Review: Giant Reign Advanced 27.5 1

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

R67 500 - R49 995 = R17 505 / R49 995 = .35 x 100 = 35%

 

Or am I again doing something wrong?

No, I'm doing something wrong. I used 15,500 instead of 17,500. My apologies (goes off to edit post)

[droenn]

My reply was that the exchange rate, which affects all equally, cannot account for this increase when others somehow avoided it.  Yes, the exchange rate makes sense as part reason for this actual bike's increase, but why is Giant so particularly sensitive to it?

 

The exchange rate jump is around 20% - 25% for the last year so purchasing times is bull.

 

So my point (albeit poorly expressed) and conclusion is that Giant's business model is less consumer friendly when other brands have managed to absorb some of the exhange rate knock on.

 

Interesting comment, I would have thought Giant (along with Specialized) less sensitive.

 

Quote from a review of Trance for Aus market:

 

 

Giant are well known for offering great bang for your buck, often cited as the benchmark in competitive pricing in Australia. In recent times where the of state Australian dollar has seen the prices of bikes steadily creep up, it’s the big guys like Giant Australia who have the power to keep their bikes affordable, and it shows with this bike.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

 

My reply was that the exchange rate, which affects all equally, cannot account for this increase when others somehow avoided it.  Yes, the exchange rate makes sense as part reason for this actual bike's increase, but why is Giant so particularly sensitive to it?

 

The exchange rate jump is around 20% - 25% for the last year so purchasing times is bull.

 

So my point (albeit poorly expressed) and conclusion is that Giant's business model is less consumer friendly when other brands have managed to absorb some of the exhange rate knock on.

See, the thing is, Nico, it doesn't. It's highly dependent on WHEN the purchase or transfer is made. To prove this, here is a snapshot of the 2y chart for the ZAR/USD As you can see, it makes rapid gains and losses on an almost permanent basis. 

 

 

Digging down to the 1 year chart, you can see it even more closely. This is particularly applicable as the bunch that had an RRP of R 49,995 was brought in at the end of 2014. Now, this bunch was brought in about 2 or 3 months ago. See the difference there?

 

Now - have a look at the 1 year chart. Can you see the volatility there? In the place of just a month, you've got a differential of up to 12% in currency fluctuations alone, between August and September. 

 

 

Now, I don't know when Specialized / Trek / Giant bought their currency, but if you actually dig down into it, this volatility explains it all for you, and shows how on some were less affected by the currency creepage than others were. 

Edited December 1, 2015 by Myles Mayhew

[NicoBoshoff]

See, the thing is, Nico, it doesn't. It's highly dependent on WHEN the purchase or transfer is made. To prove this, here is a snapshot of the 2y chart for the ZAR/USD As you can see, it makes rapid gains and losses on an almost permanent basis. 

 

ZARUSD.jpg

 

Digging down to the 1 year chart, you can see it even more closely. This is particularly applicable as the bunch that had an RRP of R 49,995 was brought in at the end of 2014. Now, this bunch was brought in about 2 or 3 months ago. See the difference there?

 

Now - have a look at the 1 year chart. Can you see the volatility there? In the place of just a month, you've got a differential of up to 12% in currency fluctuations alone, between August and September. 

 

ZARUSD1yr.jpg

 

Now, I don't know when Specialized / Trek / Giant bought their currency, but if you actually dig down into it, this volatility explains it all for you, and shows how on some were less affected by the currency creepage than others were. 

Uhm, I know exchange rates fluctuate.  And fwiw, I used those exact same charts on XE and without knowing exactly when the order was locked in you can't really defend the issue on a purely exchange rate foundation.   

 

And even with that knowledge, Specialized for example don't live in a parallel universe where those fluctuations don't apply to them, yet their increases are around 10-15% year on year. 

 

HENCE, Giant did something different to them, which is having a less than desireable effect for me, the consumer.

 

HENCE, the 35% WTF comment.

 

At some point retailers will have to say "look guys, yes the exchange rate is what it is, but we are inflating ourselves out of reach for the consumer.  Maybe we need to suck some of this up, or talk to the boys at head office to help us out here so that we don't have to just pass it all on to the consumer".

