Tri Product Marketing
266
Member
334 days
IthinkIcan posted 17 weeks ago.
If only Billy Mays was around to sell tri-gear.... the marketing would be so much simpler and straight forward.
Plus we'd buy 3 and get the 4th one free!
641
Member
1026 days
KitKat posted 17 weeks ago.
99% of the compression product on the market is BS.
The sad thing is that most triathlete's buy-into marketing claims of "faster". And really, how many are top AGers or Pros? What is .5 sec going to save?
As I'm a buyer by career in the industry I'm "sold" this crap-o-la everyday. Thankfully I have the power to decide what to buy and what not to.
**Pain is weakness leaving the body**
*Smile, it does a body good*
2255
Member
702 days
TriSooner posted 17 weeks ago.
It bugs me to no end. My No. 1 complaint about this sport is unquestioning acceptance of marketing hype by the gullible noob (or delusional vet) who thinks they can buy speed.
longhair wrote:
What is the most outrageous marketing claim you have heard?
While this glorified bathing suit/wrestling onesie is a horribly egregious example, it is but one example which pales in comparison to an entire industry based on the idea that anything "aero" is "faster" irrespective of any other consideration. To borrow from Field of Dreams, “If you build it call it faster, they will come.” The biggest violations come of the form of "Buy this. You will be faster, " such as a "faster" bike or “faster” wheels or "faster" helmet or "faster" skinsuit/wetsuit.
There is no such thing as a “faster” bike or “faster” wheels. They are inanimate objects which do not posses any stored mechanical energy and are incapable of self propulsion. You – the rider or swimmer – still have to transfer energy to move them. The bike frame or suit material may be result in increased efficiency, thus making it easier for you to move them and thus attain faster speeds, but they are not themselves faster.
I blame bike marketing departments, and to be more specific, I blame tri bike marketing and rag tri mags - which are just vehicles for glossy ads of ripped models posing on plastic - for creating a culture of “buy this because it is fast”. The basic concept and design of the bicycle has not changed in nearly 200 years. With little change in that span of time, marketers of modern versions have to create the illusion of innovation. Changing frame material - but configuring it in the same pattern - is not an innovation. Change the gearing from a flip-flop hub to indexed shifting - that is an innovation. Using compression-molded plastic to make the same diamond-patterned, two-triangle bike frame is not an innovation, so the marketers have to do something to justify their existence (and the cost of the frame) to create interest. Eureka! We'll say it is 'faster'! Each year, "new" technology is introduced but the basic design is the same. So those miniscule, insignificant difference are over-blown and blown-up in glossy print ads. This year's fad - the aero helmet and skinsuit - will be obsolete next year, just like integrated headsets and Biopace chain rings.
59
Member
199 days
GaryTimTim posted 17 weeks ago.
There was an article in a Canadian fitness magazine (Impact) a while back about triathlon gear, and the author had a great quote regarding this subject:
"Prior to the cash-heavy triathletes’ entry to the equation, the bicycle had remained virtually unchanged for close to century. Then, in 1987, Boone Lennon developed his Scott bars, and an industry would realize that if you came up with something that gave the triathlete a perceived advantage you could make a lot of money."
But we can take a little solace in the fact that we're not as hopeless as the golf industry! (yet...)
Article link if interested: http://tiny.cc/0VLGR
1041
Member
839 days
TryScott posted 17 weeks ago.
Here's the thing. If you have money to spend, you'll buy it no matter how true the marketing hype is. If I'm wealthy enough to think that $8,000 on a bike is reasonable, and I wouldn't have to make any other financial sacrifices to buy it, guess what I'm going to buy? Even if I'm not fast enough to ever see a top 3 age group finish in the smallest of local sprints, I'm still going to spend a lot of money on a bike. I might shop around for which one fits better, or weight proven technology over newer technology, but I'm going to spend a lot on bikes that have more marketing.
What bothers me is seeing "new and improved" on the box of something in a store. If something is new, it's never been available before. If it's never been available, you can't improve it, you can only create it.
588
Member
442 days
jnrice posted 17 weeks ago.
TriSooner wrote:
There is no such thing as a “faster” bike or “faster” wheels. They are inanimate objects which do not posses any stored mechanical energy and are incapable of self propulsion.
Yes, +100% and the other thing that gets me is the people who wear 10 watches that monitor their HR, watts, position, zodiac sign and every other conceivable aspect that doesn't actually do much because the greatest variable is your body alone. Some days it a PR pace and other days an easy training pace is all we can muster.
