[Closed] RIP Ragley?

Do they need to spend a load on producing expensive media assets? Does it generate a demonstrable return on investment in terms of sales uplift vs not doing it? If not, then no point wasting profit margin on vanity projects. Being a CRC brand means by definition they have the parent company's marketing channels and userbase to promote to for direct sales drivers rather than creating awareness/consideration.

I’m slightly envious of Cotic / Pace / Bird etc etc owners where they are engaged by the brands by promo videos and teaser trailers pretty much every couple of weeks

Surely the owners are "engaged" by the bike they own, not stuff on the internet put out by the manufacturer after they bought the bike?

Would you seriously enjoy your bike more if there we some "sick edit" of it appearing on you tube every week? If you need a video of your exact model of bike to excite you to ride your bike, you need a new bike or a new hobby.

If you need a new bike, ok, promo videos etc have a place.

OP - I know this is a kind of modern phenomena but I'm interested in your reasons for wanting to be able to consume what is basically advertising material from a chosen brand on a regular basis? Does it increase the enjoyment of owning / riding the bike? Perhaps a confirmation that you made a good choice? Genuine questions, thanks.

>Ever since the apparent sell out to CRC

Never happened. Ragley was a CRC brand from day one, which I worked on with them to start up. Was lots of fun.

and that was as shedfire design wasn't it?

All fair points, maybe it's a sign of the times that I expect social media to play a part in ownership when in reality, no it wouldn't give me any more enjoyment on the bike. It's actually the best bike I personally have ever owned, I love it and maybe it's because I like the bike/brand so much that I don't want it to disappear under a large banner like CRC. I've got absolutely nothing against CRC but it just felt a bit like big company swallows up small company and the enthusiasm of the original staff evaporates. I hope I'm wrong and that is why I asked the question.

I expect social media to play a part in ownership

God, I feel old.

>big company swallows up small company and the enthusiasm of the original staff evaporates.

I got an offer to move to back on-one, and that left CRC with Ragley.

All fair points, maybe it’s a sign of the times that I expect social media to play a part in ownership when in reality, no it wouldn’t give me any more enjoyment on the bike. It’s actually the best bike I personally have ever owned, I love it and maybe it’s because I like the bike/brand so much that I don’t want it to disappear under a large banner like CRC. I’ve got absolutely nothing against CRC but it just felt a bit like big company swallows up small company and the enthusiasm of the original staff evaporates. I hope I’m wrong and that is why I asked the question.

Thank you very much though, that's really nice. I wore my Ragley T shirt on Tuesday. It made me smile.

I expect social media to play a part in ownership

I can think of little that would put me off buying somyething more than a "pally" company.

Maybe it's a generational thing, I'm closer to 40 than 30 these days and I think the people i know of my generation would agree. Social media is for social things. News outlets are for news. TV and film companies produce films, bike companies bikes etc. These are different things and should stay distinct to me.

As a semi serious question would you buy coke instead of pepsi next time you're at the supermarket based on a video on coke's FB page, even though you prefer the taste of pepsi?

Dangeourbrain - I'm 29 and the idea of following Transition bikes (I've got two of them) on Instagram, or being their mate on Facebook, is pretty mad to me. Why would you bother? I've already bought the product. It'd be like me following Skoda or Peugeot because I own their cars (and am into cars), or the company that built our sailing dinghy. Why would I do that when I could look at videos of my mates posting pictures of the cool stuff they're up to instead?

would you buy coke instead of pepsi next time you’re at the supermarket based on a video on coke’s FB page, even though you prefer the taste of pepsi?

I wouldn't buy either, but I would buy Pilot Beer if I saw it in a bar because their twitter feed is incredible.

https://twitter.com/pilotbeeruk/status/996416809510277120

https://twitter.com/pilotbeeruk/status/837936605172281345

Dangeourbrain – I’m 29...being their mate on Facebook, is pretty mad to me

"Maybe it's a generational thing" was polite code for "get away you bloody weirdo"

Edit re pilot beer:

Smoky beercon?

They'd have been buying artisan bees, not selling. If they make schoolboy errors like that on their Twitter feed imagine what goes wrong with the beer. I'm out.

Dangeourbrain – I’m 29 and the idea of following Transition bikes (I’ve got two of them) on Instagram, or being their mate on Facebook, is pretty mad to me. Why would you bother? I’ve already bought the product. It’d be like me following Skoda or Peugeot because I own their cars (and am into cars), or the company that built our sailing dinghy. Why would I do that when I could look at videos of my mates posting pictures of the cool stuff they’re up to instead?