[raptor-22]

No.  You're redirecting the argument as you see fit.

 

My argument was "How the hell is this 35% more expensive when other large brands are managing 15% (and in some cases 8-10%)?"

 

People then chimed in with the exchange rate trope.

 

My reply was that the exchange rate, which affects all equally, cannot account for this increase when others somehow avoided it.  Yes, the exchange rate makes sense as part reason for this actual bike's increase, but why is Giant so particularly sensitive to it?

 

The exchange rate jump is around 20% - 25% for the last year so purchasing times is bull.

 

So my point (albeit poorly expressed) and conclusion is that Giant's business model is less consumer friendly when other brands have managed to absorb some of the exhange rate knock on.

 

 

 

Giant hardly raised prices over the last three years. So perhaps the other brands have raised prices ahead of the exchange rate dump and thus made more profit in the interim period. Giant now reacted to EX rate dump and the knock on seems harder to swallow

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Uhm, I know exchange rates fluctuate.  And fwiw, I used those exact same charts on XE and without knowing exactly when the order was locked in you can't really defend the issue on a purely exchange rate foundation.   

 

And even with that knowledge, Specialized for example don't live in a parallel universe where those fluctuations don't apply to them, yet their increases are around 10-15% year on year. 

 

Those 2 statements are in direct contradiction to each other, Nico. How can you assume that one was less affected by ER fluctuations without knowing exactly when the transfer was made? Maybe one of them employed forward pricing, which in itself is a very risky action due to the pure volatility of our currency. Maybe it was solely down to the one month fluctuation of 10-15% in some cases? Yes, Specialized are affected by them just as much. But it has everything to do with WHEN the transfer / purchase was made. That is the only difference. Giant have historically been very comparable in pricing in $ terms when the stock hits our shores. Maybe they prefer not to forward price. 

 

HENCE, Giant did something different to them, which is having a less than desireable effect for me, the consumer.

 

Unfounded conclusion, without the facts you cannot make such an assumption. Only if the transfer dates and ROE's are the same can you assume such an action. 

 

HENCE, the 35% WTF comment.

 

At some point retailers will have to say "look guys, yes the exchange rate is what it is, but we are inflating ourselves out of reach for the consumer.  Maybe we need to suck some of this up, or talk to the boys at head office to help us out here so that we don't have to just pass it all on to the consumer".

 

 

Agreed fully. 

[NicoBoshoff]

 

Uhm, I know exchange rates fluctuate.  And fwiw, I used those exact same charts on XE and without knowing exactly when the order was locked in you can't really defend the issue on a purely exchange rate foundation.   

 

And even with that knowledge, Specialized for example don't live in a parallel universe where those fluctuations don't apply to them, yet their increases are around 10-15% year on year. 

 

Those 2 statements are in direct contradiction to each other, Nico. How can you assume that one was less affected by ER fluctuations without knowing exactly when the transfer was made? Maybe one of them employed forward pricing, which in itself is a very risky action due to the pure volatility of our currency. Maybe it was solely down to the one month fluctuation of 10-15% in some cases? Yes, Specialized are affected by them just as much. But it has everything to do with WHEN the transfer / purchase was made. That is the only difference. Giant have historically been very comparable in pricing in $ terms when the stock hits our shores. Maybe they prefer not to forward price. 

 

HENCE, Giant did something different to them, which is having a less than desireable effect for me, the consumer.

 

Unfounded conclusion, without the facts you cannot make such an assumption. Only if the transfer dates and ROE's are the same can you assume such an action. 

 

HENCE, the 35% WTF comment.

 

At some point retailers will have to say "look guys, yes the exchange rate is what it is, but we are inflating ourselves out of reach for the consumer.  Maybe we need to suck some of this up, or talk to the boys at head office to help us out here so that we don't have to just pass it all on to the consumer".

 

 

Agreed fully. 

 

Do you have any of those variables at your disposal? 

 

If not, then how come your (on your own version) speculation is more valid than mine, which is based on the assumption that the market treats all players equally and any change in outcome is because the input decision was different?

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Do you have any of those variables at your disposal? 

