[Closed] earth calling singletrack

Vans ?
I don't buy the mag. What did I miss ?

I've not read it yet, don't spoil it please

Seconded, pandering to the 1%

How much does your car cost then, OP?

wilsation - Member

Singletrack, who exactly do you think your core readership is?

Those who reply to the 'how much do you earn' poll on the front page, seemingly.

It's been the same for a while now.
I don't feel the magazine is aimed at 'ordinary' people anymore, we've been squeezed out in the rush upmarket.

Shame really.

Should we have a £500max-build-a-bike-from-the-classifieds only grouptest?

I'd rather that than the mag being full of fawning reviews about the latest specialized/trek/giant/scott/mass produced bike that have barely any differences between them. And I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that a sizeable proportion of the readership are able, but maybe not willing, to spend 4-6k on a bike.

pandering to the 1%

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/pollsarchive/?poll_page=2 ]16%, I think you'll find[/url] 😉

Yep, the vans were not cheap even if your car was in the £30k bracket not sure how many people could stretch to a £30k biking van or how many people would want a £30k van as their main transport.

Expensive / hand built bikes on the other, makes sense to me.

Yak - Member

Should we have a £500max-build-a-bike-from-the-classifieds only grouptest?

Here's a thought - how about something for everyone?

The magazine is constantly telling us it's inclusive and aimed at everyone who loves mountain biking.
That's starting to look like an increasingly hollow statement, I'm afraid.

I disagree with most of you I'm afraid. I may not buy a new £30k van, but I think the test is perfectly good at informing me about those vans if I ever decided to buy a used one with more miles on the clock. In any case, I loved the van article.

I also have very limited interest in seeing tests of new £500 bikes. Hardly a single one of the bikers I ride I with (and most are blokes of very modest means) ride bikes in that range. I don't know how everyone affords it, but most folks seem to ride £1500-£2500 bikes. Or hardtails in the £800-£1500 range.

But I love seeing reviews of the bikes I dream about riding, which are £4k - £6k. Even if the chances of me owning one are very slim.

The team at STW appear to do their market research and personally I think the mag is good. I don't think you have to be able to afford a new Santa Cruz carbon number to be the target market for the mag. I enjoy reading the reviews of these "aspirational" bikes in the same way I enjoy reading about the latest Ferrari in Top Gear.

They occasionally review (relatively) affordable bikes but to be frank I don't buy it for the bike reviews. If I was after a low to mid-end full susser I'd be reading something else entirely. Is it Singletrack's fault that bike prices have gone up and up in recent years?

It's an aspirational mag. I aspire to have a top-end boutique bike. I aspire to ride these far-flung trails around the world (and the UK for that matter). I aspire to add some niche bikes to my fleet. I read Singletrack because I like to dream. I don't need to subscribe to the real-world; I'm already in it 🙂

They're running a business, and I'm sure if people didn't buy the mag in sufficient numbers, they'd change the content, wouldn't they?

And aren't all the mountain bike mags basically the same? Which one doesn't mainly feature multi-thousand-pound bikes? It's what people buy (the mag, that is, rather than the expensive bike featured).

Isn't it the same across sectors anyway - people are aspirational. Look at the roads: full of Mondeos, Focuses, Civics, Fiestas, Micras. Look at the covers of the glossy car mags on the newsstands: Lamborghini, Maserati, Ferrari...

There is something about magazines and their dependence on the industry, and it's naïve to think that a magazine dependent on advertising revenue is ever, even if the writers thought it so, going to come out with "expensive bikes are all a waste of money, buy these cheap ones instead" but I don't think singletrack is any more guilty than all the rest in that regard, that's just how it is.

MBR really hacked me off a while ago with their take on it - responding to the same moan from readers that they only featured unrealistically expensive machinery, they did a test at the other end of the market, but really took the urine with it - buying secondhand wrecks and supermarket BSOs for £100, which were obviously useless and / or dangerous and then concluded that cheap bikes were useless and / or dangerous so you had to buy an expensive one if you wanted to go mountain biking...

Aracer, my car cost 1700 and that was too much.

I agree with stilltortoise. I like to look at fancy bikes and riding destinations for the escapism of it, so I read Singletrack and Cyclist.

When I want to actually buy stuff I look at the What MTB.

My car went 2yrs ago, along with silly high priced fuel and extortionate insurance! Its not missed

Didn't they do a 'budget bikes' test not long back?

I rarely buy 'this years' stuff so I always just read the articles with a 'oohh that looks nice' head on, not a 'well I can't afford that'.

Same as when I used to read Car Magazine or Classic and Sportscar.

OP has a good point, I stopped subscribing as I was fed up of all the dream trips abroad and high end boutique equipment.

I mean direct mount bottle openers!!!!!

Who wants to be ordinary ?

