-
• #38552
Cheers.
I guess the question is whether there's room for a premium offering if they returned to their roots.
-
• #38553
I doubt it. The future is always forward and they need to work out what Rapha 2030 is about, not how they can resurrect Rapha 2010.
I'm here cheering for them. Hope they're able to find the right energy again.
-
• #38554
I get finances don’t look great but I don’t understand the panic.
Prices on some items are totally insane, but otherwise I don’t understand this “roots” stuff. You mean just do the Classic line? Pro Team is brilliant. Core looks decent (only use the bibs). Trail items I’ve used have been impressive.
I don’t buy the Palace stuff, but I enjoy watching it bubble over every now and then. The design is fun and it’s good to see Rapha let its hair down.
The 20th anniversary exhibition was disappointing, but the gear is still the best. It has less of a ‘vibe’ nowadays as you have to be new and small to define a vibe. When you grow you lose that, but it’s fine. Vibey types (edgelords) will leave when you grow anyway. I like the current elite-normcore status of Rapha. It’s almost ubiquitous.
-
• #38555
Rapha is in a bit of a mid-life crisis
This should be relateable to a large portion of their customer base
-
• #38556
The global cycling apparel market is about $60B
What part of this is in Raphas defined market?
The sad truth is that their end of the industry is now very well populated (garms for performance focussed hobbyists and commuters who probably consider themselves of having a "high design sensibility"). Their almost unique proposition of being cost approachable (not cheap) but very design and quality driven, is now bread and butter from a multititude of other brand competitors. Some that arguably do it better than Rapha.
edit: to add, they also never worked out how to address the image problems that were bourne from their own success + popularity. Anecdotally, I know heaps of riders who like the design and quality but turn their nose up at the label for whatever reason i.e increased retail reach therefore declining exclusivity of the label, ubiquity with certain rider customer types, evolved reputation as being increasingly bourgeoise and unserious kit or whatever other perceived associations there now are due to expanded customer base, etc etc
-
• #38557
Some that arguably do it better than Rapha.
Such as?
-
• #38558
Albion
-
• #38559
What if so happens that you are not an athletic fit?
-
• #38560
Go to Rapha
-
• #38561
From a quality standpoint I've had a better experience with MAAP over the last few years, and as user Amey mentioned, Albion.
-
• #38562
size up
-
• #38564
+1
Also the few bits I've picked up from Pedaled
-
• #38565
It doesn't work with sportswear, unfortunately. Size up and will end up with flappy sleeves, too-long straps, etc.
I mean my question is genuine - who makes good-looking quality cycling clothing in "club fit"?
-
• #38566
Baseline point is that for majority of Rapha's offering there are less obvious, more nicely designed, comparable quality and similarly priced alternatives.
-
• #38567
Hmm I have some Maap bits that I like, colour and fit wise but whilst no negative experiences, I’d say the shorts especially aren’t to the same level of construction.
-
• #38568
I've not bought MAAP bib shorts, just top half stuff so you may well be right!
-
• #38569
Just little things like choice of stitches. I’d be curious if using say flat lock creates more QC failures in production.
-
• #38570
I picked up some Pro Team Winter Socks and they feel nice (and not too pricey), but on the inside of both cuffs there is an ‘L’. Have I got 2
Left feet, or does this mean something else? Long perhaps? -
• #38571
Large?
-
• #38572
Could be!
-
• #38573
Definitely, in Rapha socks Left and Right (if asymmetrical) are almost always denoted by L & R on the bottom toe or ball of the foot area.
-
• #38574
Galibier.
-
• #38575
Plus one for Galibier. Absolutely great stuff and not too pricey.
If they are EBITDA positive then surely it is viable assuming the exceptionals are not there in following years.