I posted this on the article but wanted to move it here as requested:


Dan, great article. But there are a couple of points that are important to understanding the plight of the Plasma 5.

We've done well with the Plasma4, and like R&A, a Plasma5 has yet to leave the shop that didn't get di2 on it. We have done better with the Plasma 10 at $3749 than the Plasma 20 at $3249.

First of all, this bike isn't a year old. It was impossible to get fulfillment on this bike at any non-inflated (read, not the overly expensive Team Issue bike with Red22) price point until this spring. Framesets and the Plasma Premium became available mid-March - just three months ago and after most riders that were upgrading had already made a purchase decision. We had a number of riders that would have elected to purchase a Plasma5 had it been available but chose alternatives instead. Just because Kienle could ride it does not mean that the average triathlete could ride it. A midwestern dealer called me in February with a number of frustrated pre-orders on the Plasma5 because what was initially promised as a 2014 delivery kept slipping.

Second, the bike is a bit overpriced - certainly at the 105 and Ultegra levels. Were the 105 bike $2800 or even $2999, and the Ultegra bike more in the $3500 range, it would compare a bit more favorably with its competitors. One has to articulate superiority to justify an increase in price, and Scott has not done that effectively with the Plasma4. The Plasma5 price for the Plasma Premium is $7000, not $6000 as mentioned in the article. The Team Issue version of the bike with Red22 is $12000, not $11000.

Third, all of Scott's marketing is centered around the Plasma5, and very little of that marketing is ground in the science of the bike. Instead, is ground in the performance of riders like Kienle. And compare that to another bike in that range that sells like hotcakes, such as the Felt IA. Felt has made an engineering case for the superiority of the IA and delivered on its ship dates and with good numbers. This has resulted in, effectively, a sell-through of the IA. You simply can't get it - frameset or otherwise - at any level, in certain sizes (the 48 has been gone for a couple of months). You'd figure that with the success of Cervelo and Felt in the triathlon space and the means through which they've built that reputation, other brands would seek to market in a similar fashion. But no, the marketing spins like a broken record.

Fourth, the packages on the Plasma5 are the least compelling we sell across every brand. We sell more triathlon bikes for a single store than anyone, and we have yet to have a single rider demand Red 22 on their bike this year. We have not sold a single Dura-Ace mechanical build this year either - in every case a Dura-Ace spec was upgraded to di2. In most cases, it was upgraded to Ultegra di2 with brake lever shifters and the Dura-Ace crankset, chain, and cassette were preserved. Were the two Plasma5 options instead spec'd with Ultegra di2 and Dura-Ace di2, sales of that bike would probably be 3x or 4x.

Since Shimano has created such a pricing mess with it's absolute refusal to regulate the European online market, upselling di2 makes shops no money and requires significant work. If the shop isn't savvy with di2 and the routing complexities and brake complexities of a superbike aren't well known, the labor required to install di2 can be prohibitive. The Plasma5 and the inferior (and problematic) di2 routing Scott recommends is a perfect example of this.

As a result of where the market is, it's imperative that bike brands offer those options out of the box as a consequence.

Fifth, expecting reps to provide value in selling bikes - especially triathlon bikes - is utter folly. With all due respect to the great guys and gals out there working the roads, the days of the outside rep with bike brands are numbered. The breadth of a territory a rep must cover and the breadth of knowledge they have to have in order to provide real support to the shops out there that do well in triathlon makes it impossible for them to be very useful to my shop. Over and over, they come in and present a PPT slide deck full of information we've already read via the marketing info or Slowtwitch. One thing about reps that nobody wants to really mention as well is that my shop, largely, has the same exact reps it did three years ago. Except now, they all rep different brands than they did when they first opened us up. That happens less frequently with inside reps. Brands that choose to keep their reps outside, like Scott does, are at a significant disadvantage.

You nailed a couple of points spot on. There is no excuse for a modern bike brand not to provide a fit calculator and an armpad stack and reach table with ranges of adjustment on superbikes. Frame stack and reach is effectiely useless for superbikes since the relationship the armpad position has with the geometry of the frame isn't the same as a bike with a traditional stem and steerer tube and is different from superbike to superbike. That said, the number of shops that can really fit a person effectively on a superbike can probably be counted on your fingers and toes as well. A number of local shops have all manner of fitting equipment and very little skill. It's akin to buying a hammer and screwdriver set and proclaiming to the world that you're a carpenter.

