Is anyone completely done with these absurd prices?

[smartyiak]

I would hazard a guess that finance plans to pay for these highend/£10k+ bikes could be a factor fuelling the demand.

I'm sure that's part of it, but I would guess many more go to Dubai and Doha, hedge fund mamagers, tech nerds, etc. If you're next worth is $100million of greater....what's $15k if you want one?

Edit: The google machine tells me there are 28,240 Centi-millionaires, 264,200 people worth > $50mil, and 2.8million worth > $10mil. That coin can buy a lot of "superbikes." There are also > 3,000 billionaires...and that can prolly buy ALL the superbikes.

[EtoDemerzel]

Though easy to complain about prices when using the top spec racing bikes, they have been along the same price for many years.
2018 Tarmac SL6 SWorks - $10200 ($12,700 today)
2024 Tarmac SL8 SWorks - $14000
Adjust for inflation, the top tier bikes have not changed much despite now being electronic wireless and hydraulic with much more aero development and tire & wheel development.

$5500-6500 Di2 or AXS race bike from Specialized, or other name brands is at least the equal of any race bike from 10 yrs ago that cost $7200-8600 back then.

Bikes are more expensive, for sure. But so are all goods and services.

[Lina]

I would hazard a guess that finance plans to pay for these highend/£10k+ bikes could be a factor fuelling the demand.

I'm sure that's part of it, but I would guess many more go to Dubai and Doha, hedge fund mamagers, tech nerds, etc. If you're next worth is $100million of greater....what's $15k if you want one?

Edit: The google machine tells me there are 28,240 Centi-millionaires, 264,200 people worth > $50mil, and 2.8million worth > $10mil. That coin can buy a lot of "superbikes." There are also > 3,000 billionaires...and that can prolly buy ALL the superbikes.

Don't even have to be worth $100 million. If you're getting paid +$150k a year it's very easy to justify spending $15k on a hobby you like every few years. Especially if you don't have kids.

[MiSzA (PL)]

(...)
Bikes are more expensive, for sure. But so are all goods and services.

True - but what about the fact that there is littel innovation with year-to-year models? Basicly proposed changes are minor and rarely are an overhaul of the frame-fork combo. If that woud be the case - I would understand the price.

Secondly - service and warraties are becoming non existing in real world sense - Spec and Trek are famous (at least in Poland) for not taking care of customers unless you take them to court with a formal complaint after back-and-forth e-mail conversations lasting months.

[Jaisen]

A lot of the complaints about prices fail to appreciate that almost all sports are very expensive. The big difference with cycling is you pay mostly upfront as opposed to on a monthly basis.

My bouldering membership costs 90$ a month and I need new shoes or to resole them every 6 months, which is typically a few hundred, plus regularly buying chalk. So all told, easily 125$ a month. Similarly, when I played hockey, the equipment itself was very expensive upfront, but paying for ice time is easily comes out to 15-20$ a game. Play 3 times a week on a regular basis and all told the costs are easily 300$ a month for hockey. Even a standard gym membership at a good local gym costs ~100$ a month.

So over a 10 year time frame even buying a top of the line bicycle that costs > 10k up front strikes me as very reasonable and not disproportionate to other sports. Of course if you are the type who needs a new bike every 2-3 years, or as soon as your components start to wear down, like people who lease cars and buy new ones as soon as the warranty runs out, that's an entirely different issue.

[JMeinholdt]

A lot of the complaints about prices fail to appreciate that almost all sports are very expensive. The big difference with cycling is you pay mostly upfront as opposed to on a monthly basis.

Comparison to other sports completely misses the point. It's that the investment cost to manufacturers and price to consumers is so far out of whack at this point. And the absurd year over year price increases implemented over the last 4 years is coming back to haunt the entire industry with numerous companies in serious financial trouble since people aren't buying bikes right now.

[Jaisen]

A lot of the complaints about prices fail to appreciate that almost all sports are very expensive. The big difference with cycling is you pay mostly upfront as opposed to on a monthly basis.

Comparison to other sports completely misses the point. It's that the investment cost to manufacturers and price to consumers is so far out of whack at this point. And the absurd year over year price increases implemented over the last 4 years is coming back to haunt the entire industry with numerous companies in serious financial trouble since people aren't buying bikes right now.

