Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
08-02.-2008, 01:23 AM
|
#31 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 5, 9:11 pm, Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 1:45 am, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Jay Beattie wrote: > > > > What I take away from the press release is that Pacific Cycles will > > > continue with its low-end bikes through high volume dealers, and > > > Cannondale will continue in its current niche selling higher quality > > > bikes through LBS. > > > I think we can expect a major expansion of Cannondale's recent > > practice of having some of its frames manufactured overseas. An > > aluminum Cannondale used to be a qualitatively different thing than an > > aluminum Trek, Giant, Redline, etc. That's probably going to > > change. > > > > If you believe the > > > press release, Cannondale is not headed for Walmart, and it would not > > > make sense to devalue the brand by selling it mass market. > > > It didn't make sense for them to do it to Mongoose, GT, or worst of > > all, Schwinn. But they did. I think their track record speaks louder > > than their press release about where this is all going. > > > If Dorel/Pacific think it is better for the bottom line to keep the > > Cannondale brand exclusive to the LBS market, then they will. If they > > think it will be more profitable for the brand to be retailed through > > nationwide sporting goods chain stores, they'll do that. And have no > > doubt-- if they think there's more money in selling $150 "Cannondales" > > at Wally World, they will do that. > > > What I would not count on in any case is for the new owners to > > continue to uphold the few quality distinctions Cannondale has managed > > to retain-- or USA frame production, for that matter. > > > Chalo > > Is Cannondale so distinguished a brand that it is worth saving? (This > is not a rhetorical question; I just know nothing about Cannondale.) If you don't know, are you just posting to hear yourself type? > > Is it necessarily a bad thing to kick a sliding brand around a bit? > (This is a rhetorical question. I know the answer. It is, No.) > > There are good conglomerates and bad conglomerates. Some of the > world's finest bikes come from good conglomerates. > > A few decades ago, Raleigh was shit, it's bikes were shit, it's > reputation was shit. It was sold to a conglomerate who thought they > could milk the name. They came a cropper. Raleigh was sold to a good > conglomerate and now the name is slowly coming to mean something > again. > > Perhaps Cannondale comes out of the process leaner, meaner and once > more honest, two or three owners down the road. If not, is it really > such a hardship that another lowball bike assembler has bitten the > dust? > > Andre Jute > Economist & Darwinist Pegasus is selling the company for more than three times as much as they paid to get it out of bankruptcy in 2003. Quality has been steadily improving, and the fact that some of their goofy proprietary hardware (BB-30 for example) is becoming standard for other manufacturers puts them in a very respected position. The bankruptcy, by the way, was caused entirely by the addition of a motorsports division. So this is hardly a sliding brand, and the process to make it "leaner, meaner and once more honest" happened five years ago. This is just a case of investors cashing out. |
|
|
08-02.-2008, 02:50 AM
|
#32 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 7, 7:23*am, unforgive...@juno.com wrote:
> On Feb 5, 9:11 pm, Andre Jute <fiul...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 6, 1:45 am, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Jay Beattie wrote: > > > > > What I take away from the press release is that Pacific Cycles will > > > > continue with its low-end bikes through high volume dealers, and > > > > Cannondale will continue in its current niche selling higher quality > > > > bikes through LBS. > > > > I think we can expect a major expansion of Cannondale's recent > > > practice of having some of its frames manufactured overseas. *An > > > aluminum Cannondale used to be a qualitatively different thing than an > > > aluminum Trek, Giant, Redline, etc. *That's probably going to > > > change. > > > > > If you believe the > > > > press release, Cannondale is not headed for Walmart, and it would not > > > > make sense to devalue the brand by selling it mass market. > > > > It didn't make sense for them to do it to Mongoose, GT, or worst of > > > all, Schwinn. *But they did. *I think their track record speaks louder > > > than their press release about where this is all going. > > > > If Dorel/Pacific think it is better for the bottom line to keep the > > > Cannondale brand exclusive to the LBS market, then they will. *If they > > > think it will be more profitable for the brand to be retailed through > > > nationwide sporting goods chain stores, they'll do that. *And have no > > > doubt-- if they think there's more money in selling $150 "Cannondales" > > > at Wally World, they will do that. > > > > What I would not count on in any case is for the new owners to > > > continue to uphold the few quality distinctions Cannondale has managed > > > to retain-- or USA frame production, for that matter. > > > > Chalo > > > Is Cannondale so