# Bike pricing has increased 96%, inflation has increased 27%



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

Really interesting article in Bicycle Retailer about the pricing state of the Bicycle Industry Report available on 'turbulent' 2013 US bike market | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News

Gives me this vision of where the Bicycle Industry is and is headed.....doesn't seem to be a sustainable biz model, IMO.









Love to hear your thoughts...


----------



## lewisfoto (Nov 12, 2013)

Not too sure about the basic math i.e. 4-13=-8? should be -9 no?

But I have been saying the same for years, bicycle price increases are unsustainable. Six thousand dollars for an XT equipped full suspension bike is already well out of reach for most American wage earners whose incomes have been flat for most of the last decade. Though MSRP and what a customer actually pays can diverge widely even a sharply discounted unit would be a big sacrifice for most households.

Steven


----------



## TwoNin9r (Jan 26, 2011)

I have mixed thoughts about it, but the bottom line is that the bike consumer doesn't benefit from the one real advantage of having giant conglomerate bike Companies, which is competitive price 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

Especially when one can piece together an XT group for well under a grand. I have a great XT equipped FS with less than 3k into it. Done through after purchase (initial) online upgrades.


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

lewisfoto said:


> Not too sure about the basic math i.e. 4-13=-8? should be -9 no?


The average price per bike grew 4%
The number of units decreased 13%

We don't have enough information to determine whether an 8% decrease in value is the resulting figure. (But for $1500 we can purchase the report!)


----------



## lewisfoto (Nov 12, 2013)

Berkley said:


> The average price per bike grew 4%
> The number of units decreased 13%
> 
> We don't have enough information to determine whether an 8% decrease in value is the resulting figure. (But for $1500 we can purchase the report!)


Yes I was also concerned about the logic of the statement


----------



## Brewtality (Jul 25, 2007)

*Bike has pricing increased 96%, inflation has increased 27%*

I have yet to see a bike shop customer have a gun held to his head a forced into buying a bike. 
Clearly, somebody is buying these high dollar bikes and they are doing it on their own free will. If you can't afford one, don't buy it. Simple as that.


----------



## TwoNin9r (Jan 26, 2011)

I don't think anyone is purporting to be forced. But there are solid grounds for being upset when doing what you love increases in price drastically. No? 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

Interesting. I wonder if the relatively small number of super high-end bikes has skewed these numbers. are $150 department store junk bikes also included in these numbers? what is the average actual person buying?

despite all these increases, you can still buy a solid hard tail for about $1500. Deore is the new XT. the markup is a bit nuts still, but I don't think that is going to stop any of us from having fun.


----------



## okie_calvin (Jan 31, 2004)

It's been said before that cycling is the new golf, at this rate again only the uber rich will be partaking. If you've been riding for awhile you like me probably started on a cheap but halfway decent hardtail for $5-700 bucks; the bikes in that price range now are very heavy and poorly equipped for anything but super buff trails. Seems like the bike industry is killing off their future business for a few big sales right now. But then again, soon after a $10K road bike shows up on the sales floor it's sold so what do I know?


----------



## lewisfoto (Nov 12, 2013)

Yeah no one is being forced to buy anything the question remains is it sustainable? and in my opinion the answer is no. There will be some type of pull back, maybe just a further gap between MSRP and out the door.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

no one is forcing anyone to buy a $10K bike. there are plenty of "reasonably" priced bikes and they seem to have kept up with inflation. how much did a Deore-equipped mid-level hardtail ten years ago? has that gone up proportionately?


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Meh, heard the same complaints 25 years ago, it didn't cripple the sport then, somehow I don't think it will now. If anything, lusting after that top of the line uberbike should motivate not intimidate.


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2014)

Berkley said:


> The average price per bike grew 4%
> The number of units decreased 13%
> 
> We don't have enough information to determine whether an 8% decrease in value is the resulting figure. (But for $1500 we can purchase the report!)


You can calculate the offset by using a nominal price per unit (i.e. $1,000/unit) for 100 units would be $100K. Adjusted sales price is $1040/unit x 87 units (13% fewer) is $90.48K a decrease of 9% +/-.

Doesn't impact me much I buy last year's stuff mostly. Plus high-end stuff is raising the bar for the mid-range stuff.


----------



## HitmenOnlyInc (Jul 20, 2012)

Prices have gotten out of hand. 

Try and find a bike with a Fox Talas Kashima, decent wheels (even basic Stans are $600), and a comparable frame only, and you could be into nearly 4 grand. I don't think I am going out on a limb by saying that most of the avid posters here who actually bought a bike off the floor didn't make major upgrades very soon after.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> I don't think I am going out on a limb by saying that most of the avid posters here who actually bought a bike off the floor didn't make major upgrades very soon after.


Isn't that why you opt for higher spec levels, so you don't have to upgrade it as soon as you get it home? That's what makes upper level bikes good values.


----------



## PrincipalRider (Jun 24, 2005)

I feel like bikes are becoming like RVs or boats. The high end stuff will sell to people who have the money or who choose to get in ridiculous credit card debt and people like me will buy those bikes used when the original purchasers decide they need to buy the latest and greatest OR they need to pay off some bills. 

This is basically how I got my 2012 Pivot Firebird about 2 months ago. It was in great condition and I paid 1/3 or retail for it. It is the best performing AM bike I have ever owned! Who cares if it is around 2 years old?


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

Everyone is making really great points....complicated issue for sure. My hope is the industry can sustain....hard to see exactly how when looking at comparisons like this

$8,490 MSRP 2014 Yamaha YZ450F Specifications, specs

$10,500
Specialized Bicycle Components

Yeah, economics of scale and all....but still....


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

Flucod said:


> Part of the problem is our own government. In the last 4 years or so have added some bike parts into automotive tariffs for imports. I believe cassettes and cranks fall into this category now resulting in a 400% import tax increase on these items.


Bike parts = 6% import duties
Complete Bikes = 20% import duties
Those import duties haven't changed in the last 3 years


----------



## djork (Nov 8, 2004)

Somewhat related is the cost of components. I'm going through a bout of upgrade-itis atm, and one item I need is a new tire to replace the Michelin Dry [2] I have on the rear of one of my bikes. It's more of a want than a need, as the tire is perfectly fine but it just doesn't offer enough grip...so anyway I've been looking at my options and I'm shocked by some of the prices. Some tires go for almost $100--each! This is car tire price territory. I should have never sold my spare tires for a song and dance...now that I need one. Grrrrrr.


----------



## PatMc (Feb 14, 2014)

Everything has gotten stupid expensive. Pickup trucks now go into $70K, $100 each used to be expensive for a car tire, now you're lucky to find 'em anywhere near that price. I bought a diamondback FS rig about 8 years ago...boxxer double clamp forks (iirc), XT build, out the door at my LBS for under $900...you'd be lucky to find that bike for $3000 these days. Everything goes up but my salary...it ain't just bikes, although I don't get how I can buy a proper dirt bike without pedals for less than a MTB.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Help me with my thinking here. I do realize the following analogy is not perfect so please correct the flaws in my thought process. 

I started mountain biking in the early 90's. I remember around '95 a top of the line mtb went for $3500 to 5k and many bikes were made in the USA back then. The last new bike I bought was in '05. A top of the line bike in '05 went for $3500 to 5k and many bikes were made in the USA back then.

There was a hell of a lot of advancements in mtb technology between '95 and 2005, yet pricing pretty much stayed the same. 

Now, a top of the line mtb goes for 10k and many bikes are made with cheap labor over seas now. Sure the technology has improved since '05, but no where near like between '95 and '05. And actually, I have been looking at buying a new bike and really don't see a dramatic difference in technology between '05 and now, but between '95 and '05 there was a galaxy of difference.

I took a quick look at the historical inflation rate by year and as far as I can tell it shows the inflation rate between '95 and '05 is higher than between '05 and now. However, that was a quick look on the web and may not be right, so if I am wrong please let us know what the inflation rate was between these two periods. 

I love mountain biking with a passion, but these numbers leave a very bad taste in my mouth and makes me think that (yes, I'll say it and I know it won't make me popular, but it's what I feel in my gut, so sorry if it pisses you off) corporate greed is the reason. And that's not just a trendy thing to say now a days, if you've been around you know that shits been talked about since the 80's. It just never had a place in mountain biking before now.

Oh and I see someone brought up economy of scale. There are a hell of a lot more people mountain biking today than in '95 and back then there was a lot more more manufactures, so with that theory prices should be really going down, but....

What has happened to the mountain bike industry?


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

PatMc said:


> Everything has gotten stupid expensive. Pickup trucks now go into $70K, $100 each used to expensive for a car tire, now you're luck to find 'em anywhere near that price. I bought a diamondback FS rig about 8 years ago...boxxer double clamp forks (iirc), XT build, out the door at my LBS for under $900...you'd be lucky to find that bike for $3000 these days. Everything goes up but my salary.


Very good points


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

singletrackmack said:


> Help me with my thinking here. I do realize the following analogy is not perfect so please correct the flaws in my thought process.
> 
> I started mountain biking in the early 90's. I remember around '95 a top of the line mtb went for $3500 to 5k and many bikes were made in the USA back then. The last new bike I bought was in '05. A top of the line bike in '05 went for $3500 to 5k and many bikes were made in the USA back then.
> 
> ...


Good points as well


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

Just my personal opinion, but I think there will be a correction in the market place in the future. The market is over saturated. Most everyone has a 29 inch bike now. So what does the industry do? Market 650b. Consumers have been able to get decent 26 tires for decades. 29 tires are insanely expensive, still. It doesn't cost tire manufactures that much to retool on an old design. Heck 29 Ingnitors are still $60. that tire design is Atleast 12 years old. I get it, supple and demand.

Back in the nineties there were hundreds of boutique builders welding frames. Many of them went under. There was just to much competition.

I've been riding steel hts for over twenty years now. As I get older, I've considered switching to fs. The only way id even consider purchasing fs is end of year close outs at 40% off, or used. 3500-4000$ for an alum. Frame with x7 shifting and elixer brakes. Oh but wait, it has a piece of **** $1000 front fork with an equally crappy 500$ rear shock. How does Fox stay in business? Why purchase suspension that will have to be sent to PUSH or Avy for rebuild, just to get it to perform correctly? I don't get it.


----------



## Guest (Mar 2, 2014)

Flucod said:


> Part of the problem is our own government. In the last 4 years or so have added some bike parts into automotive tariffs for imports. I believe cassettes and cranks fall into this category now resulting in a 400% import tax increase on these items.


At some point the market would normally force manufacturing back to domestic production. That requires cyclists to avoid paying 400% mark-ups until someone realizes there's a profit margin sufficient to start domestic production. Let's face it, if prices are 4 times higher than they need to be to be competative, there's room for a Chris King or some brand to enter the market with a premium product made state-side.


----------



## STACK (Mar 23, 2009)

Brewtality said:


> I have yet to see a bike shop customer have a gun held to his head a forced into buying a bike.
> Clearly, somebody is buying these high dollar bikes and they are doing it on their own free will. If you can't afford one, don't buy it. Simple as that.


It's never "simple as that." And the "simple as that" arguments are almost always anti-consumer/worker. You rarely ever hear: "Wal-Mart doesn't want to cut a small % into their billions and pay their workers an almost living wage, they can close every store and go do something else for a living." Because, you know, they ARE free do to that.

No offense, I just don't like the "you don't like getting screwed over? Just stop doing what you like," argument. There is sometimes/often a middle ground.


----------



## STACK (Mar 23, 2009)

Also, whenever an ultra conservative (I'm not a Democrat, and voted for a Republican governor not that long ago)brainwashed type tries to explain to you that we HAVE to have things made in China, because that is how we get things cheaper and it's actually good for the economy, just know they are completely wrong. There is ZERO wish to supply cheaper products by making things cheaper, just to make them cheaper for more short term profits. The last 20 years has been the race to the bottom in a few different ways, the major one being a shift from "winning through innovation" turning into "winning through third world manufacturing standards." We would be closer to Back to the Future II than a crumbling West if it would not have happened.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Well, manufacturing is already returning to U.S. shores, seems the "cheap" labor force has decided that they need to be paid more so it makes it to expensive to manufacture things off shore. And the cycle continues. I would also argue that the "Walmart Syndrome" does nothing to help the situation, as many have found out the cheapest possible prices does not equal prosperity.


----------



## J_R_A (Dec 15, 2011)

*singletrackmack* has some great points...I think that often times I get pretty hyped up on small incremental changes and forget that although that there have been numerous rapid industry wide changes in the last 10 years they are nothing compared to the improvements that came about in the previous 10 years. An 05' RLC and a 14' CDT compared to a 95' Indy C and a 04' Reba RL is huge or URT to Horst again huge.

The recent exception might be brakes?

Another point: the report, I'm not sure I'd consider it a complete abstract more of a summary. I'd also note that there was a whole lot of Trans-Pacific movement in the last 15 years so the collected data might be small to draw a long term conclusion as sited in the summary.

~JRA


----------



## borabora (Feb 16, 2011)

It might be worth noting that while bikes are expensive, biking can be dirt cheap. In the long term that makes mountain biking less expensive than skiing/boarding, golf, tennis and some other popular recreational activities.
Yes, of course you can spend tons of money on destination biking and you can play golf or tennis on public courses. But most mountain bikers can get away with spending very little after an initial bike purchase and many skiers or golfers spend thousands per season to be active in their sport.
I think that mountain bike price points of diminishing returns are somewhere in the range of $1000-$2000 for a hard tail and $2000-$3000 for a full suspension bike. Spending more will get you a lighter and better handling bike but the improvements get smaller and smaller the more you spend. 
Super high bike prices are simply an indicator that there are still lots of people with lots of money. Just like there are dozens of cars available that run more than $100K. That doesn't mean that you have to be rich to mountain bike or to drive even a pretty nice car.


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

singletrackmack said:


> .
> 
> What has happened to the mountain bike industry?


It became all about earnings and dividends. One could try to take advantage of the current financial climate and do a minimum order of frames from the myriad of builders, slap your branding on it and market them over the internet. There is little to no overhead so it maximizes profits. The sheep complain about high prices, the wolves take advantage of them.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Switchback Bikes said:


> Everyone is making really great points....complicated issue for sure. My hope is the industry can sustain....hard to see exactly how when looking at comparisons like this
> 
> $8,490 MSRP 2014 Yamaha YZ450F Specifications, specs
> 
> ...


One can purchase motorcycles full of carbon and titanium parts. They cost a bit more than that Yamaha.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Well...


----------



## Ltdan12a (Jun 15, 2012)

Idunno, a "mid-range" bike has been out of my price range for a few years now... I'm riding, a $400 dollar fork, $400 carbon frame, $200 wheel set, and the rest has all been bought on clearance or at the swapmeets... Pretty sure I'm having just as much fun as the dude on his $4000 rig....


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Ltdan12a said:


> . Pretty sure I'm having just as much fun as the dude on his $4000 rig....