The Aeria bars are terrific, and the adustment and comfort of the entire Profile Design bar range is without peer.

This bike is a very well-engineered piece of tech. The Profile Design integrated drink is very well done, easy to remove, and large enough to support real hydrational needs. The bike is fast in the tunnel and fast with a rider on it.

And last, you're absolutely right - this bike should sell better and should get better support from Scott USA and Park Cities. We've been a Scott dealer for nearly four years and, most years, are the largest Scott dealer in a very large metropolitan area. But I've yet to meet a single person inside Scott that designs bikes, that designs marketing efforts, and that designs the means of connecting with customers. Every other brand we carry has solicited our advice and, in many cases, used it. Scott is the exception.

---

Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)

i have heard from a couple of people that the electronic cable routing was an issue. andres from beyond aero told me that, i think. but al at R&A said he hadn't heard complaints. but then al isn't the one routing the cables.

it seems to me that this might be helpful:

1. framesets with prerouted electronic cables? this, because virtually every one of these frames will go electronic.
2. obviously, pad rise and run fit matrix that produces both flat and angled stem complete bike solutions.
3. prices for frameset that do not include hydration and storage (with these available aftermarket, separately).

if you're going to use the flat stem as a viable option, which i think is imperative, you have to split out the hydration as a separate purchase. it seems to me that both scott and specialized has taken the view that real men ride flat stems, and pussy triathletes need angled up stems. when you see all the pro cyclists in time trials in europe riding bikes that look one way, and all the bikes marketed to triathletes riding bikes that look another way, that's a problem that needs to either be explained, or solved.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

The problem with building these bikes, outside of the always existent brake issues that plague superbikes, is junction box placement. Scott recommended routing the junction box up the seat post and under the saddle. On an XL that took lots of cables and lots of junction boxes. Then, when the seat post slipped, the cables were all pulled and couldn't be shifted. We no longer route the di2 cables as Scott recommends, drill a hole in the integrated bento box, and drop the junction box in there. It's easier, accessible, and clean.

---

Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)

My LBS has the new Plasma for a week. Then it was gone and I was told there were only 3 left in stock at Scott for the rest of the year in the model/size I wanted; no idea if this was accurate or my LBS trying to get me to immediately commit to a new bike (I just purchased the Addict 10 a few days prior and the new Plasma was a perfect match).

Is one of the issues they aren't really prevalent because of availability issues?

scott's biggest problem with this bike was a lot of companies' problems: the dock strike. well, not a dock strike. a dock slowdown. container ships outside the long beach harbor.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I agree completely with the plasma being a great bike and lacks support. I have a 3 and love it but was annoyed when I wanted a flat stem and couldn't find one and even had a hard time getting a different sized rise stem. I've emailed and called scott in the past with no luck and the dealers I have gone too have had a hard time as well... My wife got the new speed concept this year and its night and day on the support. Parts are easy to get, Carl here on ST is amazing for answering questions and information on the bike is readily available.

If I was in the market for a new bike I'd probably go to a new SC due to support and pricing. You can get a new project one 7.5 speed concept built with integration mechanical for under 6k which is still less than the plasma 5 dura ace... A stock SC 7.5 is only 4.5k...

---

Andy Mullen
Team Zoot

in triathlon at least, carl is the most important sponsored athlete trek has. carl is the most prolific and successful sales rep trek has. carl is the most important marketing executive trek has. he may or may not be the most important engineer trek has. i'm quite sure trek understands maybe 20 percent, at most, of the value carl delivers to his employer.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Well said. He was a big reason we choose the SC as we were able to get all the info we needed. Same with Dave at Felt for that matter- big help when I owned a felt. I wish scott had someone in a similar capacity either on here or accessible in some fashion.

---

Andy Mullen
Team Zoot

I'm often asked "Why do so many people buy Cervelos" and the answer is relatively simply: they are extremely good at research and marketing that research. It creates a compelling and inherent brand trust on behalf of the consumer. It's why I have 2 of them, ha.


Perfect.