distinguished a brand that it is worth saving? (This > > is not a rhetorical question; I just know nothing about Cannondale.) > > If you don't know, are you just posting to hear yourself type? > > > > > > > > > Is it necessarily a bad thing to kick a sliding brand around a bit? > > (This is a rhetorical question. I know the answer. It is, No.) > > > There are good conglomerates and bad conglomerates. Some of the > > world's finest bikes come from good conglomerates. > > > A few decades ago, Raleigh was shit, it's bikes were shit, it's > > reputation was shit. It was sold to a conglomerate who thought they > > could milk the name. They came a cropper. Raleigh was sold to a good > > conglomerate and now the name is slowly coming to mean something > > again. > > > Perhaps Cannondale comes out of the process leaner, meaner and once > > more honest, two or three owners down the road. If not, is it really > > such a hardship that another lowball bike assembler has bitten the > > dust? > > > Andre Jute > > Economist & Darwinist > > Pegasus is selling the company for more than three times as much as > they paid to get it out of bankruptcy in 2003. *Quality has been > steadily improving, and the fact that some of their goofy proprietary > hardware (BB-30 for example) is becoming standard for other > manufacturers puts them in a very respected position. *The bankruptcy, > by the way, was caused entirely by the addition of a motorsports > division. *So this is hardly a sliding brand, and the process to make > it "leaner, meaner and once more honest" happened five years ago. > This is just a case of investors cashing out.- Hide quoted text - Absolutely correct. Pegasus is a venture capital LLP and was the primary creditor of Cannondale. It was secured by all the assets of the corporation, and it was first in line in bankruptcy. It was in it purely for the money -- but it was also smart and understood that by preserving the brand and building it up, it would get more money. That is my point about Dorel. Even assuming that it is in it just for the money, there is money to be made by preserving the brand. There is also quick, short term money in trashing the brand at Walmart -- which is Chalo's point. It will be interesting to see which road it takes. -- Jay Beattie. |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 03:04 AM
|
#33 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 6, 8:25*pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 4:11*pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Jay Beattie wrote: > > > > Chalo wrote: > > > [re: Wal-marketing the Cannondale brand] > > > > > It didn't make sense for them to do it to Mongoose, GT, or worst of > > > > all, Schwinn. *But they did. *I think their track record speaks louder > > > > than their press release about where this is all going. > > > > Schwinn was never a premium brand. *It was always a plumbing pipe, > > > boat anchor brand that sold through its own stores until the company > > > was driven in to the ground by feuding family members and competition > > > ffrom overseas -- and then sold three (or four) times out of various > > > bankruptcies. We may have all sorts of warm and fuzzy feelings about > > > Paramounts, but those were the wall ornaments at the local Schwinn > > > shop and not typical of the usual Schwinn production. * I think that > > > the current Asian Schwinns put out by Pacific are better than any > > > Varsity I ever rode. > > > Schwinn was a quality-conscious brand by the standards of the day. > > Their bikes looked better and held up better than others in the same > > price categories. *Those Electro-Forged Schwinns are still around in > > great numbers. *Their competition? *Not so much. > > > On top of that, Schwinn enjoyed a wide reputation for quality, out of > > proportion to the observable quality of their production. *This must > > have been due in part to their lifetime warranty, and to their astute > > cultivation of brand mystique (comparable to what Gazelle of the > > Netherlands exhibits today). *But it would be inaccurate to say that > > there was nothing about Schwinns to uphold their good reputation. > > > It would be accurate, however, to say that there is nothing about > > _today's_ Pacific/Schwinns to uphold whatever shreds of esteem they > > might have among the buying public. > > > > And Dorel says in its press release that it is > > > going to fluff up the GT brand and make that part of its top tier LBS > > > offerings. > > > We'll see. *That would be inconsistent with their business practices > > up to now. > > > > > And have no > > > > doubt-- if they think there's more money in selling $150 "Cannondales" > > > > at Wally World, they will do that. > > > > True, business is business -- but why would someone want to compete at > > > the lowest end of the market with narrowest margins? *That does not > > > make sense. *Dorel already has brands in that market, and it looks to > > > be following the usual course of purchasing a premium brand in an > > > effort to increase its margins. > > > Taking a $100 Pacific, slapping on a Cannondale decal and selling it > > for $150 is a nice way to get a better margin. *That appears to be > > exactly what they did with the Schwinn brand. *It also appears to be > > why all those Wal-bikes are