eja_ bottecchia

This!

colombo357

I haven't seen any real innovation from Trek since their Y-frame MTBs in the mid to late 90s. I'll take a current Santa Cruz over a Trek MTB anyday.

As for their road bikes, they had OCLV when all Specialized had was the aluminum Allez and a "Roubaix" suspension fork. Don't know what happened... I'm sure the Madone is a fine frame, but the current offerings from Specialized, Cannondale, Cervelo, etc are just a lot more appealing. Not sure why... maybe it's the excessive Bontrager stuff on the Treks.

Maybe Trek should've concentrated more on continuing their lead in innovation than kissing LA's ass.

cthenn

Is this a serious question? Some of you guys have the biggest hard-ons for Lance Armstrong it's hilarious. Never knew one man could provide so much obsession of hate. Because the man rode bike brand X, it is now blacklisted by certain people who foam at the mouth when they hear his name? LOL, please... to all of you THIS far down the Armstrong rabbit hole, I implore you, get a life. You can't avoid certain sports wear, beers, postal services, electronics stores, sunglasses, cancer foundations, and TV channels your whole life.

cruiserhead

Commodus

You can't avoid buying a Trek? Walnut Creek may be under-served in terms of bike shops.

And if you don't think your dollars represent any kind of political action on your part, your naivete is shocking.

Pug

The real deception is Carmichael's coaching having anything to do with LA's success. It didn't. To use Floyd's term, Carmichael was a "beard", no more.

BykOfALesserGod

Most of us Trek owners just want to ride. I don't even know who won the Tour this year.

oldbobcat

Well let's see some of the riders who endorse the other brands: Specialized has Contador (banned), Vinokourov (banned), and Tom Boonen (recreational drugs off season); Cannondale has Ivan Basso (banned); Bianch had Marco Pantani (banned and OD'ed). I think I'll buy a Jamis.

The irony is that Trek was loosing market share on the bikes Lance was winning on, mainly because they were a difficult fit for non-racers. They had to wait until 2005 to start designing the current series ('til 2012) Madones. At the time Scott was making the lightest, most durable carbon bikes, and 2006 Madones show this.

mprelaw

So, I guess they'll be no shiny new Pinarello under the tree this Christmas?

mconlonx

Trek's statement said they were disappointed in the USADA findings, not that they were disappointed with Lance. Big difference.

Trek sales in our shop are down in Oct and Nov, Trek is saying we're not alone...

Doohickie

None.

Commodus

Surely you don't think it's about the doping.

Bacciagalupe

Is Trek sales down, while other brands are up?

mconlonx

We're Trek-only and I am not privvy to other shops in the area or other brands in the industry. But yes, that would make a difference...

oldbobcat

We sell Trek, Bianchi, Scott, and Raleigh, and road bike sales are down for all of 'em. Hybrids and MTBs are still trickling out the door, but those buyers are pretty oblivious or indifferent to what's happening in pro road cycling. The gigantic Lance photo-fresco in the back of the shop raises a few humorous comments each week, and Trek had someone measuring our wall for something new.

We really haven't seen a Lance factor since at least 2009. Buyers are basing their selection on merit (fit, ride, appearance, warranty & reputation, stuff that counts), not endorsements. There are two road-bike buying seasons, late winter and early spring for those who want the new models, and late fall for bargain hunters. Except for Domanes, the 2013s have been slow to trickle in, so there's no hurry to push the '12s out the door yet.

oldbobcat

I think that once a non-racing non-fanboy customer compared the fit of a Lance-era Madone or 5000 OCLV with a Tarmac or Roubaix or similar bike, the Trek usually lost.

The fanboys were a small group and they never believed the doping stories anyway.

FriendlyFred

No matter what your opinion is of Lance Armstrong or Trek, the pair of them brought cycling to a LOT of people who otherwise might not have discovered the joy of getting out there cranking miles on a bike. Do I ride a Trek? No, not anymore. All my bikes are BMCs. But I started on a Trek, and still remember the absolute pride and joy when I got my first carbon road bike, a Trek 5200. Over time, I evolved and found I enjoyed the look and ride of BMCs more than Trek, but I'm not going to belittle anyone who's riding, whether it's a Trek, Specialized, or a Wal-Mart special, If you want to get on your moral high-horse, there are damned few products or companies that you can't find something to boycott or be fist shaking angry over if you so choose. Life is too short for continued anger and witch hunts.

edited to add: if you're pissed at Trek because Lance doped, exactly what bike ARE you going to ride? They ALL have had dopers ride them. Think Sky is clean? Think again. What does a bunch of guys doping on the pro circuit have to do with YOU pedaling miles for fun and exercise? Do you like the NFL? Well THAT sport is full of wife beaters, drunk drivers, dopers, murderers and disgusting dog torturers. Do you rail against Budweiser? Ford? Sprint, or any of the other companies who sponsor support or sponsor the NFL? At this point, I don't give a darn about doping. I'm not sure Cycling, or any sport, has ever been clean. If someone can get an advantage they will. If you think they're clean, they aren't, they're just ahead of the testing curve.

Commodus

So this was....what? Colour commentary?

Commodus

Once again, for the latecomers: No one is pissed at Trek because Lance doped. We're pissed at Trek because they're a **** company who supported the biggest ******bag in sports history and helped him damage the lives of several honest, decent people.

Some folks don't care about that kind of thing, I happen to put my dollars into companies I feel good about supporting. We all vote with our dollars, and we vote our conscience. There are other bike companies out there.

Rowan

You would be surprised at the power of people in the age of electonic social media, especially now that companies are gauging their sponsorships on the reactions posted to Facebook and Twitter accounts.

Big companies like those you talk about indeed do get railed against, especially when special-interest groups start targeting them for the antisocial behaviour of those they sponsored.

You only have to look at the likes of Rabobank withdrawing from pro cycling sponsorship to understand how important these issues do become to the reputations of these companies.

Sort of discounts your argument when you look at it like that.

AC1074

Well, from what I understand Trek has already dropped Armstrong and probably should start doing some damage control along with other sponsors like Nike. It's not really Trek's or Nike's fault they just backed someone whom they thought was legit.

frantik

you're not upset they sold you an $1800 bike that broke after 4 years?

Rodimus_Prime

Any bike can "fit" given its close to the proper frame size for you, one brand doesn't fit any better than another

Theres different types of geometry, theres race, theres more upright comfort, etc, every major company offers several models

Jed19

Stuff break all the time. Even the space shuttles that had some of the smartest engineers in the world working on it failed twice.

My attitude about "equipment" in general is hoping for non-catastrophic failure when in failure-mode,and that the manufacturer stand behind their product.

900aero

1) Trek will probably be fine but they really should think about changing the name of the Madone. That place is now seriously infamous for all the wrong reasons - if you follow my double negative... Check Tylers' book.
2) If you believe Tyler and Floyd, Chris C was a very distant part of the operation. The name they heard most every day was "Michele", even more than "Kik", Armstrong's wife. Chris was not part of the game according to these guys.