Timeline for What do I get by paying more for a bicycle?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 2019 at 14:04 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | @J... but “pretty much anything” implies that the cases where the generalisation doesn't apply are somehow fringe and/or can usually be disregarded. Actually though, there are many very different and relevant exceptions. I would rather say the exponential-extremes curve is a special case, albeit a quite common one. It does turn up in many consumer goods, arts and competition supplies, but it's not somehow an inevitable state any market would naturally converge towards. | |
| Oct 17, 2019 at 13:43 | comment | added | J... | @leftaroundabout "Pretty much" is a modifier that indicates the generalization is not absolute. | |
| Oct 17, 2019 at 13:26 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | @J... not pretty much anything. There are both cases where products on the very bottom end of the price scale are nevertheless ok in quality (usually as a result of very high mass production and/or commodification strategy), and cases where high quality is really only attainable at near-top prices (e.g. some software, specialist tools, or lab equipment). And sometimes it makes sense to combine one really expensive long-lasting component with a really cheap consumable one, rather than taking both middle-priced. | |
| Oct 16, 2019 at 18:39 | comment | added | David D | @Useless that's a great add. I tried to make "value" something objective in my answer for clarity. To your point, value has to be determined by each person. Even the value of $1 is different from person to person. | |
| Oct 16, 2019 at 15:20 | comment | added | Useless | The only thing I'd add to this is that you need to determine what the utility to you of a component is, because the extra cost may be paying for something you don't care about. That is, there isn't really a single value dimension, because you may value durability where I value lightness (or just durability under different conditions) | |
| Oct 16, 2019 at 14:01 | comment | added | J... | Pretty much anything has a similar value curve. The cheap crap at the bottom is effectively disposable, and expensive since you'll quickly discover how bad it is at doing what it is meant for. In the middle there's a sensible spectrum of reasonable value where price and features correlate sanely and where most people will find the best value, and at the top the sky is the limit for price - expensive because you pay through the nose for prestige features that don't matter for all but the most extreme customers (if at all). | |
| Oct 16, 2019 at 13:17 | vote | accept | Clueless | ||
| Oct 16, 2019 at 4:05 | comment | added | Criggie♦ | +1 for looking at the question from an economics point of view. | |
| Oct 16, 2019 at 3:49 | comment | added | mattnz | +1 Its important to note the value is defined by the user - a commuter values durability, a racer weight, so a commuter might get more value from a $20 steel chain over a $200 light weight titanium chain, or a 9 speed over a 12 speed. I suspect the curve starts steep - value increase quicker than cost on very cheap bikes - the sweat spot is where the curve levels out before climbing again. Only problem of finding your curve, because we all have different needs and budgets. E.g. If I win the lottery tonight, my curve changes dramatically. | |
| Oct 15, 2019 at 21:08 | comment | added | Peter Duniho | "cost increases faster than value" -- this is one of the most important things for a consumer to understand. It's true to bikes, and nearly every other non-commodity good. Product lines and brands are designed to capture as much consumer dollar as possible; this is accomplished by providing a wide range of price points to accommodate a wide range of consumers. Price goes up quickly once you get past a basic level of quality; the seller is targeting a much smaller number of consumers, with a much larger amount of disposable income. | |
| Oct 15, 2019 at 19:04 | comment | added | cmaster - reinstate monica | It's not only that expensive parts are more expensive to produce, the market for them is also rather small: Many, many people buy bikes that cost less than 300 Euros, but only very few feel that a high-end carbon frame with titanium seat post etc. is really worth the thousands of Euros you need to pay for it. So, the development costs are split across only a few customers, and thus the individual customer needs to pay much more for that in relation to the actual manufacturing costs. | |
| Oct 15, 2019 at 15:23 | history | answered | David D | CC BY-SA 4.0 |