Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get...
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
Mx
I kinda doubt people will just start to see GT as a top shelf brand all of a sudden just because they want to position themselves as one.
Making your bikes more expensive isn’t going to change your brand perception, just means less people will buy it because the value is worse compared to the competition.
I kinda doubt people will just start to see GT as a top shelf brand all of a sudden just because they want to position themselves...
I kinda doubt people will just start to see GT as a top shelf brand all of a sudden just because they want to position themselves as one.
Making your bikes more expensive isn’t going to change your brand perception, just means less people will buy it because the value is worse compared to the competition.
I don't question your judgement, I actually agree with it, but I can only say what has been said to be, no extras. It's only fair like that.
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get...
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
Mx
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium brand the year after.
They're actually doing the complete opposite of what's required to reposition GT as a premium brand within the next two years.
If they half-ass it, then I'd agree the pause probably wouldn't be a good way to reposition. On the other hand, if they kept going along as normal and then release a very competent and premium bike tomorrow, I doubt many consumers would take it too seriously. But if they're planning on dumping a ton of capital into GT in the refresh then the pause is probably the way to go. it would have to go something like this:
1. get rid of everything they have now. No more cheap or discounted GTs out on shelves, sales floors, or websites.
2. wait long enough for people to forget about those cheap, discounted GTs on shelves, sales floors, and websites. This is probably less time than we'd like to think.
3. Spend millions on engineering, product development, tooling and production to make a completely relaunched lineup of premium bikes. You'd probably need to launch 3-5 models right out of the gate to do this successfully.
4. pick up some high profile riders of the day and get them racing whatever the most popular discipline at the time is, in addition to mass media campaigns ensuring your bikes are going to be the cream of the crop (remember they're all new and fancy and bespoke, right?).
5. do 3. and 4. all while making no money whatsoever for years.
Personally, I think PON would be stupid to do the above rather than just putting more money into the Santa Cruz blender - it seems like if someone took that approach, the brand with the biggest target on its back would BE Santa Cruz, aka themselves.
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get...
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium...
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium brand the year after.
They're actually doing the complete opposite of what's required to reposition GT as a premium brand within the next two years.
I would imagine they're trying to paint a hopeful picture for the future because that's much better than saying, "Yeah, we're going to shit and will be a second rate big box brand from here on out, because that's what PON decided." (I'm not saying that's where the brand is actually headed, but just pointing out that Polyanna, hopeful messaging is a coping mechanism for brands to use when faced with tough, painful situations).
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get...
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium...
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium brand the year after.
They're actually doing the complete opposite of what's required to reposition GT as a premium brand within the next two years.
I would imagine they're trying to paint a hopeful picture for the future because that's much better than saying, "Yeah, we're going to shit and will...
I would imagine they're trying to paint a hopeful picture for the future because that's much better than saying, "Yeah, we're going to shit and will be a second rate big box brand from here on out, because that's what PON decided." (I'm not saying that's where the brand is actually headed, but just pointing out that Polyanna, hopeful messaging is a coping mechanism for brands to use when faced with tough, painful situations).
In Canada GT has been a shit-tier big box brand for years. They're a Canadian Tire/Walmart equivalent brand. Sponsoring WBP did nothing to help the image.
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get...
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
Mx
No offence, but that's some industrial grade hopium right there.
Others have pointed out how incredibly unlikely that is.
All I'll say is that they already own Santa Cruz and Cannondale, do you really believe they'd gut there mid-budget firm to reposition it to compete in the same market as their other 2 companies?
My GT story;In the years 2000-2001, I was working as a team technician and road manager for Schwinn Toyota RAV4 Racing, GT also was owned by...
My GT story; In the years 2000-2001, I was working as a team technician and road manager for Schwinn Toyota RAV4 Racing, GT also was owned by Questor at the time. Our challenging experience began in August 2001 during a World Cup race in Arai, Japan. My company credit card was suddenly declined, and we started hearing rumors from the United States that Schwinn/GT was going bankrupt.
