[diego_moita]

I find it funny how over-American this is.

In the U.S. bicycles are basically tools for practising sports and, as such, should be expensive, ultra-efficient and loaded with high-tech.

In the rest of the world (from Amsterdam to Manila) bicycles are mostly for transportation and should be durable, reliable and not expensive at all. So far, I never saw an "omafiets" (a.k.a. "grandma bike") in the US. And sports should also be very cheap and shouldn't need expensive equipment, as in "real" football (aka: "soccer").

Edit: also, isn't bicycle navigation the kind of problem that Eric Migicowski tried to solve in Amsterdam with smartwatches (Pebble)?

[nradov]

That's an odd statement considering how popular bike racing is in Europe. I seem to recall a bunch of expensive, ultra-efficient and loaded with high-tech bikes dashing through France last July...

[hellomyguys]

Weird over-generalization that ignores the popularity of cycling as a sport (which is expensive) in Europe and the fact that the majority of people using bicycles in the US are using them how you describe the rest of the world uses them.

[1-more]

The US has barely any road racing scene; the closest we have is just Criterium racing. The biggest road races in the world happen in Europe and are won by Europeans. Barely any US companies even sponsor teams at the secondary level let alone primary. Trek is the only one I can think of off the top of my head and they split it with Segafredo.

But the other thing is what kinds of bikes you see in the US. By far what you see the most of in NYC is shitty Huffys that cost maybe $150 new, and then Arrow e-bikes that food delivery drivers use.

[PedroBatista]

Are you trying to say Peloton bikes will not saves us from doom?

[38932ur98u]

What? No. Competitive cycling was birthed in Europe.