No Illusions Here!

We all have people in our lives--friends, boyfriends, girlfriends, spouses, co-workers and others--who simply cannot understand why we ride our bikes instead of driving (or taking a train or plane!) to some place or another.

They have probably called us worse than this:

We, however, know why we ride.  That's why, if they looked at us closely, they would find none of the signs of mental disorder.  Instead, they are more likely to see this:

The Future, For Now? Am I Responsible For It?

I'll take credit--but not blame.

No, I'm not channeling El Cheeto Grande.  Rather, I am here now to tell you that a line I tossed off in an earlier post has become a reality--better (or worse) yet, a business plan.

Last year I wrote about the then-new dockless bike share programs making their debut in China.  They have since appeared in European and North American locales:  In fact, there's talk of bringing such services to the Bronx and other parts of New York City not presently served by Citibike.

I called those dockless programs, which allow anyone with the company's app on his or her smart phone to pick up or leave a bicycle, "Uber for bicycles."

Now--you guessed it--Uber is getting into the bike share business.  I am not surprised, really:  If the future is in driverless cars (the Force forbid!) or fewer or no cars, it makes perfect sense for the company to look at other forms of transportation.

Uber is doing something to many other companies failed to do:  look at the industry, not the business, of which they are a part.  Some business writer, I forget whom, said the real reason why the New York Central and Pennsylvania Railroads--at their peak, the world's two largest corporations-- are in the dustbin of history (Funny, isn't it, to quote Marx when talking about business?) is that they didn't realize that they were not just in the railroad business--which was dying in the US--but in the transportation industry.  So, by the time they merged, it was too late to save either of them.

One of the better analogies I can think of in the bicycle world is Schwinn.  They failed to see their role in the bicycle industry, which changed dramatically.  That is why the company started by Ignaz Schwinn in the 1890s didn't start making (or even offering) BMX or mountain bikes until other bike makers, some of them newcomers, had already taken hold of those markets.  The company's management seemed to think that its industry consisted of making and selling people the bikes their parents and grandparents bought--the only difference being that it added derailleurs and skinnier tires to the two-wheeled tanks they'd been making.  

Which reminds me:  For all of the Varsities and Continentals they sold during the '70's Bike Boom, they really missed the boat when, a couple of years in, college students and other young adults started to demand lighter bikes, like the ones offered by European and Japanese makers.  

At that time, the only really lightweight bicycles Schwinn offered were the Paramount and, depending on how you define "lightweight", the Sports Tourer.  The  former was beyond the means of most young people, while the latter was indistinguishable, appearance-wise, from the company's flash-welded bikes.By the time Schwinn started to offer the Japanese-made LeTour and Voyageur, in 1974, the Bike Boom had already crested and people who wanted lighter bikes had already bought Nishikis, Fujis, Motobecanes and Raleighs.

Anyway, it seems like Uber is not falling into the same trap as Schwinn or the railroads.  They are debuting their new share program in Berlin, Germany and, I am sure, will expand into other places.  With the popularity of dockless share programs and the company's name recognition, it seems like Uber has an unbeatable combination--for now.

It'd be nice if they give me credit, though--although it would be nice to be compensated at least as well as someone who created one of the world's most recognized logos.

A Memorial To The Kalamazoo Tragedy

Two years ago this week, Charles Pickett Jr. mowed down five cyclists and severely injured four others in one of the most horrific car-on-bike crashes I've heard of.

Yesterday, a monument those cyclists--part of "The Chain Gang", a group that met every week for a ride--was unveiled in Cooper Township's Markin Glen Park, near the site of the Kalamazoo (Michigan) tragedy.  The four survivors--Paul Gobble, Sheila Jeske, Jennifer Johnson and Paul Runnels--attended along with others.  The five front seats were left empty to honor Debra Ann ("Debbie") Bradley, Melissa Ann Fevig-Hughes, Fred Anton ("Tony") Nelson, Lorenz John ("Larry") Paulik and Suzanne Joan Sippel.  

Local artist Joshua Diedrich designed the monument. The sculpture's sloped curve shape represents the hill on North Westnedge Avenue, where the cyclists were riding at that fateful moment, he explained.  That curve consists of four panels, two telling the story of the crash and the other two listing the names of the killed and injured cyclists.  The monument is topped by five bicycles, one for each cyclist whose lives ended on that evening ride two years ago.  

Survivors (l to r) Sheila Jeske, Paul Runnels, Jennifer Johnson and Paul Gobble in front of the monument.

 After the ceremony, Chain Gang members and other cyclists rode 25 miles to raise funds for maintenance of the memorial and bicycle advocacy in Michigan. A reception followed the ride.

Last month, Pickett was convicted of five counts of murder, five counts of driving while intoxicated and four counts causing serious injury by driving while intoxicated.  Sentencing is scheduled for Monday the 11th.

Out Of Season, All To Myself

Yesterday was unseasonably cool.  I didn't mind: it was good riding weather.  At times, though, it seemed as if the snow was covered with snow rather than clouds.

Under the blanket, but still cool all the way from the Rockaways to Coney Island.   Another way the day belied the season was the nearly complete absence of people on the boardwalks.

Even the bay, where I normally see at least a few boats, was abandoned.  Or, to look at it another way, I had everything else to myself.  I enjoyed it.

If You Get A Bike Named After You....

I suppose most of us want to be immortalized.  The problem is that, if we are, we probably don't have a say in why or how someone is perpetuating our memory.

So it is with the newest Trek model.  Now, I could understand why the company wouldn't name any of its products after Lance.  Yes, he's alive, but as we know, there are other reasons why a "Lance-strong" bike would be a public relations fiasco for the company.  I also see why they wouldn't want to name their bikes after any number of other cyclists--or celebrities-- living or dead.  

On the other hand, I can understand why Trek, or any other company, would name one of its wares after someone who never got anywhere near a bicycle.  I mean, there was even a whole bike brand--Hercules--named for a mythological hero.  The last person who actually believed in his existence died, probably, about two milennia before the first bicycle--however you define it--saw the light of day.  

Some Trek marketing genius probably figured that if bikes called Hercules could evoke images of that character's strength and fortitude, then a line of its bikes could surely trade on some other famous person's most notable physical trait--one that essentially became his metier.

And so we have Trek "Farley" bikes, named for the late comedian and actor Chris Farley.   His stock-in-trade was "fat guy" humor, which is not surprising given that he weighed about 400 pounds when he died in 1997.  Trek's new machines are--you guessed it--"fat" (i.e., fat-tire) bikes.  

Not surprisingly, his family is not happy about this.  They're not upset that he's still known as "the fat guy"--that will most likely remain his claim to fame--but that the company "misappropriated" his image.  According to a lawsuit the family filed, even though he turned his girth into his art, if you will, he "carefully guarded and policed his brand" and often rejected overtures from companies whom wanted to use it to sell their products.

Now, Trek might not be Apple or Microsoft, but I imagine they can hire some high-priced lawyers.  I am guessing they did:  Who else could challenge the lawsuit because it was filed in California, where Make Him Smile, the company his family formed to protect his rights and images is based.   That would subject the claim to California law.   Trek is trying to invalidate the family's claim by saying that it's invalid because Farley was a resident of Illinois, where he died of a drug overdose in Chicago.  

An irony of this case is that Trek could have named bikes after Farley for another, and possibly better (public-relations wise, anyway) reason:  He was born and raised in Madison, Wisconsin--about 30 miles from Trek's headquarters in The Badger State. 

Hmm...What if Trek decided to name its bikes for famous people from Wisconsin?  What would the Rod Blagojevich bike look like?