Despite having our hotel pre-paid, we—myself and team members Elke, Leigh D, and Deldycke—found ourselves in a precarious situation. The office was giving us vague reassurances about potential loans and future payments, but the reality was much grimmer, credit cards were toast and paychecks had stopped. We headed to Mammoth for the National (with I think Tahoe world cup following?) I distinctly remember one industry executive from GT arriving at a Mammoth race in a new high-end European car, telling us everything would be fine—but it wasn't.
For the remainder of the racing season (August and September), both team staff and athletes continued to represent the brand without pay. We completed our final races at the Vail World Championships 2001, which coincidentally occurred during the 9/11 tragedy. Before I headed up to Vail, I loaded up the race semi truck/trailer at the Schwinn boulder office with all spare equipment, frames, and parts. In the parking lot on Sunday after the races I divided these assets among team members, hoping we could recover some of our lost wages and expenses.
That winter, I attended a bicycle swap meet in San Diego with my wife Leigh, selling some of our equipment. A component sponsor's manager even tried to stop us, claiming we couldn't sell the items—but we did anyway. The financial impact was significant: I was owed around $20,000, and Leigh was owed nearly $100,000 in wages and bonuses from her end-of-season titles and wins. Prominent riders like Peaty, Lopes, and Alison Dunlap similarly never received their promised bonuses, all of the Schwinn and GT BMX racers and freestylers and dirt jumpers as well.
We were given legal options: accept a flat fee of around $500-$1,000 or wait for a potential bankruptcy settlement. Leigh and I chose to wait, and about 14 months later, when Pacific Cycle purchased the brand, we received some compensation—I recall I got $6,000 or so and Leigh received 15-20k?
Around Jan/Feb of 2022, the 'new' GT approached me to reform the team and asked me to manage it. Initially reluctant, I eventually agreed. Those three years were challenging. At every dealer visit and race event I encountered overwhelming anger from customers and dealers. The brand's reputation had been severely damaged.
Many believed GT's decline began with the tragic death of its founder, Rich Long, in the mid-90s. While the word "iconic" is often overused, GT truly was an iconic Southern California—perhaps even American—brand, especially considering its incredible BMX legacy.
GT has struggled since the late 90s, particularly after Long's death and the subsequent leadership changes. Despite everything, I hope the spirit of GT bikes lives on in some capacity. Wishing the best to all GT peeps during these sudden developments.
It will be interesting to see where this goes.. Laying off staff and sponsored riders is a great way to reduce overhead.. I don't know what current inventory levels are like since I'm no longer working for a GT dealer.. But, they are most likely heavy and have a backup in Taiwan like a lot of other players have right now. Keep the product guys on board and give them more time to come up with something really cool that will grab people's attention when the time is right..
My opinion is the GT has lacked an identity and direction for a while now.. Not terrible bikes, especially on the blowout prices, but not much to really wow a customer. The graphics redo a couple years ago was flatter than a fast foot soda the next morning.. I would totally grab a Sensor or Force and use the savings towards some upgrades if the funds were there for me.. Hopefully GT doesn't go away, but they need to figure out what to do with it..
To me the magic of gt was wether you were a 10 year old who needed a bike to get to his friends house or a high end dh bike they often had a good performing model for the dollars versus the competition. But that’s something that’s really hard to do and isn’t as profitable as the make low numbers for obscene prices model that most stockholders and CEOs seem to be gearing towards these days.
No offence, but that's some industrial grade hopium right there. Others have pointed out how incredibly unlikely that is. All I'll say is that they already own Santa...
No offence, but that's some industrial grade hopium right there.
Others have pointed out how incredibly unlikely that is.
All I'll say is that they already own Santa Cruz and Cannondale, do you really believe they'd gut there mid-budget firm to reposition it to compete in the same market as their other 2 companies?
GT is dead. Long live GT
I don't know why people get so revved up because of the above I wrote, considering I mentioned where it comes from. We are on a forum, where we are passionate about bikes and people often drop rumours and things they hear. This is the case here. I personally doubt that this is how you revitalise a brand, but again, that is not my opinion, I reported what has been said to me and been transparent about it.
