41 Think Tank Brixen - WTF is this?

[viku]

41 Think Tank: Breaking the Cycle – Turning Crisis into Clarity

This is the weirdest bike industry article I’ve seen in a while. What do you make of this?

[Dealers] driving sales through discounts or tech specs like the latest Bosch or Avinox motor and battery size – instead of conveying brand values, emotion, and experience. Or simply because they’ve never been properly educated by the brands.
As someone once said: “We can’t expect riders to believe in magic if half our dealers don’t.” Exactly.
- Oh noes, customers and dealers aren’t buying into our marketing drivel, and are actually looking at the specs!

”This also means: We don’t need more brands. We need fewer – and stronger ones. For too long, we’ve built an industry of survivors, not leaders. But surviving isn’t enough anymore.”
- Let’s create a cartel?

 

[MeatBike]

conveying brand values, emotion, and experience

 

[LowBatteryLad]

What an absolute 5,000 word circle jerk wank tank.

This is exactly what happens when you stick a bunch of industry execs in a fancy location, pour enough booze down them, and suddenly everyone thinks they’re reinventing philosophy.

It’s dripping with corporate self importance, industry awakening bollocks, endless metaphors with fuck all actual answers and a self congratulatory advert for emtb news up as “deep thought"

And the irony they spend a big article shitting on “ingredient marketing” and copy paste culture while simultaneously name dropping every big brand and selling their own “Think Tank” like it’s the second coming.

Have you ever read any of their reviews? They literally are the main culprits on spec-listing and comparing one against another with massive charts, and then pretending they’re above the exact behaviour they’ve built their whole site on.

And of course then patting themselves on the back for having “real conversations” in a vineyard after a ride lol

“We didn’t fix anything, but we talked about fixing things, so clap for us.”

The most self congratulatory, pseudo-literary, creative writing essay bollox the bike world has ever seen.

Oh fuck right off.... Some of their actual quotes below.

“If the bike industry were a patient, the diagnosis would be grim: chronic short-term thinking, acute ego inflation, and dangerously low levels of honesty and communication.”

“Storms have two purposes: to destroy what isn’t solid – and to reveal what is.”

“Playing it safe is the new risk.”

“Before solving symptoms, we need to understand the causes. Before taking action, we need direction. Before talking specs, we need purpose.”

“We weren’t there to pitch. We were there to look at ourselves, together, and ask the hard stuff out loud.”

“The geeky obsession with components kills storytelling, weak storytelling weakens dealers, weak dealers kill trust – and when trust goes, everything else goes with it.”

“It’s our industry’s own version of Andersen’s fable, The Emperor’s New Clothes.”

“Leaders who dare to build pyramids stone by stone instead of castles of sand.”

 

[Ndanger]

“We didn’t fix anything, but we talked about fixing things, so clap for us.”

The most self congratulatory, pseudo-literary, creative writing essay bollox the bike world has ever seen.

If summaries were a game of golf, this would be a hole in one! You sir deserve the award of of the week for first postings.

 

[Deleted member 9676]

WTF is this shirt??

These m*th*rf**ers want to make peoples follow bike brands like cults, buying into their bullshit unnecessary innovations (like headset cable routing) blindly, at outrageous prices.

"“We can’t expect riders to believe in magic if half our dealers don’t.”"

Oh boy..... when will this late stage capitalism bullshit end? These peoples selling their souls for pennies mostly for private equity companies, where only profits matter. I hate this world.

 

[Fangs2k]

You gotta love it when people claim that branding and emotional connections regarding mountain bikes is ‘all bollox’.

If such events are just ‘self congratulatory circle jerks’ then what are places like this forum and the people who post on it all about?

People do get connected to brands, of course we all pretend we don’t, but what are all the posts praising a certain new arrival to the market if not a connection and the start of brand loyalty?

Everybody seems to get angry about everything it seems, so what if a load of bike industry people met to talk about the sector they all work in, and a magazine wrote about it? I suggest if such stuff makes you that angry, just stop reading and move on?

 

[calnearlyebike]

Shat your mouth ya dogs!!! Let the industry burn !! Cheaper e-bikes for all !!! They can have their oak milk flat whites and il have ya bike at 40 Percent off !!

 

[MeatBike]

Shat your mouth ya dogs!!! Let the industry burn !! Cheaper e-bikes for all !!! They can have their oak milk flat whites and il have ya bike at 40 Percent off !!

You'll get an extra 20% off if you're emotionally connected to it.

 

[ZR1]

I think most of it went over my head.

Bikes should be advertised without power/range/charge time etc? Don't advertise if it has fox or rockshox suspension?

I wouldn't buy a car not knowing its power/fuel economy/range

 

[RustyMTB]

Turns out Gus Hedges was not a fictional character.

 

[steve_sordy]

I think most of it went over my head.

Bikes should be advertised without power/range/charge time etc? Don't advertise if it has fox or rockshox suspension?

