I don't disagree that there is a difference in perception between Bruce's bikes and Richard's bikes in terms of what the cycling public believe they need. That is where I see magazines, internet discussions, and bike shops needing to step up and say "not everyone needs a race geometry bike". As I stated Cycling Plus is the only mainstream magazine that routinely reviews touring geometry bikes (and if we see them we want them, right?) and giving creedence to audax, touring or real life commuting. as for manufacterers, a good example would be Serotta's Rapid Tour Geometry, a bit more relaxed than a full blown race geometry but still fast paced. I doubt 20% of the people who know the name Serotta know about Rapid Tour, and that's the real problem in perception (IMHO).
Marty Eison
Frisco, Texas