branded Schwinn and Mongoose instead of > > Murray, which is another Dorel brand. > > > > This is a very common way to go. > > > Ford owns Jag, Volvo and Land Rover *and maintains those brands. > > > Harman owns Mark Levinson and maintains that brand. There are many > > > other examples. > > > I wouldn't rule out the likelihood that Dorel/Pacific feel they have > > liquidated most of the residual honor out of the Mongoose and Schwinn > > names, and now they need another well-respected name to wring the > > juice out of. > > > Ford understands the same principle in its way-- that seems to be why > > they keep switching the names of their most miserable cars as people > > come to understand what those names indicate. *The Fiesta became the > > Festiva, and then the Aspire. *The Tempo became the Contour. *Those > > cars had to acquire new names in an attempt to outrun their > > overwhelming suckiness. *Evidently changing a car's name is an easier > > thing for Ford to do than making a car that doesn't suck. > > > I have seen enough Jags that are obviously reskinned Tauruses to know > > that Ford is in the process of doing to that formerly esteemed brand > > what Pacific did to Schwinn (and may soon do to Cannondale). > > Some people see the Fordification of Jag as a good thing -- a sleek > exterior, decent wiring and no oil leaks! > > I know what you are saying about Schwinn, but that brand was already > beaten down before it was bought at fire sale by Pacific. There was > nothing left of it except the goodwill of baby-boomers who had warm > and fuzzy feelings about their first boat anchor bikes. *Even before > the first bankrupcy, Schwinn was outsourcing to Japan and was > struggling to hold on to its market. It's dealer network was falling > apart, and people were looking for lighter imports -- including me. I > dumped my Varsity for a Gitane in '69 -- which cost the same as a > Varsity. *Schwinn was shorthand for clunker after that. My Gitane > would still be around had it not been stolen. > > But I won't pick nits. *You could be right. *We'll have to check > Walmart in a year to see if Dorel remains true to its PR. -- Jay > Beattie. > > PS -- check out some of the current offernings from Schwinn including > the Madison. *There are some pretty neat bikes -- and many are not > cheap (pricewise -- I cannot vouch for build quality).- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Actually, after Schwinn's first sale they were doing some pretty neat stuff. They purchased Yeti, who built the high end aluminum "Home Grown" frames of the late 90's. Serotta built their Paramount ti and steel road frames, and their upper-to-mid range bikes were nice overseas 853 steel frames while everyone else was using aluminum. I don't remember who was running the company then, but they were putting out some pretty neat stuff and I think that their shops were generally happy. Once Pacific took over I the Schwinn dealer I knew threw in the towel as there wasn't enough to differentiate their bikes with those in the big box stores. Their high end stuff does look like nice stuff (and may gain from the economy of scale of belonging to a huge brand, but I have yet to see one in person or in a shop. The market for their 1950's-70's is still in great shape though. I garbage pick, fix up and sell them all the time. Why? Because they're simple, fun, relatively cheap, built to last, and look good. /s |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 05:20 AM
|
#34 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 7, 9:04*am, Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 8:25*pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 6, 4:11*pm, Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Jay Beattie wrote: > > > > > Chalo wrote: > > > > [re: Wal-marketing the Cannondale brand] > > > > > > It didn't make sense for them to do it to Mongoose, GT, or worst of > > > > > all, Schwinn. *But they did. *I think their track record speaks louder > > > > > than their press release about where this is all going. > > > > > Schwinn was never a premium brand. *It was always a plumbing pipe, > > > > boat anchor brand that sold through its own stores until the company > > > > was driven in to the ground by feuding family members and competition > > > > ffrom overseas -- and then sold three (or four) times out of various > > > > bankruptcies. We may have all sorts of warm and fuzzy feelings about > > > > Paramounts, but those were the wall ornaments at the local Schwinn > > > > shop and not typical of the usual Schwinn production. * I think that > > > > the current Asian Schwinns put out by Pacific are better than any > > > > Varsity I ever rode. > > > > Schwinn was a quality-conscious brand by the standards of the day. > > > Their bikes looked better and held up better than others in the same > > > price categories. *Those Electro-Forged Schwinns are still around in > > > great numbers. *Their competition? *Not so much. > > > > On top of that, Schwinn enjoyed a wide reputation for quality, out of > > > proportion to the observable quality of their production. *This must > > > have been due in part to their lifetime warranty, and to their astute > > > cultivation of brand mystique (comparable to what Gazelle of the > > > Netherlands exhibits today). *But it