okay, this is not a direct reply to k’tesh; i’m sorry.
i have been “not reading” the comments that past few weeks, to save time and to divert my energies in other directions, so this may have been covered. again, i’m sorry.
this is in my role as grammar-man:
in the banner ad at the top [and i have no problem with the concept of banner ads] for velopaint, the text SHOULD read: “painting that celebrates the spirit of cycle sport and the portraits of those WHO ride.” the “that” in the text refers to objects that ride, while “who” refers to people who ride.
bad grammar poorly reflects upon the speaker, and in the case of a business, this is not necessarily good.
@ Kim West..Out of everything, you choose to point that out? Really? Try enjoying the comic for once, not everything has to be your personal campaign for your attempts at betterment of everything within your view. You take yourself too seriously lately.
i DO enjoy the hell out of the comics, but i have been a life-long upholder of the english language, too. i taught elementary school, was a daycare director, raised a child and am now working on two grandchildren, and i do my best to teach all of them the best or better way to speak.
Ditto..Mr. West, please just save your sermons for the family then b/c you’re wasting our time reading your drivel. You appear to feel you didn’t do the teaching job well enough in the first place, went onto something different, and are now trying to vicariously live it out on your terms here.
Maybe save that for your show, not this one, OK. Although your posts are somewhat entertaining, I ultimately find them lacking. Then, in the end, who cares, right?
Just know there are quite a number of us here who are just tired of your rants.
Bike Culture Quarterly didn’t have ads but it was very expensive. I appeared in an article in it which was up on Glasgow Transport Museum wall for a few years because it mentioned some local boys.
Wasting time on the internet has cured me of my previous television addiction, as did canceling my cable. I wanted to watch a game on television the other night and it took me a half hour to find the remote I hadn’t used in over a month.
Why would anybody want to stream live tv for anything other than a game? Justin.tv sucks, as does it’s offshore malware infected equivalents, and most of the rights owners have wised up and are stamping out the practice anyway.
I do still watch certain television programs, only I now watch them streaming via my computer on my television. When I said I didn’t watch television I should have specified that I no longer watch broadcasted television. When I said I couldn’t find the remote I should have specified that I couldn’t find the digital converter remote. With that said, my television program watching is far more purposeful than it ever was before. If I’m watching a program it is because I’ve sought it out. The television is never turned on for its own sake. The concept of turning the tv on to see what is on is now foreign.
I can’t stand the television. Its a plague. Though I can admit I have been known to watch the occasional history/discovery/nat geo special. ok ok, the tour de france to but i swear thats it.
Nice one R&B!
Ads are getting on my nerves too – on TV they can’t wait for the gap between progs to advertise what coming on! They spend the first 30s of many progs telling us about stuff we aren’t interested in etc, If we want to know what’s on we will scan the guide…
It’s not all bad. Off the top of my head, I know that Subaru does do quite a bit of sponsorship/advocacy for cycling and sponsored the USPS team. Of course, it probably didn’t hurt to have Lance Armstrong on hand to shill Impreza WRXs! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIdBQc6aT4
Unfortunately, this type of sponsorship seems to be limited to mountain bikes - the former Volvo-Cannondale, Honda (and their custom bike), etc.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t mind if Yehuda took a swipe at those horrible bikes named after cars. I’m looking at you, GMC Denali road bike. Why anyone would choose to name a drop-bar road bike after a fat pig of a SUV is beyond me.
I really like the fact that so many people put links in their comments to illistrate what they are talking about. I have not see broadcast TV for several years. (When I moved, friends hung my little flat screen but the cord did not reach to the outlet. I never did get around to finding an extension cord.) I have no idea what adds have been shown. But sadly I do spend time watching shows I have found on Hulu and reading cycling commics comments.
If you have the right attitude the world is seemingly ad free. Since I’m not in particularly in the market for any of the stuff in the magazine ads I don’t actually see them. TV shows are interspersed with convenient dish-washing, play-with-pets and pee breaks. When I’m riding past huge illuminated blank billboards at night they help illuminate the roadway. Granted, it is a bit tiresome flipping past 20 or 30 blank magazine pages to get to an article, but I’m really not a huge magazine reader anyway. I actually love how ads keep costs down to the consumer. Satan could advertise sin for all I care. Ads beat the hell out of donation drives, that’s for damn sure.
Actually, come to think of it, the only kind of ad that pisses me off is when I’m seeking out a movie trailer on the internet and they force me to watch an ad prior to watching the trailer. The trailer is an ad! To tell the truth, since they’ve been doing that with increasing frequency lately I’ve been avoiding movie trailers; and come to think of it I haven’t been to the movies in months. Their loss.
What is this DVD that you speak of? Is that like the 8-track?
