# Bike prices



## PJ79LIZARD (10 Nov 2011)

How is charging £8000 justified by road bike manufacturers, and really when it comes down to it how much better is a bike with an £8000 price tag compared to one with £3000 or even £2000 to the average cyclist?

In dec cycling plus a statement is made along the lines of "like buying an f1 car and driving it on the road" about one said £8000 bike. I'm sorry but that is just ridiculous. Even in jest.


----------



## Kestevan (10 Nov 2011)

PJ79LIZARD said:


> How is charging £8000 justified by road bike manufacturers.......



Cos someone, somewhere will pay for it.


Everyone has a different view of what constitues expensive. To most people anything over £1000 is a "lot" to spend on a bike. 

However to a small but not insignificant number of people 8K is pocket change. If you were a manufacturer with a "name" capable of getting away with it would you not do what you could to relieve these people of as much as possible?


----------



## I like Skol (10 Nov 2011)

I was mooching around a bike shop last Saturday when I overheard part of a conversation between a salesman and a late-middle aged gentleman about a roadbike they had on display......

Gent:
OK, how much would it be with those wheels then?

Sales assistant (shouting across shop to another assistant/manager):
How much was this bike you sold to Mr XXX last week?

Assistant 2/manager:
The one your looking at now? It was 4.

Me (thinking to myself):
That's a nice looking bike for £400, I wonder what make it is?

Sales assistant 1 to Gent:
So as it is finished now with those components and wheels it would be just £4000!!!!

Me:
Kids, come on were leaving.... and don't touch anything!


----------



## PJ79LIZARD (10 Nov 2011)

Four years ago if you told me I'd spend nearly a hundred notes on a couple of tyres for a bicycle I would of laughed in your face! When I got into cycling I couldn't believe how expensive things were. It seemed unreasonable, now those items prices seem reasonable and the norm. Being in the cycling bubble or culture changes your rational perseption on pricing. My partner not being in the cycling bubble has the same train of thought as I did four years ago and thinks the pricing is ridiculous and priced the way it is simply because people pay it. But even now I find an £8000 price tag unjustifiable. But I don't suppose cycling is any different to other leisure/sport activities. I know personally the equestrian world is exactly the same. I can't justify there pricing either. I must just be poor!


----------



## Gixxerman (10 Nov 2011)

PJ79LIZARD said:


> How is charging £8000 justified by road bike manufacturers, and really when it comes down to it how much better is a bike with an £8000 price tag compared to one with £3000 or even £2000 to the average cyclist?


That statement applies to most things we buy, including cycles.
I play snooker / pool. My cue is handmade and cost me £250.
My team mates cue is also handmade and cost him £600.
Is his cue better than mine? Well yes it is. But over twice as good? Well probably not.
Will a £2000 cue make and average player a better player? Absolutely not.

It is the law of diminishing returns. A "good" quality item can be bought for a datum price.
To better this product, you have to pay increasingly more and more.
The last few % of quality required to get a "perfect" product would be very expensive.

Some people feel the need to always have the best, regardless of cost, when in practice, something quite a bit cheaper would suffice.
Like a friend of mine who always has to have the latest a greatest PC technology as soon as it comes out.
He only uses his PC for web browsing, emails and a a bit of office work (spreadsheets, word documents etc.), and the high spec PC's he buys are largely wasted, as he never uses the huge potential anything like to the full. But he just wants the "best" he can afford.
The companies will make these expensive products, as they know that there will always be a small percentage of buyers who will buy them.


----------



## fossyant (10 Nov 2011)

£8k is OTT for a bike. You can get a pro bike for £4k-5k if you want, even DI2. Canyon bikes - the top of the range road bike with all the bling is £4k. Super Record and R-Sys wheels.

Some things are stupid, like £2k Zipp/Lightweight wheels - WTF, or the Dogma 2 frame which is pushing £4k, when you can get better performing pro frames for £2k-£2.5k

If people want to spend that, then there isn't a problem. My opinion is there is a 'price point' where things become stupid cost.