I have to agree with you re Carl. Honestly, his responsiveness is the reason why I don't see myself riding anything besides a Speed Concept in the foreseeable future. With that said, I was Scott's perfect customer: willing to pay knowing full well it wouldn't net me much if anything over my current bike, Kienle fan-boy, liked the colors, like Scott's products in general, wear the Split helmet (best I've found for myself thus far), and I'm a big fan of the integrated front hydration of the Plasma Premium. With that said, there were essentially three deal breakers for me:

1. No Di2. I'm a fan of Di2 for weird reasons. Yes, the shifting is amazing but that's not why I run it on my race bike. Di2 makes traveling easier for me in addition to making cockpit adjustments easier. This wouldn't have been an issue if they sold the bike as a frameset but, to my knowledge, they don't.
2. Horizontal dropouts. I suppose I could've let this one slide if everything else was perfect but... it wasn't so it irks me even more.
3. My local Scott dealer had precisely zero interest in selling me one. I came in looking for the new Plasma Premium, they didn't have one, and proceeded to aggressively try to sell me on the last gen Plasma Premium. The whole experience was very off-putting. Had they been honest and said something like "there aren't many in the country, we don't expect to get one until later in the year" I would've considered going back and checking the bike out when it finally came in.... but now I won't.

You see this all the time in different industries where a company has a good product that is very competitive on all specs but the marketing execution just isn't there.

Thanks for the insights, Dan. I'm actually pretty amazed by your article: I looked at the Plasma, in part because I really like the integrated storage options, but stopped looking when I saw the stack and reach numbers. If I could get lower than I am on my P5-6, I would, and when I saw that the Plasma stacked 3cms HIGHER (on Scott's chart) than the Cervelo, I stopped reading. It's kind of ironic that a metric that's supposed to enable direct comparison of bikes with differing geometries should end up being used in such a counter-productive way.

Funny you mention Giant in the intro. Both companies have a strong history in North America of ignoring the triathlon market. An old roommate of mine was the main Giatn NA sales rep, he hadn't a _clue_ what triathlon was or why they needed to bring in the HTC giant bike (this is 7ish years ago).

A lot of Scott USA's failure lies in Ketchum.

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

this is why these things matter. metrics matter. support systems matter. north american tri bike product managers get it. european design teams don't. i know that's a generalization, but i think there's a culture in europe that you make the bike and stick it under some star riders, that's all you really have to do.

but then aerobars came along, snuck up on everybody, and made the process more complex. and superbikes with integrated front ends make everything more complex. so you need to build a support system. a launch is more than a white paper and a wind tunnel comparison graph.

bike maker ====(support system)===> consumer

european design teams don't really yet get the above.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"A lot of Scott USA's failure lies in Ketchum."

i'm not so sure about that. if you need to know the rise and run from the head tube top to the handlebar clamp, for each of your 2 stems offered on the plasma 5, you need to get the engineers to open up their CAD programs and give you this. this just didn't happen, that i know of (and, yes, i've asked, and have been asking).

look, here's the problem. i tell EVERY bike company that makes one of these superbikes, i'll tell you how to easily make one of these fit matrices. i'll walk you through it. we run through a couple of emails. then the communication stops on their side. i'm not talking about scott. i'm talking about a lot of bike companies. we just have aborted conversations, and i'm not the one who aborts them.

fair warning to every company. from here on in, if you make a superbike, and you don't have some kind of fit matrix, it's on you. it's going to be pointed out. not just by me. by your retailers, who expect this. they just won't sell your bike. it's like, hmm, got a guy in front of me, the fit was just done, rise and run from the BB to the pads of 650mm and 495mm. trek has a matrix. velobici and aeroweener don't have matrices for their bikes. why am i going to horse around trying to figure out how to fit my customer to these bikes? i'm just going to call up trek and get a P1 going.

trek is #2 in tri right now. closing in on cervelo. trek's success is 50% the bike, and it's 50% a process that carl developed and husbands.