Probably more.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

J_R_A said:


> *singletrackmack* has some great points.... An 05' RLC and a 14' CDT compared to a 95' Indy C and a 04' Reba RL is huge or URT to Horst again huge.
> ~JRA


You bringing up rear suspension improvements reminds me that many of the rear suspension patents are up, like the Horst Link four bar. These companies no longer need to pay for the license to use these designs which should again, bring pricing down.


----------



## Snfoilhat (May 3, 2010)

This press release is not the report itself, and so it's tough to take away much. But for everyone on the thread that has harped in $10000 bikes, you are missing the point. Average price went up. They probably mean "mean", though there is some chance they meant "median". $10000 bikes affect the mean a little and the median even less.

If the industry-wide bike price average goes up, it's because the bikes in the tall, fat part of the cost distribution have gotten more expensive. I am guessing here based on my experience in a large shop, but we're talking about $700 hardtails, $600 commuters, $900 entry-level road bikes.

The often seen "You can get a MTB for $10000, you can get a 4-stroke 450 MX for $9000" is not very helpful in the way the poster usually means it to be. But there is a lesson from the MX world. I can't cite a source here, but my father--long-time MX racer 70s-00s--will go on at length about how at the peak of American MX interest, the big four were selling almost a million units per model year. Now it is a tiny fraction of that.

We don't have the data on whether total revenues changed, but we do know that even if the pie stays the same size, cutting it up into larger pieces means fewer people on bikes, or motos. Cost of entry is not the only thing that drives the popularity of a sport, but it is a big factor.

A biz can make $1,000,000 by selling 100 $10,000 bikes or by selling 1,000 $1000 bikes right? But if that business wants to grow its revenues, which is the easier path?
To eke $11,000 out 100 rich dudes the next year, or to expand the 1000 to 1100 as more people get stoked on riding?

This is obviously a simplified example, and bike companies target consumers at all price points. But to get back the the main thrust of this thread and the unknown 'report' that started it:

If the average price is going up, then the major sales focus is on bikes priced higher than they were before, even adjusting for inflation. The companies are persuing a strategy more like the first example than the second: fewer and more expensive bikes.

Ask Honda/Yamaha/Kawasaki/Suzuki/KTM how well thats working for them.

For anyone who just cannot understand that there is any problem, because they themself have a totally rad bike they got for a totally reasonable price there is an answer, and one to keep in mind while reading MTBR: this place is _not_ representitive. MTBR users and the 'enthusiast' class of cyclists enjoy several privileges that skew their perspective on the industry. We ride the $2000-6000 bikes which the companies simply don't make that many of, and which don't matter much. We get great value because of the pressure to 'trickle' component technologies down after a season or three. We get our bikes with even thinner margins than usual. You are the bike industry's marketing experiment/obligation. Your costs are to some degree subsidized. You are a very special person and your mother loves you, but you don't matter in a discussion like this. It's a hard thing to keep in mind as you read the forums.


----------



## mr_chrome (Jan 17, 2005)

- we have now, objectively, hit the engineering "sweet spot" for bikes - there just are not many more possible changes you can make to a mountain bike but the price will continue to climb because the manufacturers say they have something "new" about their geometry / components / etc.........yes, the price of a bike is ridiculous considering I can buy a new car made from far more metal / plastic / other materials that have been engineered considerably more than ANY bike on the market for less than twice the cost of the highest end bikes......actually, things like disc brakes were engineered for motor-driven vehicles before they came to bikes so for a manufacturer to claim they "engineered" new technology is BS - everything was already in place before they ever even started on bikes.......wheel technology did require some work since we hammer our wheels pretty good, but off-road motorcycles had already been doing quite a bit of the work here, too, along with frame-tech, saving the bike industry quite a bit - their real contribution was in carbon tech for frames........so what is the point? - quite a bit of technology has been taken from other industries to apply to mt bikes, and for the bike industry to charge us customers serious money for "borrowed" engineering is fairly disingenuous........a new bike that costs half as much as a new car is outrageous to me, so I buy used and rebuild to my specifications to save as much $$ as I can, the rest is spent on beer..............


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

Snfoilhat said:


> This press release is not the report itself, and so it's tough to take away much.


Bingo. BRAIN cherry picked some statistics from a 19-page report and posted a five paragraph article on it.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Alot of good points on this subject but...

It comes down to one big problem, enough people with the money to spend to allow prices to go up. The manufacturers are paying less for everything and charging more. Not many sectors of business are getting by with this but some are or did make insane record profits during the time they could do it.

I can tell u with 100% certainty the price issue isn't taxes or the supposed cost of manufacturing bikes and parts, its the companies themselves charging insane markups. 

I simply know this because im in manufacturing (In a factory that makes items for companies that then sell to stores to go on store shelves) .
Here is reality: where I work a part we make and assemble (plastic molding) we charge a company $55 for the part finished and boxed. This is for an order of hundreds of parts. By the time the item makes it to store shelves, its $150. I can't give details but these numbers are exactly true down to the dollar. A job that pays me $12 plus small quarterly bonuses. And I would put out 30 of those parts an hour. Sounds like a big gap, but add in costs of getting parts to their warehouse, sent out to individual stores and so on. So gap is a bit smaller but per part, not much.

Now put that into perspective on a bike and every part that goes into it. Labor is cheaper, components aren't shipped out of country just from one factory to the next, then finished bike shipped to us here in the states. That is done for higher profits then allowed by being made here.

Food for thought for the rest of u that didn't realize cost of manufacturing and store price, profits made using US labor not being enough, yet charge even more....

Sent from my Nokia Stupidphone using Tapatalk


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

mr_chrome said:


> - we have now, objectively, hit the engineering "sweet spot" for bikes - there just are not many more possible changes you can make to a mountain bike but the price will continue to climb because the manufacturers say they have something "new" about their geometry / components / etc.........*yes, the price of a bike is ridiculous considering I can buy a new car made from far more metal / plastic / other materials that have been engineered considerably more than ANY bike on the market for less than twice the cost of the highest end bikes*......actually, things like disc brakes were engineered for motor-driven vehicles before they came to bikes so for a manufacturer to claim they "engineered" new technology is BS - everything was already in place before they ever even started on bikes.......wheel technology did require some work since we hammer our wheels pretty good, but off-road motorcycles had already been doing quite a bit of the work here, too, along with frame-tech, saving the bike industry quite a bit - their real contribution was in carbon tech for frames........so what is the point? - quite a bit of technology has been taken from other industries to apply to mt bikes, and for the bike industry to charge us customers serious money for "borrowed" engineering is fairly disingenuous........a new bike that costs half as much as a new car is outrageous to me, so I buy used and rebuild to my specifications to save as much $$ as I can, the rest is spent on beer..............


That's an apples and potatos argument. I can spend millions of dollars on a carbon crystal with zero engineering or a lump of shiny metal. So what, indeed.


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

borabora said:


> It might be worth noting that while bikes are expensive, biking can be dirt cheap. In the long term that makes mountain biking less expensive than skiing/boarding, golf, tennis and some other popular recreational activities.
> Yes, of course you can spend tons of money on destination biking and you can play golf or tennis on public courses. But most mountain bikers can get away with spending very little after an initial bike purchase and many skiers or golfers spend thousands per season to be active in their sport.
> I think that mountain bike price points of diminishing returns are somewhere in the range of $1000-$2000 for a hard tail and $2000-$3000 for a full suspension bike. Spending more will get you a lighter and better handling bike but the improvements get smaller and smaller the more you spend.
> Super high bike prices are simply an indicator that there are still lots of people with lots of money. Just like there are dozens of cars available that run more than $100K. That doesn't mean that you have to be rich to mountain bike or to drive even a pretty nice car.


Great point about an upfront cost to get into the MTB game & then the recurring expenses not being there like Golf, Tennis can be.......last time I rode out my garage and to the trail I didn't have to pay a green fee


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

Flucod said:


> Exactly, it will swing back and swing back in a hurry when the dollar becomes worthless against the worlds economies. The BIGGER problem is the things that cannot be brought back when the dollar tanks (and it will tank, just do a little bit of research) with hyper inflation. We will not have to worry about bike prices because gas will be $50 per gallon. There will be be a whole new demand for bikes!


Are you saying bike prices will go down if gas hits $50/gallon? Certainly price of Bikes would go through the roof if gas ever hit $50/gallon, as demand would go through the roof...

If I misread your post....Disclaimer - I failed Reading Comprehension on my SATs in a big way  killed the Science & Math sections though HA!


----------



## Thor29 (May 12, 2005)

One major problem with the original article is mentioning the "rate of inflation". My understanding is that the official rate of inflation in the USA has been severely manipulated for political reasons and is almost meaningless. Like at least one other person mentioned, everything has gotten more expensive while salaries have remained stagnant. It's not just mountain bikes - take a look at health care, college education, housing costs (at least in the coastal states), concert tickets, sporting events, ski lift tickets, motorcycles, cars... I'm sure you can name lots of things that have skyrocketed in price in the last decade or so.

Personally, although I love bikes and currently have 6 that I built from parts, mountain bike prices have recently gone beyond my willingness to spend. The retail price for full suspension frames made in Taiwan is creeping past the $2000 mark and suspension forks are heading past $1000. That's just too much - my wallet is now officially closed for any new mountain bike projects. I'm sticking with the two I have for the foreseeable future. (That's saying a lot considering I have averaged buying a new mountain bike frame every other year for the last decade).


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

Thor29 said:


> I'm sticking with the two I have for the foreseeable future. (That's saying a lot considering I have averaged buying a new mountain bike frame every other year for the last decade).


This is the only way it will change, for the consumer to simply stop buying. Demand goes down, supply increases, prices go down until the glut of product is reduced. Just depends on ones threshold on prices I guess.


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

over blown media propaganda...


----------



## Mr5150 (Dec 20, 2011)

Hawg said:


> over blown media propaganda...


I disagree. Been in this sport for 22 years.

I built my midlevel XT Superlight in 2008. Cost me $3500. As a reference point it weighs 26.5 pounds-with pedals. Price out a 26.5 pound midlevel XT FS bike in today's market.

Prior to 2009, a top end HT might have been $4000. Check out what trek charges for their top end HT. Project One | Trek Bikes

Prices were fairly stable until 2008 then shot thru the roof.


----------



## Guest (Mar 3, 2014)

The problem with the inflation drives prices argument is that it doesn't. I was at the Denso Plant in Tennesee last year and they are faced with increasing material and labor costs while lowering their prices to meet foreign competitor's prices. They counter rising costs with increasing effeciency. If inflation was really 29% then prices would be expected to raise 29%. In reality, inflation has averaged less than 2% annually since 2008, so prices should have risen 12% to keep up with inflation.


----------



## 411898 (Nov 5, 2008)

Are you guys blind? The idea in this country is to get rich. Therefore, prices will continue to rise as long as people keep forking out the cash, and they do. Bikes, among other finely crafted products are outrageously priced. There is no denying that. Always have been. Inflation does play into this price gouging crap but only to a minimal degree. Greedy bastards are to blame more than anything. 

Prices shot through the roof because the consumer agreed to pay...


----------



## damnitman (Jan 30, 2008)

...My GF and I just bought 4 studded fatbike tires @ $225 ea...


----------



## RideEagleCO (Nov 8, 2012)

I think that we need to demand more value as consumers. If we blindly pay $200 to have fancy gold paint on bike parts, then that's what the industry is going to give us. I'll admit, I've bought into the hype. I've saved about $6000 from overtime shifts and want to buy a new bike. I've worked my ass off for that money, but I don't think I can stomach paying MSRP for a Mach 6. If that's the bike that I want, and I have the money on the other hand though, why would I buy something different? If we can demand better value for our hard earned dollars, maybe we'll get more. I'll gladly drop the money for a bad ass bike if I can get it 15-20% below MSRP and not feel like I am being taken advantage of, but until then, I might just keep looking, or lower my standards and not get my dream bike and put the money toward other sports.


----------



## vack (Jan 2, 2003)

One has to wonder what these bikes really cost. Example. Cannondale is blowing out last years Scalpels. The model I'm thinking about was 3300 in the spring.....it's 2000 now. I'm sure they are still making some money on it too....

I don't know what the answer is...I mean we all love these new high tech things....and we're the ones pushing the market....but at the same time we are pushing the market out of reach. Once you've ridden long enough you come to appreciate XT over Deore. XO over X7. But now if you want a new bike we're almost forced into the lower components because we can't afford an XT build anymore.

Furthermore, all these Carbon Frames....Excellent designs I get it....but 90% of them are made overseas and most of them in China, yet they charge a price like it was made right here.

Even Trek, and Cannondale...My SuperSix Frame has a big ole Made in China sticker on it. A friends Superfly SS frame....yup you guess it....made in China. The quality is spot on but the price is out of hand....yet....I own them.

But again it's our fault because we pay the prices....but I guess that's capitalism.


----------



## Awshucks (Apr 14, 2013)

Wonder when those capitalist swines over in the "too much bike" thread are going to chime in. Lol jk. I say burn it all down! Or buy from craigslist. Or keep using those 10% coupons jenson always gives you. Amiright?


----------



## damnitman (Jan 30, 2008)

...sure you did...you pay taxes right?


----------



## Stormf (Jan 24, 2009)

Bike prices everywhere are unsustainable especially as they've outstripped the cost of entry level Moto-X bikes. Its ludicrous actually.


----------



## SSteel (Dec 31, 2003)

The bicycle world is going to get shaken up in the next couple of years. The advent of the 3D printer will tear down the industry and render the landscape of prices, business models and the role of an LBS to an unrecognizable form from what it is now.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

I only wish we had companies like YT or Canyon in the US.
Their pricing is significantly better.

Inflation is a hidden tax. It is most unfair, flat and hits mainly the middle class. Fiat money is evil.


----------



## z400jt (Oct 30, 2006)

Could the availability of financing be part of the problem as well? If you had to go in and drop $5,000-10,000 for that new bike instead of negotiating a monthly payment it seems like it would be much harder to justify. 

The same goes for the $70,000+ trucks. I know people who have no idea what the OTD price of their car was, only what they pay a month. It's much easier to sell someone on a "small" monthly payment than the actual price.


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

There's some good points here. It does make one wonder how many are mastering the moment, by charging them on a cc. I've been considering a fs bike. Ran across several slightly used were the seller states "impulse buy" while on vacation or " can't believe how much my monthly cc payment is".

As another poster mentioned. I have to pull overtime to fund my mtn bike hobby. As a parent now in my 40s, priorities change. After 20 years of 60-70 hr work weeks. I've learned time is more valuable to me. It doesn't bother me to purchase parts a year or two old in design. Been running my xo 9 speed shifters for five years now. Just recently put a complete new 9 speed drive train on my bike. Thinking about purchasing a spare rear shifter, incase the current one wears out or breaks in a crash. I just can't bring myself to pay $350+ for and 11 speed cassette, which is a consumable. I know how to adjust a front Der., 2x9 is fine with me.

