Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

cyclingtips.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 134 posts

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#121

Post by sangnoir »

bhouston wrote: post #110
microtherion wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There might be at least the perception that the CEO will spend most of their tenure plotting their next startup (and quite possibly poaching employees and intellectual property on the way out). Think Anthony Levandowski. Are there any well known cases of startup CEOs who were wildly successful as employees in another company?

Andy Rubin was a President/CEO/Founder of Android and then was at Google for a decade. Maybe he wasn't C-level though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin

Difference is, Google acquired his startup - he din't apply to Google solo after an Android "exit".

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#122

Post by akvadrako »

nradov wrote: post #14

It's a shame that there's been little innovation from road bike manufacturers in the past 10 years or so. The last major innovation was aero carbon frames. Since then everyone is just copying each other and trying to improve by fractions of a percent for weight, stiffness, and efficiency. Most of the value and innovation has shifted to the groupset suppliers, with Shimano taking the lion's share of the market and a f…

There is stuff like https://www.ceramicspeed.com/en/driven/

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#123

Post by fatnoah »

rdiddly wrote: post #36
RugnirViking wrote: post #2

Is it just me, or are there seemingly far more people trying to invest and profit off bikeshares than there are using them? I've lived in several cities in europe and i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them. Yet there seems to be tons of competing companies putting out bikes in the street. On top of that, they don't even seem to bother marketing or anything. The first I'll hear of a new company is see…

I've pondered that question too. Something like Uber or Lyft works partly because of the cost and burden of car ownership. It's attractive to use someone else's equipment if you don't have to buy, maintain, finance, fuel, insure, and store (park) similar equipment yourself, to the tune of thousands of dollars per year. But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even t…

You'd be surprised. Here's a cool visualization from a bike share in Boston. It's from 2015, and it's grown a bit since then:

https://twitter.com/ridebluebikes/status/634459070200680449

As others have stated, it's not about renting vs. owning a bike, but it's about having the bike option when/where you need it.

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#124

Post by mikestew »

nradov wrote: post #14

It's a shame that there's been little innovation from road bike manufacturers in the past 10 years or so. The last major innovation was aero carbon frames. Since then everyone is just copying each other and trying to improve by fractions of a percent for weight, stiffness, and efficiency. Most of the value and innovation has shifted to the groupset suppliers, with Shimano taking the lion's share of the market and a f…

It's a shame that there's been little innovation from road bike manufacturers in the past 10 years or so.

If you want to stop, we've got hydraulic disc brakes. If you want to go, we can stick a motor on it. Don't want to maintain derailleurs? Get a 14 gear Rohlhoff internal hub. Don't want to maintain a chain? Get belt drive. Don't even want to go to the effort to physically push the mechanism to the next gear? We have electric shifting now.

None of this was available twenty years ago. The "innovation every 10 years" you're looking for happened well over 100 years ago. The low-hanging fruit was taken before your grandfather was born. But build a bike with brakes so good it will lift the back wheel in the pouring rain, and people still aren't satisfied. :-)

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#125

Post by trhwe2313 »

fooblitzky wrote: post #46
RugnirViking wrote: post #2

Is it just me, or are there seemingly far more people trying to invest and profit off bikeshares than there are using them? I've lived in several cities in europe and i'm not actually sure i've ever seen anybody using them. Yet there seems to be tons of competing companies putting out bikes in the street. On top of that, they don't even seem to bother marketing or anything. The first I'll hear of a new company is see…

Seattle collects data on bike share usage, available here: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs... Seems in the sunnier months they get about 200,000 trips, from a fleet of 10,000 bikes. I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before deciding to purchase a bike themselves too. Overall ridership is up 12% this year.

> I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before decidin

I don't mean to sound elitist but riding BSOs is the surest way to turn people away from biking - and these bikeshare one look worse than the mamacharis ridden in Tokyo. In anycase, considering the bike culture of Seattle, I doubt there is a big overlap b/w the two kind of riders - casual and dedicated commuters.

