The end of Guru

[wheelsONfire]

http://www.slowtwitch.com/Opinion/The_D ... _5574.html

[fromtrektocolnago]

Seems Guru wasn't active in Social media the way Seven cycles, Firefly and to some extent Parlee does. To compete against the mass market cookie cutter manufacturers requires a lot of social media marketing and a lot of end customer contact. I just didn't see Guru doing that. Haven't thought much about Guru in over a decade.

[jmaccyd]

Wondered why my local bike shop was selling off Guru frames at really bargain prices.

[xena]

I agree. The bikes are incredible but somehow the message never really got out there. Their reputation on this site was blighted by you know who.
They needed a much cooler profile IMO
My guru is without doubt the best bike I have been on
Its a shame. I do think there is a market for a cool custom bike but the marketing always seems so conservative. We need a new edgy brand that reeks of cool.

[2old4this]

First AX (http://ax-lightness.de/en/infocenter/), now this ....

[wheelsONfire]

Ax Lightness do exist which Guru doesn't seem to do.

According to Ax they are in a better financial situation now then they were before.

So i am not sure what you try to say?

[Tooslow]

I am in Western Canada and I deal with a few Quebecois businesses, non bike related. Guru's demise does not surprise me.

Nonetheless still sad when a niche brand cannot survive.

[2old4this]

Ax Lightness do exist which Guru doesn't seem to do.
According to Ax they are in a better financial situation now then they were before.
So i am not sure what you try to say?

True, they've been bought out. So, the name still exists. Is it going to stay to be the same company? We'll see...

[Rippin]

It's unfortunate that Guru is closing their doors. I hope someone will buy them out, but with the troubles they've had in the past with dealers, that's probably not likely. They wanted to compete with the big boys but few would pay the high entry price for a brand very few know about, and as they've started to increase outsourcing, the appeal of "hand-built in Canada" becomes lost. But I've read good things about their current line up of bikes, so much so that I purchased a Photon SL this past October. I haven't even finished the build and they're going out of business but I have high hopes that the bike will ride very well.

[fromtrektocolnago]

sounds like this was self inflicted...

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/north-am ... pG6_VIgvEp

[2old4this]

Attention: Major conspiracy theory follows. And I am sorry for the endless runt. It is the weekend and I had some free time


I don't think the state Guru (and all the other small vendors) is in simply because of bad execution. The market for small vendors are shirinking...

After the end of 90s, with the UCI rules, American vendors (Trek and Cannondale are two I can think of) were contained and their obsession with light weight frames/bikes were controlled. UCI was hiding behind the excuse of "safer bikes", though, simple engineering would have determined the characteristics of these new genre of bikes... Incidentally, the traditional vendors, like Colnago and Pinarello, with their "super heavy" bikes were saved (ehem!) Unfortunately (or fortunately), even today, they are still going with their traditional methods, producing little variations of the same bikes (dare I say hiding behind UCI.)

Anyways, UCI did not stop there, and I think that is where the whole industry started declining. The frame geometry definition got severly limited, forcing every vendor to produce the same frame. Yep, there are a few differences here and there but you get the point. Since it is too expensive to make a UCI compliant and another one non-compliant, in most cases, we only get one. Hence, they all look the same now...

So what do the the vendors do? They needed to differentiate themselves, so they start playing with (and advertising for) the few things they can freely touch; weight, aero, and bottom bracket.

The weight hits the 690 gr limit for frames, and 260 gr for forks, and 150 gr for handle bars ... Unfortunately, they are now too expensive to produce anywhere but Far East. So the small vendors are squeezed out of business. And the big vendors cannot effort custom frames or technology that may or may not work out. BTW, some of the surviving small vendors, pay through the nose to pro-teams to use their bikes. They need advertising. Guru didn't do that and is now out of business. Pinarello did it and it is still in the business (don't get me wrong it is a good bike, but if it weren't ridden by Team Sky, how many of us would have paid $5K+ for a "Made in China" bike?)

Aero; well everybody says it should make a difference. Unfortunately, for most of us, it does not make much of a difference.

And the bottom bracket... Don't get me started on that one. After Canondale with bb30, everybody is coming up with a better stiffer lighter BB "standard"... Then again, I don't blame the vendors. What else can they play with? ...