I use to be somewhat of a tire whore. After purchasing a 29 over five years ago. I've learned to make due with the tires I have. Granted I have eight tires in six different designs, for one bike. Just can't bring myself to pay more than 40$ for a 29 tire. Also barter tires locally with other riders. Tires are only one of three contact points on a bike, blah blah blah. Doesn't mean I have to bend over and take $80+ tires that wear out in 400 miles in the A$$.

I'm so ready for this long winter to be over. Ready for some ride time. Had just about enough of seeing over priced carbon bikes in magazines and on the internet.


----------



## TwoNin9r (Jan 26, 2011)

SSteel said:


> The bicycle world is going to get shaken up in the next couple of years. The advent of the 3D printer will tear down the industry and render the landscape of prices, business models and the role of an LBS to an unrecognizable form from what it is now.


How many components on a bike do you see being made on one though. And I'm asking genuinely because I'm not of much knowledge when it comes to 3D printing.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


----------



## mtuck1 (Apr 13, 2009)

SSteel said:


> The bicycle world is going to get shaken up in the next couple of years. The advent of the 3D printer will tear down the industry and render the landscape of prices, business models and the role of an LBS to an unrecognizable form from what it is now.


Just for the record I totally disagree with this! 3D printing is a valuable rapid prototyping tool but will never replace current production processes.


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

jazzanova said:


> I only wish we had companies like YT or Canyon in the US.
> Their pricing is significantly better.
> 
> Inflation is a hidden tax. It is most unfair, flat and hits mainly the middle class. Fiat money is evil.


Couldn't agree more. I'd purchase a Canyon in a heartbeat. YT appears to be doing some really interesting things as well.


----------



## smithcreek (Nov 27, 2012)

vack said:


> Furthermore, all these Carbon Frames....Excellent designs I get it....but 90% of them are made overseas and most of them in China, yet they charge a price like it was made right here.


Yes, the price of manufacturing has gone down, but those savings are not passed to consumers. It's not evil greedy profit hungry companies stuffing it all in their pockets either. Most of those saving are redirected towards other expenses, the main one being marketing. What did marketing consist of 20 years ago? Sponsorship, brochures at the LBS and some ads in a few print magazines. Now I'll bet the marketing department at the big bike companies is larger than the engineering department.


----------



## mtuck1 (Apr 13, 2009)

Personally I feel that much of the pricing in the cycling business, from bikes to clothing and everything in between, is based more on what the companies feel buyers are willing to pay than what the items are actually worth. But the reality is everything is worth what someone is willing to pay for it so the reality is we cyclists are the root of the problem.


----------



## Iamrockandroll13 (Feb 10, 2013)

Here's an idea. If you want to spend big bucks on a bike, support a smaller more local builder and get something truly unique. If we stopped buying stuff from the big guys when it's overpriced, they would quickly adjust their prices to a more reasonable level. The problem is that most of us are suckers for marketing, and at least have an urge to try out what the big companies are touting as the latest and greatest. $10,000 buys you a crazy ridiculous awesome bike from one of the famous builders (Moots, IF, Calfee, etc.), handcrafted in the good ole USA. It takes being around cycling for a little bit to know that these options exist and that even if you don't have $10k to drop going custom is still an option and normally a good one if you do your homework.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

SSteel said:


> The bicycle world is going to get shaken up in the next couple of years. The advent of the 3D printer will tear down the industry and render the landscape of prices, business models and the role of an LBS to an unrecognizable form from what it is now.


A couple of years is at least 8 too few.


----------



## Schril (Oct 28, 2010)

I think the one factor on increasing prices is effective marketing. People are sucked into thinking a $6k bike truly is a better than a $2k bike, etc... I sort of equate it to buying a car. How many of us buy the base model? It still drives the same as the one twice the price, just isn't as cool.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Iamrockandroll13 said:


> Here's an idea. If you want to spend big bucks on a bike, support a smaller more local builder and get something truly unique. If we stopped buying stuff from the big guys when it's overpriced, they would quickly adjust their prices to a more reasonable level. The problem is that most of us are suckers for marketing, and at least have an urge to try out what the big companies are touting as the latest and greatest. $10,000 buys you a crazy ridiculous awesome bike from one of the famous builders (Moots, IF, Calfee, etc.), handcrafted in the good ole USA. It takes being around cycling for a little bit to know that these options exist and that even if you don't have $10k to drop going custom is still an option and normally a good one if you do your homework.


If one is looking at dual suspension, local would mean you are a Californian (Turner, Ventana, Intense). Hardtails? Sure - option abound.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Mr5150 said:


> I disagree. Been in this sport for 22 years.
> 
> I built my midlevel XT Superlight in 2008. Cost me $3500. As a reference point it weighs 26.5 pounds-with pedals. Price out a 26.5 pound midlevel XT FS bike in today's market.
> 
> ...


Isn't SLX going to be better or equivalent to 2008 XT though? Aren't you comparing your mass produced steel frame to the highest-end carbon frame?

I bought a Merlin XLM frame in 1995 for $2200, and I'm certain the build was in the $4-5K range.


----------



## nogod (May 30, 2009)

Suckers are born every second. When we can buy a nice Harley for less than a bicycle we know that the industry thinks that their customers are idiots. No amount of reasoning can explain why a bicycle that has no engine would cost more to make. And face it there are a lot of suckers buying bicycles at extremely of inflated prices. Its those people that think that more expensive is better. In this forum i have seen people brag that they paid more for the same part than someone else as if it were a good thing. Just a bunch of poseurs trying to keep up with the Jones. 

But it is good that this post showed up, it shows that bicyclists are getting a clue. Though I noticed some are still trying to justify the insane pricing in the industry.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

nogod said:


> When we can buy a nice Harley for less than a bicycle


Or to make a more apt comparison, one can buy this new for $3,000,000:










Carbon and titanium add quite a lot to the price of most anything, and while you can get an 883 for $8500, we all know that's not a real Harley.


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

Oh but wait, it has a piece of **** $1000 front fork with an equally crappy 500$ rear shock. How does Fox stay in business? Why purchase suspension that will have to be sent to PUSH or Avy for rebuild, just to get it to perform correctly? I don't get it.[/QUOTE]

Fox is way over priced, but still the best and most consistent suspension available right out of the box.


----------



## Chuch (Jan 10, 2013)

Interesting read after getting pounded into the ground yesterday on a 16 mile ride, by a friend of a friend who rides once every couple of months. Yup, he was riding his rigid 1995 Gary Fisher LX build. The only thing I was proud of was that I had a $20 tool in my fancy camelback to fix his blown out chain at mile 13. It was one of my first rides of the spring, but regardless...the dude looked like he was having more fun than I was and it wasn't his bike choice. His Fitness was far superior to mine, so while I sit here all week worrying about upgrades and wheel sizes, I need to focus not on the $ but on myself first and foremost. Ugh.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

Shane5001 said:


> Oh but wait, it has a piece of **** $1000 front fork with an equally crappy 500$ rear shock. How does Fox stay in business? Why purchase suspension that will have to be sent to PUSH or Avy for rebuild, just to get it to perform correctly? I don't get it.


Fox is way over priced, but still the best and most consistent suspension available right out of the box.[/QUOTE]

Fox the best out of the box?
You must have been living under a rock for last 2 years...
Fox is the most overrated, overpriced and underperforming suspension on the market. The service intervals are ridiculous.
Lets hope the 2014 really is better, but I am not willing to gamble.


----------



## michaelscott (May 23, 2011)

The moral of the story is:

Buy used.

Be happy with what you got.

Ride more.


----------



## johnb (Feb 8, 2004)

PrincipalRider said:


> I feel like bikes are becoming like RVs or boats. The high end stuff will sell to people who have the money or who choose to get in ridiculous credit card debt and people like me will buy those bikes used when the original purchasers decide they need to buy the latest and greatest OR they need to


^^ I agree with this.
Its incredible how many $10k bikes are on eBay. 1, 2 or 3 years old. Seems like quite a few people who buy the $10k bikes, turn around and sell it a year later, just to get the latest and greatest. IMO, that has a lot to do with what is driving the prices up.


----------



## Iamrockandroll13 (Feb 10, 2013)

juan_speeder said:


> If one is looking at dual suspension, local would mean you are a Californian (Turner, Ventana, Intense). Hardtails? Sure - option abound.


I meant local in the global business sense as made in the same country. There are plenty of small builders out there that can build you a FS. the point was more not to support giant conglomerates when spending that kind of money.


----------



## tysonnemb (Jan 23, 2010)

Yeah we are to blame for the prices, buying in to the marketing, etc. What has changed, tech wise in the past few years? Big Red S still uses FSR, DW is still being used, unchanged, single pivot still around, etc. Materials? Carbon and aluminum and steel, been around for a bit. Geometry? People are still shaped the same. 

I worked at a bike shop a few years back that sold Cannondale. When I started, they were USA made, when I left, all overseas. So they saved on manufacturing costs, but didn't pass the savings on. But why would they, if we were still paying. I can't think of many vendors (I'm sure they exist) that will pass on savings if they find cheaper suppliers. Everyone wants to make more money, it's never enough. But people buy in to the marketing, pay the full price, and then eventually the leftover will be sold, still at a profit. 

It is cool to have the new shiny advanced toy, I'll admit to that line of thinking. But I recently learned that you can perform just as good (if not better) on your 'old' bike (which most of the technology is still the same) just by changing you as a rider by cross training. 

But it makes you think if everyone on this forum all had money to burn, what would we all be riding? I'd pick a blue one.


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

I dunno. I for one am starting to get a bitter taste in my mouth from cycling. This is coming from a life long cycliest, the last 20+ years have been mainly mtn biking with road biking thrown in. With the prices of bicycles these days. A motorcycle is looking rather appealing. The bicycle industry clearly mocked the moto industry for decades. Will they take the same path as moto?


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Double Post?


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Iamrockandroll13 said:


> I meant local in the global business sense as made in the same country. There are plenty of small builders out there that can build you a FS. the point was more not to support giant conglomerates when spending that kind of money.


I'm not trying to be argumentative, but those small builders most often use a Ventana rear end. Engin, Eriksen, etc.. While Moots does make a full suspension frame, but i wouldn't buy a full ti dually, ever - not the right tool for the job. There's a few soft-tail designs out there too. Zero US carbon offerings as far as I know.

Oh, Lenz.

What else is there?


----------



## SSteel (Dec 31, 2003)

TwoNin9r said:


> How many components on a bike do you see being made on one though. And I'm asking genuinely because I'm not of much knowledge when it comes to 3D printing.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk


I'm thinking more of the frames, less of the components. The ability to make a number of pieces out of carbon fiber and bond them together will change the way you buy a frame. They have already started , so imagine the effect of sales and manufacturing when you can print your own frame at home.


----------



## SSteel (Dec 31, 2003)

juan_speeder said:


> A couple of years is at least 8 too few.


Eight years is a lifetime in technological development. There were no 3d printers 8 years ago (well maybe a prototype somewhere). Now they are all over the place and the prices are dropping. They just announced a carbon fiber 3D printer earlier this year and (separately) Empire Cycles just printed their own prototype frame.
Empire Cycles x Renishaw ? World?s First 3d Printed Complete Bicycle Frame
It is not a stretch to put the 2 together and be printing bike frames (that you bond pieces together) in the VERY near future.


----------



## Iamrockandroll13 (Feb 10, 2013)

juan_speeder said:


> I'm not trying to be argumentative, but those small builders most often use a Ventana rear end. Engin, Eriksen, etc.. While Moots does make a full suspension frame, but i wouldn't buy a full ti dually, ever - not the right tool for the job. There's a few soft-tail designs out there too. Zero US carbon offerings as far as I know.
> 
> Oh, Lenz.
> 
> What else is there?


Not a lot, modern carbon fiber frame manufacturing techniques aren't really feasible for a low volume builder. I feel that, for the most part, carbon isn't worth it in the end for frames, but I won't go into it here as it's not relevant.


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

Why were the comments regarding Fox deleted? Perfect example as to what's wrong with the mtn bike industry.

I thought this was consumer review, not MBA. Sell outs.


----------



## timobkg (May 24, 2009)

A lot of people here are talking about the top end, multi-thousand dollar bikes. But what about the low end, the entry level bikes? Let's take a look at Trek / Garry Fisher for example. 

14 years ago:
$600 MSRP - RockShox / Marzocchi fork, Deore components with an LX rear - good solid components that would last you many years of riding without needing to be replaced. 
$800 added a nicer fork, LX components with an XT rear. You could race XC on it. 
$1000 added (disappointing) disc brakes.

7 years ago:
$600 got my wife RockShox fork, full Deore components.

Today:
$480 gets you terrible disk brakes paired with a terrible fork and terrible components. But at least it has disc brakes, right?
$660 gets you an RST fork with Altus components.
$1050 before you see the first RockShox fork, Deore level components with LX level rear (Sram X5 / X7).
$1320 to get LX components with an XT rear.
$1370 with an SR Suntour fork and full LX components? What?

So $1050 today buys the same component level that $600 did 7 years ago? Yikes! Has there been enough technology trickle down that Altus today is Deore 7 years ago? And maybe I'm a brand snob, but I just don't trust RST / SR Suntour forks to last on the trail. 

I view buying even a beginner mountain bike as an investment, that you want to get quality components that will last. My 14-year-old Marzocchi/LX/XT hardtail and 13-year-old RockShox/Fox/XT/XTR full-suspension bikes ride just fine today with all their original components (excluding rings/cassettes, obviously).

So if I was looking to recommend a beginner bike for a friend today, I'd have to tell them that they need to throw down $1000 to get a name-brand fork and good components? That's a pretty high barrier for entry.


----------



## syl3 (Apr 23, 2008)

Forster said:


> At some point the market would normally force manufacturing back to domestic production. That requires cyclists to avoid paying 400% mark-ups until someone realizes there's a profit margin sufficient to start domestic production. Let's face it, if prices are 4 times higher than they need to be to be competative, there's room for a Chris King or some brand to enter the market with a premium product made state-side.


he was not talking about a 400% increase in price, but a 400% increase in taxes.

when import taxes go from 1.5% to 6% that's a 400% increase


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

HitmenOnlyInc said:


> Especially when one can piece together an XT group for well under a grand. I have a great XT equipped FS with less than 3k into it. Done through after purchase (initial) online upgrades.


True, but you probably know what you are doing.

How many people that walk into a bike shop know you can't mix shimano's 9 spd and 10 spd offerings? Or how about the difference between an M770 and M771 front derailleur?

Many just want "a bike that works". The people here know what they want usually. I think the one like us that see $3000 for a bike is perfectly fine are the minority that walk into a bike shop.


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

Ltdan12a said:


> Idunno, a "mid-range" bike has been out of my price range for a few years now... I'm riding, a $400 dollar fork, $400 carbon frame, $200 wheel set, and the rest has all been bought on clearance or at the swapmeets... Pretty sure I'm having just as much fun as the dude on his $4000 rig....





AZ said:


> Probably more.


Probably as he is out riding hard and the guy with the $4k rig is worried about scratching the paint


----------



## moonraker (Jan 22, 2004)

Mt thought is that manufacturers are now pricing in a warranty replacement frame with the retail price of the bikes. That is why you can buy a used bike, with no warranty, for half the price after a year or two. 