From the pack of brands that PON owns there is big variety that covers a lot of areas and some are dormant. Kalkhoff make great city bikes, cargo bikes are on the rise in all of Europe, from what I know, Gazelle is THE Royal Dutch brand and, Cervelo have a good perception in the road world, from what I recall, and last time I saw a Caloi ad was probably in 1999, but it is not relevant, as they cater to a South American public. Coming to our MTB world, I imagine you leave Santa Cruz alone, if you are PON (but I really don't know how full those warehouses are), but what do you do with the others? Why do they keep the Iron Horse brand? Schwinn could be more than cruisers, right? Cannondale has been downgraded from a pioneer of tech to something rather bland and sad and the same is valid for GT too. There is too much overlap between the two.
I assume GT can always return to their BMX roots one way or the other and in the MTB world there have been good signs with bikes like the last Fury or the Force and Sensor. Sure, it's a long time ago, but I recall riding their fresh 27.5” bikes at Eurobike in 2014, and man did they feel nice and of good quality! But the Helion and the..., erm... Zaskar FS? Nah, man! If you make entry level hardtail on various price points, why not at least give them heritage names (you have a bucket of those)a and make them in happier colors with cool graphics? People will always be suckers for looks. Keep the Zaskar a flagship, but make ONE Avalanche, ONE Karakoram etc. Their hardcore hardtails weren't bad either, but man did they look ugh! I think there are companies that can be inspiration, like Marin or even Kona. Oh, and how about making a steel singlespeed rigid 29er in triple triangle design, with optional racks? Or have I been doom scrolling too many resto mods on IG lately? Anyway, Triple Triangle is an asset that others don't have.
I think it's time to end my little wishful rant here.
Bummer to hear about the GT situation—really tough, especially given the history. I hope everyone who worked there lands on their feet quickly. My thoughts, in no particular order:
Brand Equity: As others have mentioned, the perception and value of a brand are crucial, especially during a time of performance consolidation (where performance variance is shrinking). GT has long struggled to define its identity, perhaps trying to do too much: a value brand that also fields a World Cup team; a performance company but also one with bikes in big-box stores.
Margin Erosion: While I can't say for sure, it seems that when a brand's perception weakens, it can only compete on price. Unfortunately, competing on price requires moving significant volume to stay viable. Ironically, the brands that have maintained strong equity—like Specialized, Trek, and Santa Cruz—are also the ones moving volume. This leaves GT stuck in no-man's land: clearly not a low-volume boutique brand, but also not one whose bikes are flying off showroom floors in high volume.
The Future (oh boy~): Nobody really knows what’s next. Companies usually keep these situations under wraps. Maybe the brand gets relaunched and the rumors are true—or maybe not. Having worked in company news for years, I’ve found rumors are often wrong, so take them with a grain of salt. Could someone relaunch GT? Sure, but it would take serious effort to turn the brand around, shift perceptions, and make it work again. It’s not just a product management challenge—it’s a cost accounting issue, a dealer network issue, and fundamentally a question of where GT fits in the world of mountain biking.
If I were tackling this, I’d start with data—PON likely has a goldmine of it. I’d use that to inform decisions, but the solutions need to span the entire company, not just GT.
@Stiksandstones Didn’t the nyc-based Bankruptcy judge sell Questor GT/Schwinn to Pacific on 9/11/01 between the times the first and second planes hit the twin towers? Everyone...
Didn’t the nyc-based Bankruptcy judge sell Questor GT/Schwinn to Pacific on 9/11/01 between the times the first and second planes hit the twin towers?
Everyone I ever knew that worked at post 9/11 GT tells that as part of the lore.
The bankruptcy hearing was definitely on 9/11/2001 and that's when Schwinn was broken up into two with the bicycle side (Schwinn bike, GT, Riteway) going to Pacific and the fitness side (Schwinn Airdynes, "Spinning" bikes, etc) being purchased by Direct Focus aka Nautilus.
