The end is no longer nigh: Kona Bikes

[BerthaPog]

Shimano Thumbies were either Deore or XT2, why would you offer them on a bike with 300LX?

Well, if you had a significant overstock, it might have been a more financially prudent approach (“might” doing some heavy lifting there).

 

[Russell]

Fairly weighty!

Don’t get me wrong, I think Konas from that era were great bikes.

 

[MattiThundrrr]

I was reading a similar thread at another more modern flavoring forum. The opinion there seemed to be that Kona hadn't innovated in years, and weren't really offering any products worthy of interest.

 

[Attempted Mustache]

I think it is entirely a matter of perspective. It seems to me that people that consider themselves to be primarily ‘mountain bikers’ are a smaller and smaller bunch these days and the predominant forms of off road cycling, at least the stuff the marketers - and this applies to all brands - have gotten behind (and presumably sales have been driven by) have been ‘gravel’ & ‘bikepacking’. Regardless of how you may feel about those terms, in those fields Kona has innovated and remained well regarded, the Sutra, Libre and Unit ranges have been well reviewed and often hard to get hold of in recent years.

I appreciate the potential for bias here - I own and regularly ride two classic era Konas, but I don’t think there was anything particularly wrong with their product or brand perception lately, it has simply been, or is likely to become, victim of an uninterested parent company / malevolent corporate entity.

 

[al-onestare]

Dealer messages are beginning to circulate. Verifying which are real, which are not, is a challenge.

Presumably US based:

Dear Kona Dealers,

First and foremost, we’re sorry for the delay in getting some information to you, but there has been a lot to digest and organize in the past few days.

By now you’ve heard the news that our parent company, Kent Outdoors made the decision to close our booth at Sea Otter that they intend to sell Kona.

Although this can be taken as disheartening, we are staying positive and continuing to push on. Please be aware that your team at Kona is still here to support you and our riders.

At Kona, we’ve always been about the long sweet ride and we intend to keep it going as long as possible. Should you have a warranty or inventory inquiry, we are here to help as we always have.

We know you have questions, so here are a few things we’re working on to help.

Pricing: The current promo pricelist that we released recently with healthy margin boosts will now run indefinitely. This is to ensure that you will be able to continue to make competitive margins.

Program: The current program is valid, but all payment terms are subject to approval.

Online discounting: Yes, we will see some discounting occur, but the current plan is to focus on older models, overstocked models, parts, frames and accessories.

New Models: Unfortunately, our plans to intro our new models have been put on pause. We will of course keep you updated on changes.
Thanks for your continued support, we’ll provide updates as often as possible.

Your Friends at Kona

For down-under:

 

[al-onestare]

If you're thinking, what's up with the UK, I suspect the changes to logistics and single distributor (Mount Green) are factors.

https://cyclingindustry.news/kona-switches-to-distributor-model-in-the-uk-ireland/
Although the intention, at least 4 days ago, is to continue importing whilst stocks last...

https://singletrackworld.com/2024/0...ale-uk-distributor-continues-to-import-stock/
To quote:

So in short, Kona will still have an ongoing presence in the UK via its existing 60+ Kona dealers with full warranty being assured by dealers & Mount Green Cycles with the caveat of ‘While stocks last’.

 

[al-onestare]

I appreciate the potential for bias here - I own and regularly ride two classic era Konas, but I don’t think there was anything particularly wrong with their product or brand perception lately, it has simply been, or is likely to become, victim of an uninterested parent company / malevolent corporate entity.

I'd love to agree with this statement, but there is truth in that the brand has serious product, range and perceptional challenges, that are partly to blame for the current situation. When/if the dust settles, I'll share my view. For now, my attention and energy is on what happens next.

 

[Cloverleaf]

And unless daddy payed for your obsession with boutique brands, a hand-built frame was off limits for anyone without a sponsorship deal or inheritance.

I think those of us with a work ethic might like to disagree with that rather sweeping and chippy shouldered generalisation!