----------



## MissTillyFlop (10 Nov 2011)

PJ79LIZARD said:


> How is charging £8000 justified by road bike manufacturers, and really when it comes down to it how much better is a bike with an £8000 price tag compared to one with £3000 or even £2000 to the average cyclist?
> 
> In dec cycling plus a statement is made along the lines of "like buying an f1 car and driving it on the road" about one said £8000 bike. I'm sorry but that is just ridiculous. Even in jest.



You can apply that to a million different things - I don't understand having a £5k watch, as my £50 watch works just fine, but it's not about having a watch that works, it's about having a REALLY EXPENSIVE WATCH so all the women can secretly think that you are very poorly endowed or a bit stupid.

Or both.


----------



## Strick (10 Nov 2011)

MissTillyFlop said:


> You can apply that to a million different things - I don't understand having a £5k watch, as my £50 watch works just fine, but it's not about having a watch that works, it's about having a REALLY EXPENSIVE WATCH so all the women can secretly think that you are very poorly endowed or a bit stupid.
> 
> Or both.


----------



## mickle (10 Nov 2011)

I think it's great that £8000 bikes exist. It tells us that the cycling industry is bouyant, and that bicycles are seen as very serious pieces of equipment. 

They wouldn't make them if there wasn't a market for them and who are we to judge what is too much to pay? People lose those kinds of numbers and more in a year in car depreciation all the time and we don't bat an eyelid.


----------



## Strick (10 Nov 2011)

It's all relative to how much disposable wealth a person has and what they value it at really.
If someone is happy to pay that kind of money, then thats down to them.


----------



## Theseus (10 Nov 2011)

MissTillyFlop said:


> You can apply that to a million different things - I don't understand having a £5k watch, as my £50 watch works just fine, but it's not about having a watch that works, it's about having a REALLY EXPENSIVE WATCH so all the women can secretly think that you are very poorly endowed or a bit stupid.
> 
> Or both.




£50 for a watch!!!

You can get one from Argos for £5


----------



## MissTillyFlop (10 Nov 2011)

Touche said:


> £50 for a watch!!!
> 
> You can get one from Argos for £5



This is the dearest watch I have ever bought (and It's from Argos) it's a metal one.

I have had a lot of £5 watches, but they all end up falling to bits.

This one tells you that date and it glows when you press abutton!


----------



## Matthames (10 Nov 2011)

Gixxerman said:


> That statement applies to most things we buy, including cycles.
> I play snooker / pool. My cue is handmade and cost me £250.
> My team mates cue is also handmade and cost him £600.
> Is his cue better than mine? Well yes it is. But over twice as good? Well probably not.
> ...



If you look at a lot of other sports you would find the same. Archery is a very good case in point. There is a lot of guff about in the archery world that if you buy this really shiny and expensive piece of equipment that your scores will magically improve to grand master levels, when the reality is that the gains you make would be marginal at best. However people have seen their scores jump significantly by just buying a brand new quiver, this effect is just purely psychological. 

You could apply this effect in cycling. If you have just brought an £8000 bike, who wouldn't suddenly think they have suddenly become Mark Cavendish or what ever their favourite rider is.


----------



## Moodyman (10 Nov 2011)

If you're looking at an 8k bike you must be an 8k rider.

The average Joe cannot tell the difference between a £800 bike and an £8k one, but the guys who race at the higher end, are adamant that they can.

I was in local bike shop and stood next to ordinary looking wheels. I only realised their worth, when the shop owner mentioned that they were £3K - carbon racing wheels. He was going to fit them to a bike where that the rider was going to use in a race.


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

Moodyman said:


> ... the guys who race at the higher end, are adamant that they can...


Ironically, if they are fast enough to race professionally, then they won't get a choice - they ride what the sponsor wants them to ride.


----------



## jay clock (10 Nov 2011)

My first road bike in 2004 was £500 RRP and I paid £400. I now have a lovely road bike with lovely new wheels (these were over 40% off the RRP) and the whole shebang mist be worth about £3000+. Am I faster? Well, just analysed my years of data and EXACTLY the same (25.8kmh). This is only based on those rides that I bothered to record accurate times, and the newer bike does include Ironman and all the long training rides.