The other thing is that a lot of big bike manufacturing operations are now owned by marketing corporations via big investment groups. Example: Dorel owning Cannondale, GT, Mongoose, Schwinn, etc. or Specialized who started as an marketing company outsourcing manufacturing from the very beginning.


----------



## RajunCajun44 (Aug 12, 2012)

I don't know if this of interest, but it seems new bikes lose 50% of their value in the first year... Look at final sold values on ebay if you don't believe me... One reason why I buy used from now on.... Save a $hittload of money...


----------



## RajunCajun44 (Aug 12, 2012)

moonraker said:


> Mt thought is that manufacturers are now pricing in a warranty replacement frame with the retail price of the bikes. That is why you can buy a used bike, with no warranty, for half the price after a year or two.
> 
> .


I saw this after I wrote my post  .... what you say is very true !


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

Wanted to read the whole thread before I commented. I had the same exact conversation at the LBS during my lunch break today.

So glad to see some more people waking the hell up.

I, for one am so sick of seeing all these foolish yuppies parroting the
"You get what you pay for" shpeel all the time.

The bike industry right now, cannot sustain how they are operating. 
They are completely dependant on the foolish consumer with too much money at this point. They are well on their way to pricing themselves to extinction, at this point the only consumers buying all these high end parts and bikes are the same ones who bought the same top end stuff last year, or the year before. These are the people who have more money than brains, and those who are willing to spend as much as it takes to get what they want. It doesn't matter if the top of the line model was 5k or 10k, they have such an ego that they "need" to feel justified in spending that much money, and thus at every juncture have to point out how they spent $X, and that anything below that just isn't good enough. These people are common on this site, and are commonly seen as the "snobs" putting down someone with less.

Average Joe America cannot even get into a descent mountain bike right now.
As been pointed out by previous posters, the cost of an entry level bike has gone up dramatically, whereas the quality level of the components and bike have gone down.

What the heck is going on? $1000 forks that need rebuilt after 100 miles, or a couple rides, bike tires and shocks that cost more than car tires, whatever. The fact of the matter is that someone out there is spending these kinds of numbers, and the industry sees this, so they continue to offer overpriced products. The amount of people rolling around in high end bikes is the same it was 10 years ago. There is no significant market share gains, those people had high end then, and have newer high end now. They are the ones with disposable income that are ruining everything for everyone else.

The average guy with 40-50k salary a wife, 2.5 kids and mortgage simply cannot afford to be upgrading at the rate the industry would like. Heck, those people are LUCKY if they can even buy a new bike good enough to be considered entry level anymore. Prices are downright INSANE compared to what they were 20 years ago when MTB really caught on. 

As someone who rides and buys/sells bikes as spare income/hobby, I see a lot of crazy crap out there now. I would never, EVER, EVER buy a bike new off the LBS showroom floor. MSRP's are so inflated right now, they could be 50% off and manufacturers are still making a killing off of them. With improved manufacturing techniques, cheaper labor rates, we should be seeing prices go down, but instead they are going up, up, and away. 

I don't know how many of you guys have friends that don't ride, or are thinking about riding, but at this point, the industry has already priced itself out of the average person range. Just this past year, I've had a few people I know that have come to me about getting a bike, since they know I move a good amount of them and find some killer deals. They'll come over and see my bikes, and when I tell them what they cost, their jaws drop. I don't even have ultra high end, new bikes, my 2 main personal MTBs right now are a 4 year old Ti motobecane HT and a 11 y/o FS Giant bike. I have roughly $1200 combined into both of these bikes, and I would consider what I paid for them to be steals for what type of components are on them. These are lower-middle tier bikes overall, nothing special compared to whats out there. That is a lot of money to the average guy. So when I start to find out what they want, and give them basics on what something costs, I can see their interest in getting into biking starting to waver already. 

Noone wants to go to a store, and to find out an entry level bike costs $1000 or more. The intial cost to get into this sport is absolutely on a retarded level right now. People see those price tags and don't even want to bother, that's a pretty big chunk of money to be spent on something that they may or may not do 2 years down the road. 

So, then you have the lower tiers of bikes out there. Starting off with Walmart bikes, you literally get made fun of by a good portion of avid bikers out for riding one of these, and lets face it, yes the quality is somewhere between Junk and somewhat useable with lots of maintenance issues. 

Most people don't want to deal with the headache of constantly adjusting and/or replacing stuff, and certainly don't want to get ragged on at the trail, or on the net.

So what choice do people have here? There no longer exists a middle ground between garbage $100 big box store bikes and $1000k LBS offerings. There's a barren middle ground out there that a few places are catering too, such as bikesdirect or other online retailers, but you still get the bigots out in force proclaiming any such offering as crap as well, and on something where you are looking for peer review on, when you see a very motivated group of haters out there, and you can't see and touch the product before buying, then well that cuts out yet another demographic of riders and price bracket of potential riders.

So between a combination of industry pushing the overpriced high end stuff, and the fools buying it anyways, then going around and crapping on anything less than what they have, the Bike industry and community is killing itself from the inside.

Face it, the raw % of people riding bikes now-a-days is lower than ever. Whether its the internet, technology, video games, or social stigmas having less people buying bikes is a bad thing. The amount of riders out there has stagnated. 

That's why you see the only way to really they have been expanding the biking market is to bring new technology and products to showrooms and to feed off of the already existing consumer base. You can see it happening currently with "Fat Bikes" and to a lesser extent 650b, and you saw it previously with 29ers before them. 

However, I see a really big resistance to the whole 650b thing, because it wasn't 5 years ago that the marketing had you convinced that 29'ers were the do-it-all bestest ever thing to come around in bikes, now they have all those same early adopting suckers standing in line to spend an EVEN HIGHER premium for 650b, which is at best a slight upgrade to the traditional 26" bikes that worked just fine for close to 100 years.

Shops around me don't want to carry them(650s), and certainly aren't pushing them when you go in. The bike manufacturers have shot themselves in the foot this time, I think they went all-in on this 650b thing WAY too early. I would honestly be surprised if it ever gets a market share to rival 26 or 29, and isn't relegated to a very small niche like 24" has. Infact, I would bet that you will see the largest new biking market to become the fat bikes.

The real key to growing the biking market(not just making more bottom line profit) is to get new riders out there. Unfortunately the majority of the marketing and aims of the industry as a whole as I see it, is predicated on convincing those already riding that what they have isn't good enough. 

Its a real shame really.


----------



## dirtdawg21892 (Jul 20, 2009)

michaelscott said:


> the moral of the story is:
> 
> Buy used.
> 
> ...


yes!


----------



## Blurbikerider (Mar 12, 2011)

steveohio said:


> Wanted to read the whole thread before I commented. I had the same exact conversation at the LBS during my lunch break today.
> 
> So glad to see some more people waking the hell up.
> 
> ...


I agree with a lot of things you are saying here except for the 650b thing. Do you think the competive nature in us is a good part of the reason for all the high end spending , we want to best our friends and local rides take Koms on Strava and compete in races .It just seems companies are capitalizing on our emotions ,imagine if there were bike weight and wheel weight categories in racing along with age ,wouldn't this allow and encourage more people to sign up at races and end most of the push for the most expensive and lightest bikes except for those that could afford to race in that category.


----------



## Gumbi4Prez (Jan 2, 2014)

Not so sure about 650b either. Millions of parts at dirt cheap prices will be on the market for 26", it will make sales tough for 650b. 

Enduro, yeee hayyyy. I can see where it would be great for the east and west coast. Where there are bigger mtns, lift assistance etc. I shake my head when I see the mid west and southern states trying to organize endure formats. There isn't enough terrain to run a real endure format. I'll be the first in line to spend $50-200 just on entry fees plus, travel, lodging, food. All for three to five minutes worth of racing, that takes all day, or even two (speaking about the mid west and south). Some friends, a couple of vehicles, some gas, a gps and we can play all day long. On top of that you can take a piss in the woods, with no one else around. Best of all you don't have to own a $5000-10000 650b Enduro bike to do it.

How's Super D and 4x holding up a whole? Lets just call it Enduro for the sake of simplicity.

Others brought up good points. The average person is being priced out of the market. Not everyone lives in Vancouver, Sedona, Moab, Nor Cal, Bend (sorry east coast, I haven't ridden out there).

I wonder what bike purchases across the entire North American looks like. What's the average median price? If Giant can research and write a six page paper on why 650b is optimal. Surely they know the sales demographics. Anyone out there ran across sales numbers? Might not be released to the general public.


----------



## RajunCajun44 (Aug 12, 2012)

I mean there is a silver lining here.... Because so many folks are buying the new technologies (29er, 27.5, carbon, hydraulic disc brakes etc...), the market is insanely flooded with used bikes... Anyone who wants to get into mt biking, can do so easily by buying a used aluminum 26er with either rim brakes or mech disc.... Ain't nothing wrong with these bikes... I rode them for years with lots of smiles.


----------



## crossracer (Jun 27, 2004)

Reading thru this post I have noticed that everyone is comparing bikes from ten to twenty years ago and today's prices. Having been in the bike industry for 25 years the prices have gone up, but so has performance.
What I noticed missing is that everything else has gone up in price so much also, plus there are new costs in our lives for things we didn't have 20 years ago (cell phones, Internet, computers and gadgets) all these things now take a big chunk out of our lives, and that means less to spend on bikes.
Last year I spent 400 to have bothy shocks tuned by Push and another 200 to convert to 1x10. My bike is a giant trance with upgraded bearings and is over 7 years old. It's an aluminum frame and should give great service for years to come. Yes it's a bit long in the tooth for suspention, but it still rides fantastic. 
I'm the bike industries worst nightmare, because I'm loving what I have, not lusting for what I don't. 

Bill


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## shortbutfunky (Mar 5, 2014)

Everything has gone up in price? Really? 

I saw a post before it was deleted in another forum and there was a really great point brought up, but the poster got beat down, so he deleted it. Too bad.

Hear is a recap: do remember how much a plasma or flat screen tv cost back in the early 2000? They were like 3k to 6K and that was for a 40". Technology was new, so prices reflected the high cost of R&D and the need for return. Now that all the leg work has been done, prices have dropped well below 1k even though the technology is way better than it was back then. They are now better, lighter, thinner, clearer and much larger than you could get back then. Yet prices dropped well below 1k for a much larger and better TV.

All the leg work for mtb had been done by the mid 2000's, but prices were never thru the roof. 

What technology is new since the mid 2000's that requires such ridiculous prices for return on R&D?

Carbon Fiber? Trek was making bikes with carbon fiber since the early 90's when they borrowed the tech from tennis racquets. They didn't have to spend money to invent it. Carbon forks and other parts were available in the 90's, and others were making full carbon bikes by the early 2000's, yet no 10k bikes back then. 

29ers? Leg work for that was done in the early 2000's. Sure there are better now, but really just tweaks to geometry. And FS 29ers just use the same suspension designs as other bikes but tweaked for 29ers. 

Suspension? Santa Cruz and others have used the same suspension designs from the mid 2000's. Do remember suspension bikes form the 90's? Elastomers and URT designs all gone by mid 2000, yet no crazy spikes in price to cover R&D for those major tech improvements.

Is tweaking bikes ever so slightly year by year really that expensive? I find that hard to believe.

Using MTB math flat screen TV's should cost around 15k today and it's not like the demand for them has slowed, everyone has to have a flats screen nowadays.


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

Hey man, that was my post! Thanks for recapping here in this thread. My rep pretty much got sh*t on from the http://forums.mtbr.com/beginners-corner/20mm-longer-fork-weakens-frame-voids-warranty-867877.html thread i created in the beginners forum. So I just deleted that last comment figuring it would hurt my rep even more. Glade you caught it before i could delete it.

The thread took a weird turn, and I said some things about no love for mtb manufactures who charge more for a mtb than a moto cross bike and how I would have no issues switching forks back to get the warranty honored from those charging outrageous prices.

Probably should't of said that, because i really wouldn't do it (I love Gary Fisher too much) but i was fired up when i looked into how much moto cross bikes cost compared to MTB's. Frankly, i feel like mtb manufactures are taking advantage of us just because they can and said that because thats a way I could take advantage of them just because I could. Would that be dishonest, yes, so i would't really do it. In hindsight I shouldn't of said that if I am not willing to do it, but oh well.


----------



## kabayan (Oct 25, 2004)

IMO, it's all about the Pricepoints (not the WWW but feel free to PM me your thx). 
All over the news, the wealth gap is wide and getting wider.
If the dude's net worth is increasing >40% year over year, it doesn't make sense to hit him with a 6% price increase. 
And if some non sponsored, non1% wants to play on the high roller table, then that's gravy for the businesses.
I don't believe the entry level bikes have increased in price that much compared to the high end, so you now have this large spread to cover. And the manufacturers deal with it by offering X3, X5, X7, X9, X0, XO1, XX, XX1, and everyone's favorite XXX :thumbsup:. 
Pricepoints


----------



## mtuck1 (Apr 13, 2009)

crossracer said:


> I'm the bike industries worst nightmare, because I'm loving what I have, not lusting for what I don't.


Me too! I sent my shock to Push as well. Expensive but well worth it. Also I upgrade as I see fit. I did buy two new fat bikes Last year but I bought frames only and built them up with the components I like. I am unlikely to buy a complete new bike ever again.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

crossracer said:


> Reading thru this post I have noticed that everyone is comparing bikes from ten to twenty years ago and today's prices. Having been in the bike industry for 25 years the prices have gone up, but so has performance.
> What I noticed missing is that everything else has gone up in price so much also, plus there are new costs in our lives for things we didn't have 20 years ago (cell phones, Internet, computers and gadgets) all these things now take a big chunk out of our lives, and that means less to spend on bikes.
> Last year I spent 400 to have bothy shocks tuned by Push and another 200 to convert to 1x10. My bike is a giant trance with upgraded bearings and is over 7 years old. It's an aluminum frame and should give great service for years to come. Yes it's a bit long in the tooth for suspention, but it still rides fantastic.
> I'm the bike industries worst nightmare, because I'm loving what I have, not lusting for what I don't.


It's a shame that bicycles don't fall under Moore's Law (technically, neither do flat screen tvs, but the principle still applies).

Did you know that I carry more than the computing power of a Cray I Supercomputer in my pocket? That much computing power cost $9 million in 1977 dollars. I paid $350 for mine and it's a phone too!


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

I highly doubt the Bike industry thinks someone who buys 2 fat bikes in a year and pays to service a fork at what they charge thinks your a nightmare, you are exactly the kind of person they love. 

Also, it generally costs more to build a bike than buy a complete, unless you have spare parts laying around already..


----------



## mtuck1 (Apr 13, 2009)

steveohio said:


> I highly doubt the Bike industry thinks someone who buys 2 fat bikes in a year and pays to service a fork at what they charge thinks your a nightmare, you are exactly the kind of person they love.
> 
> Also, it generally costs more to build a bike than buy a complete, unless you have spare parts laying around already..


