I agree that no self financed racer world risk a frame of that value but it doesn't devalue the purpose of the product as a tour level race bike. I don't really have an issue with the high cost as it trickles down in time. The armchair critic or clairvoyant shop assistant seems to revel in judging the people who buy these frames as being misguided freds who never ride them. It all seems a bit odd to knock a pretty solid method of pushing technology and financing it through high value sales. The UCI limit won't last forever. Cervelo being bought by pon doesn't change that it is a relatively small manufacturing business where any high cost research has to be financially justified. Cycling is not F1.
I also don't agree that companies like Pinarello push the tech to the same level as say spesh bmc or cervelo as they tend to follow the rest of the industry. The UCI limit is not easily broken on a dogma as they are quite heavy for a top spec frame.
I agree that no self financed racer world risk a frame of that value but it doesn't devalue the purpose of the product as a tour level race bike. I don't really have an issue with the high cost as it trickles down in time. The armchair critic or clairvoyant shop assistant seems to revel in judging the people who buy these frames as being misguided freds who never ride them. It all seems a bit odd to knock a pretty solid method of pushing technology and financing it through high value sales. The UCI limit won't last forever. Cervelo being bought by pon doesn't change that it is a relatively small manufacturing business where any high cost research has to be financially justified. Cycling is not F1.
I also don't agree that companies like Pinarello push the tech to the same level as say spesh bmc or cervelo as they tend to follow the rest of the industry. The UCI limit is not easily broken on a dogma as they are quite heavy for a top spec frame.