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#126

Post by zanderz »

nradov wrote: post #14

It's a shame that there's been little innovation from road bike manufacturers in the past 10 years or so. The last major innovation was aero carbon frames. Since then everyone is just copying each other and trying to improve by fractions of a percent for weight, stiffness, and efficiency. Most of the value and innovation has shifted to the groupset suppliers, with Shimano taking the lion's share of the market and a f…

A prime example of this was the Trek Y-Foil. It is surprising how much the entire bike industry is shaped by the arcane rules of a very conservative 119 year old European governing body.

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#127

Post by rdiddly »

dagw wrote: post #102
rdiddly wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've pondered that question too. Something like Uber or Lyft works partly because of the cost and burden of car ownership. It's attractive to use someone else's equipment if you don't have to buy, maintain, finance, fuel, insure, and store (park) similar equipment yourself, to the tune of thousands of dollars per year. But then you look at bike ownership. I almost want to put "bike ownership" in quotes because even t…

The 'problem' you're looking to solve is not the hassle of bike "ownership" but bike access. If I take the car or bus to work I can't then take my bike to meet a client. If I take my bike into town I can't then take the bus home if the weather turns bad or I have a lot shopping to carry. If I take my bike into a 'bad' part of town to go to a bar I have to worry about the very real chance that it won't be where I left…

If you take the bus home because of bad weather one day, and leave your bike at work, it's there for you to go meet a client the next day! :P

No but seriously. Sounds like your transit agency doesn't have bike racks on the buses. That's what enables the integration with transit. Around my area you can take a bike on the bus or light rail.

All the other problems have pre-existing solutions though too:

Groceries to carry → Get panniers, and don't buy more than they can hold (you can always get more tomorrow, and it'll be fresher).

Rain → Wear rain gear.

Bad part of town → Own a modest bike and a good lock.

The extreme mode flexibility you mention sounds nice, but I've never found I've needed it. With a little advance planning and the extra bits above, you can just commit to one mode.

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#128

Post by rasz »

timwaagh wrote: post #107
rasz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why bother innovating when its not needed? Expensive bicycles are in the same market as fancy watches. Its all just wealth signalling. Nobody needs 10% lighter frames, or 5% more aerodynamic shapes. If you want to drive faster or burn less energy you go electric, If you want health benefits you buy the shittiest heaviest bike you can find and pedal harder.

these are racing bikes meant for racing. A racer might want 5% more aero, because that's the difference between winning that race or not.

This $3-5K https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/speedx/speedx-unicorn-s... was a racing bike?

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#129

Post by microtherion »

bhouston wrote: post #110
microtherion wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There might be at least the perception that the CEO will spend most of their tenure plotting their next startup (and quite possibly poaching employees and intellectual property on the way out). Think Anthony Levandowski. Are there any well known cases of startup CEOs who were wildly successful as employees in another company?

Andy Rubin was a President/CEO/Founder of Android and then was at Google for a decade. Maybe he wasn't C-level though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin

Yes, I agree that this is a very successful case.

Re: The birth and death of a bike company: What happened to SpeedX

#130

Post by msrpotus »

trhwe2313 wrote: post #125
fooblitzky wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seattle collects data on bike share usage, available here: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs... Seems in the sunnier months they get about 200,000 trips, from a fleet of 10,000 bikes. I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before deciding to purchase a bike themselves too. Overall ridership is up 12% this year.

> I think a lot of people start riding the share bikes before decidin I don't mean to sound elitist but riding BSOs is the surest way to turn people away from biking - and these bikeshare one look worse than the mamacharis ridden in Tokyo. In anycase, considering the bike culture of Seattle, I doubt there is a big overlap b/w the two kind of riders - casual and dedicated commuters.

I started as a casual biker (using the London bike share on vacation there) and became a serious bike commuter. It’s a journey, not a simple division.
Post reply on HN