----------



## Xiorell (10 Nov 2011)

I could only imagine bikes with that price tag being any real *use* to propper sports people.
I suppose if I had shed loads of money then yeah, why not spend 8k on a bike, same as being a millionair, you could buy a perfectly good car for 25grand new, and never want for more but if you had that kinda cash sitting about why not buy an Aston or something if you so wish.

I can't see myself ever needing more than a grands worth of bike, my current one was about 500 it's mint. I might give MTBs another go, another 500quid will get something that'll fill my level of offroading and more, but then if I was planning to ride it down the sides of mountains I'd want to spend more.


----------



## tyred (10 Nov 2011)

I suppose there are people gullible enough to believe that an £8,000 pound bike genuinely will make you a much faster cyclist. I'm realistic enough to know that even if I had an £8,000 bike, Lance Armstrong could still leave me for dead even if he was riding Tesco's finest double bouncer.


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

jay clock said:


> My first road bike in 2004 was £500 RRP and I paid £400. I now have a lovely road bike with lovely new wheels (these were over 40% off the RRP) and the whole shebang mist be worth about £3000+. *Am I faster? Well, just analysed my years of data and EXACTLY the same (25.8kmh)*. This is only based on those rides that I bothered to record accurate times, and the newer bike does include Ironman and all the long training rides.


There was a study performed which analysed how much faster road bikes have got in the TdF over about the last 100 years: bottom line, 6%.

Considering that the early road bikes had 40kg frames and were single-speed, that doesn't seem like much. However, it does seem to correlate with your observation that the bike doesn't make much difference.


----------



## lukesdad (10 Nov 2011)

You could allways spend the £8000 on 3 or 4 decent bikes for different disciplines. Some would also say the bike is their main or only form of transport. Mind even I wouldn t spend £ 8000 on a commuter


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

lukesdad said:


> You could allways spend the £8000 on 3 or 4 decent bikes for different disciplines. Some would also say the bike is their main or only form of transport. Mind even *I wouldn t spend £ 8000 on a commuter*


If it had 4 wheels and an engine, that would be a fair price


----------



## mickle (10 Nov 2011)

I hope that the fact that £8000 bikes exist will seep into the general public's conciousness and start to erode the myth that bicycles cost less than a tank of petrol and are ridden only by people too poor to buy a car.


----------



## rowan 46 (10 Nov 2011)

As has been pointed out by many there is a law of diminishing returns in objects. especially in enthusiast objects. whether it's photography, music, astronomy, cycling,motoring et al there is a price point where an object can do the job well. After that to get the last few per cent the price rises steeply. I can't afford an £8000 bike. Would I notice the difference over mine? probably. Would I notice the difference over a £6000 bike probably not at least not with my level of cycling. The fact is though I will probably never get to the level where I am getting the best out of a top end bike. In formula 1 it's said that it costs a million pounds to take .1 seconds off a lap. I suspect its something of that order to produce %1 efficiency in any object. It will cost more to produce a top end bike or other enthusiast object and they will not sell as many which pushes the price up even more. Are they a waste of money? for me yes I will never be skilled or discerning enough to fully appreciate their characteristics but I would still love to be able to own one of these objects.


----------



## Mugshot (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> There was a study performed which analysed how much faster road bikes have got in the TdF over about the last 100 years: bottom line, 6%.



Couldn't that be the riders have got faster by 6% over the past 100 years, and if so, how so?


----------



## mickle (10 Nov 2011)

Mugshot said:


> Couldn't that be the riders have got faster by 6% over the past 100 years, and if so, how so?



Better diets and training might be the obvious ones.


----------



## Mugshot (10 Nov 2011)

mickle said:


> Better diets and training might be the obvious ones.



Quite likely.
I really know nothing about this (as I'm sure is blindingly obvious) but has a top rider from say 50 years ago ever said he could have beaten the whippersnappers of today and used the fact that he was performing similar times on bikes which were twice as heavy?


