Hoshie
Posts:134
 |
| 12/08/2013 02:47 PM |
|
LSD - sarcasm on the ivy league. Got lost on the forum. Of course those schools pride themselves on the case method, and inquiry based learning not wrote memorization which is why reasonable accommodation seems to be an easy outcome for thinking men and women.
But frikken no!!! Not for the big s. |
|
|
|
|
Entheo
Posts:317
|
| 12/08/2013 04:33 PM |
|
here's a new slogan for them, royalty-free with my condolences:
"We're Specialized... the New Trek" |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 12/08/2013 06:03 PM |
|
Our old friend, Charles Pelkey, has something to say.....
http://redkiteprayer.com/2013/12/the-explainer-because-i-ing-hate-bullies/
I just ordered a few things from specialized.....WB's and helmet replacement pads. Unfortunately, I need the helmet pads, but unless Specialized drops this case, after XMas, everything else goes is going back. |
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
Hoshie
Posts:134
|
| 12/08/2013 07:46 PM |
|
Ck, ironically, They sued the person who was the product mgr of their water bottles. He's one of the volagi guys.
J |
|
|
|
|
longslowdistance
Posts:2886
|
| 12/08/2013 09:10 PM |
|
CK, thanks very much for the link, in which Mr. Pelkey makes a brilliant suggestion:
Don't just rant at the tone-deaf Specialized bullies,
**help the little guy with some business**.
I ordered a shop logo T shirt. If they sold replica bike shop signs, I'd buy one in an instant. It would look super cool in a bike space/man cave/mountain cabin or the like. |
|
|
|
|
Dale
Posts:1767
|
| 12/09/2013 01:58 AM |
|
| The whole trademarking of names is funny and while Spez uses the name Roubaix and it does have a cycling connection (the model, the city, and this Canadian bike shop), Bill France aka NASCAR got Campagnolo and Bianchi to drop the model Daytona. WTH? No correlation between a city in Florida where car racing takes place and a bike model or a component grouppo model designation. |
|
|
|
|
Spud
Posts:525
|
| 12/09/2013 08:12 AM |
|
| Liked them on Facebook and going to order one of thier shirts, in support of the shop. |
|
|
|
|
Yo Mike
Posts:338
|
| 12/09/2013 09:46 AM |
|
A little 'internet hyperbole' here, but hey; I'm a visual person, and made the connection between the logos:
and
|
|
|
|
|
huckleberry
Posts:824
|
| 12/09/2013 09:52 AM |
|
Damn!
Good thing the t-shirt was fairly good looking.
Nothing like supporting someone with a purchase you don't want ; )
Will wear with pride. Or with a sneer of "F@ck You" Specialized... |
|
|
|
|
winterale
Posts:48
|
| 12/09/2013 10:09 AM |
|
| https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=672589656119751&set=p.672589656119751&type=1&theater |
|
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 12/09/2013 10:33 AM |
|
This isn't too uncommon behavior in the bike biz.
If I remember correctly, Cannondale once sued rock shox/manitou because they had the audacity to use a hydraulic dampening unit in their forks and cannondale felt it was covered in their patent for the cruddy headshock. even though dampening units have been used for eons by pretty much anybody that has developed suspension components
Another stake in the specialized heart; they were highly litigious with the horst link which they defined as pretty much any rear suspension design that used 4 pivots - or one by the rear dropouts. kinda clogged development of active rear suspension with their crappy FSR design. patent finally ran out.
If you think think is bad, you should research the way that they have treated their dealers over the years with attempts to floorplan their stores. Sinyard is a real piece of work |
|
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 12/09/2013 11:25 AM |
|
I saw this and chuckled
 |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 12/09/2013 11:54 AM |
|
Another stake in the specialized heart; they were highly litigious with the horst link which they defined as pretty much any rear suspension design that used 4 pivots - or one by the rear dropouts. kinda clogged development of active rear suspension with their crappy FSR design. patent finally ran out.
I've mentioned this before.....the Horst Link patent has 2 parts; a pivot on the chainstay near the rear dropout and a pivot above and behind the BB shell. IOW, you need to have both aspects to violate the patent, but Specialized only focused on bikes with chainstay pivots.
If you had a chainstay pivot, they came after you, no matter where the BB pivot was located. If your BB pivot was not "above and behind" the BB shell, you didn't violate the patent, but that didn't matter to them. You got served either way. Remember how they shut down both Giant and Scott? I also ahd run-ins with them along this same line (albeit with much smaller volume).
Problem was that it was just cheaper to agree to a license than it was to litigate. I knew we could prevail in a lawsuit, but the cost would have been 10x (or more) what we would have paid in licensing. So it was 'easier" to just play along.
|
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 12/09/2013 12:57 PM |
|
Thanks for cranking up the way back machine, I remember that about companies moving the pivots from the different stays and still getting nailed. Scott had a world beater design that never made it to the US as a result of the crack legal team of Specialized.
My understanding was that this situation is what led to the Fuel, jekyll, fuel, sugar designs being developed and hanging around so long. they all had less than 4 pivots and flex built into something (except for the Jekyll) - and they wouldn't get sued
FWIW: the FSR of that generation was a festering, flexy POS. sad that it held technology back for a bit, but special-ed made $ |
|
|
|
|
bobswire
Posts:304
|
| 12/09/2013 03:48 PM |
|
Sue this....
Courtesy of https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151749235865974&set=a.14204710973.33282.610075973&type=1&theater |
|
|
|
|