16%, I think you'll find

Interesting maths in the section "What do you wear under your baggy shorts" of the [url= http://singletrackmag.com/pollsarchive/?poll_page=2 ]survey[/url]

Nothing! (1%, 0 Votes)

I don't know what stw's circulation is but I saw WhatMTB was less than 15,000 last time I read it.

Which may go someway to explain why Future are completely restructuring their business and make a lot of staff redundant.

STW seem to be expanding, though (launching cx site, number of pages increasing etc), so they must be appealing to a wide enough audience that it's commercially viable?

Singletrack, who exactly do you think your core readership is? In the last edition you reviewed bikes at 4k and 6k and vans at 30k.

They probably know. Who do YOU think the readership is? 🙂

I'm not sure how much you earn is always a good indicator of disposable income.
I have a few friends who earn 4 times my salary and are always skint as they have bought very expensive property or have lots of children.

Despite my relative poverty in pay compared to them we have low outgoings, very small mortgage, car paid for upfront 6 years ago, no other debts, oh and no children.

So as a result I can if needed save very quickly for most things, but I've reached a point where I have more than enough bikes & spares that are if I'm honest too good for my ability.

Instead have embarked on “Nigel’s World of Wood” that’s a log cabin workshop/bike store.

Kids don't cost us much at all.. until we want to go on ****ing holiday!

Singletrack to earth..
Mark here..

🙂

Most of what I would have said has been said, so this is to acknowledge that we have read this.

I want to add that we are already working on an entry level bike article featuring good hardtails at around £500 and FS bikes at around £1000. That will be ready for publishing online sometime in June/July.

Our recent poll suggests that about a third of you have household incomes over £75k. Has anyone seen the Maserati ad that pops up now and then? That's a targeted ad to the site demographic! I know! It's crazy! But there you go. Chipps was also at pains to point out that vans do end up on the 2nd hand market for reasonable prices and when they do that's when most of us will stand a realistic chance of being able to get one I imagine. But the van feature has attracted an order of magnitude fewer complaints than our infamous pedal car feature of yore 🙂

For the record, Singletrack is intended to be aspirational and inspirational. 'No one buys Top Gear magazine for the Yaris reviews... even if you drive a Yaris', said Chipps over my shoulder just now.

Sounds reasonable. ST isn't a buyer's guide, after all. I wouldn't read it if it was, that'd be boring.

Why write about stuff that the vast majority of us will never have a hope of actually owning.
Posted 4 hours ago # Report-Post

who wants to read about a cheap bike you could easily afford?, i want to see the exotic new stuff that i aspire to own and articles on places i long to visit

buying secondhand wrecks and supermarket BSOs for £100, which were obviously useless and / or dangerous and then concluded that cheap bikes were useless and / or dangerous

you need a magazine to tell you that?

I'm not even going to get my butler to bother opening the plastic wrapping on the next mag unless you guarantee an article on gold plated, swarovski adorned 36er fat cargo bikes, and rocket powered unobtanium zondas.

That is all..

DrP

I wonder how many Flypast readers could afford a Spitfire.

I couldn't afford a C64 when I read Input.

Singletrack, who exactly do you think your core readership is?

Not you.

I liked the £100 bike article.
In fact, I liked it so much I bought the bike from Chipps. 🙂

The thing about 'Car' mag, mentioned above is that it takes cheap machinery just as seriously as the bling.
And still remains 'aspirational and inspirational and retains it's credibility.

I like the reviews of the bling in ST, always seem fair and well reasoned, but I'd just like to see the balance shifted slightly.
So, I'm looking forward to the article mentioned, as I fancy a new bike.

I like the travel articles too.
I'd much rather travel somewhere nice and ride a cheaper bike than spend thousands on one.

Im pretty surprised that people are taking that poll seriously, that its fact and not dreamland.

I thought everything that gets paid for mostly by advertising revenue had to pander to the purchasing demographic.

Thus: People who used to like to drive to play golf, now drive to ride bikes. A 4k bike. In a 30k car.

Car magazines are just about cars though. Most people use their cars to get to work and go to the shops, so the actual driving doesn't make for great copy.

ST is surely about biking itself more than bikes, surely?

Most people use their cars to get to work and go to the shops

I use a bicycle

If only there was some cyclocross content 😉

molgrips - Member

Car magazines are just about cars though. Most people use their cars to get to work and go to the shops, so the actual driving doesn't make for great copy.

'Car' is more famous for it's inspirational road trip stories and it's excellent journalism as it is for the reviews.

Honestly, try some LJK Setright, Russell Bulgin, George Bishop or Phil Llewellyn.

Fine by me - reviewing £1k bikes and £10k vans would have no interest to me.

You should have tried harder at school wilsation.....

(I'm joking btw - as if I read Singletrack)

😉

I think they should review scabby old mondeos, Ragley Tis and cracked Cotic Hemlocks. Possibly also never-ridden Orange 224s. I'd buy that mag.

