erness.wild@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> That's why I still think marketing is everything, and because they are
> faster
The /fast/ ones are faster, but if you say you can blow away an upright
racer on something like an OkeJa then you're not marketing, you're lying!
> they need to loose the 're***bent' and negative short form of 'bent.
What's negative about 'bent?
> If a name didn't mean much then Marion Morrison would never of
> bothered to change his name.
It was a lot easier for him because nobody had ever heard of him.
'Bents date back to the 19th century, lots of people do know what they
are. If you come up with a new name you're unlikely to displace the
existing one because the bikes themselves will still be invisible enough
that your new term won't get wide recognition and among folk that
already know what they are they'll just think "why is he calling a
re***bent /that/?".
> If a name didn't mean much then the automakers wouldn't bother
> spending millions to get just the right one.
> Imagine if a Toyota Corolla was a Toyota Snail. Who wants to drive a
> snail? Or an Echo for that matter.
First up, they're all cars/automobiles as the base name, and you can't
change that. The Corolla is the name of the car/auto just as
"Streetmachine" is the name of my bike, "Fiero" is the name of my
wife's. Nothing in the chosen name there tells you anything, it's just
a name, but they're both "bikes".
Seconds, Toyota managed to come up with the name MR2, which is
em-ehr-deux en francais which isn't too far off the Toyota ****... so
much for spending millions...
> The obvious advantage of the bicycle referred to now as the 'bent, is
> it's superior aerodynamics to the diamond frame design.
Not necessarily. An HPVel Spirit is not particularly aerodynamic,
certainly less so than a diamond frame track bike. So what's the point
of a Spirit? comfort and rideability of the Spirit are vastly superior.
A lot of riders aren't actually that interested in the aerodynamics
(look at what most folk in NL ride for practical trans****t, aerodynamics
is about bottom of the list of priorities), so it's dumb to push that as
the main winning point across all re***bents. You've fallen into the
same trap as others who class them all as "re***bents": there are very
many very different designs with all sorts of priorities, but you're
just looking at a single one that is only a worry to a minority of
cyclists.
> A better name for the design would be along the lines of Aerodynamics.
If you try and sell an Anthrotech trike on its aerodynamics you'll be
laughed at, and rightly so.
> I notice you call other bicycle designs 'uprights'.
> Some descriptive words to consider combinations of:
> Fast, streak, quick, rapid, swift, speedy, race, or: lightning,
> rocket, missile, rush, surge,
> bullet, arrow, zip, zoom,
Okay, how do any of those apply to either my upright Brompton or
8Freight, or my re***bent Streetmachine. The SM is pretty quick down a
hill, but that's not enough to sell a bike. OTOH it's amazingly
comfortable and very well built and carries luggage better than any
touring other bike I've come across, so why all this emphasis in
hypersonic booms?
There's a lot more to the world of re***bent cycles than you're making
out, you're simply concentrating on a small sector of the market.
Here's a re***bent cycle: http://drumbent.com/brox.jpg,
do you think
it'll be right to describe that as a speedy swift zoom zipper?
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
|
