nice post, jon!
but, again, here's the rub. one man businesses are anomalies. there is simply no growth potential; therefore, business eventually ceases. costs must be spread out. responsibilities grow and must be delegated. the business itself takes time to administer which takes time from the 'making' of the product. except for such arcane crafts, (apologies to these craft- people, or to english majors claiming 'poor use of the word-arcane'), as knife making, basket weaving, pottery...it's just not realistic to expect one person to do everything. heck-even the best luthiers ever didn't grow the tree that their fiddle was made from. 'probably didn't fell the tree either. my point is that this one man shop notion, however romantic, does not overlap with a sound business equation. and, not to regurgitate yesterday's drivel, but i think it's not 'foul-play', (my term), to have have developed a nice item and then have it produced. it doesn't sully the item. it gives the public more of a chance to be part of the producer's original thought. and to borrow from yesterday, it's up to the market to discern whether these items are coveted and collected. e-RICHIE laptop for sale
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002 15:34:39 -0400 "Jon M. Schaer"
<jschaer@columbus.rr.com> writes:
> Something I see being danced around, but not really stepped on, in
> the
> string of posts, is the true core of the subject.
>
> When there is a name on a bike (which there always is), what does
> that
> symbolize? I'm not worrying about things like top tube signatures,
> but brand
> names. The "real" vs "fake" argument is pretty pointless, as by a
> strict
> definition nearly all bikes would be considered fakes. Only a true
> one-man
> operation would have the right to put his/her name on the down tube,
> as an
> indication that this person made the bike.
>
> So then the question arises; where's the line in the sand? To my
> knowledge
> no frame builder draws their own tubing or makes their own paint,
> etc. So
> were dealing with construction and assembly issues.
>
> Builders such as Peter Weigle or Brian Baylis or Landshark
> completely prep
> materials, brazes, finishes, and paints the frames, so they can
> legitimately
> put their name on the dt as "their" bike.
>
> But what if there's one helper? Is a RS not real because Joe Bell
> paints
> them? Joe Bell has help, too, so even then there's even more hands
> creating
> the final product.
>
> What about the "DeRosa and his two sons" approach, or the Pegoretti
> Brothers
> (one builds, one does business)? Are the bikes fakes because Ugo
> didn't
> build them?
>
> If that's acceptable, then what of a shop of six builders, but with
> final
> checking of every frame by the "named" builder. Are those real or
> fake? What
> about Tom Ritchey's finishing on some frames. Are these real
> Ritchey's, or
> only the ones he built entirely? Then what about the frames with the
> same
> design, geometry, and materials, but not ever touched by Tom. Real
> or fake?
>
> There are very few framemakers doing over a few hundred frames per
> year that
> are one-man operations. But there are many 200-1000 frame per year
> frame
> shops. Some may be under the direct guidance of a head builder that
> started
> as a one-man, or some started as a multi-man shop. Some may have a
> head
> builder that started the thing, but now only the philosophies,
> methods,
> geometries, etc, are still in place, but the construction is by a
> group. Are
> these fake?
>
> Then, if a group construction method is accepted, how detached can
> it become
> and still be legit? An in-house group employed by the "name" would
> be
> considered to be making "name" frames. If a contractor is hired, but
> works
> in the same facility, is that accepted? Then, are completely
> outside
> contractors accepted, if they still employ geometries, methods,
> tooling,
> materials, etc of the original?
>
> If I take the absolutely exact dimensions of geometries and
> materials of a
> Masi, but have a local builder copy it, what is that?
>
> In the end, we need to identify what it is that makes a bike we
> like. I
> think firstly there are two ideals; collector value and user value.
> Collector value is probably the much harder quality to identify
> relating to
> the above story. User value mostly refers to what makes the bike do
> what it
> does well. Having a name on a product is supposed to say that this
> product
> reflects the ideas, values, talents, and preferences of that name.
> Of
> course, that rarely is the case these days.
>
> With bikes, one would hope that construction craftsmanship,
> geometries, and
> sometimes custom fit, of a particular bike is what that builder
> intended. I
> believe that goal can be achieved without 100% of the product being
> generated or molded by one person, or even the "originator" of the
> product.
> I feel that an Independent Fabrication or Waterford bike, being a
> group
> effort, is just as legitimate a bike as a Landshark or Weigle. But
> somewhere
> we want to feel that there is some "soul" of the builder or group in
> the
> final product. Salsa might be an example of one that had it, but
> now
> doesn't, though the environment under which they're built is
> probably not
> too different from the original.
>
> I don't think there is a definable set of criteria. It's almost a
> case-by-case basis judgment. I consider the Padua(sp?)-built
> Torellis as
> legitimate as the Mondonico-built ones, as Torelli doesn't actually
> build
> anything. But I do we consider the Masis built by Mondonico for
> Torelli
> "real"? Was there an established "Masi" geometry that the Torelli
> Masis were
> made to? Even though Alberto had no involvement with these, would he
> say
> they were ok bikes, or would he scoff at them as junky imposters?
>
> There are probably makes of bikes out there that the modern
> "contracted"
> versions are actually better bikes than the ones the founder of the
> marque
> built. And of course, there are fine bikes that actually don't
> represent any
> proper name at all, but rather just a marketing name. Where does it
> all
> end......
>
> Jon Schaer
> Columbus, OH