----------



## Nebulous (10 Nov 2011)

People have a limited ability to see beyond where they are at the moment. I remember seeing a programme about lottery winners. The person on the programme, who advises winners said almost everybody who has a serious win ends up in the big house with 5 acre grounds, pond and everything that goes with that. Some of them take several moves to get there though. You go from the 3 bed semi to the 4 or 5 bedroom detached then land up with the mansion house. 

Bikes are the same. I have an £800 Allez Elite that I paid £543 for. 

The height of my ambition at the moment would be a £1500 Tarmac. I just cannot comprehend a situation where I would buy an £8000 bike.


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

Mugshot said:


> Couldn't that be the riders have got faster by 6% over the past 100 years, and if so, how so?


TdF speeds increased about 50-55% over its history. The riders improved by something like 45% IIRC. The other factors were the introduction of paved roads and the TdF course being progressively shortened. But the improvement due to faster bikes was only 6%, according to the study.


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

mickle said:


> Better diets and training might be the obvious ones.


<cough> doping <cough>


----------



## petenats (10 Nov 2011)

I suppose it also depends what you are paying for and if you feel that is worth it.

I've been looking at Cervolo's, amazing frames, the R3 being on the Paris-Roubaix podium means that in standard guise it's as much as most people would ever need, and definitely more bike than I'll find the limits of! The designs are all from Canada but the carbon laid in China with the quality control being maintained by Cervelo. Those are the bikes that the race team use...however a lot of the research into new bikes and manufacture is done in a special plant in California. They now produce a small number (one per week) of frames by hand. The frame is 300g lighter than the Chinese production line one (albeit a hand made production line and already under 1kg) and hand prepped and formed in the design plant. The frame then costs almost triple! Does it ride better, the pro's say yes. Would the average mortal know...no. Can you race the bike from California? Not without adding close to 300g to it to make it legal!!! 

The point is what are you paying for? The hand made top of the range bike with cutting edge technology. Tech which was only available to the race teams but as some people wanted it they can now buy it. Most people do not care about those last few grams of weight saving, eating one less burger is much cheaper for most of us, but some people can afford it and do want that state of the art machine. The same tech does trickle down to a more mortal price point in future years. Look at Di2 and now Ui2, I suspect next year will have a 105i2! It all depends on how long you are prepared to wait...for some not long if they can pay now.

Peoples hobbies are also different. For some the latest golf clubs, memberships, travel to courses round the country and golfing paraphernalia run into many thousands. Others take flying lessons and buy a share of an aircraft or hundreds of pounds per hour in hire. Track day motorcycling costs thousands with trailers parts and race tyres which are worn by the end of a weekend not to mention the bike itself! There are countless hobbies and pastimes where a one off payment of £8000 that would last years may seem very good value.

It doesn't make an £8000 bike cheap or for some remotely justifiable, it does however need to be put into context of what some are willing to spend on their hobbies, pastimes and sports!

Pete


----------



## Mugshot (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> TdF speeds increased about 50-55% over its history. The riders improved by something like 45% IIRC. The other factors were the introduction of paved roads and the TdF course being progressively shortened. But the improvement due to faster bikes was only 6%, according to the study.



How do they separate the two?


----------



## the snail (10 Nov 2011)

Gixxerman said:


> Will a £2000 cue make and average player a better player? Absolutely not.



IIRC Stephen Hendry won 7 world titles with a £40 cue?


----------



## albion (10 Nov 2011)

The weird thing about cycling is that if you ride in a group, the fittest person is logically more likely to have a cheap bike.


----------



## Gixxerman (10 Nov 2011)

the snail said:


> IIRC Stephen Hendry won 7 world titles with a £40 cue?



Well remembered. He did indeed.
He was once described as "the best player in the world with the worst cue in the world".


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

Mugshot said:


> How do they separate the two?


They benchmarked cyclists against the improvements seen in runners over the same time period.


----------



## Dan_h (10 Nov 2011)

£8k is a bit cheap really, the Cervelo RC5ca is that just for the frameset, add the groupset, wheels etc and you are well over 10k (I think I saw somewhere one build for about £12k).

http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/bikes/2012/R5ca/prices-specs/


----------



## Mugshot (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> They benchmarked cyclists against the improvements seen in runners over the same time period.