would be inaccurate to say that > > > there was nothing about Schwinns to uphold their good reputation. > > > > It would be accurate, however, to say that there is nothing about > > > _today's_ Pacific/Schwinns to uphold whatever shreds of esteem they > > > might have among the buying public. > > > > > And Dorel says in its press release that it is > > > > going to fluff up the GT brand and make that part of its top tier LBS > > > > offerings. > > > > We'll see. *That would be inconsistent with their business practices > > > up to now. > > > > > > And have no > > > > > doubt-- if they think there's more money in selling $150 "Cannondales" > > > > > at Wally World, they will do that. > > > > > True, business is business -- but why would someone want to compete at > > > > the lowest end of the market with narrowest margins? *That does not > > > > make sense. *Dorel already has brands in that market, and it looksto > > > > be following the usual course of purchasing a premium brand in an > > > > effort to increase its margins. > > > > Taking a $100 Pacific, slapping on a Cannondale decal and selling it > > > for $150 is a nice way to get a better margin. *That appears to be > > > exactly what they did with the Schwinn brand. *It also appears to be > > > why all those Wal-bikes are branded Schwinn and Mongoose instead of > > > Murray, which is another Dorel brand. > > > > > This is a very common way to go. > > > > Ford owns Jag, Volvo and Land Rover *and maintains those brands. > > > > Harman owns Mark Levinson and maintains that brand. There are many > > > > other examples. > > > > I wouldn't rule out the likelihood that Dorel/Pacific feel they have > > > liquidated most of the residual honor out of the Mongoose and Schwinn > > > names, and now they need another well-respected name to wring the > > > juice out of. > > > > Ford understands the same principle in its way-- that seems to be why > > > they keep switching the names of their most miserable cars as people > > > come to understand what those names indicate. *The Fiesta became the > > > Festiva, and then the Aspire. *The Tempo became the Contour. *Those > > > cars had to acquire new names in an attempt to outrun their > > > overwhelming suckiness. *Evidently changing a car's name is an easier > > > thing for Ford to do than making a car that doesn't suck. > > > > I have seen enough Jags that are obviously reskinned Tauruses to know > > > that Ford is in the process of doing to that formerly esteemed brand > > > what Pacific did to Schwinn (and may soon do to Cannondale). > > > Some people see the Fordification of Jag as a good thing -- a sleek > > exterior, decent wiring and no oil leaks! > > > I know what you are saying about Schwinn, but that brand was already > > beaten down before it was bought at fire sale by Pacific. There was > > nothing left of it except the goodwill of baby-boomers who had warm > > and fuzzy feelings about their first boat anchor bikes. *Even before > > the first bankrupcy, Schwinn was outsourcing to Japan and was > > struggling to hold on to its market. It's dealer network was falling > > apart, and people were looking for lighter imports -- including me. I > > dumped my Varsity for a Gitane in '69 -- which cost the same as a > > Varsity. *Schwinn was shorthand for clunker after that. My Gitane > > would still be around had it not been stolen. > > > But I won't pick nits. *You could be right. *We'll have to check > > Walmart in a year to see if Dorel remains true to its PR. -- Jay > > Beattie. > > > PS -- check out some of the current offernings from Schwinn including > > the Madison. *There are some pretty neat bikes -- and many are not > > cheap (pricewise -- I cannot vouch for build quality).- Hide quoted text- > > > - Show quoted text - > > Actually, after Schwinn's first sale they were doing some pretty neat > stuff. They purchased Yeti, who built the high end aluminum "Home > Grown" frames of the late 90's. Serotta built their Paramount ti and > steel road frames, and their upper-to-mid range bikes were nice > overseas 853 steel frames while everyone else was using aluminum. I > don't remember who was running the company then, but they were putting > out some pretty neat stuff and I think that their shops were generally > happy. Once Pacific took over I the Schwinn dealer I knew threw in the > towel as there wasn't enough to differentiate their bikes with those > in the big box stores. Their high end stuff does look like nice stuff > (and may gain from the economy of scale of belonging to a huge brand, > but I have yet to see one in person or in a shop. > > The market for their 1950's-70's is still in great shape though. I > garbage pick, fix up and sell them all the time. Why? Because they're > simple, fun, relatively cheap, built to last, and look good. I think the models you are talking about (the 853 and Ti Serotta Paramount) were in the very late 90s while Schwinn was owned by Questor Partners -- who bought from Zell/Chilmark (who bought it out of bankruptcy). You are right that they were coming up with some interesting bikes -- which is doubly interesting since they were owned by Questor, a turn around capital company. I guess they couldn't get them turned around with the interesting bikes, IMO, probably because the brand loyalty was in the low end market. I think Pacific understood where the brand loyalty/value was and catered to that market -- for better or for worse. -- Jay Beattie. |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 07:38 AM
