Why I will never buy a TREK.
 

Interesting to hold a grudge that doesn’t have anything to do with you.

Yeah, the way that went down really stained Trek in my eyes, too. I’m also in the “never Trek” camp. In all honesty, Trek was never on my Lust List, not even back in the ‘80s, so I never bought new, but admit to having owned a 970 second-hand in ‘91 or so, and I did recently rebuild an old, found, touring model for my 11 year old son,

I've had three vintage steel Treks including my great 1985 770. I currently have a Checkpoint gravel bike. I sleep well at night.

YMMV

My 660 with Campy Nuovo drivetrain and Modolo brakes with aero levers from the 80s made me a serious rider.

I bet the bottom falls out of Trek stock now.

O.p., this isn't about TREK at all, is it. Nope. It's yet another thinly disguised L.A. deserves to die, ragepost. Just saying, when VW deliberately set out to avoid emissions detection for 20 years (!),YOU were harmed. Directly. Are you as angry towards VW? If so, let's hear it. In the appropriate forum, of course.

Yeah, and I'll never eat a Subway sandwich.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f732257c64.png
Except the sweet chicken teriyaki. I like those. And the meatball. And maybe the steak and cheese.
Oh heck, I'll eat any of them. Just because their former spokesperson is in prison doesn't make the product bad.

If the whole Nazi origin thing didn't do it, a little extra smoke from the tail pipe won't either. Wife wants one of the new buses, I'm shopping bead curtains and water pipes...

I dislike Trek for many reasons none of which have anything to do with L.A. or other team members. That is a silly reason to hate a company because someone who used their product did something semi-wrong. I say semi-wrong because most of the peloton at that point was involved with it so it was wrong but in that context it wasn't really frowned upon. L.A. might have been a jerk about it but that wasn't Trek that did the doping or the lying and even still that was a while ago.

If you are going to take strong moral stances then I would hope you are also boycotting other companies who actually themselves do serious wrong worth boycotting over. Trek may have their issues but boycotting based on some guy a while back that is old news and so snooze worthy these days is just beyond silly.

If you were saying I don't want to buy a Trek because they buy out and destroy local shops or their bikes are overpriced for what you get in some models or their quality has declined since they moved production out of the U.S. or you dislike the police bike thing (which is not unique to Trek) or maybe you don't like that the 520 swapped a lovely steel fork to a aluminum fork or maybe you are mad they got rid of the carbon belt carbon frame single speed/fixed gear bike or maybe it is their logo is so huge and they have increased tube sizes to accommodate a larger logo or something similarly kinda silly along those lines.

In terms of L.A. love him, hate him but in the end he is got a lot of people talking about cycling and got them interested and talking about him years and years later. If you truly dislike him, why still talk about him? He is not really relevant anymore but people like you and others keep him alive in that sense (obviously he is alive but people still talk about his old career)

I support your boycott. If you find any 990 zx in large or extra large I will gladly take them off your hands.

I don’t dislike Trek because Lance “used their product” (it cracks me up how you apologists craft mythologies by hiding the truth!), I dislike Trek because of how they did Lemond real dirty.

yeah ok so I own some Treks and even a Big Sur from 1997, but that doesn't really expose my bias. still, full disclosure

I remember how things were and I had a little insight being involved in a sportswear business breaking into cycling shortly after we won the bid for track and field at the Olympics that the US boycotted back in the day. had everyone out to the offices. heck we outfitted the 7-eleven team. again, had everyone out to the offices. at one point we were looking to buy into LeMonds brand when no one thought he'd recover from being shot. we didn't and he did more than recover

but you know LeMond was absolutely amazing and his rivalry with teammates and competing on the last day of the tour got my attention and added to my resolve with the sport, but I also very much enjoyed watching LA slay the field year after year

bottom line is I don't hate brands ridden by anybody who may or may not have tested positive over a substance anyone else on the street can buy pretty much over the counter. I don't hate the riders either. and this tired story ain't just about bullies and tattle-tales. I don't particularly care for how either of those guys behaved back then, but I'd prefer not to hold on to it

I will say I don't remember Greg being quite as much a passive victim as that video implies

I also own Apple devices and never felt harmed by MicroSoft

If a person boycotted every corp that cheated, their house would be empty
And their garage

I remember meeting Lemond back in the day, he had just won his second Tour, and he was a great guy. He was honest, open, and eager. He wasn’t “holier than thou” despite his fame, and his “Sports Illustrated” cover, he was an all around great guy. You could talk to him without being pushed away by his security detail, or being forced to make an appointment with his PR people.

In the late 90’s I was racing in Europe (though not especially well), and Lance was the new God of the sport. I and everyone else were huge fans, though there were plenty of rumors from the start. I was in France during the Festina Affair in 1998, when Lance was still recovering from cancer, so I wasn’t naive about what was going on in the sport, but even so, Lance was “The Man.”