Oh right, that's interesting, thank you 
How do they separate the improvements in the runners gear*, tracks and the like against their training and diet?
If you have a link I'll look at that to save you having to put up with my mithering 

*As in shoes etc not as in


----------



## RhythMick (10 Nov 2011)

Matthames said:


> If you look at a lot of other sports you would find the same. Archery is a very good case in point. There is a lot of guff about in the archery world that if you buy this really shiny and expensive piece of equipment that your scores will magically improve to grand master levels, when the reality is that the gains you make would be marginal at best. However people have seen their scores jump significantly by just buying a brand new quiver, this effect is just purely psychological.
> 
> You could apply this effect in cycling. If you have just brought an £8000 bike, who wouldn't suddenly think they have suddenly become Mark Cavendish or what ever their favourite rider is.


And don't get me started about hi-fi. A pair of Western Electric 300B valves for £850? 

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk


----------



## Night Train (10 Nov 2011)

It is funny how relative it all is.

Back in 2001 I bought a new Marin Hawkhill for £400 and brought it home proudly as the most expensive bike I've ever had.
Neighbouring friends thought I was mad for spending such a rediculus amount on a bike and claiming that their £100 bike were as good. Earlier this year I sold my Marin for £200, and regretted letting it go as it was in near perfect condition and still rode fantastically well. I doubt any of the £100 bikes lasted 10 years never mind held a good value.

Now I look at recumbent trikes and happily accept their price tags as reasonable.


----------



## cyberknight (10 Nov 2011)

mickle said:


> I hope that the fact that £8000 bikes exist will seep into the general public's conciousness and start to erode the myth that bicycles cost less than a tank of petrol and are ridden only by people too poor to buy a car.



I very much doubt it, my co-workers think i am absolutely crazy for spending £800 on a "best " bike and keep telling me to buy a car etc etc .........


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

Mugshot said:


> Oh right, that's interesting, thank you
> How do they separate the improvements in the runners gear*, tracks and the like against their training and diet?
> If you have a link I'll look at that to save you having to put up with my mithering
> 
> *As in shoes etc not as in



I can't find the original link, but here is another link that references the original study:

http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2010/08/modern-bicycles-and-cycling-speeds-any.html


----------



## MarkF (10 Nov 2011)

MissTillyFlop said:


> You can apply that to a million different things - I don't understand having a £5k watch, as my £50 watch works just fine, but it's not about having a watch that works, it's about having a REALLY EXPENSIVE WATCH so all the women can secretly think that you are very poorly endowed or a bit stupid.
> 
> Or both.




I collect watches (seem to have started collecting bikes too) and wouldn't be able to concentrate enough to cycle straight if I had a shitty 50 nicker "watch" on my wrist, my yin yang levels would be all over the place. I treated myself to Rolex Deepsea Sea Dweller with money my dad left me, cost more than £5k actually. I moved it on after 12 months with no financial loss, nothing. You've lost more cash on your 50 nicker trinket, so put that in your pipe. 


Agree with a lot posted, an 8k bike? I'd love one and think it's great that such a thing could exist, however, to make it a "known" and "desirable" £8k bike would I think, cost an awful lot of money spent on marketing, money that has got to be recouped.....


----------



## Mugshot (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> I can't find the original link, but here is another link that references the original study:
> 
> http://cozybeehive.b...speeds-any.html



Fantastic, I shall have a read, thank you


----------



## oldfatfool (10 Nov 2011)

When you look at the first years depreciation on a new car the a few K on a bike and kit that will last a few years is a sound investment. If my bike gets me round my hols next year then as far as I am concerned it will have effectively paid for itself compared to the usual cost of an holiday and what I hoping to raise in sponsorship for charidee.

Have to agree a good Swiss timepiece will hold its value if not appreciate so long as you don't take into account servicing uch:


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

oldfatfool said:


> When you look at the first years depreciation on a new car the a few K on a bike and kit that will last a few years is a sound investment...