|
#35 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
Jay Beattie wrote:
> > PS -- check out some of the current offernings from Schwinn including > the Madison. There are some pretty neat bikes -- and many are not > cheap (pricewise -- I cannot vouch for build quality). I saw a Madison at a local bike shop and I really liked the retro graphics treatment. The chrome looked too thin and cheesy to be retro, but it was nice that they tried. The fork looked sort of steroid-enhanced, too. But all in all, it seemed like a nicely turned- out bike and a tasteful way to refer back to Schwinn's glory days. Better than the average fashion fixie, for sure. Chalo |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 08:09 AM
|
#36 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
"Chalo" <chalo.colina@gmail.com> wrote in message news:d9e69fbf-e29c-43dc-9f00-de424d0e5ef8@b2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > Jay Beattie wrote: >> >> PS -- check out some of the current offernings from Schwinn including >> the Madison. There are some pretty neat bikes -- and many are not >> cheap (pricewise -- I cannot vouch for build quality). > > I saw a Madison at a local bike shop and I really liked the retro > graphics treatment. The chrome looked too thin and cheesy to be > retro, but it was nice that they tried. The fork looked sort of > steroid-enhanced, too. But all in all, it seemed like a nicely turned- > out bike and a tasteful way to refer back to Schwinn's glory days. > Better than the average fashion fixie, for sure. > > Chalo My first was a Schwinn and my last is a Schwinn. I don't know about glory, but my latest does everything I need done: http://www.schwinnbike.com/products...tail.php?id=422 My ex-racer son spent 18 times the price of mine for his serious mountain bike. Trek? Made here in Tempe, AZ. |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 09:02 AM
|
#37 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 7, 6:29*am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article > <a6291a09-7cc6-436f-bd0d-eedeb6475...@c4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > *Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have seen enough Jags that are obviously reskinned Tauruses to know > > that Ford is in the process of doing to that formerly esteemed brand > > what Pacific did to Schwinn (and may soon do to Cannondale). > > What was the big deal with Jaguar automobiles? > They had a good racing team. > They were sought after for their symbolism. > They had mystique and reputation. > I also heard that you needed two, > so one could be in the shop. The founding generation endowed Jaguar with the finest styling, the finest engine (victories at Le Mans) and the finest suspension of any saloon car, But after the founders retired, British labour unions and their destructive attitudes happened to Jaguar. Under BL management (state ownership) the cars were poorly made. Ford took over and straightened out the quality and made Jaguar again into cars to be proud of. Ford must be also be commended for pulling Volvo, the Swedish maker of tractorlike quality cars (you can see I'm a big fan, and have been since i was college) into the modern age. (GM by contrast has done very badly by SAAB, once one of the most innovative car makers in the world, turning SAABs into badge-engineered Opel/ Vauxhalls.) BMW pulled Range Rover into the modern age and made their trucks reliable, but Ford is doing a good job with another iconic brand there. By the way, whatever people may say about Ford's own brands in the States, in Europe they make and sell very fine cars; a European Mondeo in terms of build quality and performance leaves many a small Mercedes standing in the taxi ranks (where it anyway properly belongs). Andre Jute Who gave up the car altogether in 1992 |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 01:22 PM
|
#38 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
Andre Jute wrote:
> On Feb 7, 6:29 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote: >> In article >> <a6291a09-7cc6-436f-bd0d-eedeb6475...@c4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, >> >> Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I have seen enough Jags that are obviously reskinned Tauruses to know >>> that Ford is in the process of doing to that formerly esteemed brand >>> what Pacific did to Schwinn (and may soon do to Cannondale). >> What was the big deal with Jaguar automobiles? >> They had a good racing team. >> They were sought after for their symbolism. >> They had mystique and reputation. >> I also heard that you needed two, >> so one could be in the shop. > > The founding generation endowed Jaguar with the finest styling, the > finest engine (victories at Le Mans) Was not Jaguar's first victory at Le Mans mostly due to having superior brakes (discs) to the competition (drum brakes)? > and the finest suspension of any > saloon car, But after the founders retired, British labour unions and > their destructive attitudes happened to Jaguar. Under BL management > (state ownership) the cars