Fascinating post. I definitely subscribe to the "nobody ****ing cares about your business" school of marketing, but this position seems to be quite polarised.

I wore my Ragley T shirt on Tuesday. It made me smile.

I rode my Ragley ti on Tuesday. That made me smile 🙂

It''s always made me smile since the day I bought it when it first came out.

Fascinating post. I definitely subscribe to the “nobody **** cares about your business” school of marketing, but this position seems to be quite polarised.

Generally I agree but it does feel different in a market centered around hobbyists, with so many small brands.

It's hard to imagine brand reps from Honda turning up to a demo day and discussing genuine opinions of Toyota's cars, or sharing unannounced info about their new models.

and that's why I bought a Sick bike.  Got the T-shirt, tons of social media stuff all the time, hell I didn't just buy a frame I bought into a soap opera.

BTW is 49 too old to grow my hair and get tattoos?

Aren't Pepsi & Coke the same thing?

When did you ever hear "pepsi and hookers"?

their twitter feed is incredible.

Well, it's quite funny. 😉

rode my td-1 yesterday its certainly not dead.

needs new rigid forks but its not dead 😀

the fact i dont see instabangers from them doesnt really bother me although i did get a quiet excited brant rushing over and declaring me quite mad for doing strathpuffer on schwalbe marathon ice spikes.

Although I dont subscribe to any kind of 'push media' like twitter etc - prefer to choose when and where to receive information - I get that part of the appeal of some brands is that they seem personal and active - and maybe if they are part of an activity that is meaningful to people then they have some interest in seeing that the product they own can enable them to do the thing they aspire to.

For example, I have a Skoda and a Bird bike - I will check the Bird website every so often to see if they have any new products or interesting things to say there but I don't follow a channel and am not that invested in what they do day to day as long as the business is doing well and I can get help with anything that might go wrong with my bike.

I literally could not give a FF about what Skoda or most other brands of things I use and / or consume have to say to me but then riding a bike is many times more meaningful that driving a car - though probably less useful in the grand scheme of things.

I’m 45 and see why social media is used, I follow a few manufactures on facebook of bike and other goods as it’s an easy way to keep up to date with latest products, offers and the occasional recall.

I’m a self-facilitating media node, if a brand hasn’t followed me first I won’t even acknowledge they exist.

Totally Mexico!

>Ever since the apparent sell out to CRC

Never happened. Ragley was a CRC brand from day one, which I worked on with them to start up. Was lots of fun.

That's interesting as Ragley was never marketed as such at the start and there was certainly a point where the impression given was that CRC had bought the company. I remember clearly as my mate used to bum on about his mk1 Bluepig like it was some custom build, until he had to send it back..... and then the mk2 that followed.

Marketing eh, just shows. Reminds me of some trousers.

Maybe different as I was selling them but I always knew Ragley was a Hotlines brand. I think at one time we were selling more mmbops than anyone else.

Time for a Ragley photo thread to rekindle the brand love?

Fascinating! I bought my Ragley Marley,partly because the previous year's model won the best hardtail award and partly because of seeing the early videos of Brant testing out early models of the Blue Pig. When I bought an On One years ago, Brant's genuineness and reachability (quite literally at the end of a mobile phone number advertised on the site), were a massive draw. Maybe not everyone cares about the ethics of what they buy, but a lot of people do. The idea of any proportion of a bike company being 'Artisanal' is a massive draw to many. Anyway, I presumed Ragley was that. Bought the bike.

I enjoy the bike. But it is definitely not a Stanton. Not because it's a much cheaper Aluminium frame... But because when I tried to make contact... Nada!! Then I find out about CRC. Now I have been waiting 5 months for a replacement mech hanger... the original replacement one I bought and fitted (after the first one just snapped off whilst pedalling), has screws that protrude through the dropout and onto the face that engages with the wheel nut. Meaning the tension of the QR skewer, is sitting on two off set protruding screw ends, rather than the drop out face. Cheap!

I have nothing bad to say about Brant or his bikes. He is a champion! But there is a difference between buying into a micro brand, with an ability to connect to passionate people and the fellowship of passionate riders. And of course that can effect your riding!!!??? Who the F*** can honestly say they only ride a bike for it's function??? The form (in every sense) feeds back to you in many ways and enhances or diminishes your pleasure... even your skill. If not, then we'd all be riding simple rigid white single speeds.... hang on?

 my 11 year old lad is building up a xs bluepig just now, just need forks and cranks and it's good to go. Nice bike, I'm a little jealous...