Is it really so far out of whack? Escape Collective did a write up recently where they talked with the CEO of Factor. I'm running off memory here, but if you look at a modern carbon frame, the basic materials are about 400$ (unlike Giant the carbon sheets are not produced in house but purchased from Toray), then you need to pay the design team that has to use very advanced computational techniques and even wind tunnel tests for their designs, so that's easily another 100-200$. Carbon frames are in part built up by hand, then they need to be QC'd and painted, so another 200$. You have to pay for the multiple very expensive molds, so another 100$. Shipping out to various countries across the world adds another 100$. Those big brands all sponsor pro teams, so that cost has to be accounted for, easily another 200$. I am sure there are other various expenses, but the basic cost to manufacture is easily 1500$. Then they need to make a profit, as does the LBS you buy the frame from, and you see why the frame sets alone are +3000$.

30 years ago it was a rather simple affair to just buy metal tubes and weld them together in the shape of a bicycle. Modern bikes have a heck of a lot of expensive tech behind them and the costs will only increase as improving designs will continue to become even more complex.

[EtoDemerzel]

(...)
Bikes are more expensive, for sure. But so are all goods and services.

True - but what about the fact that there is littel innovation with year-to-year models? Basicly proposed changes are minor and rarely are an overhaul of the frame-fork combo. If that woud be the case - I would understand the price.

Secondly - service and warraties are becoming non existing in real world sense - Spec and Trek are famous (at least in Poland) for not taking care of customers unless you take them to court with a formal complaint after back-and-forth e-mail conversations lasting months.

Preface:
Are top end bikes expensive? Yes. I think so. Do people even consider mid range bikes anymore? No. Di2 105 and Ultegra bikes are bargains today. Is there any discussion about that when talking about prices? No. There is a $4-7k market that gives you 90% of the performance at half the price, as it has been for decades.

1. INNOVATION: Please tell me the innovation year to year between a
2010 S-Works Tarmac ($10,900 adj)
2018 S-Works Tarmac-last rim brake yr- ($12,700* adj)
Nearly a decade of rim brake "innovation" where we went from 10 spd to 11 spd, and almost nothing else. Adjusted for inflation, top end bikes have been $10-14k over 24 years ago.

Since 2018, there have been many innovations. Thru Axles, wider rims, tire technology, wireless-semi wireless shifting, 12 spd, aero performance, hydraulic disc brakes, 3d printing, further advances in carbon manufacturing.

Put another way:
Does a top tier bike from 5 yrs ago compare to one today at the same dollar value?
The innovation from 2018 to 2024 is an entire sea change in how road bikes are made.
The innovation from 2010 to 2018 is granular and, by today's perspective, almost non-existent.

2. SERVICE WARRANTY: With name brands like Trek and Specialized, at least in the USA, this is a huge reason people pay for the name. Service, storefront access, and warranty as well as perception as the premier brands in the industry.
Poland, no idea.

[AJS914]

Is it really so far out of whack? Escape Collective did a write up recently where they talked with the CEO of Factor. I'm running off memory here, but if you look at a modern carbon frame, the basic materials are about 400$ (unlike Giant the carbon sheets are not produced in house but purchased from Toray), then you need to pay the design team that has to use very advanced computational techniques and even wind tunnel tests for their designs, so that's easily another 100-200$. Carbon frames are in part built up by hand, then they need to be QC'd and painted, so another 200$. You have to pay for the multiple very expensive molds, so another 100$. Shipping out to various countries across the world adds another 100$. Those big brands all sponsor pro teams, so that cost has to be accounted for, easily another 200$. I am sure there are other various expenses, but the basic cost to manufacture is easily 1500$.

That was an interesting conversation but I take what the CEO of Factor says with some skepticism.

He really didn't explain how an S-Works Tarmac frame costs $5500 and a regular Tarmac $3500. Same mold and all. The tiny bit of tuning with a few different bits of carbon fiber and less resin doesn't account for a $2000 price difference at retail.

Same with the Emonda. The SLR is like $4200 and the SL is $2200. By Factor's accounting, how can Trek even make money selling the Emonda SL at $2200 retail?

His analysis also didn't explain carbon frame that come with retail price points of say $1500 to $500 (open mold).

My take on $7500 framesets is that the bicycle industry finally figured out halo products. Dentists, lawyers, hedge fund guys, and even tech dudes with no kids making $100k+ per year want the "best" when they show up on the group ride. And "best" is often defined by being the most expensive. They just don't buy second tier nor ultegra and definitely not 105. They make enough that $10-15k+ for a bike is nothing.

[EtoDemerzel]

My take on $7500 framesets is that the bicycle industry finally figured out halo products. Dentists, lawyers, hedge fund guys, and even tech dudes with no kids making $100k+ per year want the "best" when they show up on the group ride. And "best" is often defined by being the most expensive. They just don't buy second tier nor ultegra and definitely not 105. They make enough that $10-15k+ for a bike is nothing.

Has it ever been any different?