At that time I was managing a big IBD in Boulder, CO and due to the events of that day we sent all the staff home before opening while a few of the managers stuck around to receive packages and generally sit around in shock. We carried a fairly decent selection of mid to high-end Schwinn Road that MTB bikes, and Schwinn was at that time a hometown Boulder brand, so when word hit later that morning about the hearing, it was yet another bit of bad news on a generally ugly day.
I wonder if they could do something with GT and Cannondale like Fox did with Fox and Marzocchi or Easton and Race Face? Cannondale becomes the XC and Road race brand while GT is the trail and gravity brand? Maybe some crossover in gravel..
As a Canadian with less invested feels in the legacies and heritage of both GT and Cannondale, both these brands from the MTB side have descended into the epitome of dull corporate blandness, are not very innovative (Cannondale seems to have given up), not carried by a real LBS, and I have no idea why I would want to ride either. Both are generic big box brands here (GT at SportChek, Cannondale at MEC). Cannondales are still well regarded by the cardio community up here. PON has big lineup overlap issues here that seem ripe for solving with cutthroat corporate efficiency.
I raced a Zaskar in the early 2000's and had a huge soft-spot for GT back then. Has always been impossible to find a better GT in Canada, so I never did.
Just from a marketing point of view, GT have not been a cool brand for the past 20 years, their full sus bikes consistently had weird suspension layouts that never reviewed well, then they went a more traditional layout but some of ugliest frames ever.
I can only think of one brief time GT bikes were cool, when the Atherton's got on them and they made a big hitting enduro bike for Dan, while Gee was winning in DH. The secret behind the performance of those bikes? Slightly longer reach 🤣
At least Cannondale had the right branding idea, sponsoring Jerome Clementz due the enduro heyday and then Bryceland for their revival, they get a bit of cred for that although I never see any on trails around me in France.
GT could build a future as a premium E-bike brand building e-bikes for older riders that were kids in the '70s & '80s and still think of the brand as premium.
That said that window is closing fast as so many good e-bikes are being released. Soon, it'll be hard to stand out.
GT could build a future as a premium E-bike brand building e-bikes for older riders that were kids in the '70s & '80s and still think...
GT could build a future as a premium E-bike brand building e-bikes for older riders that were kids in the '70s & '80s and still think of the brand as premium.
That said that window is closing fast as so many good e-bikes are being released. Soon, it'll be hard to stand out.
Especially when you look at the current GT ebikes and they are pretty mediocre at best..
Although I recall hearing some employee grumblings from time to time in BC in relation to their "Quebec accountants", I hope the former Procycle doesn't need to do anything with the brand (are they still separate entities and Procycle took the name, or were the all folded into each other; I never knew). The decade I worked at a dealer was marked with entirely positive interactions (how many brands will put you in touch with the guys who designed their e-bike motor for advanced troubleshooting? how cool is that!?) and it would be a crying shame to see any of those folks face difficulties from the slowdown.
I'm still bitter Procycle bought and killed Balfa back in the day! The BB7 was a way better bike and value than anything Rocky had been doing at the time.
Also, yes, there are things being heard past few days.
edit...looks like Spomer has the scoop while I was typing.
Anyone know how much of a cash safety net Canyon are sitting on, and what is their distribution of sales in terms of road vs mtb?
Because they must be getting absolutely hammered on the ebike battery recall. They havn't been selling any full power ebikes for weeks, they are offering hundreds of euros in compensation to spectral:on and torque:on riders who have been told not to ride their bikes for the next few months. I'm sure they are getting tons of requests for refunds. This will massively damage their reputation, but maybe they make enough from the road side, which probably has more volume and higher margins anyway.
I presume Rocky will be able to trade out of it, but RIP to bike development
Regarding bike development... Are the 2 to 3 year cycles long enough? We had a lot of companies that used to do 2 year cycles but switched to 3 years claiming rushed products due to the a 2 year crunch.. Personally, I think the companies wanted more time to get the money back on expensive carbon molds. Maybe 4 years and there will always be some new components to help refresh a bike in that time.
Look at cars where the the product cycles are typically 6 years with a mid cycle update..
