MikeD":15ogdp4q 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:
MikeD":15ogdp4q 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?
Dr S":3gkoxq3r said:Sycip have a beautiful looking e-stay doing the rounds if thats your bag.
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... ;-)
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.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.
Ha ha! I think you know what my point is.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?
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: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: