They’re running a business, and I’m sure if people didn’t buy the mag in sufficient numbers, they’d change the content, wouldn’t they?
And aren’t all the mountain bike mags basically the same? Which one doesn’t mainly feature multi-thousand-pound bikes? It’s what people buy (the mag, that is, rather than the expensive bike featured).
Isn’t it the same across sectors anyway – people are aspirational. Look at the roads: full of Mondeos, Focuses, Civics, Fiestas, Micras. Look at the covers of the glossy car mags on the newsstands: Lamborghini, Maserati, Ferrari…
There is something about magazines and their dependence on the industry, and it’s naïve to think that a magazine dependent on advertising revenue is ever, even if the writers thought it so, going to come out with “expensive bikes are all a waste of money, buy these cheap ones instead” but I don’t think singletrack is any more guilty than all the rest in that regard, that’s just how it is.
MBR really hacked me off a while ago with their take on it – responding to the same moan from readers that they only featured unrealistically expensive machinery, they did a test at the other end of the market, but really took the urine with it – buying secondhand wrecks and supermarket BSOs for £100, which were obviously useless and / or dangerous and then concluded that cheap bikes were useless and / or dangerous so you had to buy an expensive one if you wanted to go mountain biking…