were poorly made. You don't say! I had a British Leyland era MG Midget, which I almost spent more time repairing than driving. > Ford took over and > straightened out the quality and made Jaguar again into cars to be > proud of. Ford must be also be commended for pulling Volvo, the > Swedish maker of tractorlike quality cars (you can see I'm a big fan, > and have been since i was college) into the modern age. (GM by > contrast has done very badly by SAAB, once one of the most innovative > car makers in the world, turning SAABs into badge-engineered Opel/ > Vauxhalls.) Yes, when they moved the ignition key from the console to the column, that was the end. > BMW pulled Range Rover into the modern age and made their > trucks reliable, but Ford is doing a good job with another iconic > brand there. By the way, whatever people may say about Ford's own > brands in the States, in Europe they make and sell very fine cars; a > European Mondeo in terms of build quality and performance leaves many > a small Mercedes standing in the taxi ranks (where it anyway properly > belongs). > Most USians buy Mercedes-Benz vehicles as status symbols. -- Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia The weather is here, wish you were beautiful |
|
|
|
08-02.-2008, 03:18 PM
|
#39 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 5, 2:55 pm, Scott Gordo <blubberp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cannondale announced that it has been acquired by Dorel Industries, > Ltd., a Montreal, Canada-based 'global consumer products company' with > US$1.8B in total sales last year. Heh, I read that as $1.88 in sales. Think I need a new font. gabrielle |
|
|
|
09-02.-2008, 02:19 AM
|
#40 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Ewwww....
On Feb 8, 3:22*am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@REMOVETHISyahoo.com>
wrote: > Andre Jute wrote: > > On Feb 7, 6:29 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote: > >> In article > >> <a6291a09-7cc6-436f-bd0d-eedeb6475...@c4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > >> *Chalo <chalo.col...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> I have seen enough Jags that are obviously reskinned Tauruses to know > >>> that Ford is in the process of doing to that formerly esteemed brand > >>> what Pacific did to Schwinn (and may soon do to Cannondale). > >> What was the big deal with Jaguar automobiles? > >> They had a good racing team. > >> They were sought after for their symbolism. > >> They had mystique and reputation. > >> I also heard that you needed two, > >> so one could be in the shop. > > > The founding generation endowed Jaguar with the finest styling, the > > finest engine (victories at Le Mans) > > Was not Jaguar's first victory at Le Mans mostly due to having superior > brakes (discs) to the competition (drum brakes)? That's what the losers would like to have you think. But disc brakes are no good unless you first have the engine power and the aerodynamics to give you speed. It was a class thing, see. Today an engineer might think of a Jaguar as an alternative to a Mercedes or a BMW and so on. Back then, Jaguar had the reputation for building "Cars for cads." Flash bodywork on other people's engines; whatever you couldn't see on SS cars (as Jaguar was called before the war, was cheap; I had a 100 which had the original firewall, made of painted plywood... After the war Jaguar put the overhead cam engine they designed during the war into big lumbering Bentley-sized saloons. Still no racing track record. Meanwhile, Mercedes and Alfa were racers from veteran days, and they and whoever of the noble French marques not net bankrupted by the spite of socialist French governments, and Ferrari who, though he started making cars under is own name only after he war, had a long and distinguished record as team manager for others, thought they owned Le Mans. So now, here comes this upstart *assembler* of Cads' Cars (about the equivalent of a Jordan in the States), with an admirable engine that beat them hollow -- well, of course they need an excuse, and that excuse was, Oh, they had disc brakes and we didn't. I had a Mk II with that engine, an XK150, an E- type, an XK6 and they were all fabulous cars at half or less than the price of cars that never even came close. (A Mercedes 300SEL 6.3, which I also had, had a swing axle rear suspension!) Then the British unions wrecked Jaguar's hardwon quality, its image and its markets... Ford is to be hugely admired for salvaging a dead brand and remaking it in the image of the great founders, only better and truer to their vision than they themselves could ever afford. > > and the finest suspension of any > > saloon car, But after the founders retired, British labour unions and > > their destructive attitudes happened to Jaguar. Under BL management > > (state ownership) the cars were poorly made. > > You don't say! I had a British Leyland era MG Midget, which I almost > spent more time repairing than driving. Yeah, I had an XJ6 as a company car in the early 1970s and after a fortnight gave it back and demanded a car that actually ran. A protottype Bertone spyder on Fiat mechanicals that I ran as a backup car had fewer faults in a year than that Jaguar had on any one day. Andre Jute Bicyclist |
|
|
Linear Mode
