- Feedback
- View
I recently met a man from the cycle trade who knew Ron Kitching. When I mentioned Mr Kitching's role in the untimely demise of Cleland Cycles in 1984, this longtime cycle trader was unsurprised and said that this was the kind of thing that Kitching used to do. "Kitching would have had interests in the new mountain bike trade and wouldn't want to have any unnecessary competition". This is another example of British companies not just "doing the usual" by ignoring innovation, but deliberately impeding it. There are other well documented examples like Dyson vacuum cleaners were James Dyson had to risk everything to get his cleaners produced. If the fledgling US mountain bike companies had had the same reaction from the established cycle industry then we might never have had the worldwide mountain bike sales explosion of the 1990s.GeoffApps":2b4sekqv said:
Unfortunately where money is involved morality, fair play and justice are too often, nowhere to be seen. A wiser man than Kitching would have made even more money by investing in Cleland instead of closing it down. The Cleland was different enough so as not to be a direct competitor of the US mountain bikes and both could have easily thrived together.
In nature competition produces variation, diversity and lifeforms that perfectly fit their niches. In business competition too often leads to increased monopoly and less real choice.
For instance: Despite the thousands of mountain bike models available you still can't buy a Cleland like bicycle or even a serious mountain bike designed to be used with mudguards. I believe that the industry's fixation on macho racing, risk taking and speed is one reason why so few women ride off-road. The Cleland design is more inclusive than mainstream mountain bikes and so my wife and daughters like to join me in riding off-road. The design is also more comfortable and easier on those with medical conditions that can make cycling uncomfortable.