I'm now waiting for someone to say how £200 is good value for a pair of shoes, because it's a lot cheaper than the £800 they might otherwise have spent on a bike


----------



## oldfatfool (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> I'm now waiting for someone to say how £200 is good value for a pair of shoes, because it's a lot cheaper than the £800 they might otherwise have spent on a bike


----------



## MacB (10 Nov 2011)

snailracer said:


> They benchmarked cyclists against the improvements seen in runners over the same time period.



Interesting, I suppose you could recreate a bike from back then and stick a pro on it and see how they do


----------



## snailracer (10 Nov 2011)

MacB said:


> Interesting, I suppose you could recreate a bike from back then and stick a pro on it and see how they do



If it was up to the UCI alone, they'd still be racing on 'em.


----------



## User16625 (10 Nov 2011)

Do people who buy £8000 bicycles do their shopping at motorway services?


----------



## VamP (11 Nov 2011)

The Sperminator said:


> Do people who buy £8000 bicycles do their shopping at motorway services?




No. They have staff for that  


Seriously though, I agree with Mickle that it is a good thing that there is enough interest in high end products. The degree of hhigh tech engineering that goes into these machines easily matches other industries, and it is a measure of recognition of cycling as a sport that there is a market for that.

Most people that I know that race bikes on the other hand spend a lot less, if they are funding bikes out of their own pocket that is. Partly because they typically need more than one race bike, plus multiple wheelsets, and partly because there is the inevitable attrition and breakage. Often they plump for lesser groupsets too, as replacing 105 or Ultegra on a regular basis works out a lot more reasonable than replacing Dura-Ace. It's about finding the sweet spot between what is good enough for the job, and your pocket can allow. Plus there's always the temptation of being able to buy improved performance.


----------



## Moss (11 Nov 2011)

MissTillyFlop said:


> This is the dearest watch I have ever bought (and It's from Argos) it's a metal one.
> 
> I have had a lot of £5 watches, but they all end up falling to bits.
> 
> This one tells you that date and it glows when you press abutton!



You could have ten £5 watches ! £50, seems a lot.


----------



## adam23 (11 Nov 2011)

good thread this one, i would say when i got into cycling about 2yrs ago now on a mtb bike at £400 and loved it and was the 
most expensive bike i had bought then i watched some road cycling and thought i wouldnt mind a go at that so saved and bought
my first wilier at £1000 and wow what a bike it was and made me feel odd riding a bike of that cost but it felt good.
then in april this year i was made redundant but lucky enought to have a job lined up so treated my self to a new wilier that cost me 
£2050 inc new pedals the difference was huge and instantly felt better, the gears smoother the ride was better etc.
i have since swapped the wheels over to some fulcrum 1's that i saved for and again the difference in climbing was obvious and it felt quicker 
as the wheels were 500grams lighter.
so the idea that the average joe cant tell the difference is not true and if you try it you will see the difference.



when it comes to bike prices then 8000 is a lot of money for a bike but if you have the money to spare it doesnt seem a lot
i work in a top end hifi shop and in our shop window we have a pair of speakers for £150 and in our demo room we have some for 
£27,500 and we have sold a few pairs of them so it doesnt matter the cost some one will buy it.


----------



## peelywally (11 Nov 2011)

its a sellers market ,

the expensive the equipment the better it must be or so some think , ive gone past suited and booted full carbon spec bikes and riders like they were going backwards at the same time ive been passed with the guy wearing a t shirt and bermuda shorts on a fixie he either built himself or rescued from a skip 




manufacturing costs surely are the main reason for cost if not then why ,

plasma tvs cost about £2000 as manufacturing improved due to sales etc prices came down to around £500 today ?
apply that to bikes and theres something not happening


----------



## the snail (11 Nov 2011)

peelywally said:


> manufacturing costs surely are the main reason for cost if not then why ,
> 
> plasma tvs cost about £2000 as manufacturing improved due to sales etc prices came down to around £500 today ?
> apply that to bikes and theres something not happening



there are other factors than manufacturing costs, for instance cheaper bikes will be easier to shift for the shop, compared to the top-end bikes which might sit in the shop longer, plus there's more competition and buyers are more price sensitive at the lower end. There's a lot of marketing ploys too. Is it really necessary for Shimano to produce so many types of groupset? Probably not, but by having so many options, it allows them to extract the maximum profit through a range of price points. Reminds me of the first electronic calculator I got at school, mine was £12.50 I think, my friend had the snazzier £25 version. After a bit of experimentation, I discovered that mine had exactly the same functions as his, the only difference was that mine didn't have the extra ones marked on the case. Sneaky bastards!