 

If not, then how come your (on your own version) speculation is more valid than mine, which is based on the assumption that the market treats all players equally and any change in outcome is because the input decision was different?

Because I'm assuming no difference in strategy whatsoever. Exchange rate was different at time of purchase. Simple. The numbers support that, based on historical volatility. 

 

What they don't support is that all of a sardine Giant decided to change the way they do business and increase their bike cost 10 - 15% above all others. If that were so, the USD price would reflect so as well. As would the AUD price, EUR price and so on. 

[pauljohn]

love the bike but agree I'm not good enough for it, so my Trance will do just fine. However, just love reading this FX dialogue between Myles, Nico etc, as it sounds like my daily routine at customers! Being an importer I live, eat and sleep this stuff 24/7. So few people actually realize the impact it is having on us Saffers... 

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

love the bike but agree I'm not good enough for it, so my Trance will do just fine. However, just love reading this FX dialogue between Myles, Nico etc, as it sounds like my daily routine at customers! Being an importer I live, eat and sleep this stuff 24/7. So few people actually realize the impact it is having on us Saffers... 

I'm nowhere near good enough for it. Bloody hell, I'm actually really slow when I'm tired & overthinking stuff - which is most of the time. But I can feel this bike pushing me for more. It's actually a lekker bike for progression of skills in a way, cos it just wants you to go faster and take a little bit more risk than you're used to, and it's got the safety net for when you DO stuff it up. 

[Arnaud]

How does the new Reign compare to the Santa Cruz 27.5 Bronson (2015) much the same price range with the SCB being about 15K more,  

[nonky]

All 2016 ranges are 35% more expensive?  No they're not. 

 

Sorry, I was doing mental calcs for my FEb-2014 bike to 2016 replacement, which has gone from 40k-odd to 55k-odd.

 

ZAR has gone from 10.47 to 14.44 from begin 2014 to now (38% depreciation). 

 

The point is that  the ZAr has gone into freefall, which impacts ALL bike prices sooner or later

[NicoBoshoff]

Sorry, I was doing mental calcs for my FEb-2014 bike to 2016 replacement, which has gone from 40k-odd to 55k-odd.

 

ZAR has gone from 10.47 to 14.44 from begin 2014 to now (38% depreciation). 

 

The point is that  the ZAr has gone into freefall, which impacts ALL bike prices sooner or later

Absolutely.  No disputing that.  To replace my bike now would also be a 30% jump over two years, which is ridiculous - and that is purely exchange rate driven since RRP hasn't changed.

 

Joke is, the actual point of my post initially was that bike prices are ridiculous.  In all countries and currencies.  It's a joke.  At least there seems to be some concensus on that.

 

2nd hand is the future.  Of this I am becoming more and more convinced. 

[nonky]

Absolutely.  No disputing that.  To replace my bike now would also be a 30% jump over two years, which is ridiculous - and that is purely exchange rate driven since RRP hasn't changed.

 

Joke is, the actual point of my post initially was that bike prices are ridiculous.  In all countries and currencies.  It's a joke.  At least there seems to be some concensus on that.

 

2nd hand is the future.  Of this I am becoming more and more convinced. 

 

The USD price of my spez camber has NOT CHANGED since 2014, only the ZAR by 30%-odd...

If SA gets another ratings downgrade, the ZAR will drop like a stone.  

[Odinson]

How does the new Reign compare to the Santa Cruz 27.5 Bronson (2015) much the same price range with the SCB being about 15K more,  

 

Huh? Since when is a R15k price difference in "the same price range"?!

[Headshot]

This was a problem I had as well... Just couldn't get it feeling right... But finally I have sorted it, 4 tokens up front at 70psi and it runs oh so nicely.

 

Also did the electrical tape thing in the back and run at 300psi, feels really good allround now. Oh, also Reign 2 ali.

 

It seems to be a trait of the Maestro suspension design. My 2013 Reign required the biggest volume reducer in the CTD shock to make it run right for my weight. It was perfect after I tweaked it but not very good until I spent R500 on volume reducers. My out of date Spaz enduro frame with an RP23 out back feels bottomless and hasn't needed any tweaking so far...