I was wondering why there are not more people riding Guru’s? I was at Powerman Alabama this weekend and only saw 2 or 3 people riding them. Guru is not even listed on the Kona survey. The only tri-bike I have ever been on is my Guru Crono. It seems like a good bike to me.
They’re another Canadan company and are based in Montreal. They make some great bikes but even in Canada we don’t hear or see much of them compared to Cervelo. For whatever reason, Cervelo seems to be a bigger player on the market. Perhaps Guru sells more in Quebec?
It’s harder for a plant to grow in the shadow of a giant tree. I won’t extol their virtues because they slagged another company outright (bad business no matter what business you’re in)…but they make a mighty fine bike. Ask the reigning Olympic triathlon champion.
That’s a good question Amstel. I have a few theories:
-
Guru won the first Olympic triathlon, then- not much. At the time the Olympics in Sydney happened the majority of their product was different than other triathlon product widely available. Also, Guru won the Olympics- a mere sideshow in our sport- they didn’t win Ironman.
-
Triathlon bike consumers are generally conspicuous consumers and don;t really know what they are getting. They are perfectly happy with some fairly average quality, Taiwan frameset with an aero downtube, cool decals and a fancy parts kit. To a triathlete, that is a “good deal”. Guru uses frame materials from the top shelf, and they make the frames themselves. Even the paint work is industry standard. when most other triathletes are on a Dodge Neon with $2000 wheels and a $4000 stereo, a Guru is like a real car- BMW or Mercedes- the beuaty is more than gimmicks or skin deep. They use the highest end aluminum tubing and carbon rear ends in the entire industry. Their designs and geometries are unique too. This subtle details and refinements are lost on most triathletes- they don;t understand why Guru is so much better than other bikes.
-
Lack of advertising. While Guru has run some print ads they haven’t been too saavy about putting the key Ironman athletes- the ones who sell the bikes in this sport- on the bikes. Also, the ads do not tell the story of why the bikes are so much better than everything else out there.
-
As I mentioned in #2, triathletes tend to be “component shoppers” when they look for a bike, rather than “frame shoppers”. The Felt B2 is an example. People buy the B2 all day long thinking it is some super-bike. It is a nice bike, but at the end of the day it is a Taiwanese frame with fancy parts. Those parts on a high end, Dedaccai tubing (what Guru uses) frame would be a nice bike- both coomponents and frame.
-
There aren;t many dealers- yet. As the brand grows (and it will) their dealer network will increase. This is a double edge sword. Gurus are a very, very tricky fit- so only expereinced dealers who have owned and ridden the bikes will be able to size them correctly.
Overall, Guru is a terribly underrated company with some bikes no one else is even coming close to. The next time you see one, look at it closely for a few minutes. It doesn;t take a rocket scientist to see there is a big difference.
“the Olympics- a mere sideshow in our sport- they didn’t win Ironman.”
Huh? AFAIK, Cervelo has never won Kona but are still a huge player. Who thinks of Specialized or Giant as tri bikes but they’ve both won Kona? Cervelo has probably got far more out of CSC than any IM wins.
That’s true about Guru. Simon Whitfield won Olympic gold on a Guru but I can’t think of any other big name pros riding them.
We’ve done surveys in here- What bike won the Ironman?
Our customers say “Peter Reid on a Specialized- but it wasn’t a real Specialized” so their understanding of the dynamics awere more sophisticated than we originally thought.
When we asked “Who is the official bike of Ironman?” we got answers ranging from “Kestrel” to “Huffy” with very few mentions of Cannondale.
When we asked which bike won the Olympic triathlon almost no one knew.
Ironman is an annual event we can all get into and produces “durable” media images in print and Internet that are played and viewed over and over and over. There are far less images of the Sydney Olympic triathlon. I haven’t even seen a picture of Simon Whitfield on his Guru.
I haven’t even seen a picture of Simon Whitfield on his Guru.
HEY! Neither have I now that you mention it…what the hell? Hey Guru, if yer listening, how about setting up a camera or two at one of Simons races and getting some exposure. If not for you then him.