Regarding GT, a friend who lives in Cali just dropped me a message, saying that it's not as bad as it looks, that they will get rid of the 1000 bucks Zaskars and are looking to reposition GT as a ”top shelf brand” in the next two years. Don't know what his sources are, but he is an active rider on th West Coast and definitely closer to the action than I am.
Mx
I kinda doubt people will just start to see GT as a top shelf brand all of a sudden just because they want to position themselves as one.
Making your bikes more expensive isn’t going to change your brand perception, just means less people will buy it because the value is worse compared to the competition.
I don't question your judgement, I actually agree with it, but I can only say what has been said to be, no extras. It's only fair like that.
Mx
This is making no sense at all, you can't ''pause'' a brand, lay off staff & athletes just to try to position yourself as a premium brand the year after.
They're actually doing the complete opposite of what's required to reposition GT as a premium brand within the next two years.
If they half-ass it, then I'd agree the pause probably wouldn't be a good way to reposition. On the other hand, if they kept going along as normal and then release a very competent and premium bike tomorrow, I doubt many consumers would take it too seriously. But if they're planning on dumping a ton of capital into GT in the refresh then the pause is probably the way to go. it would have to go something like this:
1. get rid of everything they have now. No more cheap or discounted GTs out on shelves, sales floors, or websites.
2. wait long enough for people to forget about those cheap, discounted GTs on shelves, sales floors, and websites. This is probably less time than we'd like to think.
3. Spend millions on engineering, product development, tooling and production to make a completely relaunched lineup of premium bikes. You'd probably need to launch 3-5 models right out of the gate to do this successfully.
4. pick up some high profile riders of the day and get them racing whatever the most popular discipline at the time is, in addition to mass media campaigns ensuring your bikes are going to be the cream of the crop (remember they're all new and fancy and bespoke, right?).
5. do 3. and 4. all while making no money whatsoever for years.
Personally, I think PON would be stupid to do the above rather than just putting more money into the Santa Cruz blender - it seems like if someone took that approach, the brand with the biggest target on its back would BE Santa Cruz, aka themselves.
I would imagine they're trying to paint a hopeful picture for the future because that's much better than saying, "Yeah, we're going to shit and will be a second rate big box brand from here on out, because that's what PON decided." (I'm not saying that's where the brand is actually headed, but just pointing out that Polyanna, hopeful messaging is a coping mechanism for brands to use when faced with tough, painful situations).
In Canada GT has been a shit-tier big box brand for years. They're a Canadian Tire/Walmart equivalent brand. Sponsoring WBP did nothing to help the image.
No offence, but that's some industrial grade hopium right there.
Others have pointed out how incredibly unlikely that is.
All I'll say is that they already own Santa Cruz and Cannondale, do you really believe they'd gut there mid-budget firm to reposition it to compete in the same market as their other 2 companies?
GT is dead. Long live GT
That there? That's one helluva story.
It will be interesting to see where this goes.. Laying off staff and sponsored riders is a great way to reduce overhead.. I don't know what current inventory levels are like since I'm no longer working for a GT dealer.. But, they are most likely heavy and have a backup in Taiwan like a lot of other players have right now. Keep the product guys on board and give them more time to come up with something really cool that will grab people's attention when the time is right..
My opinion is the GT has lacked an identity and direction for a while now.. Not terrible bikes, especially on the blowout prices, but not much to really wow a customer. The graphics redo a couple years ago was flatter than a fast foot soda the next morning.. I would totally grab a Sensor or Force and use the savings towards some upgrades if the funds were there for me.. Hopefully GT doesn't go away, but they need to figure out what to do with it..
The rebrand...
To me the magic of gt was wether you were a 10 year old who needed a bike to get to his friends house or a high end dh bike they often had a good performing model for the dollars versus the competition. But that’s something that’s really hard to do and isn’t as profitable as the make low numbers for obscene prices model that most stockholders and CEOs seem to be gearing towards these days.
@Stiksandstones
Didn’t the nyc-based Bankruptcy judge sell Questor GT/Schwinn to Pacific on 9/11/01 between the times the first and second planes hit the twin towers?