Shhh Hemlocks never cracked

Honestly, try some LJK Setright, Russell Bulgin, George Bishop or Phil Llewellyn.

I have quite a few old issues where they're the four columnists - sadly it's a bit like watching Dad's Army: "He's dead. He's dead now. He's dead too. Saw him in Islington shortly before he died..." Four fine reasons why I get so frustrated with the quality of writing in the bike world...

Much as I like Car magazine and have bought it for years and years, they've never tested nor indeed acknowledged the existence of the car I've been driving for the last decade!

When Singletrack try to write about riding bikes they talk about the view, the cake, the beer, the coffee... They occasionally mention pedalling. I'm not sure they've ever acknowledged the existence of corners... Still, if you're into whimsical mincing as opposed to mincecore-lite then it's perfect! 😉

I know. 😐

Steve Worland's untimely death got me that way too.

Roland Brown is very, very good if you're into motorbikes.
As are Dan Walsh, Alan Cathcart and many of the travel/op ed journos on Bike & Motorcycle Sport and Leisure mag.

Worth a read.

[quote=wilsation ]Aracer, my car cost 1700 and that was too much.

You're probably not the core readership then.

to be honest I dont see why they cant do articles such as a top gear style £500 budget bike. I.E. get a cheap used bike and see how they fare against newer bikes at twice the price and other tests such as that. Yes they arent directly advertising new products but they would highlighting how well built bikes are if they are in good condition and perform well.

Questions regarding used bikes are also commonplace on here too so it would be good to get their perspective on it.

Playing devil's advocate, how many of us actually buy the mag for the gear reviews? It's the other articles that are the more interesting bit IMHO; if I want pages of test, there's WMB.

As this is still going, and nobody else seems to have made this point, where I was aiming for was that:

[quote=wilsation ]In the last edition you reviewed bikes at 4k and 6k... Why write about stuff that the vast majority of us will never have a hope of actually owning.

is incorrect. I own more than one £4k bike, and am far from rich (I've never been in the top half of readership incomes according to the survey).

But the van feature has attracted an order of magnitude fewer complaints than our infamous pedal car feature of yore

now I missed that - which issue?

Can we submit articles to the mag?

I used to subscribe to the mag a long, long time ago when it was about grown men pissing about on bikes over the moors of Calderdale. When they weren't doing this they were doing other silly stuff like the pedal car story which, again, appealed to me greatly. There was a distinct feeling that the kit they tested they had quite often bought or blagged directly from the manufacturers, and the bikes were stuff I could, usually afford.

However, over the years the success of the magazine has led to it having a bigger voice within the industry and they get more opportunities to obtain, and test, higher end stuff; the Fresh Goods is a lot bigger and contains much pricier stuff than of yore.

The demographics of the core readership developed as the hobby became more popular and it has attracted a significant number of people who are affluent. The magazine, as a business, has to recognise this and respond appropriately - they would be pretty stupid not to.

I am still just a bloke who generally rides bikes over the moors of Calderdale on an oldish, slightly rusty and wobbly selection of bikes and enjoy messing about with them and related stuff.

I haven't changed but the pastime and it's participants have, and so has the magazine.

I don't think people like me and the OP are the core readership anymore so I don't buy the mag. Reckon the OP should do the same.

I'm more interested in components than bikes, I would question whether the magazine needs a bike test every issue - often the bikes are too different to actually compare.

shirley the issue is with bike mfrs only sending out the top of the line spec for testing, im sure most bikes ride lovely with enve wheels, xx1 and titanium dustcaps

which is why they want their bikes reviewed at that level, everything gets a great write up

and when you buy the lower spec model you can convince yourself youre on a 5 star bike

Time for a poll - what percentage of readers ride an off-the-peg bike?

I only ever read a cheaper bike (or whatever) review when I'm actually planning on buying something - and like most people (I imagine) that doesn't actually happen that often. For the rest of the time I'd rather look at lottery-win bikes, and dream...

I've never bought a complete bike 8)

I don't really lust over bikes, just want them to work preferably for a long time. Maybe that's why mags don't appeal.

Complete bikes? 3 of the current fleet/stable/quiver, but 1 of those has been significantly changed.

Out of the bikes I currently own, the x-bike and the tandem were bought complete, though the tandem had a lot of mods on purchase (flat bars to drops...) I suppose the fixie also came complete (s/h), but with gears when I got it.

I have 6 other bikes built up from bits.

All 3 of my bikes are off the peg and between £700-1400 RRP. Yet according to Mark my income means I should be buying a Mazarati, like wtf? 75K annual income is tidy, but nowt special if you live in a nice area and have kids. Well unless you like running a lot debt, then I don't doubt you can have alot of things.

I've no idea who the STW demographic is, but it doesn't feel like me.