As for unskippable ads on streaming content, I’m generally fine with it… depending on the web architecture, for tv shows that is. I recognize that skippable ads bring in less revenue, understandably. I don’t skip ads, I ignore them. The architecture for Hulu, for instance, is fine. CBS ads are a nightmare (I’m speaking of the American market specifically) and bounce you out of full screen. Since I watch streaming shows on my TV through my computer I have to wrestle with my computer controls to get full screen back on after every ad. Consequently, I don’t watch CBS programs very often anymore.
Totally agree wee, I spend a couple bucks at redbox once every six months and have to listen about piracy equals stealing and the poor movie stars will have to drive a lexus instead of the rolls… I mean come on! It’s not like this is the first video I’ve watched with it on there.
I disagree SDMSS what about the devious tactic of product placement and bias reviews. Advertisers have figured out that the general public is jaded and desensitized to traditional adds so they instead pay to have there products shown off in our favorite shows and movies. TV/movies theses days are nothing more than one long commercial, the movie Transformer comes to mind where GMC paid to have the Autobots robots be GMC vehicles.
And then there are the bias reviews by sold out magazines where you think your getting good advice but in fact there just trying to promote there advertisers products. If that magazine yehuda is reading is the one i think it is, they do engage in this behavior.
Yes yes yes, it is all a vast conspiracy. I know the difference between reviews in magazines that do and do not advertise. I respect the integrity of those magazines like Consumer Reports, but it is the responsibility or the consumer to seek out content with integrity and filter out the nonsense. If you take offense to product placements in movies and television shows, refuse to watch those programs. That way everybody wins.
You mean like if I pay for a web comic I don’t have to worry about product placement like Walz Caps or Velopaint? Or arrows within the comic pointing at particular branded products with their names printed?
Yes, advertising for paid content typically does piss me off. Advertising for free content, on the other hand, is the definition of awesome. Donation drives are more annoying than both, and donation drives coupled with advertising (*cough cough* *hint hint*) should be an executable offense.
I drove to the LBS on the way home from work yesterday. After a 300k with 12,000′ of climbing on Saturday, I needed an extra day off the saddle to recover. Plus I had totally worn through a set of brake pads on that ride.
Your only bike is broken? The shop with what you want is too far? Buying a bike in a box to assemble at home? If you ride there you’ll be riding home with two bikes? I’ve driven to bike shops for all those reasons.
Same reason they’d drive a car to any other shop. So they can get there and get their shit back home. What, you gonna strap that new bike you just bought to the rack on your old bike? And anyway, ain’t you the dude that runs a motor?
But why would any cyclist even own a car (mountain bikers apart of course-they need to get to thier trails)? I don’t.
Advertising companies get paid huge sums of money to sell stuff to the likes of me, and in thier turn go to great lengths to target ads to specific markets or demographs. Yehuda has a point in that advertising a car in a magazine devoted to something specifically not about cars means that they are in fact crap at this targeting business. Further evidence is that many of the tv programs I watch have ads for feminine beauty products (because I’m worth it) and stuff in general that I am not remotely interested in. Or perhaps I’m just wierd…
I think Bicycling Magazine and Velonews would be a perfect places to advertise motor vehicles, as 90% of the readership owns cars and need them to haul their competitive bicycles where they want to ride. The Hippy-Dippy Transportation Quarterly probably not so much.
@Johnboy: Are you the center of the universe? Or the only person watching that show or reading that magazine? [Answers: no, no, and no.] “Demographic Groups” are not monolithic. (Except for the Cylons on Battlestar Galactica.)
If the ad keeps showing up, it’s working. Maybe not on you, but somebody. Just like spam e-mail, only a tiny percentage of folks need to respond for an ad to be worth the cost.
P.S. For TV commercials, I keep the remote handy and hit the mute button frequently. This was necessary to prevent brain rot after a few days of watching The Tour on Versus.
What Johnboy is failing to understand about advertising towards women is that women are able to consume and memorize all media within their periphery. If there is an advertisement for feminine hygiene products on during a football or hockey game it’s because the 10 or 20% of the audience that are women actually process the ad, as well as the women who are in the room but not even paying attention to the game. Their perception is geared that way. Men on the other hand, can watch the same ad 100 times and never even notice it if there aren’t any bouncing boobs or donuts in it.
I think that car ads in bike magazines are typical in the US where the concept of bicycle as exercise toy rather then vehicle is still quite strong.
As for the comment about GM, there is a logical reason for naming it after an SUV, see when the price of oil goes up again and gas gets expensive again, you can still use your Denalli, the bike version, because there is no way you could afford to put $1.75 a litre gas in it, at the rate those things can empty a 100L tank….