The thing is if you want a Lefty front fork, Formula R1 brakes, and full Sram X0 on your fat bike you really have no choice but to build it yourself. Many of the parts were "take off's", or used, including the Lefty fork and hub. The frame was the most expensive item and the only thing I paid retail for.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

I saw this today, and figured it was worth sharing here: NSMB: The Angry Mob.


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

^ the person on their blog is clearly drinking the koolaid the bike industry wants them to drink.

The fact that he states its ok that a middle of the road bike is $4,000 is a clue that this person never had to struggle or starve a day in his life or has idea what its like to not have a metric shitton of disposable income.

And his comment stating that that type of spending for a pastime is minor compared to others, and goes on to compare them to houses and children is a clear indicator that this person is so delusional he doesn't even separate Need vs Want. 

Oh, and that site is trying to force a virus executable through your browser BTW, please remove the link.

Total **** fest of a site, that person is a retard, his site's security is compromised, and I feel sad for them and their need to puff their chest and talk about how they are cool because their hobby costs a lot, and they spent a lot doing it, and its ok that bikes cost as that much, cause well you can race them off the showroom floor!


----------



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

This seems like as good a place as any for this:

The Angry Mob - NSMB.com

Shoot. Sorry. I scrolled too fast and didn't see that someone else already posted it.


----------



## abelfonseca (Dec 26, 2011)

Great thread. I also think bike pricing is silly and outrageous. I have now learned to only order last year clearances at great discount or buy from brands that give you more value for your money. 

Wouldnt it be cool if this thread went viral and the major manufacturer's facebook pages and websites were flooded with links to it.

Cheers


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

Everything's relative. You can get a new bike for $1000 now that would beat the crap out of a $3000 bike from 15 years ago. Sure, high-end bikes have gotten expensive, but high-end bikes were expensive 10 years ago. You want a super nice, fun, reliable bike right now? $1500 will get it done. It might be a bit hefty, but not any heavier than a $1500 bike with similar travel 10 years ago. I remember elastomer suspension that constantly needed lubing and blew up every couple of months. I remember brakes that were a pain in the butt to bleed or didn't work when wet. I remember tires that had tubes in them and didn't grip well on roots or wet rocks. I remember shifters that didn't click when you pushed them and pedals that didn't clip. I remember frames that flexed when pedaling up the driveway and bushings that had more slop than my local trails this time of year. I remember helmets with no vents, headsets that had threads, handlebars that were 22" wide, stems that were 130 mm long, cranks that fell off the spindles, and water bottles that didn't strap to your back. Prices have gone up in general, but so has the quality of the products. Inflation also has something to do with it. You don't need to spend $4000 on a bike to get a very good bike. If you think you do, you're an idiot. If you think $4000 is middle of the line, then you're delusional. The average cost of a bike in the major companies is nowhere near $4000. The median's even lower than the average. The market is what you make of it. How many people really need $4000 carbon fiber 6" travel bikes that weigh 26 pounds? None of us.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

okie_calvin said:


> It's been said before that cycling is the new golf, at this rate again only the uber rich will be partaking. If you've been riding for awhile you like me probably started on a cheap but halfway decent hardtail for $5-700 bucks; the bikes in that price range now are very heavy and poorly equipped for anything but super buff trails. Seems like the bike industry is killing off their future business for a few big sales right now. But then again, soon after a $10K road bike shows up on the sales floor it's sold so what do I know?


Really? The seven hundred dollar bikes I've seen are light-years ahead of the seven hundred dollar bike I bought in 1992.

In fact, my first real mountain bike after that (I gave up riding for almost twelve years) was $400 2008 Gary Fisher Wahoo and it was in every respect a superior bike than my 1992 $700 Bridgestone MB4.

Everything back in 1992 was buff compared to today.

And you can get one heck of a bike for what a high end but less capable bike cost in the early 90s.

I'm going to reiterate another poster's point: Nobody is holding a gun to anybody's head. My LBS is full of low-end but entirely capable rides.


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

Awshucks said:


> Wonder when those capitalist swines over in the "too much bike" thread are going to chime in. Lol jk. I say burn it all down! Or buy from craigslist. Or keep using those 10% coupons jenson always gives you. Amiright?


Hi. Capitalist swine here. I've said it several times but bikes are one of the few things I enjoy spending money on. I write a lot of checks: taxes (astronomical), alimony and child support (given to my ex without rancor or acrimony because she is the best woman I ever met), health insurance, disability insurance, professional fees, car insurance, renters insurance, rent, vet bills...the list is endless.

Am I the only one who likes spending money on bikes?

But I'm just not getting how mountain biking is out of anybody's reach. If you can't afford a high end bike then get an inexpensive but good-quality rigid bike and you will be no worse off than most people were ten years ago.


----------



## crossracer (Jun 27, 2004)

I don't believe the Plasma Tv analogy works here because of the economics of scale. No way bike production of the higher end bikes ever gets any where close to what TV's do in a day. That's a guess but im betting its a pretty close one. 

Say what you want, todays 500 dollar bike is way better then bikes from 15 years ago. THe shifting is better, the brakes are better, rims, tires, the whole lot all works better. 
But its the part of the spectrum that people feel they need to have to be competive that has gone thru the roof. Too many customers I deal with at first believe they need the absolutely lightest bike to be successful. How many light weight wonder bikes have I passed over the years that have been broken, cant win on a broken bike. 

One of the huge problems right now is everyone in all the magizines is talking about super bikes. 6-8-10 thousand dollar dream machines. That's where the sexy is, but it really isn't where the majority of us spend our time. Sure I love watching a ferreri 599 go around the track, but I am content owning my element and not getting rained on on my way to work. 

Until magizines start doing real world tests, showing people how to still have a great time in this sport and not spend the kids college fund we will continue to lose people who feel this sport is too expensive. Same issue is happing in the road bike world. Heck my favorite magazine is bicycle times, because it shows me products that help save me money. 

Bill


----------



## lapinGTI (Dec 30, 2009)

I don't know if you remember, but a top spec bike in early 90' like Specialized Epic ultimate was 5K+ and that was in 93-95... In 98 (in Canada) a Trek OCLV (full carbon frame) was 1800$ frame alone! Price increases but not that much. Yes it would be great if the price could go down, but unlike other thing, like TV, they don't sell that many bike to have volume prices. Especially on high end bike. And if you look around high end and new technology in any domain cost a lot. Just like XTR vs XT, even though there isn’t that much difference between them.


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

From what I've seen, the bikes at the $200-400 range from years ago, are much better than bikes in that price range now. Sure the frame is heavier, but the component spec and wheels were a lot better back then. 

Cutting off or limiting the entry level options is the worst thing to happen to the industry, because nearly everyone is going to want a cheaper option to get started to make sure its something they like, and if so, they generally upgrade fairly quickly. 

Right now, entry level bikes are too pricey unless you buy used, but not everyone(especially mechanically challenged or people without biker friends) is ok with going the used route.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

steveohio said:


> From what I've seen, the bikes at the $200-400 range from years ago, are much better than bikes in that price range now. Sure the frame is heavier, but the component spec and wheels were a lot better back then.
> 
> Cutting off or limiting the entry level options is the worst thing to happen to the industry, because nearly everyone is going to want a cheaper option to get started to make sure its something they like, and if so, they generally upgrade fairly quickly.
> 
> Right now, entry level bikes are too pricey unless you buy used, but not everyone(especially mechanically challenged or people without biker friends) is ok with going the used route.


I strongly disagree with your statements. Component specs on entry-level bikes were not better in the past. Trickle-down technology has hit the low-end bikes, as well. Now, there aren't many $250 bikes to be found in shops anymore, but Walmart bikes are better now than they used to be, too. A $250 mountain bike was never going to be a truly capable mountain bike, so why sell them in a shop? There's no profit to be made there, unless you count the constant repair bills...


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

mountainbiker24 said:


> I strongly disagree with your statements. Component specs on entry-level bikes were not better in the past. Trickle-down technology has hit the low-end bikes, as well. Now, there aren't many $250 bikes to be found in shops anymore, but Walmart bikes are better now than they used to be, too. A $250 mountain bike was never going to be a truly capable mountain bike, so why sell them in a shop? There's no profit to be made there, unless you count the constant repair bills...


Model names and #s do not equate to quality level. Parts back 10-20 years ago lasted a lot longer. I know I beat the living snot out of wheels on older $200ish bikes. Nowadays those bikes at those same price points, wheels fold like taco shells.

And yes, the fact that there are no $250 in shops anymore is a major issue here. If you cut off potential new riders due to intital cost of investment the sport doesn't grow.

Walmart bikes certainly are not better than what they used to be. I have 50-75 year old bikes from big box stores that work absolutely flawlessly. No bike produced today at the same entry level pricepoints will last more than a couple seasons, let alone rides when ridden.

Cost of production is down, but costs and profits are higher. That's messed up.


----------



## abelfonseca (Dec 26, 2011)

Ailuropoda said:


> Really? The seven hundred dollar bikes I've seen are light-years ahead of the seven hundred dollar bike I bought in 1992.
> 
> In fact, my first real mountain bike after that (I gave up riding for almost twelve years) was $400 2008 Gary Fisher Wahoo and it was in every respect a superior bike than my 1992 $700 Bridgestone MB4.
> 
> ...


Yes technology is better in entry level bikes now than back then but not quality. Price should not increase when technology gets better or trickles down, in fact, it should do the contrary.

The bottom line is, to get the equivalent of a 1500 dollar bike (quality wise) in 2008, now your have to pay close to 3000, and that is just efd up.

A ford model T cost the equivalent of 20,000 present day dollars, 800 dollars back then. The tata nano has much better and advanced technology than the model T and it costs less than 4000 present day dollars. This is a somewhat extreme example but I think it clearly ilustrates the point that trickle down technology, will make products cheaper in most cases. I agree that bikes dont have the economies of scale to get that cheap, but it shouldnt be the other way around.

Cheers


----------



## dwt (Jul 19, 2009)

Switchback Bikes said:


> Bike parts = 6% import duties
> Complete Bikes = 20% import duties
> Those import duties haven't changed in the last 3 years


There is a segment of our population who always blame the government for everything, whether it makes sense or not.

Meanwhile, with prices the way they are, it is practically impossible to afford the next new thing or fad. Therefore, a brand new generation of retrogrouches on functional rather than up to the minutes bling equipment is on its way. Probably a good result overall. Recycle used stuff, ride skillfully, wrench your own equipment


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

steveohio said:


> Model names and #s do not equate to quality level. Parts back 10-20 years ago lasted a lot longer. I know I beat the living snot out of wheels on older $200ish bikes. Nowadays those bikes at those same price points, wheels fold like taco shells.
> 
> And yes, the fact that there are no $250 in shops anymore is a major issue here. If you cut off potential new riders due to intital cost of investment the sport doesn't grow.
> 
> ...


I remember bending and trashing plenty of wheels and parts on $350 bikes 10-15 years ago. Much more than I've broken lately. People ride harder on more demanding terrain these days. Better suspension and disc brakes on entry-level bikes means riders ride faster. Manufacturing techniques have gotten better, making stronger and lighter parts. No bike less than a few hundred bucks will last long under a rider riding on real trails. Sure, plastic will break easier than steel, which I'm sure your "50-75" year old bikes are made of.

$250 today is obviously not the same as $250 10 years ago. You can't compare bikes at similar price points from different decades. Also, I would never recommend anybody, including beginners, to spend less than $400 on a bike. It will only frustrate a rider and maybe persuade them to quit riding. It happens all the time.

Costs to manufacture bikes may be down due to foreign labor, but metal prices have risen drastically, and, again, inflation means companies need to make more money to survive. Most people are making more money now than they did 10 years ago, with the exception of us North Carolina public educators.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

abelfonseca said:


> Yes technology is better in entry level bikes now than back then but not quality. Price should not increase when technology gets better or trickles down, in fact, it should do the contrary.
> 
> The bottom line is, to get the equivalent of a 1500 dollar bike (quality wise) in 2008, now your have to pay close to 3000, and that is just efd up.
> 
> ...


There is no way you can honestly say that a $1500 bike in 2008 even compares with a $3000 bike of today. No way. Flip that around and you may be more accurate. Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "quality". To me, quality means a well-designed, built, and supported product. Better manufacturing tolerances, materials, and engineering software indicates better quality.

Also, the Model T was absolute cutting edge technology when it was introduced. How much does a cutting edge car cost today? $20,000? I think not. It's all relative.


----------



## dwt (Jul 19, 2009)

mountainbiker24 said:


> There is Aa
> Apart way you can honestly say that a $1500 bike in 2008 even compares with a $3000 bike of today. No way.


Not even in the same galaxy. Apples and oranges


----------



## STACK (Mar 23, 2009)

I got a nice bike with XT and Rockshox for <$800 last year.. Actually, I got two of them, a 26 and a 29.. Right around $800, but just under. In a hardtail, if you are not seriously competitively racing, they are all a person needs. I have seen deals on bikes you could race for <$3,000, quite a bit less. The deals are out there. The big brands come with easier to use warranties and things like that which are important, but I like my Focus bikes better than my Specialized, although I did like last years RH Pro. 

Seriously, my Focus bikes are awesome, and are partly made/assembled in a first world country (Germany), I don't think I would buy anything else that was significantly more expensive spec for spec. I would buy a Trek because of the service, and because my buddy would give me a discount. So those are my two favorite brands right now. One of them you can get great deals on.


----------



## ironsinker (Oct 19, 2012)

My wife's engagement ring cost almost 7K. Her wedding dress cost about 2K (for one time use). Each "plate" at my reception cost $90 and that's a cheap wedding!! Everythings a scam. 

My Scalpel cost me 4K. I looked and schemed and tried to find a way around paying so much for a carbon FS. It's just not possible. Plus, you have to buy new or risk not having a warranty! So frustrating.....but I love my Scalpel Carbon!!!

Don't spend too much time worrying about the cost of things. You will stay depressed!!


----------



## shortbutfunky (Mar 5, 2014)

*Your MTB doesn't cost more because it's better*

Your mtb doesn't cost more because it's better, it costs more because you believe it's better.

How about we look at some facts?

-Prices:
High end mtbs in the early/mid 2000 cost the same as high end mtbs from the mid 90's.
High end mtbs cost twice as much or more than mtbs made in the early/mid 2000.

-Technology:
Mtb technology advancements from the mid 90's to early/mid 2000 was extreme.
Mtb technology advancements from the early/mid 2000 to today has been minimal.
Proof: 
Mtbs from the mid 90's were no were near as capable as mtbs from the early/mid 2000s.
Mtbs from the early/mid 2000s are just about as capable as mtbs made today.
Just check out Red Bull Rampage 2002 Video - Pinkbike to see early 2000 mtb capabilities. These guys are doing the same **** as riders today are just as easily. Would love to see someone attempt this on a mtb made in the mid 90's. Seriously that would be hilarious.

