Dollar a mile or quid a mile over here

You Don't Meet the "Dollar-a-Mile" Qualification

We’ve all seen the “too much bike” phenomenon in action. You know, the guy who buys the absurdly expensive team replica bike and rides it around the park a few times a summer in sneakers. Sorry, this is not acceptable. I think a very fair and accommodating rule is that you must meet the “Dollar-a-Mile” qualification in order to keep possession of your bike. Example: let’s say you paid $5,000 for your bike. You should then be able to prove that you ride at least 5,000 miles a year—which isn’t all that much given the fact that $5,000 buys a pretty serious bike. 5,000 miles a year is less than 100 miles a week. I think that gives plenty of latitude. And you can buy as many other bikes as you want, without additional mileage requirements. The only requirement is that you must ride annually at least the number of miles appropriate for your most expensive bicycle. Simple! And if you don’t? Repo time.

Taken from http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/
quite a good blog from my first peruse

Nice - if that's the case I'm due a serious upgrade. Who's paying then?!

I feel fine about the Serotta now :)

.

Does the same apply if you win a $5000 bike?

Not that I have won a $5000 bike.

You should sell it immediately and buy a Huffy!

just worked out that my Langster is costing 9.5p a mile at the moment, including the cost of the Armadillos it runs on.

my veto cost less than a penny a mile in that case.....seriously.

im so allowed to build up my new bike :)
i dont feel so bad about it turning into a money pit now, just means i have to ride more :)