Everyone I ever knew that worked at post 9/11 GT tells that as part of the lore.
I don't know why people get so revved up because of the above I wrote, considering I mentioned where it comes from. We are on a forum, where we are passionate about bikes and people often drop rumours and things they hear. This is the case here. I personally doubt that this is how you revitalise a brand, but again, that is not my opinion, I reported what has been said to me and been transparent about it.
From the pack of brands that PON owns there is big variety that covers a lot of areas and some are dormant. Kalkhoff make great city bikes, cargo bikes are on the rise in all of Europe, from what I know, Gazelle is THE Royal Dutch brand and, Cervelo have a good perception in the road world, from what I recall, and last time I saw a Caloi ad was probably in 1999, but it is not relevant, as they cater to a South American public. Coming to our MTB world, I imagine you leave Santa Cruz alone, if you are PON (but I really don't know how full those warehouses are), but what do you do with the others? Why do they keep the Iron Horse brand? Schwinn could be more than cruisers, right? Cannondale has been downgraded from a pioneer of tech to something rather bland and sad and the same is valid for GT too. There is too much overlap between the two.
I assume GT can always return to their BMX roots one way or the other and in the MTB world there have been good signs with bikes like the last Fury or the Force and Sensor. Sure, it's a long time ago, but I recall riding their fresh 27.5” bikes at Eurobike in 2014, and man did they feel nice and of good quality! But the Helion and the..., erm... Zaskar FS? Nah, man! If you make entry level hardtail on various price points, why not at least give them heritage names (you have a bucket of those)a and make them in happier colors with cool graphics? People will always be suckers for looks. Keep the Zaskar a flagship, but make ONE Avalanche, ONE Karakoram etc. Their hardcore hardtails weren't bad either, but man did they look ugh! I think there are companies that can be inspiration, like Marin or even Kona. Oh, and how about making a steel singlespeed rigid 29er in triple triangle design, with optional racks? Or have I been doom scrolling too many resto mods on IG lately? Anyway, Triple Triangle is an asset that others don't have.
I think it's time to end my little wishful rant here.
Cheers,
Mx
Anyone heard rumblings about Rocky Mountain?
apparently they aren't doing too well...
Bummer to hear about the GT situation—really tough, especially given the history. I hope everyone who worked there lands on their feet quickly. My thoughts, in no particular order:
Brand Equity: As others have mentioned, the perception and value of a brand are crucial, especially during a time of performance consolidation (where performance variance is shrinking). GT has long struggled to define its identity, perhaps trying to do too much: a value brand that also fields a World Cup team; a performance company but also one with bikes in big-box stores.
Margin Erosion: While I can't say for sure, it seems that when a brand's perception weakens, it can only compete on price. Unfortunately, competing on price requires moving significant volume to stay viable. Ironically, the brands that have maintained strong equity—like Specialized, Trek, and Santa Cruz—are also the ones moving volume. This leaves GT stuck in no-man's land: clearly not a low-volume boutique brand, but also not one whose bikes are flying off showroom floors in high volume.
The Future (oh boy~): Nobody really knows what’s next. Companies usually keep these situations under wraps. Maybe the brand gets relaunched and the rumors are true—or maybe not. Having worked in company news for years, I’ve found rumors are often wrong, so take them with a grain of salt. Could someone relaunch GT? Sure, but it would take serious effort to turn the brand around, shift perceptions, and make it work again. It’s not just a product management challenge—it’s a cost accounting issue, a dealer network issue, and fundamentally a question of where GT fits in the world of mountain biking.
If I were tackling this, I’d start with data—PON likely has a goldmine of it. I’d use that to inform decisions, but the solutions need to span the entire company, not just GT.
The bankruptcy hearing was definitely on 9/11/2001 and that's when Schwinn was broken up into two with the bicycle side (Schwinn bike, GT, Riteway) going to Pacific and the fitness side (Schwinn Airdynes, "Spinning" bikes, etc) being purchased by Direct Focus aka Nautilus.