New tech is almost always introduced at the top end. A lot of people are interested in how the new stuff performs. Thus, when magazines test the latest stuff, its usually high end.

ST has done grouptests of lower level components numerous times. Generally, they can be summed up as "works about 99% as well as the top end stuff, but its heavier and not quite as shiny." But those reviews tend to slip under the radar as there is nothing "new" in the review as all of the technology has tricled down from higher end groups.

Need a good example? In the 2x review in the current issue, the overall winner was Shimano SLX!!! 😯

[quote=dragon ]75K annual income is tidy, but nowt special if you live in a nice area and have kids. Well unless you like running a lot debt, then I don't doubt you can have alot of things.
I've no idea who the STW demographic is, but it doesn't feel like me.

How much do you spend on a car?

I live in a nice area (though not a SE nice area) and have kids and have never had a household income approaching that. See above for bike ownership content.

Having re-read Mark's post above, I notice that the 300 to 1000 quid bike test is due to appear only online.

That's a bit off.

Would potential Maserati owners be THAT offended by pictures of cheap bikes that they'll stop buying the mag?

How come I don't get the masarati advert, I'm stuck with ebay oxfam and halfords. is it suggeting I cant affored a 30k van or a masarati.

I own three Maseratis and a Porsche and earn far more than £750,000 a year.

My bike only cost 15 quid off Mad Dave down the Red Lion.

75K annual income is tidy, but nowt special if you live in a nice area and have kids.

😯

I recently subscribed to Dirt Rag mag, it's a nice change.

75K annual income is tidy, but nowt special

75K annual income is tidy, but nowt special if you live in a nice area and have kids.

I am so far off the bottom end of the STW demographic 😉

(Live in a reasonably nice area, have a kid, earn a fraction of that - but get to tinker with bikes all day, so ner ner nee ner ner)

bank of mummy and daddy

Just out of curiosity, why is that bit in bold?

Where I live 2 bed flats are over £300k and 2 up 2 downs are £500k

I live in very nice area and 300k will buy you a big house and 500k a massive house. 75K is a bloody good household income, some people should have a ride out with social care workers or ambulance crews you'd soon change your mind.

I definitely like reading about the bikes and trips I'll never be able to afford, which is why I buy the Dirt 100 too.

The results of the [url= http://singletrackmag.com/pollsarchive/?poll_page=2 ]income poll[/url] did make a little bit of sick come up though, certainly didn't think I was in the second smallest group, I did expect there to be a lot of high earners here based on all the usual willy waving and boasting threads but not that many!

I haven't changed but the pastime and it's participants have

Couldn't agree more.

Should we have a £500max-build-a-bike-from-the-classifieds only grouptest?

how many of us actually buy the mag for the gear reviews

But what is a realistic price range for us for new bikes that we might actually stretch to? £2k-4k? Sure, you can lust after something that's £6k, but at some point you have to settle for what you can afford. It may not look as good, it may not be as good a ride, but it's yours, and you love it.

(Also works when talking to jealous OHs...)

I bought a £3k bike once when I was young and my income had just taken a leap, and a couple of £1,500 ones. That's when £3k got you a top end bike.

Couldn't do that now, I have a house and family...

PS the household income poll isn't that remarkable. Bear in mind in most cases that's between two people, so the top category only requires two people to be earning £25kpa, which is below UK average if I have my figures right.

PS the household income poll isn't that remarkable. Bear in mind in most cases that's between two people, so the top category only requires two people to be earning £25kpa, which is below UK average if I have my figures right.

This. U.K. Average household income is £53k (26.5k per person) I suspect a lot of the folk on here are thinking in terms of individual income.

I've always had expensive bikes relative to my salary, as it is my biggest passion, after girls. Maybe. I had a £2.5k bike when earning 11k a year. Now I earn a fair bit more than that, and I have more, more expensive, bikes as it is still a passion that burns just as, if not more, brightly. I pays my money, I takes my choices.

Should we have a £500max-build-a-bike-from-the-classifieds only grouptest?

This. It's what a lot of us are doing, make it between 3 STW staff, bit of a challenge, mixed riding racing sort of thing. ( like top gear without the racism)

Then you have to sell the bikes you've bought see if you can make a profit.

This is top gear isn't it? I've just described an episode of top gear.

Bums.

This. U.K. Average household income is £53k (26.5k per person) I suspect a lot of the folk on here are thinking in terms of individual income.

No its not, closer to £40k, but your right that combined needs to be considered.

But what is a realistic price range for us for new bikes that we might actually stretch to? £2k-4k? Sure, you can lust after something that's £6k, but at some point you have to settle for what you can afford. .

until that £6k bike is sold by Pauls Cycles old stock half price, or it pops up in the classifieds. Ibis, Turner, Yeti and Intense frames all been available brand new half price or less in the last year or two. Aspirational can become affordable.