Lance was a monster, and I gave him full credit, he wasn’t doing anything that anyone else at the top of the sport wasn’t doing as well. I followed his progress, and was a big fan.

However, I lean toward the OP’s opinion of Trek. The reason is that Trek were not naive, if they didn’t know what was going on the sport, they had no business being involved in it. As a business owner, I tend to see things from the side of companies and corporations, and am comfortable with the fierce competition and dog-eat-dog mentality, it give us the best toys for the best price.

But, there are lines which should not be crossed. Trek did not treat Lemond as they should have. Greg was an honest man, and he said as much as he thought he could get away with honestly, otherwise Lance would have sued him (as he sued others). But Trek took the side of the liar, their Golden Goose. Trek could have left Lemond alone, but Lance wanted him hurt, so Trek hurt him. Trek would have thrown Greg off a cliff if Lance had threatened to make a deal with Cannondale.

Others may see things differently, but the good thing about the free market system (such as it is), we are free to look at a company and its products, and decide for ourselves. My all-time favorite bike was my old Trek 660, but the Trek of those days was not the same company which was dealing with Lance.

You’re right. It’s the product itself that is bad. Being from the land where the “sub” (It’s properly called a “hoagie”.) was invented, I consider SubWay an abomination. :innocent:

Three Trek's in my garage right now, Emonda, Lexa and my sons MTB.

I line them all up, point them right at my Lemond. I think they fight each other when I turn the lights off.


Edit:

This whole butthurt thing about Greg losing his business... Greg let his personal ethics get in the way of business. Business is business - its a ruthless world based on money and profits first. Few businesses can survive based on personal feelings or ethics. Somewhere, somehow, someone is pissed off, butthurt, has their ethics violated by a business - in any sector of the business world.

Greg - great guy? Probably. And I say probably because we only really know his public persona. A great business man? Nope.

Anyone with half a brain the business world would flat out know that calling out your parent company and its biggest profit center won't go well - ever.

Bike brands tend to conjure up an image and for me the Trek image is brash and arrogant. Lance fitted in very well there 😂

Having said that I would still buy a Trek bike, but they have never been my top choice.

The bikes just don't pull me in. If I am going the big corpo bike route I would ride something else.
The pre 2k treks are neat, and I like bontrager components and matrix rims.

I like Bontrager wheels, but I just can’t imagine them fitted to anything other than a Trek. It shouldn’t matter but it kind of does to me.

I often pinch non-Trek bikes that come with Bontrager saddles, tyres, bar.

I pull those all off and save them for Trek bikes I pinch that are missing those.

Helps in the reselling when a Trek bike is all Bontrager.

I love Trek but not as much as fishing buyers to resell to that love Trek even more.

I also disliked Trek for buying up MTB pioneers Keith Bontrager and Gary Fisher, acquisitions that really signaled the end of an era in the sport. That happens, though, and I doubt Keith or Gary resent it either. Yet, someone has to be the “evil corporation,” the Lord Business protagonist in the economic story of development, and Trek were it. Following that, Trek were at the epicenter of the death of the indie bike shop, as they first required dealers to carry their accessories if they wanted their bikes, then came the concept stores, then the company stores, and now we’re in the final stage where Trek and Specialized are running around buying up the last local, multi-store dealers. In the ‘80s and ‘90‘s, bike shops were dreamy, fascinating places where you could find an eclectic mix of small builder parts and frames, “shop’s choice” built bikes, and rare imported bits.

I miss the old days in a lot of ways, though there are some interesting things happening now, too. Regardless of how I cut it, though, Trek always seem to be doing the wrong thing. Giving credit where due, Trek have been very strong on the paint/color/graphics game in recent years, and those new Madones are pretty wicked looking pieces of kit!

People always have lists of companies they will/won't do business with for whatever reason. A person can spend their money as they choose. If you're going to boycott Trek, might as well do it to Nike also. The Swoosh makes most any other company look like an angel.

I can't see myself ever buying a Trek either - I'm sure they're perfectly good bikes and no worse than many others - they just not exciting, and I'm not wild about their role in homogenizing the bike industry by contributing to the killing off of the small bike shop - they're the Walmart of cycling.
While not a major decider, the Armstrong connection doesn't help - I don't really care about his shenanigans anymore - he wasn't the only doper, he was just the best at it. However, he put Trek on the map and they repaid the favor by rolling over and becoming his *****. So, when LA decided that he didn't like Lemond anymore, Trek's response was "What can we do, Boss?"... and Lemond Cycles disappeared. Screw that, and, for this and many other reasons, screw Trek.

And, this is what's wrong with America. It didn't happen directly to me so I guess I won't hold corporate America responsible for their bad acts towards others. I'll just go along supporting them and enabling them to act badly toward my fellow citizens and humans. And when corporate America does something to damage you should we all say "Too bad. It didn't happen to me. You're on your own." ?