Prices - am I wrong / but I'm not wrong?

[Neil]

Don't want this to become individual to anybody, or any particular sale, but can't help but think either I'm totally out-of-whack with the pricing of decent, albeit mass-produced mountain bikes from BITD, or I'm quite right, and they are worth the best part of a couple of hundred less than some seem to think is an absolute bargain price?

So a very decent, mass-produced bike (eg Marin, Specialised, GT, Alpinestars), in very good condition, with good kit (but not exotica or dripping in boutique parts, or even XTR) what sort of ballpark?

Just trying to understand / clarify that either I am very out-of-touch - which would be completely expected, or mostly out-of-touch with the occasional bit of lucidity.

As I said, don't want this to become a discussion of anybody's sale / advert / auction - just want to establish quite how much I've lost grip with reality.

 

[cyfa2809]

Roughly £200 or so, give or take £50. For a lot of bikes.

 

[Neil]

Roughly £200 or so, give or take £50. For a lot of bikes.

Don't get me wrong, I can see how rare things or exotica can be several hundreds, or thousands.

For myself, a couple of years back, I bought a solid, mid range bike, from here (my 91 Diamond Back Apex) for (from memory) around £110, plus very reasonable costs for postage (£12-15 I think). It was in very good condition, no rust, the odd stone chip, or slight bit of chain suck (just down to primer, and very slight, really). Wheels, gears, brakes, shifters and levers, were all in exceptional and pristine condition (I mean how you'd expect them to look after you'd spent quite a while cleaning and restoring them). And that was all DX throughout (as stock). In fact the bike was in a lot better condition than I thought it'd be.

Now I know there's some variance, and bikes at the higher end of mass-produced ranges can maybe command a little more - and of course there's supply and demand with some models that appear to be in great demand.

So I can understand a very sought after, albeit mass-produced bike, dripping in XTR and other boutique bits, in very good condition, maybe able to command several hundred, but outside of that, I'm really quite puzzled with some expectations.

Normally that's just a sign of me getting (gotten) old and a bit Rowley Birkin, but I can't help but think, in a Clarkson-esque manner, I'm not wrong?

 

[cyfa2809]

I was applying my value to the 98+ section. Which would also normally be for a bike with deore and front sus.

Maybe its because we arent earning as much? (I doubt it would have such an obvious/knock on effect).
Or maybe thats just market value, after all as many have said - value is what someone is willing to pay.

 

[Neil]

I was applying my value to the 98+ section. Which would also normally be for a bike with deore and front sus.

I'm more thinking of a little older, and largely rigid - I should qualify that on the basis that I know naarrthhiinng about bikes with boingy bits.

Maybe its because we arent earning as much? (I doubt it would have such an obvious/knock on effect).
Or maybe thats just market value, after all as many have said - value is what someone is willing to pay.

Not that I don't get that, but often, with all of this, there seems to be some consternation that people don't seem that willing to pay - and mostly we all know (albeit roughly) what the going rate is for most, normal, mass-produced fodder - after all, most normal stuff doesn't stuggle in the valuations thread.

I think the point I'm puzzling over, seemingly being that some seem to have inflated views on pricing, defended in the basis that it's their choice, and value is subjective, seemingly puzzled and vocal about bargains not being taken up, some defenders saying it's fair game, but not actually splurging - so it seems that very much, largely, value isn't quite so subjective and is more of a market rate, because I'm not seeing such assertions of high value being what others are prepared to pay.

 

[brocklanders023]

I think I'm with you on this one Neil and it's one of the reasons I don't have many old bikes any more. The bikes I'm interested in and that used to go for sensible amounts are quite often up for silly money now. It does seem to be down to the brand though as there's still value to be had with Diamond Back, Ridgeback, etc.

Seems that some people chance their arm on here with asking prices far higher then they'd get if they listed the bike on ebay. Saying all that, the market decides so if mid range bikes sell for daft money I guess that's the value :?

 

[Whatleymeister]

Pretty sure this should be in 'The one and only official "HOW MUCH IS MY XYZ WORTH" thread'

But in all fairness, some stuff does tend to go for more than it may perhaps be worth. Ones opinion can be a bit warped when watching things go for silly money on ebay. I would think that has quite an affect on sale prices here. Can't beat a bidding war to ramp things up a little.

 

[feetabix]

I've gone above the £200 mark to secure bikes, my stumpy and clockwork to name them.....they were however little used and original spec so I was happy to do so......I guess you have a choice!.....

 

[JeRkY]

Brands like Kona, GT and Marin were the big players back when we were growing up. If you were into mountain biking you would of been able to reel off the range orders of each of these brands as a teen in the early-mid 90's, and it is likely you fancied one of them.

Diamondback and the like required much more indepth knowledge, they were not so in your face in shops and the advertising wasn't as strong in my recollection.

As such roll on 15-20 years and you fancy an old bike, you go to the brands you knew. Which is my theory on why you could get a diamond Apex for £110 whilst it would barely get you a Hannanah in Kona money.

 

[Neil]

Brands like Kona, GT and Marin were the big players back when we were growing up. If you were into mountain biking you would of been able to reel off the range orders of each of these brands as a teen in the early-mid 90's, and it is likely you fancied one of them.

Diamondback and the like required much more indepth knowledge, they were not so in your face in shops and the advertising wasn't as strong in my recollection.

As such roll on 15-20 years and you fancy an old bike, you go to the brands you knew. Which is my theory on why you could get a diamond Apex for £110 whilst it would barely get you a Hannanah in Kona money.

You misunderstand me on my example.

The reason why I bought that Apex, here, wasn't because it was a brand I new - it was merely because when I got the opportunity to buy the same model of bike I'd enjoyed so much BITD, but had been stolen, I jumped at it. As to to the prices, here, well ignoring the fetishes for Kona stuff, for a second, mass-produced bikes go for seemingly similar money.

Now I'm sure there are more popular brands / models, and I'm sure there are some variances in prices - that's supply and demand - but all the same, the price for mid-range - or even top range, but mass-produced - isn't leaps and bounds.

I guess all I'm saying on that front, is the most popular, and nicely looked after bike, albeit mass produced, with decent, yet not exceptional kit on, ain't worth another couple of hundred - or more - pounds over the normal going rate for most mass-produced, pre-boingy, retro MTBs - NOT just because my opinion is so, but because they simply don't sell for such inflated prices.