“If you’re a bike maker scratching your head, wondering why Cervelo dominates this race, there is no easy answer for you.”
if i may, i have a few ideas: bjorn - enough said basso/zabriskie - in my opinion, having great performances at le tour on your flagship (for lack of a better term) bike add “legitimacy” to the product. i know i’m not explaining this well, so perhaps an analogy: 99.99% of people who buy cars will use them only on roads, and yet companies like subaru advertise their success in rally-car racing. now, imagine if everyone who bought subarus wanted to rally-car race, even if not at the pro-level sex - the combination of the above two factors with the distinct seat-tube of the P3 make it very visually appealing and memorable. i know that the curved seat-tube has been done before, but the bjorn/csc factors really distinguish the P3. also, i know that not all cervelos at kona were P3s. however, surely the buzz generated by the P3 results in increased sales of P2, soloist, etc?
Agreed. With all due respect to Bjorn. Outside of this group, even in tri circles few know who he is.
Cervelo is an interesting case study in marketing. There is no question that they have done some things that have pole vaulted the brand to the the front of the back in the on the tri bike side of the business, but also to the very front of at least the minds of road bike buyers if recent a VeloNews survey infomation is accurate. That’s truely extraordinary when you REALLY think about it.
I like the fact that their marketing approach has been honest and upfront explaining aero and technical advantages of their bikes rather than glitz and hype. Guess that’s what happens when engineers rather than advertising types do the job.
In this case it actually worked. Cervelo is a “thinking person’s” bicycle.