As for the jargon, I agree as well. I have a degree in chemical engineering and have studied a lot of fluid dynamics (same as aero, just more broad area of study). The "grams" of drag is totally nonsensical and we can only hope that they've made some very poorly documented assumptions that in the end make them look foolish. The yaw issue, yeah, get over yourself and take the advice that Michelle Blessing (US olympic tri coach in Australia) gave me, "skip the new wheels and buy better food if you want to go faster."
Thanks for addressing the financial bleeding of the athletes in our sport.
143
Member
530 days
kaolelo posted 17 weeks ago.
although i am certainly guilty of participating at times, i totally agree. for the vast majority of us, i don't think that most technology will make much difference. it's the engine . . . that's why it's pretty ironic to me that some people are so meticulous about their equipment and training schedule, yet eat rubbish food at other times . . .
79
Member
747 days
longhair posted 17 weeks ago.
I do have an aero tri bike (Xlab Avenger), aero wheels (Xlab Saturn V) and an aero helmet. (LG)
I selected the Xlab because of a few unique features. The rear derailleur cable runs along the top tube, down the seat stay, and then to the derailleur. The claim was that the larger bend radius in the cable house made shifting more responsive. I had a mountain bike at the time that did the same thing, and I agreed the shifting was faster, plus less friction on the cable. The bike was reasonably priced (relatively speaking).
The Xlab aero wheels came with ceramic bearings for about half of the zipps.
I am very happy with the products. The frame fit me well. I get a lot of compliments on the paint job and the package overall. Does it make me any faster? Maybe a couple of seconds, but I am still an age group athlete who does well in local races and mediocre in larger events (539 overall in Ironman 70.3 Providence). Thankfully, my paycheck does not depend on my performance.
Ironically, I don't think Xlab sells these products anymore. They decided to focus on the hydration carriers.
I guess to some degree I jumped in whole hog to the sport of triathlon, and purchased reasonable equipment. I try to rationally think about the product before I buy into it.
The nutrition ads are just as bad as the cycling ads. I don't know what they are pushing, and without any formal nutrition training, who does? At one point, my diet was heading toward a domination of powders, gels, bars and pastes. Not very satisfying at all. Now, some gu and some cytomax. Lots of fruits and vegetables. Occasional junkfood. Got to satisfy the palette somehow.
451
Member
718 days
Warrior posted 17 weeks ago.
Every time I ask what do you need to this sport, I get the answer ' a bike, running shoes, goggles and swim suit.'
There it ends really........or should, but I have bought a heart monitor because I believe I will injure myself if I don't do it correctly, but it cost 10 euro not 320 euro. I bought an odometer for the bike because I would like to gauge my distances speed and improvement, it cost 25 euro. Bike shorts cost me twenty euro. I haven't graduated to the wetsuit but I will when I can afford it and when I am ready.
So let me point the finger, all those idiots who can't think of anything else to do with their money only look flash and all those marketing idiots who think the world is made up of only the first category of idiots.
I would love to have enough time to be professional, I would love to compete and finish in the top 10 or 20 somewhere. But I have been blessed with a modicum of Brains, and I think it was TriMom or one of those other amazing women here who said something along the lines of, " it don't matter how much you spend on your bike, if it doesn't fit you it's not going to do you any good".
I am of the school of try it out, if it's working do what you can to make yourself comfortable,and if you are spending a lot of time at it, then 'invest'. Otherwise the hills around here have a 8% grade, and yesterday I climbed over 1600 ft on my way home ........no aero bars or fancy carbon wheels where going to make it any easier and today I ache like hell. But it will be easier the next time because I am doing it again. Oh Yes, YES I CAN.
Dreams are the stars which charter the course of our lives. Happy the one who follows their dreams
While reading another post, it occured to me how outrageous the marketing is of our sports products.
Take Zipp for example. There marketing use terms such as yaw angles and grams of drag. I have two degrees in Mechanical Engineering, and I understand these terms, but I don't think everone does. Do these terms really impress the consumers? (By the way, does the fact that wheel drag is measured in grams bother anyone besides me? Gram is a unit of mass, not a unit of force. But let's assume that they mean the weight of a gram on earth. The -80 grams of drag on their new disk amounts to a thrust of 0.2 pounds, and only at a certain yaw angle. Worth shelling out the additional $$$?)
Does it bother anyone else that our products are markets with technical jargon that sounds impressive, but is fairly mis leading.
What is the most outrageous marketing claim you have heard?