-Inflation:
Inflation rate from '95 to '05 was 28%
Inflation rate from '05 to today is 20%

-Theory of economy of scale:
More people are mountain biking today than in the 90's. 
There are considerably less manufactures making bikes today than in '95.
Economy of scale states that the more of a product a manufacturer can make the cheaper. Not only are they making more bikes because more people ride now, but since there are less manufactures, each is making a considerable more amount of bikes than in the 90's.

-Global cost of materials:
Aluminum: 
1995 about .95 cents a lb
2005 about .80 cents a lb
2014 about .80 cents a lb
Steel raw materials:
With the exception of tin and titanium, different steel raw materials have either stayed the same or have gone down a little or up a little since '05.
Tin has gone up by 50%, but I don't ride tin bikes.
Titanium has gone from over $20 a kg in '05 to just above $6 a kg in '13.

-Labor:
Many bikes in the 90's and early/mid 2000 were made in the good ole USA by professionals.
Mostly all bikes today are made in Asian countries probably by children and meth heads. (Yes, I said meth heads. I just watched the National Geographic's documentary called 'the world's most dangerous drug' where they shed light on the fact that in Asian countries like Taiwan, China, Korea and Thailand where yaba is part of the culture and it is common practice for factory bosses to hand out yaba to workers to increase production. Yaba is meth pills laced with caffeine. Ever wonder why labor is so cheap in Asia? This is one reason.)

-Fuel: (taken from the "20mm longer fork weakens frame, voids warranty?" thread in the beginners forum. Thanks again singletrackmack:thumbsup
Gasoline: 
1995 gallon of gas cost $1.05 to $1.11
2005 gallon of gas cost $2.10 to $2.47. An increase of about 50%
2013 gallon of gas cost $3.11 to $3.65. An increase of about 33% over '05.
"Oh, uh, but freighters don't run on gasoline and since bikes are now mainly made in Asia the cost to transport them has gone up."
Ok
Global bunker fuel:
Bunker fuel cost in '95 - about $30 a barrel
Bunker fuel cost in '05 - about $70 a barrel
Bunker fuel cost in 2013 - about $115 a barrel. Pretty steady increases there.

So, would anyone else who works for the MTB industry trying to justify ridiculous prices like to through some more **** on the wall to see if it sticks?

Truth is, mountain bikes don't cost more because they are 'that' much better. (Although the marketing sure does a good job of brain washing people into thinking they are so much better). MTBs cost more because manufactures have way bigger marketing expenses than ever, and they will keep pumping money into marketing because people are buying into it and paying ridiculous amounts of money for bikes that are marginally better each year. And finally, the last reason they cost so much is because mtb manufactures figured out they can take total advantage of us, so they do.

No, I don't have to buy a new mtb, but that doesn't make what they are doing right.


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

But, but, our marketing depar; uhm, I mean engineers have told us its 21.5% more efficient, for only 10% more than last years model and its in a limited edition gloss black instead of satin black!


----------



## vack (Jan 2, 2003)

The bottom line is, those of us that have seen this trending up in $$. Liked our XT (using it as an example) Level Bike we bought in early 2000. Now it's time to upgrade, and now to get into an XT level bike the price is out of reach. While the price of that level (Mid Level IMO) has more than doubled, most of our salaries have not. Not everyone is an executive.

I think what is kind of the blame is the terminology. I think SLX is the New XT for some of us. The XT is the new XTR, and the XTR...well that's for pro guys. (Insert X7, X9, X0, XX1 for Sram).

But my point is if you use that little theory, or thought process I laid out up there, Mid level bikes are in check. However, if you stick to XT is XT....then Mid Level Bikes Skyrocketed.


----------



## mountainbiker24 (Feb 5, 2007)

The performance of XT is so much better in every way than it was 5 years ago. Twice as good? That's difficult to quantify. The bottom line is if you are completely happy with your 2000 XT equipped bike, then a comparable bike today will be around the same price that you paid for yours in 2000. It won't be XT equipped, but you won't feel the label change.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

I buy a new singlespeed about every 5 years now, and I try to get a reasonable deal. That usually gives me time to break the frame, get it replaced/ repaired and break it again. I replace tires, grips, brake pads, chains, and cogs/rings over the life of the bike and don't upgrade a thing unless something breaks.

Aside from new bike years, I'd say I spend less than $250 annually on mtb equipment, and I'm on my bike 6.5 days/wk+

It's an outright bargain, if you ask me.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

mountainbiker24 said:


> There is no way you can honestly say that a $1500 bike in 2008 even compares with a $3000 bike of today. No way.


In 2003 I build a $1500 bike. 3.3lbs Alu HT frame, XT group 100mm fork. XT Vbrakes. Bike came in a 24lbs with a heavy 4lbs fork. I could have had the bike 1 lbs less easily with 2.5lbs Rock Shox SID like my friend, but I decided to save some cash.

I still ride that bike now, but I did replace my 4lbs 100 mm judy SL with a 4lbs $250 Manitou Minute Expert. Pretty much the same tech. Coil spring with air assist and same weight. Slightly better, but then again the judy was old worn and I could not get parts to rebuilt it.

Anyway the rest of the bike is still very solid. XT drivetrain, hubs and brakes work as well now as they did back then. It is a 3x9, but that is still plenty of gear range despite not being as cool as a 2x10 or 1x11. The brakes... they work.

Overall the bike is works well and I can't get a similar spec modern bike for anywhere near that cost. That is just 11 years out to get that weight and quality of parts is going to cost alot. That is why I keep what I have.


----------



## abelfonseca (Dec 26, 2011)

mountainbiker24 said:


> The performance of XT is so much better in every way than it was 5 years ago. Twice as good? That's difficult to quantify. The bottom line is if you are completely happy with your 2000 XT equipped bike, then a comparable bike today will be around the same price that you paid for yours in 2000. It won't be XT equipped, but you won't feel the label change.


Yes an XT equiped bike may be and should be much better now than it was 5 years ago, but it shouldnt be that much more expensive. It could be somewhat more expensive, but not close to double. Technology is supposed to get better. In almost every case, it also gets cheaper as it gets better.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

steveohio said:


> ^ the person on their blog is clearly drinking the koolaid the bike industry wants them to drink.
> 
> The fact that he states its ok that a middle of the road bike is $4,000 is a clue that this person never had to struggle or starve a day in his life or has idea what its like to not have a metric shitton of disposable income.
> 
> ...


It's not some guy's blog. It's a well-known and well-regarded mountain bike website, although with regional roots and focus (like TGR in the ski world). Your post is overflowing with personal attacks and practically pulsing with anger. I think that's an overreaction.


----------



## jnroyal (Sep 25, 2008)

The bike I ride now is definitely 96% better than what I was riding in 2000 so I don't see a problem!


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

jnroyal said:


> The bike I ride now is definitely 96% better than what I was riding in 2000 so I don't see a problem!


HA! Love it


----------



## kabayan (Oct 25, 2004)

vandolero1 said:


> I can't wait until some of these 10k frames start hitting the used market.:ihih:


You don't have to wait long, what's your size? :thumbsup:
Turner Sultan - XTR, ENVE
2013 medium Santa Cruz bronson carbon , enve , xx1
Yeti SB-95c


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

Looks like Giant USA is listening a little bit....good on them for lowering entry level prices as a move to appeal to potential new riders

Giant USA targets sub-$500 bike consumers with new campaign | Bicycle Retailer and Industry News


----------



## abelfonseca (Dec 26, 2011)

OP, youre on the inside. You can give us the real scoop as to why bikes have gotten so darn expensive. Come on now, spit it out!

Cheers!


----------



## TwoNin9r (Jan 26, 2011)

abelfonseca said:


> OP, youre on the inside. You can give us the real scoop as to why bikes have gotten so darn expensive. Come on now, spit it out!
> 
> Cheers!


From someone who bought a bike from him, he probably doesn't know, because his bikes are pretty awesome prices Lol.

Posted via mobile


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

My 1993 Fisher Aquila: LX, 3x7-speed, rigid. Had to weigh about 30+ lbs. $675. In 2013 dollars is $994.

Today $1050 buys me a X-caliber 8, 29er: comparable component package, 3x9, 100mm shock with hydraulic discs brakes.

If you want more than that you had to pay more:

1995 Bontrager Race Lite: XT 80 mm travel, v brakes, 25 lbs- $2450, that's $3534 in 2013 dollars.

or


1993 Fisher RS-1 Pro: XTR, Rock Shox mag 21,3x8, White Industries hubs yatta-yatta-yatta-$4250 

That is $6263 in 2013 dollars.


$4500 just bought an Anthem Advance 1, 27.5: 24 lbs, 2x10, 100mm front and rear travel, hydraulic brakes, 2x10.

As far as I am concerned I saved 2 grand and got a much better bike than the Fisher, spent a grand more and got a much better bike than my Bontrager.


----------



## digitalayon (Jul 31, 2007)

What a stupid thread!!! Only a bike shop kid would post something as useless as this.


----------



## 006_007 (Jan 12, 2004)

digitalayon said:


> What a stupid thread!!! Only a bike shop kid would post something as useless as this.


LOL, he is a manufacturer himself:

http://forums.mtbr.com/general-discussion/will-switchback-bikes-make-889589.html

I am hoping for a 96% reduction on the prices of their product!


----------



## TwoNin9r (Jan 26, 2011)

digitalayon said:


> What a stupid thread!!! Only a bike shop kid would post something as useless as this.


I love when someone takes the time and energy to tell someone, in their thread, how stupid their thread is, when it had hundreds of thought out and serious replies

Posted via mobile


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

abelfonseca said:


> OP, youre on the inside. You can give us the real scoop as to why bikes have gotten so darn expensive. Come on now, spit it out!
> 
> Cheers!


happy to give my "take" on the situation based on insider info I do (and don't) have....but it's gonna have to wait a bit....March Madness beers may be clouding my "take" at the current moment :thumbsup:


----------



## bianchinut (May 27, 2010)

This is exactly why I haven't bought a new bike since '03 and all my bikes have a 1" steerer tube. Instead, I just maintain the hell out of my current bikes and replace parts only when I absolutely have to.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

Thor29 said:


> One major problem with the original article is mentioning the "rate of inflation". My understanding is that the official rate of inflation in the USA has been severely manipulated for political reasons and is almost meaningless. Like at least one other person mentioned, everything has gotten more expensive while salaries have remained stagnant. It's not just mountain bikes - take a look at health care, college education, housing costs (at least in the coastal states), concert tickets, sporting events, ski lift tickets, motorcycles, cars... I'm sure you can name lots of things that have skyrocketed in price in the last decade or so.





Mr5150 said:


> Prices were fairly stable until 2008 then shot thru the roof.





jazzanova said:


> Inflation is a hidden tax. It is most unfair, flat and hits mainly the middle class.


Things have taken a turn for the worse since '08, although it is more of an acceleration of the degradation of our standard of living that has been steadily eroding since WWII. The gap between wealthy and poor is astounding at this point.

Bikes have gotten MUCH better, but a lot of it is design and geometry. At this point carbon fiber does not cost more than Al to produce. There was a quantum leap in bike design in the mid 2000s when hydroformed, stiff, lightweight frames started to be produced, and at the same time suspension designs were being fine tuned. The result is a much better bike, although I question whether they are more expensive to produce or whether design simply matured.

To be fair some components do cost more to manufacture and it is obvious, for example the XX1 cassette does have a lot of machine work in it....

As an example, my 1st fs bike was a Giant AC, and I currently own a Trek Remedy. They are both single pivot designs with similar travel, made of aluminum.... but the Giant was flexy, pedaled very inefficiently, and the geometry was downright dangerous. It sucks to ride vs the Remedy. But I don't think one cost more to make than the other.

I don't think this has anything to do with bike manufacturers, I think the subject of this thread is a symptom of a larger, global issue with our monetary system. Things are getting very difficult economically for everyone but the wealthy, and we need to figure out a new paradigm since 7 billion people can't live like the typical American on this earth.


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

*This right here may sum it all up*

Maybe the Bike Brands that are the driving force behind the crazy increase in Bike/Frame prices the last few years are more tuned in to the American Consumer Consciousness than we realize.


----------



## okie_calvin (Jan 31, 2004)

Switchback Bikes said:


> Maybe the Bike Brands that are the driving force behind the crazy increase in Bike/Frame prices the last few years are more tuned in to the American Consumer Consciousness than we realize.
> 
> View attachment 879042


^^^^^^
That's funny!


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

*Soul Ride*



abelfonseca said:


> OP, youre on the inside. You can give us the real scoop as to why bikes have gotten so darn expensive. Come on now, spit it out!
> 
> Cheers!


Blog Contributor Adam Hunt just posted a new article that does a great job of summarizing this whole deal

Soul Ride ? 27.5 | 29er | Switchback Bikes

I am still working on the boring insider view/opinion of why bikes are getting so expensive :thumbsup:


----------



## pulser (Dec 6, 2004)

vack said:


> The bottom line is, those of us that have seen this trending up in $$. Liked our XT (using it as an example) Level Bike we bought in early 2000. Now it's time to upgrade, and now to get into an XT level bike the price is out of reach. While the price of that level (Mid Level IMO) has more than doubled, most of our salaries have not. Not everyone is an executive.
> 
> I think what is kind of the blame is the terminology. I think SLX is the New XT for some of us. The XT is the new XTR, and the XTR...well that's for pro guys. (Insert X7, X9, X0, XX1 for Sram).
> 
> But my point is if you use that little theory, or thought process I laid out up there, Mid level bikes are in check. However, if you stick to XT is XT....then Mid Level Bikes Skyrocketed.


I'm right there with you. I stopped buying off the shelf bikes after I stopped working in shops. As the prices went up I stopped looking at big brands and now mostly just look small off brands. You can still spec out a bike affordably with online part prices. The biggest problem I have is Forks. Prices have gotten crazy and I find them to be the hardest part to get at a good price. I'm ok with $1200 to $1500 frames but forks going for over a grand is out of control.


----------



## abelfonseca (Dec 26, 2011)

Switchback Bikes said:


> I am still working on the boring insider view/opinion of why bikes are getting so expensive :thumbsup:


We're anxiously waiting on that! 

Cheers


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

*Bike Pricing Out Of Control - Part 1*



abelfonseca said:


> We're anxiously waiting on that!
> 
> Cheers


Finished Part 1 of the Insiders View

Bike pricing out of control - Part 1 ? 27.5 | 29er | Switchback Bikes


----------



## pearl-drum-man (Sep 3, 2012)

Switchback Bikes said:


> Finished Part 1 of the Insiders View
> 
> Bike pricing out of control - Part 1 ? 27.5 | 29er | Switchback Bikes
> 
> View attachment 888850


Good stuff! I love that you included meetings as a cost factor! Coming from a manufacturing/engineering background I can tell you if you get 8-10 people in a room for an hour or two to discuss product development or manufacturing issues these people are typically at the high end of the pay scale for the company.


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

pearl-drum-man said:


> Good stuff! I love that you included meetings as a cost factor! Coming from a manufacturing/engineering background I can tell you if you get 8-10 people in a room for an hour or two to discuss product development or manufacturing issues these people are typically at the high end of the pay scale for the company.


