here seem to think that a cheaper cf is a total POS and cannot ride like a more expensive frame.

I am tossing around the idea of a new bike next year but having spent big money on frames in past that I didn't like the ride quality, I can honestly say that my Dura Ace never disappointed me. The way I see it is that I can experiment with more frames and move over quality components regularly. Ride quality seems so subjective and there isn't a correlation per se between more expensive and "better" riding.

As far as generic frames, my Mongoose Bosberg as a complete bike was less than the same frameset sold as the Kinesis kr-810. Kinesis actually confirmed for me that their manufacturer had the rights to the design and sold it to Mongoose. These Shenanagins don't seem to take place in the component aspect of the sport where exact products are sold under different brande with dramatic price differences.

Apparently you have first-hand experience with the details of OEM manufacturing agreements. Care to share?