@stablebarns - I think you are confusing form and function - the form is cosmetic and has no effect on an objects ability to do what it is built for apart to appeal to the visual taste of the viewer, everything else is a product of function.

Maybe different as I was selling them but I always knew Ragley was a Hotlines brand. I think at one time we were selling more mmbops than anyone else.

Hotlines = distribution arm of CRC.

these days Joemmo i think form very often is function, in a lot of cases something could be the best thing at doing what it does, but if it doesn't look/sound/market right, no one buys it. OTOH a complete bag of spanners, dressed up right sells in its millions. Not a bike but frankly Apple could box the content of one of those red bins you see dotted around call it a phone and it would outsell a Sony etc.

(For clarity, I'm not saying Apple products ARE bad, different thread etc, I'm just saying they don't NEED to be good, the form IS the function, more than the practical purpose of the item beyond the very basic)

Dangeourbrain – I’m 29 and the idea of following Transition bikes (I’ve got two of them) on Instagram, or being their mate on Facebook, is pretty mad to me. Why would you bother? I’ve already bought the product. It’d be like me following Skoda or Peugeot because I own their cars (and am into cars), or the company that built our sailing dinghy. Why would I do that when I could look at videos of my mates posting pictures of the cool stuff they’re up to instead?

Conversley, I don't own a Transition, but I would follow them on social media - their videos are awesome.

Chestrockwell wrote,

<div class="bbp-reply-content">

That’s interesting as Ragley was never marketed as such at the start

I always took it as a sort of record label imprint- totally owned by CRC/Hotlines but with its own character. But I don't think you could really miss how tied it was to CRC, with all the mad discounting alienating shops and that. And I think a lot of us had some sort of contact with the warranty people too because of bent frames, bad seat tubes etc and that was all clearly CRC's own. (I had a lovely conversaiton with CRC- "This is within our spec" "I spoke to Brant and he says it's not, get a new one" "Oh. Here, have a new one")

</div>
I think they always wanted to have some small brand cachet like say Cotic but... nah. Awesome bikes though, I loved my Ti.

dangeourbrain - It's nothing new though, you're basically describing industrial / product design which aims to make things that work (function), are cost-effective to mass produce with industrial means and also appeal to consumers via a pleasing form.

Apple (let's not go there) are very successful at designing products with a strong aesthetic that appeals to people and are a great demonstrator of how people also buy stuff because of brand values often over function or form - but the form is still what a thing looks like, the function is what it does.

It doesn't necessarily follow that the form is always dictated by the function because the designer can prioritise an aesthetic choice over something purely dictated by function if its deemed more important to make something attractive and the usability isn't compromised too much.

This is going off at a tangent isn't it?

joemmo
@stablebarns – I think you are confusing form and function...

No they haven't, you've misunderstood what they're saying.

@DezB - maybe but if you're describing how a bike feels to ride, how it transmits feedback, how it handles then none of that is affected by how it looks, it's all in how it works. Plus, if you use the analogy that if we didn't care about form then we'd be riding singlespeeds then that suggests a misunderstanding of form and function. The way a bike is geared fundamentally affects how it functions, how that makes it look is entirely secondary.

This is going off at a tangent isn’t it?

Some Tangential Waffle? Of course 😉

To try bring it back to something related... Sick bicycles, the numbers etc on paper look very good (and I'm tempted by their ti thingy for my next bike) but they are (to my mind) very much a brand for whom the form and the function is inseparable. Its seemingly all about "drops", social media, edit, sleeve tattoos and so on. The actual bikes are no more important to the function of the product than the image of the product, what sells them in the first instance is they very definitely aren't a CRC bike, they're artisanal craft product made by some hipster with beard oil and bracers from tubes rolled on the inner thighs of a virgin born in brixton back when it was edgy, who now lives the life of an itinerant performance artist after gentrification made her homeless. oh and they're quite good bikes too. BUT BILL SMOKES A PIPE!

Plus, if you use the analogy that if we didn’t care about form then we’d be riding singlespeeds then that suggests a misunderstanding of form and function

Conversely I'd go so far as to say, 90% of singlespeeders ride them because of form not function (which even as a single speeder) is rarely better than a geared bike.

brilliant! - yes good example of people who understand how yer modern marketing works and are not interested in selling bikes to old farts who don't know or care to know their snaptwit from instakat. Like me.