every time i teach a F.I.S.T. workshop; every time i speak at interbike or some such event; i say "product-drive transactions are giving way to process-driven transactions; display retailing is giving way to tactile retailing." by "tactile" retailing i'm talking about, in part, the process of establishing a place of comfort. by "process" transactions i'm talking about taking that place of comfort and translating it into a precise, granular product solution. so, you go thru a fit process, establish fit coordinates you like. then carl comes along and say, "oh, well, that's an SC, size L, low/far stem, 35mm pedestal, wing back, no wing spacer, and by the way you'll want to pull those bontrager bars back about 15mm in their clamps."

it's that, or, you curiously look at your very sexy veloweener frame, scratch your head, with no flipping idea what size frame or stem works for you, or if it will work for you at all.

which company do you think is going to get the sale?

pardon the rant, but carl is an engineer. this came out of trek engineering. it needs to come out of scott, canyon, cannondale, specialized, storck, pinarello, et al, engineering. the plasma was not a ketchum engineering project. i think europe let ketchum down.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You give the NA managers far too much credit. JMO

---

Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)

That bike makes me think of a St. Bernard.

---

Proud Representative of Slowtwitch Anti-Atheists Society.

you deal with this every day, on the front lines. so, i'm not going to dispute your characterization, because you're one of maybe two dozen retailers, four dozen generously, who really get all these concepts we're talking about.

what europe did bequeath ketchum was a fantastic bike. how it slipped out without any electronic on it i don't know. to me, the bare frames need to be pre-wired electronic. or, some easy pathway to electronic. if you don't want electronic, great, there are complete bikes that come mechanical.

just, i get so double-danged frustrated, vicariously, on behalf of the bike companies, because they're so much better than i ever could be at conceiving and making today's modern tri bikes. yet, here they are, on the one yard line, best running back in the NFL, and they throw a pass.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

To clarify a bit, I did make mention of the Di2 "integration" which isn't so much about the cable routing difficulties as much as where everything should go. For example as "trentnix" mentioned & as the pictures on the feature you Herbert posted, the junction placement and excess use of internal junction boxes was less than ideal the way Scott suggests - thus the need to find alternatives (the bento box)! Who knows, maybe this bike is really more forward thinking that we're giving it credit for... hopefully once SRAM wireless is out, we'll know.

Except you do not need engineering to come up with a fit chart like Trek. If someone really wanted it, they could make it themselves. It is not exactly rocket science.

Also, why do manufactures seem to hate frameset sales so much?

+1. Before I found Slowtwitch, most available data was pretty scattered and confusing.
Here on ST, everything seems to run much more cohesively, with independent data and informed opinions available from aero gurus such as Jackmott, Jim@ERO, rruff, Andrew Coggan, Andy P and about half a dozen others I forgot to mention (sorry!). Still, there is a great deal more confidence when the information comes from the horse's mouth, especially if they are willing to discuss and defend every detail of their testing with skeptic and knowledgeable experts/triathletes. My first bike, a 2010 P2, was influenced by Damon Rinard's posts. SuperDave's active forum participation helped me be comfortable with racing a Felt B16. I massively researched Carl's threads before choosing my Trek SCs over the "S" and "C" brands, and his detailed explanations keep me constantly refining and upgrading their aero potential. And lastly, Jordan's move to DImond and his willingness to offer information and advice about this bike and how to set it up was a major factor why I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Dimond frame.
Data matters. Access to people with insider data who are willing to assist us triathletes is a great help indeed.

"Except you do not need engineering to come up with a fit chart like Trek. If someone really wanted it, they could make it themselves."

yes, you're right. i can make these charts, and have. that tells you right there how dumb somebody can be and make these charts. but you have to have metrics. you either grab the product out of the box, build it up, measure things or, better, the engineers just tell you the metrics of the sub-assemblies that conspire to produce a complete bike. i could make scott's fit matrix in half a day, but not without accurate measurements of the x and y components of the frames and stems (and bar, but i could get that from profile).

"Also, why do manufactures seem to hate frameset sales so much?"

beats me.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

We make our own. We have a Retul Zin, which is a very accurate way to measure the relationship and position of things relative to the bottom bracket. We also write our own software to help with our fits to distill fit coordinates into bike recommendations. It saves constant database lookups, and allows us to account for fitter's discretion when making recommendations.

The scary part? On more than one occasion (meaning, more than one bike), the actual measurements differed from what the manufacturer provided in their calculator.

---

Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)