@wogster: I agree with your comment about the “exercise toy” mentality, but don’t forget that most cyclists here own both cars and bikes. I have noticed a trend in Bicycling Magazine, for example, that emphasizes higher-end racing bikes instead of the type that one would use on a daily, utilitarian purpose. People that can afford those more expensive machines (and upgrade/replace them frequently) have the type of disposable income that makes advertisers target them for a multitude of products, not just cycling-related ones. As a member of LAB, I receive a free subscription to Bicycling, but skip most of the magazine since I, too, am not particularly in the market for the things they advertise; am not in the market for a “faster ride for under $5000!;” or am training for my first century, triathlon, etc. I think Yehuda is just on one his rants (like we all go into once in a while) even though deep down inside, as a business owner, he knows why the ads are there.
@Johnboy: So why do I own both a car and a bike (well, several bikes)? Because each has its purpose. The charity ride I was at last week was almost an hour drive. It seems as though all the events I attend each year are at least as far, and it’s fun to get together with like-minded people and raise money for good causes at the same time. I am striving to use the car less when a bike would do just as well, but I’m not there yet, and for some things I might never be. Astronomy is another hobby of mine, and I need the space my vehicle provides to transport the equipment. Sometimes people ride with me for a variety of reasons and purposes which make bicycle transportation in those instances impractical. My quarterly VA visits are almost 2 hours away by car. My back and knee problems flare up occasionally, but I can still get where I need to go (work, for example) and be functional when I get there. I wish I were young again and in perfect health, but I’m not. Don’t be hatin’…
The “toy” mentality does exist for some, but it’s also that since WWII, North American transportation infrastructure has been built almost exclusively around the car, and it’ll cost billions to change that. So like it or not, they’re necessary for many people.
I don’t own one – I use Autoshare and the bike racks on GO Transit buses – but I’m lucky to have those options, it’s nothing to be smug about.
If your job or other committment requires that you travel too far from your home to bike. If you have to haul large loads that are not practicable on a bike. If you have a semi-invalid parent to take to the doctor and other places. If you want to/need to go places that you don’t want to arrive at all sweaty or soaked to the skin from the rain.
I have a friend who is one of the ‘visually impaired resource teachers’ for the county schools; what, when we were in school was called the ‘sight-saving teacher’. She has to travel to schools all over the county to work with the blind and visually impaired students and their subject-area teachers. There is no way she could visit all the schools she has to, much less transport her special equipment, on a bicycle. (The latter would be possible given a trailer or a cargo bike, but not the former given time and distance [it is a big county, and she's one of two VIRTs.])
“But why would any cyclist even own a car (mountain bikers apart of course-they need to get to thier trails)? I don’t.”
I guess I’m not a *real* cyclist because I didn’t ride the 150 miles including a 4300′ mountain pass to get to the 300km, 3 mountain pass brevet I rode this weekend…
I won’t feel bad about driving to/from my 400km (80mi drive each way) or 600km (40mi drive each way, but it’s a 380mi ride in 40hrs) brevets in the next month, either.
Being a “real cyclist” is not a matter of mileage, it is more a matter of attitude. I’m car-free, and I ride my bike to get places and carry stuff. Does that make me a “real cyclist”? Well I think so, but those are not the only things that meke me “real”. The fact that I have no personal experience with the square root of -1 makes me “real” as well. (math joke)
Most people (not only cyclists) in my city actually don’t have or use a car. Most of those use public transportation (mainly metro). Unlike the many cyclist tribes, all of them are “utility-metro-users” and very few wonder whether they are real metro-users or not.
More than car-bashing, cycling facilities (tracks, etc) may convince them to ride. Oh, and frequent strikes in public transportation helped a lot to the popularity of utility-riding too.
My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that a ‘real’ cyclist is someone actually cycles. Talking/Bragging about what you do or have or aspire to own only makes you ‘real’ to yourself – still a valid opinion though.
Lance probably does more miles in motorised transport, does that not make HIM real?
Oh to be car free…, a cherished dream, and I am working diligently to achieve that goal. In my opinion being car free in our society is a great and noble accomplishment. All you car free cyclists are my heroes. I hate what the American obsession with cars and trucks and motorcycles and ATVs and all other motorized vehicles has done to this country—environmentally, psychologically, spiritually, and the way we are forced to live and walk and cycle in a hostile, polluted, twisted ego-centered environment. To become car free is a huge step towards becoming FREE, period. Also, becoming tv, commercialized internet, and mind controlling advertisement free is also desirable.
As a commited bicycle commuter I have a tendency to proselytism, and I think the worst way to convert the unbelievers is to engage into some kind of car-bashing or driver-bashing.