And UCI continued... I do not even think they are trying to justify some of the strangest rules anymore. Why people cannot wear knee-high socks (is it because some cannot afford it? Or they simply look funny? Who cares anyways, seriously!) What is the justification for the ball-breaking saddle angles? Why can't the stem be 130mm? Why saddle has to be 5 cm behind.... And on and on and on...

UCI's solution to a non-existing problem, unfortunately, ended up limiting innovation, and killing the small guys. I think they've started with good intentions but forgot the fact that races are won by the riders, not what they are riding.

[djconnel]

Sad, but the difference between frames is just too small, and with mainstream companies like Specialized and Trek able to capture a decent chunk of even the money-is-no-object crowd, how much is there for Parlee? The UCI comment is valid, because the rules limit the scope for diversity.

[mattyNorm]

Wait sorry to derail the thread but is there actually an official rule governing sock length?????

[andrewfelix]

Sad, but the difference between frames is just too small, and with mainstream companies like Specialized and Trek able to capture a decent chunk of even the money-is-no-object crowd, how much is there for Parlee? The UCI comment is valid, because the rules limit the scope for diversity.

Socks must be no higher than the mid-point between the ankle and the knee.

Apparently this is to avoid use of compression socks. Pretty f*ing ridiculous considering all the other technology being used for gains.

Which brings me back to Guru. I think the market is becoming increasingly obsessed with technology, such as aero, integration etc. Technology that small operations can't afford to develop to the same levels for the same prices as the big guys.

[fromtrektocolnago]

Attention: Major conspiracy theory follows. And I am sorry for the endless runt. It is the weekend and I had some free time


I don't think the state Guru (and all the other small vendors) is in simply because of bad execution. The market for small vendors are shirinking...

After the end of 90s, with the UCI rules, American vendors (Trek and Cannondale are two I can think of) were contained and their obsession with light weight frames/bikes were controlled. UCI was hiding behind the excuse of "safer bikes", though, simple engineering would have determined the characteristics of these new genre of bikes... Incidentally, the traditional vendors, like Colnago and Pinarello, with their "super heavy" bikes were saved (ehem!) Unfortunately (or fortunately), even today, they are still going with their traditional methods, producing little variations of the same bikes (dare I say hiding behind UCI.)

Anyways, UCI did not stop there, and I think that is where the whole industry started declining. The frame geometry definition got severly limited, forcing every vendor to produce the same frame. Yep, there are a few differences here and there but you get the point. Since it is too expensive to make a UCI compliant and another one non-compliant, in most cases, we only get one. Hence, they all look the same now...

So what do the the vendors do? They needed to differentiate themselves, so they start playing with (and advertising for) the few things they can freely touch; weight, aero, and bottom bracket.

The weight hits the 690 gr limit for frames, and 260 gr for forks, and 150 gr for handle bars ... Unfortunately, they are now too expensive to produce anywhere but Far East. So the small vendors are squeezed out of business. And the big vendors cannot effort custom frames or technology that may or may not work out. BTW, some of the surviving small vendors, pay through the nose to pro-teams to use their bikes. They need advertising. Guru didn't do that and is now out of business. Pinarello did it and it is still in the business (don't get me wrong it is a good bike, but if it weren't ridden by Team Sky, how many of us would have paid $5K+ for a "Made in China" bike?)

Aero; well everybody says it should make a difference. Unfortunately, for most of us, it does not make much of a difference.

And the bottom bracket... Don't get me started on that one. After Canondale with bb30, everybody is coming up with a better stiffer lighter BB "standard"... Then again, I don't blame the vendors. What else can they play with? ...

And UCI continued... I do not even think they are trying to justify some of the strangest rules anymore. Why people cannot wear knee-high socks (is it because some cannot afford it? Or they simply look funny? Who cares anyways, seriously!) What is the justification for the ball-breaking saddle angles? Why can't the stem be 130mm? Why saddle has to be 5 cm behind.... And on and on and on...

UCI's solution to a non-existing problem, unfortunately, ended up limiting innovation, and killing the small guys. I think they've started with good intentions but forgot the fact that races are won by the riders, not what they are riding.

I don't agree at all. Companies like Seven are doing well and growing. Same with Firefly, Ken Bedford, Mosaic and others. But to be successful companies must connect with customers, control costs and deliver great fit and value. Seven and Firefly are capitalizing on the growing interest in gravel bikes and customers willing to pay up for good custom solutions.
It's pretty clear Guru had a bad strategy which led to run-away costs and a factory that could not open on time.