I wouldn't buy a car not knowing its power/fuel economy/range

When 29ers first came out, there was resentment from some; "nothing wrong with my 26er!" and ""they steer like a barge!" (which was true for some bikes until the geometry was sorted). Praise from some; "rolls over all the bumps" and "worth 50mm of travel!" Most of us were bemused and decided to give it a while for the market to settle down. Then came acceptance and then came the bit I didn't like. Bikes were reviewed without mentioning such a fundamental item as wheelsize! Was it a 29 or the later arrived 27.5? The reviews never mentioned it. To find out, I had to look at the specs to see what size tyres were listed!

It felt a bit like the industry was determined not to talk about wheelsize. It was a bit like trying to describe your stolen car to the police without mentioning its colour, or the number of doors.

 

[Ndanger]

Presenting the "41 Think Tank" status of the market

 

[ZR1]

When 29ers first came out, there was resentment from some; "nothing wrong with my 26er!" and ""they steer like a barge!" (which was true for some bikes until the geometry was sorted). Praise from some; "rolls over all the bumps" and "worth 50mm of travel!" Most of us were bemused and decided to give it a while for the market to settle down. Then came acceptance and then came the bit I didn't like. Bikes were reviewed without mentioning such a fundamental item as wheelsize! Was it a 29 or the later arrived 27.5? The reviews never mentioned it. To find out, I had to look at the specs to see what size tyres were listed!

It felt a bit like the industry was determined not to talk about wheelsize. It was a bit like trying to describe your stolen car to the police without mentioning its colour, or the number of doors.

It is a bit of a strange industry indeed, I just don't understand the tone of the article, refinement is bad - innovaton is what we need but don't market the components. Are we supposed to be blind to where the components are improving weight, power, stiffness, damping etc

Frame brands stick premium components on their bikes because it sells and they make margin on it. If the levo had specialized branded forks/brakes I'd assume they were the cheapest components they could get away with, regardless of all the supernatural marketing etc

 

[calnearlyebike]

second paper is out. still the same. really noticed the weird insider jargon this time. Reading between the lines they are just gutted there hasn't been a mass adoption of high end ebikes which means they haven't been able to charge even more ?

 

[John_likes_bikes]

Ah the age old, non-sales people trying to tell sales people how to sell stuff.

 

[irie]

Ah the age old, non-sales people trying to tell sales people how to sell stuff.

Just like the age old, sales people telling technical people how to make stuff.

 

[viku]

The third Brixen paper is out, and they’re once again pushing the “tell stories, not specs” agenda. Which feels a bit ironic, given this whole initiative is run by people whose core product is… storytelling. Storytellers telling a story about how storytelling will save the industry.

I’ve been thinking about why that rubs so many of us the wrong way. It’s not that stories are bad. Most of us do feel a difference between brands, and we definitely have emotional connections to some of them. So on the surface, “less spec sheet, more meaning” sounds fine.

The problem, at least for me, is trust.

Bike brands have almost never been truly honest when they talk about their products. Everything is always stiffer, stronger, lighter, “more capable,” “game changing,” “category defining.” It’s all upside, never tradeoffs. When was the last time you saw a brand say something like:

• “We made this bike more capable, but yes, it gained a kilo.”
• “This one is light and playful, but it’s not the burliest choice for bike park abuse.”
• “We chose this motor/battery combo for reliability and feel, not headline numbers.”

That kind of honesty basically doesn’t exist in mainstream brand communication.

So when the same people now say, ”Forget the numbers, focus on the story,” it doesn’t feel like a deeper, more human approach. It feels like an attempt to move the conversation into a space where their claims can’t really be checked. Specs, geometry, weight, kinematics, you can argue about those. “Brand soul” and vibes are hard to pin down.

The funny part is that the actual stories already exist, and they don’t come from the brands. They come from reviewers and content creators like Rob, people who ride a lot of bikes, talk about what works and what doesn’t, and aren’t afraid to say “this is good, but here’s where it sucks.” Those are the stories that feel trustworthy, because they include context and tradeoffs, not just slogans.

If brands want to lean into storytelling, that’s fine. But first they need to earn the right to be believed: clear geo and tech info, honest discussion of compromises, realistic claims instead of constant “revolution.” Without that, “less specs, more story” just sounds like “stop looking too closely and buy into the mood.”

 

[Fangs2k]

They come from reviewers and content creators like Rob, people who ride a lot of bikes, talk about what works and what doesn’t, and aren’t afraid to say “this is good, but here’s where it sucks.”

Unfortunately, I think that’s changing now as well.

The lines between ‘independent reviews’ and ‘paid advertorial’ are very blurred nowadays (not pointing at Rob here) and the trust is eroding from everybody as a result.

Fortunately, most bikes are perfectly good enough for most people, there are very few turkeys now I feel, but pricing has gone stupid and long term support is patchy.