Isn’t it safe to say (from a Metro Detroit/Michigan perspective), that until this year you would have had to travel far or order online in order to get a Guru?
Tom, as I understand it, up until this year, you didn’t recommend Guru’s for some of my tri-buds who were “interested”…instead, you felt that a Litespeed or Cannondale was a better fit for them? Several bought based on your rec, and others had to order online which was a little less “settling” of an experience for them. I’m sure you had your reasons for it but it leads me to the following hypothesis: If you’re not an expert on bikes and a gear head who understands the nuances between different tri-bikes (as MANY triathletes are not), then you take the word of your local dealers as “expert”. If the local dealers don’t “recommend” the brand then you’re far more likely to buy something they do “recommend”. Therefore, in this region, if the one Tri-shop (Bikesport) doesn’t sell Guru’s, then you as a triathlete may not ever hear about them (outside of an ad in a tri-magazine) and are far less likely to buy or even consider them as part of the purchase process.
Makes me wonder what other outstanding bikes I as a consumer could/should consider that my local bike shops don’t offer? I guess a forum like this helps shed some light on it.
-bz (matt buese)
Bottom line: We hadn’t bought any and didn’t see a reason to.
Prior to 2004 we looked at Guru but didn’t see compelling reason to buy them. Before we sell anything- first we have to buy it, and there was nothing about the bike that warranted us buying them- until 2004.
There have been significant changes in the bikes, and in other bike lines too- that made Guru competitive and attractive for 2004 compared to other bikes.
When we buy something there has to be a tangible reason for it compared to other bikes. With Guru, now there is. Before we felt there was not.
Before we sold them we ought some bikes, not for resale- and tested them: Built them and rode them. We practiced fitting them and measured them. We discovered the new 2004 bikes were a good option for our customers compared to other bikes.
Prior to that, we were not compelled to buy them. Since we wouldn’t buy them, it was unreasonable to expect our customers should.
Seems fair Tom. My hypothesis directly answers the question of this forum: “I was wondering why there are not more people riding Guru’s”…and from my perspective, it’s because no retailer in the area offers/offered them. It’s really that simple.
What criteria does a bike shop use to decide which bikes they will buy/test in order to judge whether or not they want to be a supplier? Are there tri-bikes that you currently don’t supply/sell to customers that you’re currently testing?
I’m interested in how that process works for several reasons: If I’m in your store today, you might recommend a Guru vs. a Litespeed or a Kestrel (let’s say). However, if I come in there in 6 months (even if the offerings from the manufacturers haven’t changed), you might recommend a Quintana Roo or a Kestrel based on the bikes (remaining inventory) you are trying to sell, right? As a consumer, it begs the question: How do I know I’m getting the best/right bike for my money if the shop I’m buying from doesn’t offer all that’s available?
Anyway, appreciate the feedback…sorry for the ramble.
-bz
I consider you (Tom) and other bike shops and online resources as EXPERTS. Don’t get me wrong, I have a clear understanding that you’re running a business and you need to sell your inventory, but it makes buying a bike a very unsettling experience, especially for the “newbie”.
For instance, I know what I can expect from a car dealership when I go b/c a Mazda Dealer sells Mazda’s, I wouldn’t expect for them to tell me that a Nissan is a better car for the money. But the difference is, they are always going to push Mazda’s. They are the experts on Mazda’s so you know what you’re going to get. A jaded perspective that without question results in them pushing a sale of a Mazda. However, in your industry, it sounds like you have the flexibility to offer different bikes from year to year. Therefore, there isn’t the same consistency which leads many consumers, post purchase, to second guess their decision. I guess that’s how it goes. I’m sure that’s the tough part about being in your business/position, you need to build relationships w/ customers in order to ensure that they trust/value you so that they will return to your shop for additional services and products. But I wonder how you safe guard to ensure that your message to the customer is consistent so they do consider you a reliable source and not just a guy who’s looking to sell a bike and move on. (Trust me, there are several shops like that in this area! as I’m sure you know.)
I think you’re missing the point-
It is because no retailer BOUGHT them.