----------



## MarkF (11 Nov 2011)

peelywally said:


> manufacturing costs surely are the main reason for cost if not then why ,
> 
> plasma tvs cost about £2000 as manufacturing improved due to sales etc prices came down to around £500 today ?
> apply that to bikes and theres something not happening



At the "high end" of any mainstream desirable product range (Rolex, Mercedes, Harley etc) I doubt very much that manufacturing costs are the main reason for the high purchase costs, and why would they be? They are aspirational products, marketing at that level costs a bomb, intrinsic and percieved values go out the window, in a nutshell, they make the owner feel "good", what price can you put on that?

Owning a high end £5k+ Rolex was an ambition realised for me, but, it was the same price as a 4 year old Ford Focus, not something I'd have gazed at lovingly and taken pleasure from, wouldn't have got my money back from it either. 

I can't, and never will, be able to afford an £8k bike but it's great that such a thing could exist and that people can purchase them, how must they feel wheeling it out of the garage?


----------



## david k (11 Nov 2011)

MissTillyFlop said:


> You can apply that to a million different things - I don't understand having a £5k watch, as my £50 watch works just fine, but it's not about having a watch that works, it's about having a REALLY EXPENSIVE WATCH so all the women can secretly think that you are very poorly endowed or a bit stupid.
> 
> Or both.



£50 on a watch, you must be minted


----------



## cycleruk (11 Nov 2011)

MarkF said:


> At the "high end" of any mainstream desirable product range (Rolex, Mercedes, Harley etc) I doubt very much that manufacturing costs are the main reason for the high purchase costs, and why would they be? They are aspirational products, marketing at that level costs a bomb, intrinsic and percieved values go out the window, in a nutshell, they make the owner feel "good", what price can you put on that?
> 
> Owning a high end £5k+ Rolex was an ambition realised for me, but, it was the same price as a 4 year old Ford Focus, not something I'd have gazed at lovingly and taken pleasure from, wouldn't have got my money back from it either.
> 
> I can't, and never will, be able to afford *an £8k bike* but it's great that such a thing could exist and that people can purchase them, how must they feel wheeling it out of the garage?


you would be gutted if you crashed it!  , 8 k on a push bike, it makes the £300 i spent on my new bike make me look like a cheap scape


----------



## zigzag (12 Nov 2011)

spending £8k on a bike is more about perceived status and satisfaction it would give to the owner, rather than measurable performance gains. when i suggested to my mrs that she could have a very good custom made bike for about £2k, she said it would be stupid to spend such money on a bike. but then she thinks i need a wrist watch for the same amount of money and asked me to help her to choose one as an anniversary gift.. the thing is i don't need one as i already have a very nice (to me) watch that i don't wear very often as it's a bit heavy on the wrist when riding a bike.


----------



## jdtate101 (12 Nov 2011)

As with all things...a fool and his money are easily parted.

Now I believe in you get what you pay for, and sometime quality does cost, but there is a point at which the quality cannot get any better. Wine is a good example...just because a bottle costs £1000 (it's rare and old) doesn't mean it's better than a £50 bottle. In fact it may taste worse due to age, but still costs way more due to it's rareness. Designer clothes are a really good example. Paying £60-£80 for a tee shirt....ridiculous. It physically might be no different than the £10 tee shirt next door.

As for bikes, I think there is a point at which carbon frames become "fashion labels" and the extra benefit is lost. This would seem to be between £2K and £3K. Most cost difference at this price comes down to groupset (ultegra vs DuraAce vs Di2) and the holy grail of weight loss.

For professional athletes they may want a £8k bike, not because it cost 8K in the shop, but because it cost 8K to tailor to their exact shape and needs.