We, cyclists, have thousands of positive experiences to share that may convince people we know to leave their car at home.
My committments keep me off the bike way more than I like. But when I do have a chance to ride, I am once again ten years old and the world is new. If that ain’t a real cyclist, I’m damned if I know what is.
The issue of car vs car-less – I have a car, and I like my car, and I’m not getting rid of it. I usually drive it once or twice a week at the most. Usually, it’s because I have to go someplace for work, or traveling great distances to destinations you can’t train or bus to. Rather than get rid of cars altogether, I think the goal should be for all trips under a 2 mile radius of your home be done via walk/bike. Supposedly that’s 40 percent of trips.
We need two things to make this happen
1) places to park our bikes when we get to the grocery/nail salon/school/restaurant
2) knowledge of how to use baskets, panniers, etc, and access to affordable versions.
On my new bike, I’m using 40 # capacity kitty litter buckets. I’m still debugging the mounting brackets, but I have already made a grocery run and brough home a gallon of milk and another gallon of purified water for making coffee with tons of room for fresh produce, beans, and rice. And once I get the labels removed they won’t look too bad either.
If it’s 100 degrees F out I just ride and enjoy the cool. I start slowing down when the temp hits 105, but I have ridden when the air temperature on the road hit 145 F on a metric century. Ten feet off the road it was only 101, but the blacktop soaked up the sun and radiated the heat. I thought I was going to die on that trip.
Jon4t2, lighten up guy, my first sentence is just a touch tongue in cheek; although I do not own or want to own a car I do not wish to inflict my choice of lifestyle on anyone else, unlike Yehuda! Perhaps we need a convention, say writing in a different colour or something, to indicate when content is not intended to be taken 100% seriuosly.
Many people live in such a way that a car is absolutely essential to them, especially those outside of cities where public transport may not be an option. CliftonGK1 seems to have totally got the wrong end of the stick-my tongue in cheek comment admits that car driving mountain bikers are cyclists
The point I did want to make is that much advertising seems to me to be badly targeted and therefore a waste of money on the part of the companies trying to place products and paying advertising agencies for their services. SMDSS has valid reasons for why I may be wrong, although I am capable of awareness of stuff without bouncing boobs!
I am of course the centre of the universe, but only of my universe.
Cute Joe!
okay, this is not a direct reply to k’tesh; i’m sorry.
i have been “not reading” the comments that past few weeks, to save time and to divert my energies in other directions, so this may have been covered. again, i’m sorry.
this is in my role as grammar-man:
in the banner ad at the top [and i have no problem with the concept of banner ads] for velopaint, the text SHOULD read: “painting that celebrates the spirit of cycle sport and the portraits of those WHO ride.” the “that” in the text refers to objects that ride, while “who” refers to people who ride.
bad grammar poorly reflects upon the speaker, and in the case of a business, this is not necessarily good.
Just don’t read the banner ads like me. That will save you time as well:)
Who v. That
Using ‘who’ for people and ‘that’ for things is not a grammatical rule. It is just conventional wisdom.
““That” can, in fact, be used to refer to people, especially if the relative clause is restrictive.
Read more at Suite101: That or Who?: Knowing When Who Is More Appropriate than That http://copyediting-grammar-style.suite101.com/article.cfm/that_or_who#ixzz0wDnbsD97”
American Heritage Dictionary says, It is entirely acceptable to write either the man that wanted to talk to you, or the man who wanted to talk to you
Wait, there are banner ads on this site?
Yeah, I’m always amazed that there are people who aren’t all using Adblock Plus with Firefox.
Kim West = http://www.sangrea.net/free-cartoons/saying_anal.jpg
ROFL!! http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4077/4881019848_fabe497fdd.jpg
lame
@kim
The screaming guy in the ad picture was so disturbing that I didn’t even read the text.
@ Kim West..Out of everything, you choose to point that out? Really? Try enjoying the comic for once, not everything has to be your personal campaign for your attempts at betterment of everything within your view. You take yourself too seriously lately.
i DO enjoy the hell out of the comics, but i have been a life-long upholder of the english language, too. i taught elementary school, was a daycare director, raised a child and am now working on two grandchildren, and i do my best to teach all of them the best or better way to speak.
try it, you’ll like it.
We’re not your kids or your grandkids. Save it for them.
Ditto..Mr. West, please just save your sermons for the family then b/c you’re wasting our time reading your drivel. You appear to feel you didn’t do the teaching job well enough in the first place, went onto something different, and are now trying to vicariously live it out on your terms here.
Maybe save that for your show, not this one, OK. Although your posts are somewhat entertaining, I ultimately find them lacking. Then, in the end, who cares, right?