No, I get the point Tom. Thanks
As for my other inquiries, I know you’re very busy.
-bz
Definitely a lot more Gurus around Montreal/Quebec. I see them EVERYWHERE at tris; like the way I see Cervelos at every corner when I’m in Ontario. I even saw some teen riding a guru that looked almost like a cruiser yesterday. Their dealer network sucks. Heck, their webpage doesn’t even post the names of the stores in the Montreal area that sell them. I got one 2 years ago (from the factory), and I loved it then and still do. Would I buy one again? Probably not.
I think part of their marketing problem is that they don’t have a specific market. I think they hit it big with the tri-lite & Simon Whitfield (heck even my road bike from them has a goofy sticker stating “Guru, Olympic winner” or something like that. When I got a tour of the factory, they showed me the bikes they were making for sponsored riders. Did I recognize any of the names? nope. So obviously no real product placement like Cervelo did with CSC…
When I got my frame, most bike companies still had ugly paint jobs (ie. Marinoni, Argon 18, two other Montreal frame builders) so that sold me. But now they’ve forayed into Ti, Carbon, even mtn bikes; I get the feeling of the company focus going too wide, too fast. Its not like the Giant/Kestrel/Aegis Carbon, or Litespeed/Seven Ti, these guys just have a little bit of everything.
So why wouldn’t I get another Guru? Lets just say part of it is that pathetic dealer network - lack of help/service. Also, hearing stories from people who work there… But more than anything, I’ve learned since my first road bike (the Guru flite) a lot more about geometries, “my” fit, and the incredible paint jobs on Orbeas, or Serottas haha. That and my bike just isn’t very unique anymore. I know this may be materialistic but I like being different, having something no one else does. But when I ride some more popular bike trails and see 60 year old men riding a Guru road frame with riser bars and a fat ass seat, I feel REALLY pathetic. Now once I get that custom Serotta… mmm…
Oh, what other inquiries?
"What criteria does a bike shop use to decide which bikes they will buy/test in order to judge whether or not they want to be a supplier? Are there tri-bikes that you currently don’t supply/sell to customers that you’re currently testing? "
Oh, two good questions.
- When we evaluate a bike line for purchase we look at the following:
A. Is the bike line significantly different from current lines we offer? Is their uniqueness and differentiation from current lines?
B. Does the line offer tangible, quantifiable features and benefits: Is there a REAL, compelling reason to buy this bike as opposed to something else. We are interested in generating ADDITIONAL sales- not just transfer sales.
C. Will the company be easy to work with, especially when we are NOT easy to work with?
D. Can the company actually deliver product?
E. Would I buy it and use it?
And secondly, Are there bikes we are currently testing that we don’t sell to consumers?
- Absolutely. There are always several. And we never say what they are. It is an on-going process.
I purchased a Guru a couple years ago and actually went to the plant in Montreal for the fitting. I quite like the bike, in my opinion it is a quality product, but the fit I received is lowsy and the only feedback I received later from Guru was that I had asked for “tri-geometry” and that’s what I got. Now I have to find someone that can try and tweak to my measurements…will I buy another, not likely because as Tom mentioned, it seems to be a difficult bike to be fitted properly.
One thing we learned about Guru is that they do have to be fit very carefully. However, if you look at the set-up of my Guru Aero-ti here:
http://www.bikesportmichigan.com/reviews/aero04.shtml
You will see it is totally in proportion. However, the sizing “names” are a little unusual. My Aero-Ti is what they call a 52cm, which makes sense. My Tri-Lite is a 49 though, and it fits the same- exactly. that is a little cryptic.
That is why, when we receive a bike from a vendor we measure it. No matter what their geometry chart says it is, we measure it for actual dimensions. We frequently get very interesting numbers wildly different from what the manufacturers publish. That is why it is so important to measure the bikes and not rely solely on the geometry charts.
Obviously, I have learned an expensive lesson.
I was just thiking the same thing could be said about Elite. I’ve recently had the opportunity to check out their bikes and am very impressed, but I almost never see them at races.
I do think we’ll see them much more in the future as they look like they’re starting to expand their base.