Re: [CR]Mysteries of framebuilding

Example: Racing:Jean Robic
From: <"">
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 16:25:00 GMT
Subject: Re: [CR]Mysteries of framebuilding


Good explanation. There is a lot more to it also. The thinking and

desicions differ between those whose primary aim is to run

a "traditionally" profitable business, and those who do it primarily

as a lobor of love, so to speak. Those who do it for other than

maximum profit potential do not often sell their work cheap; but they

spend more time for less money in return (in dollars per hour) than

those with a business bent. I speak from experience. My work is

expensive, but I make relatively little as an hourly wage compared to

almost everyone. Comes with the territory.

Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA

-- Jerome & Elizabeth Moos wrote:

I think what Doug is saying is that a shop with a good retail trade,

refinishing business, etc. may be able to "subsidize" the frame

building a bit. So they can then take more time and care with the

framebuilding than would be justified by the frame price. Of course,

in theory, one can just charge more for the frames, but in the real

world, there is only so much the customer will pay and it seems that

in UK the customers will often not pay as much as in the US. There

have been lots of great products produced at a loss because the

manufacturers had other sources of profit to subsidize then. Hybrid

automobiles, at least when they were first introduced, were an

excellent example. In the world of classic bicycles, it is quite

possible that two pioneering bikes (whether the trends they started

were good or bad) the Teledyne Titan and the Exxon Graftek, never made

any money. Both were produced or marketed by huge companies for which

they were an insignificant part of overall opeartions. So they could be produced as R&D, or public

relations regardless of whether they made or lost money. Eventually,

most products must make money or their producers will ultimately tire

of subsidizing them. But many great products are produced for years

at a loss before this happens. The so-called "laws" of capitalism are

really no such thing. They are forces, and admittedly powerful ones,

which do shape human behavior. But fortunately, human behavior is

more complex than that. People can and do act counter to the profit

motive to produce objects at a loss because they find those objects

beautiful or important or visionary.


Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX

Nick Zatezalo <> wrote: Doug Wrote:

Ellis Briggs also painted frames on their premises so I was very

fortunate to have learned those procedures there as well. I think both of those places made better frames than most others partly because their shops

were not financially dependent on building alone but were just part of a

bigger operation. That allowed them to take time to finish them they way they wanted rather than turn out the numbers to make a profit.

Doug Fattic - getting closer to some of the mysteries of framebuilding

in Niles, Michigan

How does making a profit hinder an artisan from producing quality


I have heard this mentioned from several other sources and have a

difficult time comprehending this thought process.

If it was in fact true; their best work would be free.

Nick Zatezalo