Just know there are quite a number of us here who are just tired of your rants.
reminds me of tv… I can’t seem to escape its grasp. just sayin’
cars/suv’s as well of course. darn ads are worse then nats at a theme park
Bike Culture Quarterly didn’t have ads but it was very expensive. I appeared in an article in it which was up on Glasgow Transport Museum wall for a few years because it mentioned some local boys.
Wasting time on the internet has cured me of my previous television addiction, as did canceling my cable. I wanted to watch a game on television the other night and it took me a half hour to find the remote I hadn’t used in over a month.
Not that the internet is any better, mind you.
SDMSS – you can stream ‘live’ TV through the internet now anyway… it too may yet become your nemesis.
Why would anybody want to stream live tv for anything other than a game? Justin.tv sucks, as does it’s offshore malware infected equivalents, and most of the rights owners have wised up and are stamping out the practice anyway.
I do still watch certain television programs, only I now watch them streaming via my computer on my television. When I said I didn’t watch television I should have specified that I no longer watch broadcasted television. When I said I couldn’t find the remote I should have specified that I couldn’t find the digital converter remote. With that said, my television program watching is far more purposeful than it ever was before. If I’m watching a program it is because I’ve sought it out. The television is never turned on for its own sake. The concept of turning the tv on to see what is on is now foreign.
Maybe you need a remote for your computer.
I can’t stand the television. Its a plague. Though I can admit I have been known to watch the occasional history/discovery/nat geo special. ok ok, the tour de france to but i swear thats it.
kill ur t.v.
Nice one R&B!
Ads are getting on my nerves too – on TV they can’t wait for the gap between progs to advertise what coming on! They spend the first 30s of many progs telling us about stuff we aren’t interested in etc, If we want to know what’s on we will scan the guide…
If you have had enough of ads and all the other lowest common denominator rubbish on TV, do what I did: get rid of your TV. Best thing I ever did.
I got rid of mine a couple years ago. Really haven’t missed it much. (But I do spend an awful lot of time on the internet.)
If Yehuda spent half the energy working in his shop that he does pissing people off and bitching, he’d be a freakin’ millionaire.
But, if he had any interest into becoming a rich man, he wouldn’t be Yehuda Moon and you wouldn’t have been reading all his strips for years.
It’s not all bad. Off the top of my head, I know that Subaru does do quite a bit of sponsorship/advocacy for cycling and sponsored the USPS team. Of course, it probably didn’t hurt to have Lance Armstrong on hand to shill Impreza WRXs!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIdBQc6aT4
Unfortunately, this type of sponsorship seems to be limited to mountain bikes - the former Volvo-Cannondale, Honda (and their custom bike), etc.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t mind if Yehuda took a swipe at those horrible bikes named after cars. I’m looking at you, GMC Denali road bike. Why anyone would choose to name a drop-bar road bike after a fat pig of a SUV is beyond me.
Did Subaru also sponsor all the USPS doping?
Or the Alaskan mountain/ state park/ nature preserve?
Saturn sponsored a pro mens and women’s road team in the mid-90′s.
I really like the fact that so many people put links in their comments to illistrate what they are talking about. I have not see broadcast TV for several years. (When I moved, friends hung my little flat screen but the cord did not reach to the outlet. I never did get around to finding an extension cord.) I have no idea what adds have been shown. But sadly I do spend time watching shows I have found on Hulu and reading cycling commics comments.
Lance now schleps the Nissan Leaf. It’s 100% electric which makes it OK. </sarcasm>
What, no EPO turbo charger?
That sounds like the kind of car Fabian Cancellara would be interested in… ZING!
Pffft to commuter points, I’m counting smart arse comments points. Yehuda nil – Joe 2.
If you have the right attitude the world is seemingly ad free. Since I’m not in particularly in the market for any of the stuff in the magazine ads I don’t actually see them. TV shows are interspersed with convenient dish-washing, play-with-pets and pee breaks. When I’m riding past huge illuminated blank billboards at night they help illuminate the roadway. Granted, it is a bit tiresome flipping past 20 or 30 blank magazine pages to get to an article, but I’m really not a huge magazine reader anyway. I actually love how ads keep costs down to the consumer. Satan could advertise sin for all I care. Ads beat the hell out of donation drives, that’s for damn sure.
Actually, come to think of it, the only kind of ad that pisses me off is when I’m seeking out a movie trailer on the internet and they force me to watch an ad prior to watching the trailer. The trailer is an ad! To tell the truth, since they’ve been doing that with increasing frequency lately I’ve been avoiding movie trailers; and come to think of it I haven’t been to the movies in months. Their loss.
How about un-skipable ads on DVDs?
Makes me want to make an illegal copy… or just use VLC.