[wheelbuilder]

My take on $7500 framesets is that the bicycle industry finally figured out halo products. Dentists, lawyers, hedge fund guys, and even tech dudes with no kids making $100k+ per year want the "best" when they show up on the group ride. And "best" is often defined by being the most expensive. They just don't buy second tier nor ultegra and definitely not 105. They make enough that $10-15k+ for a bike is nothing.

Has it ever been any different?

It kind of was if my old guy brain is working correctly. In the early eighties , "pre lance" road riding seemed to work a different way. The bike you rode and the components you slowly bought and replaced were kind of correlated to your ability, time spent, and passion. Guys got stronger and addicted to the dedication and suffering. As that happened, more expensive components were purchased and swapped. Ultimately the frame of one's desire was purchased.
I don't ever remember a non fit guy showing up on a bike like this. This "earn it to ride it" thing does not exist now. The clumsiest, softest, out of shape guys in the world are proud to show up on and in top level kit.

[tymon_tm]

It kind of was if my old guy brain is working correctly. In the early eighties , "pre lance" road riding seemed to work a different way. The bike you rode and the components you slowly bought and replaced were kind of correlated to your ability, time spent, and passion. Guys got stronger and addicted to the dedication and suffering. As that happened, more expensive components were purchased and swapped. Ultimately the frame of one's desire was purchased.
I don't ever remember a non fit guy showing up on a bike like this. This "earn it to ride it" thing does not exist now. The clumsiest, softest, out of shape guys in the world are proud to show up on and in top level kit.

amen to that. I started right in the kiddle of 'Lance era' and followed exactly the same path (or arguably still am..)

since cycling (and sports in general) became a fashion statement, different rules apply not only to what is being bought/ridden but mostly to the product line ups. it's not customers who "voted" this or other way, it's the market that shifted and made us "fullfill our needs" their way. product line ups are vertically squashed, incentifying us to jump right onto the pricy stuff.

today the entry level race bikes are the same mould that top of the shelve models have, and despite lesser components the price tag is already very high. someone said there are 'cheap' entry bikes but that's not true - first of all they are nearly twice as expensive as "before all that &hit" (pandemic, disc brake craze etc). second of all - these are endurance focused, tall geometry bikes that really can't be used by those who wish a proper road racing bike but can't handle a 5k+ price tag.

In the beginning of 2000s Orbea for instance had like 6-7 frame levels, even before Orca was introduced. I can't remember exact geometry figures but they were more or less the similar or 'adjustable' across the line; entry models had some shitty alu, later on they got a better one, then a columbus tubing level, then two types of carbon rear end, and then some ultra thin 'starship' variant, again with additional two variations of rear end. THAT'S A LOT of choice but also having eg. 2k to spend, not 2.3k or 2.5k, i could just point at the right shelve and my choice was limited to getting either a bit lesser frame with better drivetrain or the other way round. FWIW i had a "lobular" Orbea on Tiagra at one point that i traded for a 'starship' level bike bought off a pro team. frame dimensions, "philosophy" so to speak, was the same - only the bike was just two steps better.

similar thing was at Trek; at least 3 alu frames, then 5500 and 5900 carbon. Look, hardly a volume seller, had a number of carbon frames... and all of them were 'race ready' and were actually raced too. today a bike with a remotely racing geometry is, well, not availible for those with smaller budgets anymore. we have traded that racing aspect of bikes for what exactly...?

[EtoDemerzel]

...
today the entry level race bikes are the same mould that top of the shelve models have, and despite lesser components the price tag is already very high. someone said there are 'cheap' entry bikes but that's not true - first of all they are nearly twice as expensive as "before all that &hit" (pandemic, disc brake craze etc). second of all - these are endurance focused, tall geometry bikes that really can't be used by those who wish a proper road racing bike but can't handle a 5k+ price tag.
...

2024 Tarmac SL8 Expert (Rival AXS wireless) - $6500
2024 Tarmac SL7 Comp (Di2 105 electronic) - $4500
2024 Tarmac SL7 Sport (105 mechanical) -$3800

2017 Tarmac Comp (Ultegra mechanical) - $3800 (adj $2024)
2011 Tarmac Pro SL3 (Ultegra/Roval mechanical) -$7300 (adj $2024)

[tymon_tm]

2024 Tarmac SL7 Sport (105 mechanical) -$3800

maybe in US, in europe it's around 5-5,5k for the very same bike

[EtoDemerzel]

2024 Tarmac SL7 Sport (105 mechanical) -$3800

maybe in US, in europe it's around 5-5,5k for the very same bike

2024 Tarmac SL7 Comp £3650