Not wishing to add to what seems to be rapidly escalating into a flame-war, but I am a little surprised and disheartened by some of the negativity on display in this thread, particularly the ‘ah well it was just another bike brand’ kind, given that the reason we are all on this forum is literally to celebrate/reminisce about/trade stuff from old bike brands.

And, yes I am unapologetically a Kona fan - it’s not that I’m offended, I’m just a little disappointed as I had thought this forum had moved beyond petty Kona vs Marin vs Orange vs Trek vs Whoever type discourse.

It does seem on this forum that there is sometimes this undercurrent of 'my way is the only way', and a lack of understanding that forms of riding bikes can exist other than their chosen genre, and frequently in the history of bikes it's alsocompanies that have had this attitude and a reluctance to move with the times that have struggled. There are some forms I love and some I'm ambivalent towards, but at the end of the day it's all self propelled two wheels, and in the main for me, a bunch of grown men (and women) dicking about on bikes in the mud at weekend.

Some people get really hung up on how some things change the world and such, but at the end of the day it's all just dicking about for a bit of fun. Some bikes are better, some less. Some have a great brand image, some don't, and frequently most our good memories of times on bikes is based on nothing but nostalgia and little to do with the objective 'greatness of the bike'. A bit like some of the lines in that Baz Luhrman song. Having been on the other side in the industry numerous times, companies that exist to sell products. Some do it in a way where they're trying to create an evolutionary or revolutionary better product, and some are trying to create a product that sells better to make them more money. There's definitely a difference. But at the end of the day, unless you're buying something on the upper end of the market they're all mass produced and designed and spec'd to meet the average person's demands who are likely to be buying that bike. And yes, a bike from one manufacturer might ride a bit differently to another but that doesn't inherently make it better overall, albeit it might be better for you. Is there any objective difference between an equivalent Trek, Specialized, Kona or Marin from the early/mid nineties? I'd say not, especially if you're comparing it to where bikes have evolved to. You're talking 0.1% difference between the brand's equivalent models whereas year on year movement regardless of brand might be 5%. With suspension bikes there's definitely a difference because the frame becomes something more than just a place to hang the components and keep them spaced apart properly, but most people on here seem to be more interested in older stuff so that's less relevant.

There's also way more interest on here for the XC end of the spectrum than the DH, with the same usual tropes and disparaging remarks from some as to the DH side of things (I refer to my point that it's all dicking about on two wheels) - like saying Kona lost their way by going towards the gravity market with the Stab and Stinky. Given how the market for bikes has moved on from weight weeny xc I'd say this was a good thing and if they hadn't they'd have died out long ago. The guys who owned the company evolved and decided to change their direction, either from outside pressure or simply because it was fun riding and they wanted to do it. At the end of the day a business makes decisions for itself rather than to keep a few people happy. For me Kona lost a sense of being special somewhere in the mid '00's but was that true, or simply my nostalgia talking? Hard to know. We look back on certain eras fondly, not necessarily because they were better but because of better memories. That's all.

With the Kona situation particularly it's a shame that a company of the Vulture Capital mould has so quickly given up on things. I guess they expected the boom to carry on forever, much like all the companies did in the late nineties, and when it's slowed down they've panicked and jumped. They'll be far from the last, sadly.

 

[hamster]

With the Kona situation particularly it's a shame that a company of the Vulture Capital mould has so quickly given up on things. I guess they expected the boom to carry on forever, much like all the companies did in the late nineties, and when it's slowed down they've panicked and jumped. They'll be far from the last, sadly.

Vulture capitalists typically find undervalued companies and break them up to sell the assets.

This looks more like dumb money - as you say, they assumed the boom to last. Idiots.

It's a pity that a decent business got ruined. That said, the bike industry has been trying to find ways to defy gravity for a while - lots of silly wheel sizes, reinventing XC MTBs and Tourers as Gravel bikes etc etc.

 

[brocklanders023]

Once again, Kona weren't the only one's to hold on, or go back to thumbies for a bit, Saracen did too and Orange certainly offered them. From memory not everyone (including MBUK) were huge fans of STI so keeping them would appeal to plenty of buyers. That was until 1993/4 when the next gen STI came out for the masses and swept everything else away.