Here we go again

I can't see why RB people would have inherent issues with Brant Richards - surely he's an essential element of the ongoing British offroad scene, a clear link to the very grass roots we continue to cherish here.

I find his independent approach to the corporate bike world fascinating and inspiring, considering the mighty organisations he's swimming with.

I've not yet bought a product made by his businesses, but am appreciative of the Cleland-inspired project and wish it well. The day he starts an elevated stay design or a bike polo project, I could very well become a customer... ;-)
 
First posted about on Retrobike back in September and no one raised an eyebrow, the thread pretty much died a death after that. Brant drives round and round droning on and on and it causes the world's collective knickers to get in a knot :?

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewto ... h&start=30

With you there Mr K, re-invent the E-stay and I'd have one, a 29er would be nice. Brant, how about it if you're reading this? Please?
 
Is there any real need to get all pissy about this at all? Its a bloody bike. If you dont like it, Dont buy it, No ones gonna die or lose out either way.
 
mrkawasaki":1ouykjzd said:
I can't see why RB people would have inherent issues with Brant Richards - surely he's an essential element of the ongoing British offroad scene, a clear link to the very grass roots we continue to cherish here.

I find his independent approach to the corporate bike world fascinating and inspiring, considering the mighty organisations he's swimming with.

I've not yet bought a product made by his businesses, but am appreciative of the Cleland-inspired project and wish it well. The day he starts an elevated stay design or a bike polo project, I could very well become a customer... ;-)

Couldn't agree more - although I'm sure it's not all RetroBike people. :!:

I have a brant designed 456 and I like the fact its not made by one of the big companies out of the latest fashion in deformed aluminium tubes, and that it was designed by someone in the UK. He took out time to personally answer e-mails and give advice before I bought it - can't ask for more than that really.

Keep it up Brant - I'm sure that I'll consider a Highpath copy at some point in the future, tweed I feel will be compulsory riding apparel.

:D :D
 
Dr S":2s3u0b95 said:
Not at all. And well done for missing the point, and for chopping up two seperate posts made at different times to try and have another dig.
In the context of this thread and the threads over the last few days, I'm refering to the plundering of our heritage- firstly the Chancer, and what at the time of the post appeared to be the Cleland which in case you don't remember is a 30+ year old design= Retro. I'm not alone in thinking this bike would appeal to older riders- Lord Brant said as much in his sermon, and I'm not the only poster in this thread that thinks so either. I can't see this bike appealing to yoofs hanging around the local jump spot with 180mm forks and baggy pants, do you?
Until Mike posted, as far as anyone knew, this was another attempt by a marketing guy to cash in on someone elses legacy. Hence my latter post- a confirmation of Mikes news and a softening of my view..

Finally, I care about quality because such a fine bike deserves to be built well and not lashed up, unlike Mr Richards past efforts.
I didn't miss the point. I didn't chop anything up either - your 2 quotes were still valid independently and were responded to as such.

I know exactly what you're talking about, but I still can't understand why it (so called "plundering heritage") and him (Brant) bother you so much. We'll have to agree to differ.

Dr S":2s3u0b95 said:
If Geoff is finally going to get his designs to the masses then, yes, cool, go for it. He is the original designer and has spent much of his life trying to get it accepted. He has a right to cash in, its his bike. He is not just plundering someone elses design. So what is your point exactly? Again, if the design is kept pure and a reasonable job is done of making it then yes, both should get credit. Its not my criteria, everyone wants to see good quality surely?
Ha ha! I think you know what my point is.

Even though this is Geoff's design you can't automatically assume that the result is going to meet your expectations and do justice to a classic bike. If it doesn't then I'm saying step up and say Geoff screwed up, but if it does then I'm saying step up and finally give Brant some credit - which you just said you would so fine.

Interesting that you only say "reasonable job" though, your viewpoint has softened quite a bit ;)

In contrast to you, if the new Highpath becomes a low end, cheaply made Taiwanese effort that handles like a pig then it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I would just be happy to see that beautiful frame design on the streets again in any capacity :D
 
Dr S":2u22v3fd said:
MikeD":2u22v3fd said:
Or if it does meet your criteria then I trust you'll praise both Geoff AND Brant for doing a good job.

Isn't that what he said in the bit you quoted?

Too busy getting his kecks in a twist :roll:
No. Dr S only mention Geoff getting credit if it is a success, I added that he should also praise Brant. This was the quote I responded to:

"I've spoken to Geoff Apps and he has confirmed that he is working with Brant and designing this frame. This puts a different light on things. Provided that they make a good job of building it and Geoff gets the credit and hopefully a big bag of royalties then all is cool and groovy. His bikes really deserve to get some success after all these years."

Please keep up :roll:
 
Back
Top