Heck yeah! And very good point about the high-end of the pay scale...right in line w/ this point in the Blog Post:

"have a dedicated department focused on designing the latest and greatest, that department is the highest overhead department of their organization."


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

I remember when disc brakes came out and they were $300/wheel. Thank god it's not like that anymore, I can get a high end brake (XT) for about $100. Yay for progress! Also hollow forged cranks, dropper posts, and a myriad of other parts are significantly cheaper due to economy of scale these days.


----------



## dompedro3 (Jan 26, 2004)

This is why companies like Bikes Direct do well. Because you can still get a fairly capable hardtail for under $1000, hell, you can get a decent (if heavy) entry level bike for $500. There are hundreds of pages of threads on this board dedicated to the cheap carbon fiber frames/rims/parts you can buy directly from China. 

Specialized and Trek live in a world where the enthusiasts are not the only customers driving their bottom line. They probably make less selling expensive $10,000 bikes than they do seling their $150 kids bikes, but they can make a profit on the $10,000 bikes, so why not, thats their goal, right, make a profit? The fact that one year, they may wake up and find that all the customers for those $10,000 bikes have discovered that they can buy an equivalent bike, directly from some smaller maunfacturer (maybe even right from China!) and aren't buying them any more. But that hasn't happened yet, so they will continue to make overpriced bikes and sell on their name alone.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

There are 2 problems with bike pricing. 

1) We riders pay it. 
This is a big issue because there are guys that are willing to pay 10k for new bike. Or guys that say I can't afford 10k, but that makes 6k look cheap. Then the buy the bikes. I think too many riders get caught up in the latest trends and drop big money. 29" wheels.. gotta buy new bike. 27.5" wheels gotta buy a new bike. 1x11.. gotta buy a new bike. You get the picture. While some of this stuff are nice gains most are marginal. Of course the marketing arm of the companies push them and tell you why you need this year's stuff instead of last year. The problem is that we are buying it despite knowing that last year's stuff was not bad. As long as we consumers keep falling for it the mfg will keep selling it and making money off it. 

2) Growth, market share, and maintaining staff. 
Any business wants to grow, increase market share and at minimum maintain staff. If you have 5-40 people working on R&D for the next new thing you will always have a "next new thing". Even if that next new thing is only marginal improvement on the old these teams will always come up with something. The have to as they are getting paid to come up with something new or to "catch up" to the competitor's next new thing. These people cost money to pay and to keep them going to you need promote as you can only earn the money to pay them if you sell enough of that stuff. Once you get to a point of market saturation you have to sell upgrades. Of course for this plan to work you need have consumers buy it. 

I was at the Whiskey 50 and saw the new shimano XTR system. They clearly put alot of money in thier display, but really unless I am trying to shave seconds of my race time... So what. It looks just the same as my old 2003 vintage XT. Sure it maybe a little lighter and work a little smoother, but I see no need replace a working XT from 2003 with a new 2014 XTR. The cost does not make any sense. It was what I saw every where. Lots of nice shinny bikes, but nothing so revolutionary that it made me want to write a check. 

My 26" Hardtail with 3x9 11-34 and V-brakes worked well all day. Ok except for the nasty chainsuck due to horrible weather. Of course I was not the only one with that problem. Sure the pro winner finished 3hrs faster than me, but that was not due to his bike. Ok maybe 5 min of that time was the bike... the rest was all the rider.


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

dompedro3 said:


> This is why companies like Bikes Direct do well. Because you can still get a fairly capable hardtail for under $1000, hell, you can get a decent (if heavy) entry level bike for $500. There are hundreds of pages of threads on this board dedicated to the cheap carbon fiber frames/rims/parts you can buy directly from China.
> 
> - Glad you brought this up....this will be part of the "Part 2" Blog Post :thumbsup:


----------



## turbodog (Feb 28, 2004)

I'm still riding a frame and fork from 2006. See no reason to upgrade. Parts range in age from brand new to 15+ years old. There are plenty tech illiterate people with tons of money out there driving the industry.


----------



## trboxman (Jul 7, 2010)

Companies like Bikes Direct, On-One/Planet-X, PricePoint (till they abandoned their brand) and heck...Switchback, KHS, Kona etc are interesting in the overall mix of things. On one hand you have the catalog bike brands that get vilified as cheap junk while on the other hand you get the well known brands that still source from the exact same catalog mfgs who get a pass for selling, in many cases, the exact same bike. The differentiator in view seems to be tied to whether they sell and service the end consumer or whether they sell and service the LBS. I see a need for both.

For me, the purchase of a bike is a simple price issue. My target price is $1000-$1500, I'll buy the most bang I can get for my dollar from whatever source meets my needs list. The two things not on my needs list that may be high on the needs lists of others is big name brand and LBS support. While I do want to do business with a reputable outfit I don’t need for that to be an LBS. I suspect that the name brand allegiance and LBS support is a deciding factor for many who bash the catalog bike importers.

I love the catalog bike importers that do direct sales, they keep everyone else on their toes. What I don’t like is when someone imports a catalog bike and attempts to position it as a cheaper alternative yet the cost differential is modest at best (Switchback, is this going to be you? I hope not.). I hate it when an importer (Kona, KHS and others) pretends that they’ve done design and engineering on their product when that’s gone no deeper than mix and match parts and paints. There’s a big difference between building a product and building a brand. I think many of us lose sight of this and can’t recognize that most bike companies in the US don’t build products anymore, they build brands. Even many who sell “Made in USA” frames aren’t designing or building those frames anymore than the catalog importers do…


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

trboxman said:


> Companies like Bikes Direct, On-One/Planet-X, PricePoint (till they abandoned their brand) and heck...Switchback, KHS, Kona etc are interesting in the overall mix of things. On one hand you have the catalog bike brands that get vilified as cheap junk while on the other hand you get the well known brands that still source from the exact same catalog mfgs who get a pass for selling, in many cases, the exact same bike. The differentiator in view seems to be tied to whether they sell and service the end consumer or whether they sell and service the LBS. I see a need for both.
> 
> For me, the purchase of a bike is a simple price issue. My target price is $1000-$1500, I'll buy the most bang I can get for my dollar from whatever source meets my needs list. The two things not on my needs list that may be high on the needs lists of others is big name brand and LBS support. While I do want to do business with a reputable outfit I don't need for that to be an LBS. I suspect that the name brand allegiance and LBS support is a deciding factor for many who bash the catalog bike importers.
> 
> I love the catalog bike importers that do direct sales, they keep everyone else on their toes. What I don't like is when someone imports a catalog bike and attempts to position it as a cheaper alternative yet the cost differential is modest at best (Switchback, is this going to be you? I hope not.). I hate it when an importer (Kona, KHS and others) pretends that they've done design and engineering on their product when that's gone no deeper than mix and match parts and paints. There's a big difference between building a product and building a brand. I think many of us lose sight of this and can't recognize that most bike companies in the US don't build products anymore, they build brands. Even many who sell "Made in USA" frames aren't designing or building those frames anymore that the catalog importers do&#8230;


You make some very good points....Part 2 of the Blog Post covers some of the points you make in a little more detail....hope to have it live next week


----------



## dorse (Sep 22, 2009)

I think the reason for the big up swing in bike prices is. That manufacturers aren't selling enough 29 and 27.5 wheeled bikes.


----------



## Switchback Bikes (Dec 2, 2013)

*Cycling Is The New Golf*

Cycling is the new golf for entrepreneurs - Apr. 29, 2014


----------



## crackerdog (Dec 18, 2011)

I ride a '97 Wahoo and if you don't mind riding a bike with old technology, it is cheap and reliable. This whole thread is not taking into account the fact that bikes are more expensive because they are better. Go back and ride a heavier rigid bike with v brakes and you will not spend that much money on it. I would bet that bike prices have come down for the same quality bike- if you can find one new.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

I bought a nashbar frame because I didn't need a brand, I just needed a frame. Cost me like 60 bucks I think. People ask me what kind of bike it is, and I'm like.. A bike. The only reason I'll go to the lbs is to install a starnut. I don't need the support of a company brand or store. I get **** for supporting bikes direct and companies like it when my friends ask me what bike to get.. Theyre like oh they don't sell trek. So then we go to the lbs, and I have them write down notes, component tiers and price. Then we go online, and they're like oh I get it now. I think that it becomes a bigger issue with full suspension bikes, because how many models have had frame and bushing failures.. But for a Standard basic aluminum frame, it's all the same.. Find something that fits and has the geo you want and bam, you're gonna have fun. No need to support a company that is rebadging another companies frame, and charging you 4x the money to do so. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MarkMac (Nov 28, 2012)

I took a realistic look at my age, skill, stamina, use, AND expectations. Frankly, I get little benefit from any bike over $1000. When I was at the LBS, they had a demo bike marked from $800 down to $560. It had maybe 20 miles on it, and came with a new warranty.

It had a spring/oil fork with adjustable preload and rebound. It had the cool new 29" tires, and hydraulic disk brakes. It was worlds ahead of anything I could dream of 20 years ago.

I bought it and I love it. Not overpriced in the least. In fact it's undervalued. My bike was less than a new iPhone. 

I hear people *****ing about high prices, but they still pay them. Methinks generally they pay the high prices more to impress their peers than to increase enjoyment. It's status. You're paying for a name, Prada, Gucci, Trek, Specialized.

To each their own. If status matters to you, then pay for it and stop complaining.

I paid $300 for prescription Oakley Sunglasses, and never once *****ed. Assign value where you see fit.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

I don't spend money for the bling factor, but I don't think everyone riding a nice bike bought it just because of the name and price to prove something to someone. If you want to drop 2k on a bike, that's cool. I could totally do that, if it made sense to be. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk


----------



## PolishExperiment (May 14, 2011)

Every industry has a top end product line that seems ridiculously expensive to the average consumer. From $1000 per golf club, to $2000 faucets for your bathroom. no matter what industry you pick you can find a crazy expensive example, and people who assign enough value to said item to buy it. Why complain about prices, no one is forced to buy this stuff. 

There are plenty of bikes in the 5-700 dollar range that are far better than a 2-3000 dollar bike of 15 years ago. If you don't want to pay for the latest and greatest brand name product, buy something cheaper and be happy with it. 

The only thing that drives prices up is consumers willingness to pay those prices. There are enough people willing to pay 10 grand for a bike to justify making them, and spending the money to market them.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

I think there is some price fixing going on, especially by sram. Their prices have increased as they take over more companies. This is hurting the low end consumers the most. At the 500 dollar price point, they are getting cheap suntour forks instead of decent darts now. The bike are increasing in cost and their complements are moving to lower tiers it seems. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk


----------



## MSLKauai (Dec 17, 2009)

crackerdog said:


> I ride a '97 Wahoo and if you don't mind riding a bike with old technology, it is cheap and reliable. This whole thread is not taking into account the fact that bikes are more expensive because they are better. Go back and ride a heavier rigid bike with v brakes and you will not spend that much money on it. I would bet that bike prices have come down for the same quality bike- if you can find one new.


There are many examples of products that have gotten better AND cheaper over time. Bikes, however, are not one of them. Often, when you find a product that just seems from a common sense perspective to be over priced, it's a by product of just having too many sales and marketing costs in the chain of production from manufacture to final delivery. Can't say for sure because I've never worked in the bike industry but it really does seem that about $2,000 for a pretty much entry level FS bike seems a lot.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

It depends on how you define entry level. Entry level, the beginning.. I consider that Walmart bikes. They are cheap. Cheap materials, cheap components, cheap designs.. That's the basic bike. It performs well enough for a dirt road. You go into the thousand dollar range and you have a bike that is considered entry level, in comparison to competiton ready bikes. But it's not an entry level bike when compared to all bikes. People want something designed for abuse, that will function correctly when it's limits are pushed and exceeded, but they don't want to pay for it. That's always been the basic consumer approach. But when you look at the suntour x series crap that most beginners get stuck with on their sport class entry level bike, those don't even perform on concrete. That's where people get ripped off the most. The dart series forks were meant for that grade of bike. But at like 200 a fork now, they really just don't have place in the lineup. 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrkmind (Feb 20, 2007)

I ride MTB, whitewater kayak, and (used to) ride dirt bikes which I'd like to get back into soon. I'm on a 07 Stumpy and it appears they are trying to completely phase out the 26'ers. I'd love to have a nice new 27.5" bike but if it comes down to spending 4k on a new mountain bike or 6k on a dirt bike, I'm getting the dirt bike. 

I've had folks who were interested in getting started riding mtb but when they see the price tags they are instantly turned off. It's turning into a sport for the priveleged.


----------



## davec113 (May 31, 2006)

singletrkmind said:


> I've had folks who were interested in getting started riding mtb but when they see the price tags they are instantly turned off. *It's turning into a sport for the priveleged.*


That's ridiculous.

Why do people feel they need to spend that kind of cash to ride a bike? You can get a great bike for $3k retail, $2k if you don't mind last years model on sale. And today's $3k "entry level" model is probably more fun to ride than the top of the line bike was 5 years ago.


----------



## Vespasianus (Apr 9, 2008)

Bike prices will be whatever the market dictates. People must be buying the stuff at these prices, otherwise, the bike companies would not be charging those prices. Simple supply and demand. 

With that said, I can't believe people are paying this much for some stuff. In 1995 the top of the line forks went for $350. That is ~$550 in todays dollars. Today, most top of the line forks are $1000. For the life of me, I can't imagine spending $1000 for a fork.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

The thing is there's all sorts of technology now that didn't exist then. You can still spend 350 on a fork and get one that's a million times better than the 350 dollar top of the lone fork then. But, you can also spend 450, 550, etc.. So while component prices have gone up, components have also gotten better. If you're like me, a 50 dollar deore shadow derailleur is a great value for what it is. But someone else might want the XT. So they can spend more. I'm more mad at companies like sram who literally rename something and jack the price up for no reason, like the dart series forks. A movement like that trickles down to everyone because the base models now come with suntour, when they used to come with a dart. That means that a bike that used to come with a Reba now comes with a dart at the old Reba price point. So we all end up paying more for biked even though sram doubled the price on only one fork. 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## singletrkmind (Feb 20, 2007)

davec113 said:


> That's ridiculous.
> 
> Why do people feel they need to spend that kind of cash to ride a bike? You can get a great bike for $3k retail, $2k if you don't mind last years model on sale. And today's $3k "entry level" model is probably more fun to ride than the top of the line bike was 5 years ago.


Well I'm generalizing a bit. I haven't really looked/priced in earnest, I poke around when I'm in the bike shop getting something and those are the types of prices I'm seeing.


----------



## Appalachian_Kamper (Jul 18, 2014)

Brewtality said:


> I have yet to see a bike shop customer have a gun held to his head a forced into buying a bike.
> Clearly, somebody is buying these high dollar bikes and they are doing it on their own free will. If you can't afford one, don't buy it. Simple as that.


If one delves into the fascism of consumerism, one will see that it's a market full of shysters, false claims, and peer pressure.