Of course people buy into brands because they like or identify with things that either the brand consciously promotes or they choose to assign to it - and I plead absolutely guilty on that front.

Of course people buy into brands because they like or identify with things that either the brand consciously promotes or they choose to assign to it

Did anyone say Salsa???

Of course people buy into brands because they like or identify with things that either the brand consciously promotes or they choose to assign to it – and I plead absolutely guilty on that front

But that's my point, that IS the function of those products, it's sole purpose in existing is to be different to the next thing which is the same, whether that's overly hopped artisan craft ale filtered through John's sweaty football socks vs overly hopped artisan craft ale filtered through yesterday's tea bag, or a £900 non custom steel hardtail welded by Archibald with decals by Ethel, or a £1200 non custom steel hardtail welded by Ethel, the UK's only female frame welder working in an ethical manner and brazed with organic beef fillet. it's not something you can separate into form and function these days (except for the purposes of reducing your jurisdictional tax liability), without it's form is function vanishes, it's purpose is very definitely not to be a beer or a 300 steel frame with identical geo, made with the same materials but by a nameless bloke in a factory in [s]Sheffield[/s] Pyongchang, ultimately they're "art" sold as goods.

I think we [I] may have scared the OP away.

Artisan beer?

artisan /ärˈti-zənˈ or -sənˈ/
noun
A handicraftsman or mechanic, a skilled manual worker

The adjective is artisanal.

of food or drink) made in a traditional or non-mechanized way using high-quality ingredients.

<li style="list-style-type: none;">
"Britain's artisan cheeses"

🤔

Artisan beer?

artisan /ärˈti-zənˈ or -sənˈ/
noun
A handicraftsman or mechanic, a skilled manual worker

The adjective is artisanal

No it's not. Every man and his dog makes artisanal beer these days.

Artisan beer is certified by the guild of hipster master brewers the be outstanding in its field of making you not thirsty. So because its doing something in an artisanal fashion, its an artisan beer.

Edit: also of all the nonsense spouted in relation to artisan* produce, you take umbridge at the fact that the producers (and my posts admittedly) use the wrong adjective?

But that’s my point, that IS the function of those products, it’s sole purpose in existing is to be different to the next thing which is the same,

Not sure that it's sole purpose, the MAIN purpose is still to be and work as a bike, phone whatever but it has other value to the buyer e.g they think it looks nice, they like Ethel's instagram feed of her fillets or they care about other people think of it and think of them as a result. I'd still maintain that those are all subjective and not a result of how the thing actually interacts with the physical world.

Right, off to ride my mass produced but artisanally assembled cycle type object home and ponder if it sufficiently represents my personal values within my influence sphere.

QBP do it very well.

I always took it as a sort of record label imprint- totally owned by CRC/Hotlines but with its own character. But I don’t think you could really miss how tied it was to CRC, with all the mad discounting alienating shops and that. And I think a lot of us had some sort of contact with the warranty people too because of bent frames, bad seat tubes etc and that was all clearly CRC’s own. (I had a lovely conversaiton with CRC- “This is within our spec” “I spoke to Brant and he says it’s not, get a new one” “Oh. Here, have a new one”)

Hmmmm, not sure for the first batch as my local lbs stocked them and my mates went to Chevin for the (repeated) warranty work and eventual refund. CRC seemed to get flooded with them around the time Brant left from memory. In the early days they certainly traded on a one man in a shed type vibe.

Nah - any LBS with a Hotlines account could sell them. I think we had the first Ti Ragley in the country (well, apart from the one that brant arrived on)

In the early days they certainly traded on a one man in a shed type vibe.

They talked about the designer in that manner yes but it was clear who was behind them.

Not to my mate it wasn’t, the marketing worked. There was defo a shift at some point to virtually exclusive crc sales.

My C2W 26" mmmBop is still being ridden & enjoyed in Newfoundland. It was a bargain really...

So, are they dead? Was told last year that there would be new bikes launching in March '18. No signs of life so far. Have they been wound into Vitus?

Rip Ragley?

Sounds like a chisel-jawed hero from Eagle comic!

Dammit, it was a nice piglet!

Can't post a picture, can't edit a post!

Dammit, it was a nice pogket

Yep, I had the lesser known ragley pogket

I followed the story of the launch of Ragley, always fancied an original blue pig but a new house and 2 young kids prevented it. Eventually got a mk2 and absolutely loved it, was an amazing ride and it's the only frame I've ever regretted selling.

Then Brant left, shortly followed by the Burberry/Chav colour scheme on the mk3 and it all went tits-up from there.

