06 Feb 2012

This week there’s been a minorly major kerfuffle regarding the SRAM PR and Marketing department, and them promising new 2012 (or 2013…or something…nobody can figure it out) SRAM Red components for show bikes for NAHBS - Noticeably Independent Fabrication and Richard Sachs. It turns out that both entities ordered the latest groupsets only to realise they are somewhat further down the pecking order than they realised. Here’s a picture of what they likely won’t be getting. You’ll notice the frame is not a custom US made jobbie.

It’s kind of ironic that any company would justify the pulling of supply right before a trade show using the word ‘fairness’ in any context (especially considering a non-affiliated SRAM ‘bro-buddy’ seems to be able to procure a gruppo) and also considering that ‘fairness’ plays pretty much no part in the general zeitgeist of corporations - the ‘fair’ quickly get assimilated or turfed out.  It’s difficult to label SRAM as a ‘underdog’ when it’s a multi-million dollar company supplying a huge chunk of the mid to high end MTB market, and numerous teams on the Pro Tour. In the same way it’s hard to call Apple the downtrodden second cousin. So in this way perhaps, this situation while no means being an isolated incident, is perhaps just the blinkers coming off - “Yes custom bicycle frame industry, you are not that important, despite the fact that you think you are. Now piss off.”

In fact, this leads me back to something I thought of when I first decided to pursue this fool’s errand - A custom builders’ buying co-op.

The problem when dealing with component suppliers, is that they won’t listen to you unless you wave a heap of cash in their faces. Yes, there is the exception (Think of the Velocity’s, White Industries, Pauls of the World) but generally unless you live in the same town, or the sales rep you deal with still retains a modicum of humanity, you’re SOL. Heck, we’ve been trying to sell Enve components here for what must be 5 years now without a single fork being sent, yet someone like Maietta can buy 20 NOS just by being in the right place at the right time. Never sold a single Shimano gruppo I actually bought from Shimano. The list is long. Oh so long. I’m pretty sure dealing with this shit has taken a couple of years off my life.

The crux of the issue is buying power. Even if you sell a thousand frames a year, that doesn’t even register on the scales of most companies. “Oh, you want 3 gruppos? Sorry, that’s not enough for it to be worth our while - we have a MOQ of 10 gruppos per model, and that entitles you to 5% off wholesale.”  ’Wholesale’ in Australia meaning “More expensive than what you can get via mailorder anyway, and even more expensive again when you factor in GST and freight.” It’s an endless fucking nightmare (excuse my French) everytime someone wants a complete bike.

How to end this nightmare? A very communist and un-American buyers’ co-op.

Well obviously for anyone starting such a thing, it would be the start of a nightmare most probably - akin to herding the cat herders who herd cats, most of whom have ADD and refuse to believe in dogs.

Nobody probably remembers - and I’m recounting this as a complete outsider looking in so excuse me if the details are skewed - of Easton deciding baseball bats were boring and that there was this new thing called ‘mountain biking’ we should get into. The vehicle they used to design and develop their foray into cycling? The custom bike industry - Yeti, Chris Herting, Frank Wadelton, Mountain Bike Action magazine, etc. etc.. Exciting times, no doubt.

“History is full of occasions when two parties with radically diverse backgrounds have gotten together to create something that actually represents the best interests of both of them… the Yeti Bicycle Company and corporate giant Easton Composites is [one].  The union is one that not only represents the interests of both parties involved, but also every mountain bike enthusiast around the world who is yearning for What could possibly be one of the greatest performing mountain bikes ever made.” - MBA June 1989

Of course this is just a bunch of marketing waffle, but it brings up an interesting point in the P&A Supplier vs Custom Bicycle Industry (CBI) dynamic, and the is the use of the CBI in product development. To be honest, I’m not sure why this doesn’t happen more. You see it on a small level with things such as Sean Chaney of Vertigo Cycles prompting headset makers to make a ‘tapered’ headset for 44mm headtubes, Mark at Paragon I’m sure getting a lot of valuable input from his target market, and KVA kinda sorta not really doing it, but not really on a level I think that could make for a good organised (and I stress ‘organised’) symbiotic relationship.

During the past year not doing very much it’s made me think about the environment in which the CBI exists, and what the heck it’s all about anyway, and I’ve sort of come to a conclusion that it’s actually even less about the bike than I previously thought. And not just from a practical perspective either, in so much as you don’t even spend half your time on the actual frame - most of your time is spent doing everything else. Initially one of the ‘buzz phrases’ I used to banter about the place was that the CBI was cool because it was the cheapest form of cutting edge mechanised technology you could buy, but the reality is that it’s not. Custom bikes are about personalised service, individuality, sustainability, and lifestyle. If you want a cutting edge bike from a technological sense, you want an off-the-shelf bike. Custom bikes just aren’t cutting edge. Sure, you can access some of the best welders in the world, welding with high end steel and titanium, but this is not cutting edge, and in many ways, it’s kinda retro. Aside from Bamboo composite frames, it’s difficult to look at any custom frame and see some technology long since relegated by the technoists. Even custom carbon frames are not terribly edgy.

Therein lies the rub. If you’re not at the coalface of technology, if you’re not placing big orders, then the big component manufactures only have emotive reasons to be dealing with you (in the current environment), and that’s a pretty shitty place to be as it takes a lot more work attempting to canvass and stay in the good graces of the myriad of component suppliers. To rub salt in the wound, the past has shown that even if a company does invest in an industry in a ‘mutually compatible’ way, there’s every chance they will do an Easton and abandon said industry and move production overseas once they’ve ridden the coattails of said industry and got their foot in the door with the major OEM’s.

Posted by warwick @ 5:01 am