This runs from top end bikes all the way to the bottom. For example, people running out and buying bottom end bikes with a suspension. "Why do you need a suspension?" I ask them. "Because I'm old, don't want a harsh ride, "or some other vague excuse is given. "But you ride streets and nice flat improved trails, and or a front suspension is not going to make the bicycle ride like a Cadillac." I retort, "Well, I need a suspension!" they reply.

How did they come to the conclusion that they need a suspension for paved roads and improved trails? Marketing, and other people in the herd parrot this same propaganda. Moreover, a 200 - 400 dollar brand new bike isn't going to have a very good shock absorber.

Many can easily add story after story after story of how the industry convinces people that they need something.

The argument of "nobody held a gun to their heads" is rather myopic. There is more than one way to force or coerce something into doing something that they don't want to.

Let's make frames out of cheaper aluminum 'cause steel's too expensive and hard to work with, then we'll tell them that their bikes are lighter and better, when they're really not. Moreover, it's what the professionals are using, even though the professionals actually do have a lighter and better high dollar frame...

Convince somebody that they need something, or it's better is an age old tactic of selling somebody highly overpriced and or shoddy merchandise. Moreover, many people are convinced they have to buy the best they can afford, when a much lower priced or used piece of equipment/item/car/bicycle would probably suit their needs at a significantly lower price.

Atop the radio, TV, and magazines, we now have internet forums, and people from the heard who don't _seem_ to understand just how the marketing ploy of manipulation is done policing the rest of the flock with simplistic explanations about why it's ok.

cheers,
Appalachian Kamper


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

davec113 said:


> That's ridiculous.
> 
> Why do people feel they need to spend that kind of cash to ride a bike? You can get a great bike for $3k retail, $2k if you don't mind last years model on sale. And today's $3k "entry level" model is probably more fun to ride than the top of the line bike was 5 years ago.


Yep, it's funny because these people that complain and shout up and down are usually the same ones that have totally fallen for the advertising. They are convinced that they "need" to upgrade or buy something because it's being advertised. They can't search and look for the obvious solutions themselves. They react to each and every advertisement and product endorsement. The vast majority of us think about what to get when we've worn the hell out of what we are currently using and it's time, and then it makes sense to get something decent, but we also don't have to go overboard. Those other people who watch all the adds have a friggin heart-attack when they learn that what they just bought is obsolete (to them) or a standard has changed (when parts will be avail for years to come).


----------



## Jon Richard (Dec 20, 2011)

I bought a linkage suspension fork in ‘96 for $550 having a whopping 80mm of travel. High end bikes were north of 5K in those days, and that’s with cantilever brakes. 

I have two bikes, one cost me over $8,000 and the other about $800- I would take my $800 bike over the best 1996 had to offer no contest. 

There is such a wider array of build options available to today’s mountain cyclist, we are living in the days that I had always dreamed about when I first started. Sure, I could be up in arms over the exponential increase in pricing in the last 10 years, but I’m to distracted over the stoke of my ability to build some seriously custom rigs.


----------



## SimpleJon (Mar 28, 2011)

I don't think that high level general figures such as 97% increase in bike pricing vs 27% Inflation over 13 years can be applied at the individual purchase level. Those figures appear to take into account Walmart type bikes a 10% natural drop off in those sales because most people who want them have already bought them and are now gathering dust in the garage coupled with a large increase in the number of people buying $700+ bikes (which I think has happened) is going to distort general market sector inflation figures. I don't think that it is necessarily correct to associate the drop off in total bike sales with a seemingly high Inflation figure - there isn't enough info given.

First off take financing back in 2000 it was not that easy to buy a bike on credit now all the big brands, dealers have financing. This drives people to buy a more expensive bike than if they have to pay 100% up front. It also drives companies to R&D to come up with more expensive higher end parts using more expensive materials as it creates a sales volume that wasn't there to start with; these companies then engage in sponsership, marketing etc to make people want them. All in all over the last 6 or 7 years there has been a huge increase in the technology available (much of it not really worth while) the XTR of 2004 was much closer to the XTR of 1994 than the XTR of 2014 - same deal with suspension systems and brakes. I don't have any quantitative figures but just looking at the numbers of people riding high end bikes in 2014 compared to even 10 years ago it seems to be a much larger proportion. This is especially true of roadies but also MTB's as well. Anyone who wanted to create a bike in an Formula 1 wind tunnel 15 years ago would have been told that it will never be cost effective - not anymore - so the top end has gotten more expensive.

At my intermediate level I would say bike pricing probably hasn't changed that much since 2000, I remember paying about $1000 to $1500 for a mid range hardtail back then and it is roughly equivalent now. If you go by RRP I would imagine 20% to 30% higher is probably reasonable.
Given the increased market for higher end bikes and parts being manufactured now another phenomenen that didn't really exist back in 2000 is discount. With 'new and improved' stuff coming out every couple of years these days and online shops you can pick up older models discounted by 40 or 50% over RRP - that didn't exist 15 years ago. There is also a booming second hand market which pretty much didn't exist back in 2000 and you can buy online direct from factories in China.

If you must have the latest and greatest of everything I can definitiely see how it is 4 or 5 times more expensive than 15 years ago. However if you are willing to spend a little time and effort it is certainly not 25 to 30% more expensive maybe cheaper than 2000. From my experience I have the option to get or build up a very good bike that will perform for 95%+ of us just as well as a top end brand for $2K to $4K which is pretty equivalent to the price in 2000.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

The poster a few pages back on the import taxes was interesting, I wasn't aware of that.

Overall, when prices are increasing like that the industry will start cutting costs and the biggest area may be in distribution. I never heard of CRC and Wiggle a couple years ago, their sales must have gained a lot in the USA in recent years. More companies are going factory direct. Internet sellers are going to dominate.


----------



## Vespasianus (Apr 9, 2008)

ou2mame said:


> The thing is there's all sorts of technology now that didn't exist then. You can still spend 350 on a fork and get one that's a million times better than the 350 dollar top of the lone fork then. But, you can also spend 450, 550, etc.. So while component prices have gone up, components have also gotten better. If you're like me, a 50 dollar deore shadow derailleur is a great value for what it is. But someone else might want the XT. So they can spend more. I'm more mad at companies like sram who literally rename something and jack the price up for no reason, like the dart series forks. A movement like that trickles down to everyone because the base models now come with suntour, when they used to come with a dart. That means that a bike that used to come with a Reba now comes with a dart at the old Reba price point. So we all end up paying more for biked even though sram doubled the price on only one fork.
> 
> Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


Technology is technology. With the logic you propose, in 10 years, should we pay $2000 for a fork because it is soooo much better?

I think the key thing is that people who MTB can afford it. I think as the demographics of the MTB community have changed, the pricing has as well. With that said, the pricing may end up being seen as a barrier to entry!


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

Although bike #2 is much better in technology and much funner to ride, both bikes in similar range for their time, XT/lx mix, actually wheels in bike #1 probably lighter. My buddy had bike #1 in high school, you could actually feel the rear suspension with each pedal stroke, but this bike was was bad a** back then. Although similar for time periods, $700 difference.

1995 Specialized Stumpjumper FSR - BikePedia

2010 Giant Trance X2 - BikePedia


----------



## Shane5001 (Dec 18, 2013)

Now fast forward to 2014, XT/lx mid to higher level bike, also Giant Trance, another $1000 retail.

2014 Giant Trance 27.5 1 - BikePedia


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

I had a $1000 fork in around 99-2000 and $1100 wheels, and rode with lots of people on $5000 bikes. That's about how much the 'newest and bestest' technology has cost for a long time. It's just earlier on, it seems like it was mostly DHers wanting that sort of level of tech. Nowadays, a lot of people are wanting that sort 'high performance' level out of trail bikes, and that **** costs money and always has. I remember paying a few grand for hardtails that weren't anything special a number of times in the 90s. I think in a lot of ways you get way more for your money these days.

Of course, I wised up and stopped buying anything retail ages ago.


----------



## Procter (Feb 3, 2012)

I'm shocked this thread lasted a whole two months in coma before resurrection


----------



## borabora (Feb 16, 2011)

Procter said:


> I'm shocked this thread lasted a whole two months in coma before resurrection


Yeah well, prices went up at least 0.3% during those two months. 
When will XTR Di2 start shipping...???


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

I agree with some of what you are saying, the data has low end walmart bikes included but that may be an even bigger red flag for the general bike industry. If sales of those bikes have tanked then fewer people may be interested in biking in general.

We need more information then what has been provided, averages hide more than they reveal, but the bike industry has gotten smarter on its pricing of high-end bikes. There is an income and price effect for customer demand and mountain biking in the higher end range is done by people with higher incomes.

If one were tempted to over react and read too much into this, they might say cycling in general is a stagnate to dying sport here. Companies that feel they have pushed the limits on pricing and have seen demand drop off will lower their prices, it is a competitive industry after all. If they are already at rock-bottom on the manufacturing side, then the pressure will be strong on the distribution side. I am a bit on the extreme side here, and I have had so many negative value experiences with LBS, that I personally expect the cost increases in general, to be the end for a lot of small LBS out there. More companies are allowing internet sales, but the big thing will be buying direct. The customer will get his lower priced bike at the exoense of the distributor.


----------



## jazzanova (Jun 1, 2008)

cjsb said:


> I agree with some of what you are saying, the data has low end walmart bikes included but that may be an even bigger red flag for the general bike industry. If sales of those bikes have tanked then fewer people may be interested in biking in general.
> 
> We need more information then what has been provided, averages hide more than they reveal, but the bike industry has gotten smarter on its pricing of high-end bikes. There is an income and price effect for customer demand and mountain biking in the higher end range is done by people with higher incomes.
> 
> If one were tempted to over react and read too much into this, they might say cycling in general is a stagnate to dying sport here. Companies that feel they have pushed the limits on pricing and have seen demand drop off will lower their prices, it is a competitive industry after all. If they are already at rock-bottom on the manufacturing side, then the pressure will be strong on the distribution side. I am a bit on the extreme side here, and I have had so many negative value experiences with LBS, that I personally expect the cost increases in general, to be the end for a lot of small LBS out there. More companies are allowing internet sales, but the big thing will be buying direct. The customer will get his lower priced bike at the exoense of the distributor.


Just like what YT Industries is doing.
One big disadvantage is that riders are not able to demo before they buy.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

jazzanova said:


> Just like what YT Industries is doing.
> One big disadvantage is that riders are not able to demo before they buy.


Yeah, there are definitely risks and disadvantages to direct buying--for both the companies and the riders. For example, how do you get new riders interested if they can't see if it fits at least? Higher end customers may prefer the whole experience of and service from shopping in person. So there is probably a role for LBS, but probably a uch larger LBS that can do it at lower cost. For example, I could see S sticking with the concept store and others deal with a distributor like Performance for their lower end inventory and the higher stuff buy-direct.

Once the medium size brands that may already do internet selling--just not directly--go to buy-direct and sales through other internet retailers at lower prices, it will cause a shock wave through the distribution end.

The LBS that doesn't see this coming may be in trouble. When you see how much is done now in components and bikes online over the past3-4 years, the growth is staggering, and it going to grow more.

Costco, wal-mart, and ToysRUs will still sell the real low end entry stuff, but what is shocking to me is if a generation is essentially not riding bikes.


----------



## jimbowho (Dec 16, 2009)

Recently looked into Kona's Process 111. Got stoked, found a great review on P-bike and got more excited. My last Kona was a 98-stinky-5. I remember Kona being well priced and with aluminum I figured maybe 33-3800.00 when I found the price I was blown away. NO SALE KONA.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

jimbowho said:


> Recently looked into Kona's Process 111. Got stoked, found a great review on P-bike and got more excited. My last Kona was a 98-stinky-5. I remember Kona being well priced and with aluminum I figured maybe 33-3800.00 when I found the price I was blown away. NO SALE KONA.


Yeah, the 111 was on my short-list but the price ended that pronto, along with some other brands's models. Now I am targeting a "budget" build of $3.1k for a Heckler with a Pike. Wondering now if the it is worth chasing the Pike, maybe the lower budget $2.5k heckler would be good enough, but I really don't want to buy a new bike that comes with piece of crap fork. It is too exoensive of a problem to cure in the after market.


----------



## okie_calvin (Jan 31, 2004)

cjsb said:


> Yeah, the 111 was on my short-list but the price ended that pronto, along with some other brands's models. Now I am targeting a "budget" build of $3.1k for a Heckler with a Pike. Wondering now if the it is worth chasing the Pike, maybe the lower budget $2.5k heckler would be good enough, but I really don't want to buy a new bike that comes with piece of crap fork. It is too exoensive of a problem to cure in the after market.


My brother just built a new Heckler; I had an '04 and loved it but this new one is tons better. It pedals tons better and still sucks up the hits like the old one.


----------



## Gregon2wheels (Jan 17, 2013)

It's been well established that our purchasing power or real wage has been going backwards for a long time now.

That said, in 1994, a Trek 9500 lugged CF bike with 8 speed XT and a rigid fork cost $3000.

In 2004, a Trek Fuel 98 full sus CF bike with 9 speed XT, disc brakes, and an 80 mm SID fork cost $3100.

In 2014 a Trek Fuel EX 8 29 full sus CF bike with 10 speed SLX/XT and 120 mm travel costs $2900. A Fuel EX 9.7 with full XT costs $4200.

Here's the thing, that 2004 Fuel would cost $3900 is 2013 just with inflation. So the 2014 bike with full XT costs 7.7% more than the 2004 after adjusting for inflation. The SLX/XT bike - costs 26% less in 2014 dollars.

In absolute dollars, the most expensive bikes have gotten more expensive. But, at worst, the bikes we could buy 10 or 20 years ago have gotten no more expensive that what we can buy today.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

okie_calvin said:


> My brother just built a new Heckler; I had an '04 and loved it but this new one is tons better. It pedals tons better and still sucks up the hits like the old one.


Cool! I rode my friend's 06, back in 06 and still remember it, he let me borrow it for a week when my bike was in the shop. At $3100, the new Heckler would only be a about t40% more than my 05 enduro new. Adjusted for inflation would eat into thT. But i wasn't married in 05 and a married 3.1 k is a tough sell, 4k would be grounds for sleeping on the couch for a decade.

Geeze, i hope she never finds out what I burn on components over the years.


----------



## ou2mame (Apr 23, 2010)

I was talking to my friend about bike pricing the other day.. We were talking about how high the markup must be. But there's so many expenses that eat that markup, and then there's the taxes involved and they have also gone up.. Price points have definitely moved upward quicker than inflation, but cost of transportation, labor, materials, taxes, those have all gone up too.

A bicycle is kind of like a big mac. If you want, look up the big Mac index, they compare money value with big macs throughout the world because big macs incorporate everything from labor to electric rates. So while bikes have moved forward, and technology has too, the costs have moved upwards because of counties like China having huge labor wage disputes, and shipping costs and everything else associated with building something with parts sourced all over the world in very fluctuating economies. 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------