Isn't the Bigwig post-Brant? The mk2 certainly is and it's really very good.

TBF, I think it was always fairly tits up- I had 3 Mmmbops, the first was a small because Brant told me to get a small. The second was a medium because I'm obviously a bloody medium. But then that one had to go back because it was properly bent. The third one was straight, but looked like it was painted in the dark and needed the seat tube reamed out as it was scratchy, but that was OK because I got it resprayed anyway. But of the 3 only one should have ever got past factory QC.

Of the many we sold I think it was only one mmmBop that got sent back.

Well, then there were the Lynskey ones..

The recent 2016+ ones have been great, really nice quality. I heard a rumour new ones were designed but the correct sacrifices have not been made to the wiggle shareholder gods.

Your bike brand does not offer correct level of return, goodbye.

**** wiggle

I hate big business.

The recent 2016+ ones have been great, really nice quality

Yeah, I still love mine. Always makes me smile. Thank you again.

trail_rat

rode my td-1 yesterday its certainly not dead.

And I rode mine today. Still one of the best bikes I have ridden*. All that's wrong with it is it needs a newer model owner. 🙂

[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/902/40524469920_876b9686bc_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/902/40524469920_876b9686bc_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]

That or the Scandal.

Love my 2016/17 mmmbop. Just bought a Stanton Switchback, hoping I like it more, but it's a lot to live up to.

I pre-ordered one of the original mmbops - loved it too; great fun to ride bike. Unfortunately it got stolen  and my riding had changed, so didn’t get a replacement.

i got myself a heavily reduced Ragley Cragvale not long after. Absolutely love it - perfect winter bike, and fits like a glove ... if only I could get a replacement mech hanger!!!!

I had an original mint green mmmmmbop. Fantastic bike, so thanks Brant for that one. Anyway one of the nicest videos of Ragley is this one. Enjoy peeps.....

I quite liked that Ragley was a transparently manufactured, 'gritty, northern', CRC sub-brand. It was almost like riding an in joke. The bit where the ti frame was made by Lynskey had a little bit of dissonance to it, like buying Rapha shorts from Aldi. Mostly though, they just ride really well.

I still have both the Ti and an original Mmmbop, but clearly the brand lost its carefully conceived authenticity after the mk1 line-up when Brant was transferred to West Bromwich Albion.

I still wish I'd bought a TD1.

I had a first gen MmmBop and loved it.  For me it was the first 'longer,slacker, lower' bike I had and it rendered my 2008 Trek Fuel EX (which I loved) as an expensive airer in the shed - I just never rode it after I got that bike.  Ended up getting an Orange Five a couple years later only because wanted some comfort at the back.  Still kinda miss it, and keep thinking about getting a hardtail again.

Anyone remember the full-suss bikes Ragely showcased at the trade shows, then mysteriously dropped (around 2011 maybe)?  Really lusted after the 140mm travel one so was disappointed when it didn't get released.

Never fancied them but couldn't quite put a finger on why? Maybe the styling/paint jobs, dunno, but I have the same ambivalence to Morf which seem to be a bit ragley-esque.

I think the thing is marketing wise, a sub-brand of a massive company doesn't have the year on year drive that a small rider owned company, ala Bird, Cotic, Stanton etc.. would have as the personal may come & go depending what that big company want to do with their money.

So a brand like Ragley (who I never realised until today have always been a CRC brand) Vitus will ebb & flow more.

Hi Folks,

We've been working away on a new range of bikes and frames. The new MY19 range will launch in January 2019.

Wasn't the mmbop the much unloved runt of the litter in comparison to the steel-is-real blue pig, at least until it was extremely heavily discounted,  upon which people began to rave about the frame, it's feathery weight and it's space age construction material?

Or am I dreaming?

Absolutely, I got mine because it was £145. And a total dick move from CRC/Hotlines that was, considering some of their shops had stock that they'd basically paid that much for.

Big Al is relevant to my interests.

Even  before the price drop we were selling more mmmBops than Blue Pigs.

Sonder called and they want their font back.

Decent value 29 hardtail would be great to see. Big wig always looks fun, aluminium version with modern angles would be ace.

This just confuses me.  I really do not want any marketing guff from anyone.  All advertising is blocked and the gdpr is great for me because I can now opt out of almost everything.

I don't aspire to a lifestyle.  I have a lifestyle I am happy with.  I don't buy things to affirm my place in society.  I know what my place is  ( skip diving 😉 )

This just confuses me

Imagine that..... 😁