What is this DVD that you speak of? Is that like the 8-track?
As for unskippable ads on streaming content, I’m generally fine with it… depending on the web architecture, for tv shows that is. I recognize that skippable ads bring in less revenue, understandably. I don’t skip ads, I ignore them. The architecture for Hulu, for instance, is fine. CBS ads are a nightmare (I’m speaking of the American market specifically) and bounce you out of full screen. Since I watch streaming shows on my TV through my computer I have to wrestle with my computer controls to get full screen back on after every ad. Consequently, I don’t watch CBS programs very often anymore.
Totally agree wee, I spend a couple bucks at redbox once every six months and have to listen about piracy equals stealing and the poor movie stars will have to drive a lexus instead of the rolls… I mean come on! It’s not like this is the first video I’ve watched with it on there.
I disagree SDMSS what about the devious tactic of product placement and bias reviews. Advertisers have figured out that the general public is jaded and desensitized to traditional adds so they instead pay to have there products shown off in our favorite shows and movies. TV/movies theses days are nothing more than one long commercial, the movie Transformer comes to mind where GMC paid to have the Autobots robots be GMC vehicles.
And then there are the bias reviews by sold out magazines where you think your getting good advice but in fact there just trying to promote there advertisers products. If that magazine yehuda is reading is the one i think it is, they do engage in this behavior.
Yes yes yes, it is all a vast conspiracy. I know the difference between reviews in magazines that do and do not advertise. I respect the integrity of those magazines like Consumer Reports, but it is the responsibility or the consumer to seek out content with integrity and filter out the nonsense. If you take offense to product placements in movies and television shows, refuse to watch those programs. That way everybody wins.
You mean like if I pay for a web comic I don’t have to worry about product placement like Walz Caps or Velopaint? Or arrows within the comic pointing at particular branded products with their names printed?
Probably closer to a wax cylinder version of the kinematoscope.
DVDs are different from streaming content in that you have paid for the DVD but the blighters still try to force their ads and trailers on you.
Yes, advertising for paid content typically does piss me off. Advertising for free content, on the other hand, is the definition of awesome. Donation drives are more annoying than both, and donation drives coupled with advertising (*cough cough* *hint hint*) should be an executable offense.
Why would anyone drive a car to a bicycle shop? Strange…
Bike unrideable?
All 4 bikes unrideable? Seems unlikely.
They may not own a bike as of yet, Hence the trip to the “bicycle” shop where they sell bicycles…
I drove to the LBS on the way home from work yesterday. After a 300k with 12,000′ of climbing on Saturday, I needed an extra day off the saddle to recover. Plus I had totally worn through a set of brake pads on that ride.
Your only bike is broken? The shop with what you want is too far? Buying a bike in a box to assemble at home? If you ride there you’ll be riding home with two bikes? I’ve driven to bike shops for all those reasons.
Most of the bike shops I know actually have nothing for people to park their bike outside… You should tekll them
The xtracycle / bikefiests (sp) is not rideable.
Riding a bicycle to the bicycle shop you bring the bicycle in to be worked on, or test the parts, or read the existing size.
Same reason they’d drive a car to any other shop. So they can get there and get their shit back home. What, you gonna strap that new bike you just bought to the rack on your old bike? And anyway, ain’t you the dude that runs a motor?
I see people ferrying second bikes all the time here in Cascadia. On an Extracycle, in a cargo bike, etc. No big deal.
Like so, in the snow:
http://gallery.mac.com/dr2chase/100060/IMG_3055/web.jpg?ver=12426591090004
Hauled an ALL STEEL Raleigh 3-speed 10 miles that way.
But why would any cyclist even own a car (mountain bikers apart of course-they need to get to thier trails)? I don’t.
Advertising companies get paid huge sums of money to sell stuff to the likes of me, and in thier turn go to great lengths to target ads to specific markets or demographs. Yehuda has a point in that advertising a car in a magazine devoted to something specifically not about cars means that they are in fact crap at this targeting business. Further evidence is that many of the tv programs I watch have ads for feminine beauty products (because I’m worth it) and stuff in general that I am not remotely interested in. Or perhaps I’m just wierd…
I think Bicycling Magazine and Velonews would be a perfect places to advertise motor vehicles, as 90% of the readership owns cars and need them to haul their competitive bicycles where they want to ride. The Hippy-Dippy Transportation Quarterly probably not so much.
@Johnboy: Are you the center of the universe? Or the only person watching that show or reading that magazine? [Answers: no, no, and no.] “Demographic Groups” are not monolithic. (Except for the Cylons on Battlestar Galactica.)
If the ad keeps showing up, it’s working. Maybe not on you, but somebody. Just like spam e-mail, only a tiny percentage of folks need to respond for an ad to be worth the cost.
