----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com> To: <questor@cinci.rr.com> Cc: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [CR]Re: How the mighty are fallen - OT Raleigh comments
> steve
> i know all this (below) and i'm sorry i didn't expand my point,
> "economy of word" and all that...
> here:
> during the middle 20th century raleigh consumed quite
> a few other british brands. they were to carlton, dunelt
Well now wait a sec here. Before we accuse Raleigh of being the GM of British Bikes, it's worth recalling Raleigh Cycle Co. was the one "consumed" in 1962 by Tube Investments which owned British Cycle Corp which made Phillips, Hercules, Dunelt, Sun, etc. etc. TI made the wise move given Raleigh's international standing and its huge (and by then underutilised) plant to concentrate all TI cycle manufacture in Nottingham managed by Raleigh. Prior to that Raleigh had "consumed" only Humber ('33), Rudge ('43), Triumph ('55) and finally Sunbeam/New Hudson two years later.
Many of we Raleigh "types" prefer the "real" pre-TI Raleighs. And there's no doubt post '62 there was a lot of "branding". Then again the quality of production remained high and it was still all made in England.
As far as Carlton, I don't think anyone can accuse Raleigh of bespoiling that brand. Raleigh simply gave Worksop a lot of business! Indeed, they made the name more popular and famous than ever before. Raleigh knew they had lost their edge in the lightweight business so they essentially farmed it out to Carlton. And post Raleigh Carltons lost those 'orrible chromy decal stickers... now that's progress!!
But in the end, this is, for me anyway, passion not practical. I just love British-made bikes. And I cringe when I see proud British names stuck on Asian made tat. In the old days, if it wasn't Made in England it was labelled "Foreign".. that still works for me.
Peter Kohler
Washington DC USA