Choosing a boutique brand was great before e-bikes, it more than likely used a standard bottom bracket and other kit so you could ‘love it long time’ as required.

Now with the advent of needing a brand specific computer to fix most stuff on e-bikes, and not knowing whether you’ll be able to get a new motor or battery in 3 years time, it’s getting sketchy.

The only story I want them to tell me is that spares and support will be available for 10 years.

 

[viku]

The only story I want them to tell me is that spares and support will be available for 10 years

Agreed, and I think that gets to the heart of it: the industry is hooked on quick wins.

Reviewers selling off their integrity for a fast paycheck, motor manufacturers and brands not thinking about long-term support for e-bikes, everyone optimising for the next quarter instead of the next decade.

But the thing is: the story will get out anyway. On forums like this, from the reviewers who still have independence, from riders talking to each other. You can’t fully PR your way around lived experience.

And because so much of the industry is playing the short game, it actually creates an opening for anyone willing to do the boring, long-term thing well. A brand or motor manufacturer that genuinely commits to long-term support and backward compatibility on frames, motors and batteries would stand out massively.

If someone came out with a clear, credible promise like “we’ll support spares, diagnostics and compatibility for at least 10 years”, and then actually backed it up, that’s the kind of story I’d be very interested in.

 

[Stihldog]

Have any Brands adopted AI yet?

 

[irie]

If someone came out with a clear, credible promise like “we’ll support spares, diagnostics and compatibility for at least 10 years”, and then actually backed it up, that’s the kind of story I’d be very interested in.

But how would you know that actually would be the case - you can't wait for years to see if it turns out to be true can you?

 

[calnearlyebike]

i agree with all of the above. I was pondering it also and to me , the whole premise of buy from a bike brand and not the motor brand idea. Ok , get off their dick then and let me spec my own motor , and make it backwards compatible and future proof and il buy your frame. Bike Brands are all jumping to the tune of the motor becoz Thats the main event. Motor brands will make their own bikes soon.

 

[viku]

But how would you know that actually would be the case - you can't wait for years to see if it turns out to be true can you?

Of course we wouldn’t know for sure. All we’d have is a promise, and how much that’s worth depends entirely on who makes it and how they back it up.

But honestly, anything in that direction would still be better than the current situation, where it often feels like motor manufacturers and brands actively avoid selling existing customers new motors, even when it’s 100% clear the frame is compatible.

 

[calnearlyebike]

Of course we wouldn’t know for sure. All we’d have is a promise, and how much that’s worth depends entirely on who makes it and how they back it up.

But honestly, anything in that direction would still be better than the current situation, where it often feels like motor manufacturers and brands actively avoid selling existing customers new motors, even when it’s 100% clear the frame is compatible.

I work in the construction industry, certain brands like dewalt brought out super high power cordless tools which work fantastic when new. I predict many customers will go back to plug in, the cost of replacing the battery tech with inflation and demand on battery materials has far out run wage inflation. Think e-bikes are getting close too

 

[viku]

i agree with all of the above. I was pondering it also and to me , the whole premise of buy from a bike brand and not the motor brand idea. Ok , get off their dick then and let me spec my own motor , and make it backwards compatible and future proof and il buy your frame. Bike Brands are all jumping to the tune of the motor becoz Thats the main event. Motor brands will make their own bikes soon.

I keep wondering who actually holds the upper hand right now: the bike brands or the motor manufacturers. Probably depends a lot on the combo. I’d guess the smaller motor brands will do almost anything to get spec’d on bikes, while the big ones like Bosch or Avinox can pretty much push brands around.

Either way, I completely agree that bike brands should be uniting, standardising and stop handing more leverage to the motor companies.

I’d happily buy a new frame with a last-gen motor if I knew I could upgrade the motor in a couple of years. In the current setup, that just feels like a dumb risk, because backwards compatibility is treated as a problem to avoid, not a feature to offer.

 

[BuckSaw]

 

[calnearlyebike]

I keep wondering who actually holds the upper hand right now: the bike brands or the motor manufacturers. Probably depends a lot on the combo. I’d guess the smaller motor brands will do almost anything to get spec’d on bikes, while the big ones like Bosch or Avinox can pretty much push brands around.

Either way, I completely agree that bike brands should be uniting, standardising and stop handing more leverage to the motor companies.

I’d happily buy a new frame with a last-gen motor if I knew I could upgrade the motor in a couple of years. In the current setup, that just feels like a dumb risk, because backwards compatibility is treated as a problem to avoid, not a feature to offer.

Reckon it’s a legal thing. The UK bike brand Cotic brought out a steel Ebike with an external battery. If any bike could have blown the lid on the future proofing issue it was that bikes. It was fucking steel. You could pay them a big fee to weld new mounts out for future motors. Don’t think the bullshit can hold forever , a company will take the first mover advantage on offering it .