P.S. For TV commercials, I keep the remote handy and hit the mute button frequently. This was necessary to prevent brain rot after a few days of watching The Tour on Versus.
What Johnboy is failing to understand about advertising towards women is that women are able to consume and memorize all media within their periphery. If there is an advertisement for feminine hygiene products on during a football or hockey game it’s because the 10 or 20% of the audience that are women actually process the ad, as well as the women who are in the room but not even paying attention to the game. Their perception is geared that way. Men on the other hand, can watch the same ad 100 times and never even notice it if there aren’t any bouncing boobs or donuts in it.
i need a car to visit my daughters grandmas. hard to think of that reason, isnt it ?
What is this ‘empathy’ you speak of? If it isn’t germane to my current life it is foreign, and therefore evil.
Homo solus, homo nullus.
Homo sum; nil humani alienus mihi est.
http://isu.indstate.edu/ilnprof/ENG451/ISLAND/text.html
I think that car ads in bike magazines are typical in the US where the concept of bicycle as exercise toy rather then vehicle is still quite strong.
As for the comment about GM, there is a logical reason for naming it after an SUV, see when the price of oil goes up again and gas gets expensive again, you can still use your Denalli, the bike version, because there is no way you could afford to put $1.75 a litre gas in it, at the rate those things can empty a 100L tank….
@wogster: I agree with your comment about the “exercise toy” mentality, but don’t forget that most cyclists here own both cars and bikes. I have noticed a trend in Bicycling Magazine, for example, that emphasizes higher-end racing bikes instead of the type that one would use on a daily, utilitarian purpose. People that can afford those more expensive machines (and upgrade/replace them frequently) have the type of disposable income that makes advertisers target them for a multitude of products, not just cycling-related ones. As a member of LAB, I receive a free subscription to Bicycling, but skip most of the magazine since I, too, am not particularly in the market for the things they advertise; am not in the market for a “faster ride for under $5000!;” or am training for my first century, triathlon, etc. I think Yehuda is just on one his rants (like we all go into once in a while) even though deep down inside, as a business owner, he knows why the ads are there.
@Johnboy: So why do I own both a car and a bike (well, several bikes)? Because each has its purpose. The charity ride I was at last week was almost an hour drive. It seems as though all the events I attend each year are at least as far, and it’s fun to get together with like-minded people and raise money for good causes at the same time. I am striving to use the car less when a bike would do just as well, but I’m not there yet, and for some things I might never be. Astronomy is another hobby of mine, and I need the space my vehicle provides to transport the equipment. Sometimes people ride with me for a variety of reasons and purposes which make bicycle transportation in those instances impractical. My quarterly VA visits are almost 2 hours away by car. My back and knee problems flare up occasionally, but I can still get where I need to go (work, for example) and be functional when I get there. I wish I were young again and in perfect health, but I’m not. Don’t be hatin’…
The “toy” mentality does exist for some, but it’s also that since WWII, North American transportation infrastructure has been built almost exclusively around the car, and it’ll cost billions to change that. So like it or not, they’re necessary for many people.
I don’t own one – I use Autoshare and the bike racks on GO Transit buses – but I’m lucky to have those options, it’s nothing to be smug about.
If your job or other committment requires that you travel too far from your home to bike. If you have to haul large loads that are not practicable on a bike. If you have a semi-invalid parent to take to the doctor and other places. If you want to/need to go places that you don’t want to arrive at all sweaty or soaked to the skin from the rain.
I have a friend who is one of the ‘visually impaired resource teachers’ for the county schools; what, when we were in school was called the ‘sight-saving teacher’. She has to travel to schools all over the county to work with the blind and visually impaired students and their subject-area teachers. There is no way she could visit all the schools she has to, much less transport her special equipment, on a bicycle. (The latter would be possible given a trailer or a cargo bike, but not the former given time and distance [it is a big county, and she's one of two VIRTs.])
“But why would any cyclist even own a car (mountain bikers apart of course-they need to get to thier trails)? I don’t.”
I guess I’m not a *real* cyclist because I didn’t ride the 150 miles including a 4300′ mountain pass to get to the 300km, 3 mountain pass brevet I rode this weekend…
I won’t feel bad about driving to/from my 400km (80mi drive each way) or 600km (40mi drive each way, but it’s a 380mi ride in 40hrs) brevets in the next month, either.
By the way, I am definitely worth it….
Like most cyclists I also own and use motorvehicles.
There are those–and I am not one of them–who would say you aren’t a real cyclist, then.
Ha! I bet George still rides more than many of those who would say that.