At that time I was managing a big IBD in Boulder, CO and due to the events of that day we sent all the staff home before opening while a few of the managers stuck around to receive packages and generally sit around in shock. We carried a fairly decent selection of mid to high-end Schwinn Road that MTB bikes, and Schwinn was at that time a hometown Boulder brand, so when word hit later that morning about the hearing, it was yet another bit of bad news on a generally ugly day.
I wonder if they could do something with GT and Cannondale like Fox did with Fox and Marzocchi or Easton and Race Face? Cannondale becomes the XC and Road race brand while GT is the trail and gravity brand? Maybe some crossover in gravel..
As a Canadian with less invested feels in the legacies and heritage of both GT and Cannondale, both these brands from the MTB side have descended into the epitome of dull corporate blandness, are not very innovative (Cannondale seems to have given up), not carried by a real LBS, and I have no idea why I would want to ride either. Both are generic big box brands here (GT at SportChek, Cannondale at MEC). Cannondales are still well regarded by the cardio community up here. PON has big lineup overlap issues here that seem ripe for solving with cutthroat corporate efficiency.
I raced a Zaskar in the early 2000's and had a huge soft-spot for GT back then. Has always been impossible to find a better GT in Canada, so I never did.
Just from a marketing point of view, GT have not been a cool brand for the past 20 years, their full sus bikes consistently had weird suspension layouts that never reviewed well, then they went a more traditional layout but some of ugliest frames ever.
I can only think of one brief time GT bikes were cool, when the Atherton's got on them and they made a big hitting enduro bike for Dan, while Gee was winning in DH. The secret behind the performance of those bikes? Slightly longer reach 🤣
At least Cannondale had the right branding idea, sponsoring Jerome Clementz due the enduro heyday and then Bryceland for their revival, they get a bit of cred for that although I never see any on trails around me in France.
GT could build a future as a premium E-bike brand building e-bikes for older riders that were kids in the '70s & '80s and still think of the brand as premium.
That said that window is closing fast as so many good e-bikes are being released. Soon, it'll be hard to stand out.
Especially when you look at the current GT ebikes and they are pretty mediocre at best..
Although I recall hearing some employee grumblings from time to time in BC in relation to their "Quebec accountants", I hope the former Procycle doesn't need to do anything with the brand (are they still separate entities and Procycle took the name, or were the all folded into each other; I never knew). The decade I worked at a dealer was marked with entirely positive interactions (how many brands will put you in touch with the guys who designed their e-bike motor for advanced troubleshooting? how cool is that!?) and it would be a crying shame to see any of those folks face difficulties from the slowdown.
this screenshot from a FB group was passed on to me - re: Rocky
I'm still bitter Procycle bought and killed Balfa back in the day! The BB7 was a way better bike and value than anything Rocky had been doing at the time.
Also, yes, there are things being heard past few days.
edit...looks like Spomer has the scoop while I was typing.
Wow.
Another one starts circling the drain.
I presume Rocky will be able to trade out of it, but RIP to bike development
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rocky-mountain-announces-intention-restr…
Anyone know how much of a cash safety net Canyon are sitting on, and what is their distribution of sales in terms of road vs mtb?
Because they must be getting absolutely hammered on the ebike battery recall. They havn't been selling any full power ebikes for weeks, they are offering hundreds of euros in compensation to spectral:on and torque:on riders who have been told not to ride their bikes for the next few months. I'm sure they are getting tons of requests for refunds. This will massively damage their reputation, but maybe they make enough from the road side, which probably has more volume and higher margins anyway.
Regarding bike development... Are the 2 to 3 year cycles long enough? We had a lot of companies that used to do 2 year cycles but switched to 3 years claiming rushed products due to the a 2 year crunch.. Personally, I think the companies wanted more time to get the money back on expensive carbon molds. Maybe 4 years and there will always be some new components to help refresh a bike in that time.
Look at cars where the the product cycles are typically 6 years with a mid cycle update..
I guess I'm just thinking out loud..
Post a reply to: Will more companies be shutting down in the next 12-24 months?