----------



## screenman (12 Nov 2011)

"As with all things...a fool and his money are easily parted." Quoted from above, seeing as most of the replies on here are from people who cannot afford an £8,000 bike how come the fool can. Maybe it would be better for people with no money to become fools so that they have some.


----------



## vickster (12 Nov 2011)

Surely, people should be allowed to spend their money on whatever they want? If they believe they can afford and justify an £8k bike, then so be it. 
Now if they are getting themselves into a life of debt and destitution, then they are just daft


----------



## screenman (12 Nov 2011)

Vickster, I agree with you on that very good point.


----------



## vickster (12 Nov 2011)

Ta. 

Also, all the very costly R&D that goes into developing the top end materials and components will drip feed down through the ranges as the manufacturers need to recoup that investment (they won't do it by selling a hundred £8k bikes), so sooner or later we will all benefit


----------



## Bicycle (15 Nov 2011)

As already said on this thread, top-end is top-end and it costs.

I've notced a couple of things in cycle prices over the past 20 years or so...

1. People who are 'new' to the pursuit and may only be involved for a few years go straight for high-end stuff in a way I don't recall that sort doing 20 years ago. I don't know why this is.

2. I suspect that in real terms prices are higher. In the early 80s a friend had a bespoke, high-end bike put together at Condor for about £350. At the time that was an absurd amount of money, but the bike was quite delicious. Most of us rode, but we all had standard Dawes, Raleigh or similar 5-speed or 10-speed stuff. At that time a school-leaver was earning maybe £70/80 per week. So... a posh Condor for 5 weeks' money for a school-leaver.

What would that machine cost now (updated to current spec). A condor ground-up bike can cost easily £4500-£5000, but I don't imagine many school-leavers are pulling in a grand a week.

3. Volumes for high-end stuff are greater now; Campagnolo transmissions were a rarity outside the full-on cycling community 20 or 30 years ago... now you see scores of them at every station car park. this should bring prices down, but it hasn't.

Cycling is 'sexy' in a way it really wasn't 30 years ago (apart from among a few die-hards). The market will charge what the market can bear. We are all willing to pay these barmy prices and as long as we are prices will continue as they are.

I don't like spending money and I save it where I can, but I do love to ride the smooth, swish, light bicycle that money buys me.

I'd like to resent it, but somehow I can't.


----------



## Hip Priest (15 Nov 2011)

Like most recreational cyclists, an £8k bike is not affordable to me and not really necessary for my needs. I don't begrudge anyone who wants to (and can afford to) spend that sort of money though - good luck to them.


----------



## Dave 123 (15 Nov 2011)

An 8k bike? What a great idea. The day you out climb/outsprint the owner of said machine on your 500 quid bike you'll feel a million dollars, never mind 8 grand.

In kayaking the saying "all the gear, no idea" is heard on a regular basis, £1000 boat, £400 paddle, £600 drysuit, £150 helmet, couldn't paddle a boat straight for 10 yards! Oh, hang on. That's me!


----------



## snailracer (16 Nov 2011)

vickster said:


> Surely, people should be allowed to spend their money on whatever they want? ...


In a free country, people have the right to buy what they want - and others have the right to say what they think about it.


----------



## BrumJim (16 Nov 2011)

Its a great way of telling your wife that spending £2,000 on a bike isn't actually that much.

"Its less than a quarter of the price of this bike!"

I'm working hard on this theory at the moment.


----------



## Brandane (16 Nov 2011)

A lot of it is down to peoples different perceptions. A mate of mine cannot believe that 2 years ago I spent £700 on a new Specialized Tricross. He still goes on about it whenever I see him! He is not a cyclist and spends a fair bit of time in his local pub. He probably gets through £700 across the bar of the pub in about 2 months.

After 2 years I still have the bike, have covered 5600 enjoyable miles on it in different parts of Britain and France, have lost 2 stone in weight and generally feel much fitter. It was the best bargain I ever had at £700 .

I don't have the heart to tell my mate that I have added a Secteur Sport and a Trek 6500 MTB to the collection .


----------