Being a “real cyclist” is not a matter of mileage, it is more a matter of attitude. I’m car-free, and I ride my bike to get places and carry stuff. Does that make me a “real cyclist”? Well I think so, but those are not the only things that meke me “real”. The fact that I have no personal experience with the square root of -1 makes me “real” as well. (math joke)
Most people (not only cyclists) in my city actually don’t have or use a car. Most of those use public transportation (mainly metro). Unlike the many cyclist tribes, all of them are “utility-metro-users” and very few wonder whether they are real metro-users or not.
More than car-bashing, cycling facilities (tracks, etc) may convince them to ride. Oh, and frequent strikes in public transportation helped a lot to the popularity of utility-riding too.
please say what city you are from when talking about your city —
helps us bikey people.
Paris, France. I thought it was obvious from what I told about strikes
My opinion, for what it’s worth, is that a ‘real’ cyclist is someone actually cycles. Talking/Bragging about what you do or have or aspire to own only makes you ‘real’ to yourself – still a valid opinion though.
Lance probably does more miles in motorised transport, does that not make HIM real?
Lance who?
lance and most of the others on top dont seem to be real. daily newspaper articles say those guys are big cheaters
re: ‘Cheaters’ – Jealousy?
)
i doubt a doping test could be jealous.
Oh to be car free…, a cherished dream, and I am working diligently to achieve that goal. In my opinion being car free in our society is a great and noble accomplishment. All you car free cyclists are my heroes. I hate what the American obsession with cars and trucks and motorcycles and ATVs and all other motorized vehicles has done to this country—environmentally, psychologically, spiritually, and the way we are forced to live and walk and cycle in a hostile, polluted, twisted ego-centered environment. To become car free is a huge step towards becoming FREE, period. Also, becoming tv, commercialized internet, and mind controlling advertisement free is also desirable.
As a commited bicycle commuter I have a tendency to proselytism, and I think the worst way to convert the unbelievers is to engage into some kind of car-bashing or driver-bashing.
We, cyclists, have thousands of positive experiences to share that may convince people we know to leave their car at home.
My committments keep me off the bike way more than I like. But when I do have a chance to ride, I am once again ten years old and the world is new. If that ain’t a real cyclist, I’m damned if I know what is.
The issue of car vs car-less – I have a car, and I like my car, and I’m not getting rid of it. I usually drive it once or twice a week at the most. Usually, it’s because I have to go someplace for work, or traveling great distances to destinations you can’t train or bus to. Rather than get rid of cars altogether, I think the goal should be for all trips under a 2 mile radius of your home be done via walk/bike. Supposedly that’s 40 percent of trips.
We need two things to make this happen
1) places to park our bikes when we get to the grocery/nail salon/school/restaurant
2) knowledge of how to use baskets, panniers, etc, and access to affordable versions.
Ye want cheap panniers? Check this out
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?a=250784&c=34812
On my new bike, I’m using 40 # capacity kitty litter buckets. I’m still debugging the mounting brackets, but I have already made a grocery run and brough home a gallon of milk and another gallon of purified water for making coffee with tons of room for fresh produce, beans, and rice. And once I get the labels removed they won’t look too bad either.
Screw that. I’m old. If it’s 100 degrees out or pouring down rain, I’m driving.
If I is raining, I just toss on a raincape. If it is hot, I just take more water. If it is cold, I just put on more wool.
If it’s 100 degrees F out I just ride and enjoy the cool. I start slowing down when the temp hits 105, but I have ridden when the air temperature on the road hit 145 F on a metric century. Ten feet off the road it was only 101, but the blacktop soaked up the sun and radiated the heat. I thought I was going to die on that trip.
The only car free space that matters is . . . my garage.
I would like to be able to find my garage someday…
I really loved a detail that I just noticed. The magazine subscription cards falling off the pages. Good one.
The thing about the roads in TX, they are great for cars, and they are fantastic for bikes. They suck when you try to mix the two.
Jon4t2, lighten up guy, my first sentence is just a touch tongue in cheek; although I do not own or want to own a car I do not wish to inflict my choice of lifestyle on anyone else, unlike Yehuda! Perhaps we need a convention, say writing in a different colour or something, to indicate when content is not intended to be taken 100% seriuosly.
Many people live in such a way that a car is absolutely essential to them, especially those outside of cities where public transport may not be an option. CliftonGK1 seems to have totally got the wrong end of the stick-my tongue in cheek comment admits that car driving mountain bikers are cyclists
The point I did want to make is that much advertising seems to me to be badly targeted and therefore a waste of money on the part of the companies trying to place products and paying advertising agencies for their services. SMDSS has valid reasons for why I may be wrong, although I am capable of awareness of stuff without bouncing boobs!
I am of course the centre of the universe, but only of my universe.