On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:00, Brad Gantt <brdg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I will admit that I simply do not understand the sentiment that > TCO is an "offense". I believe that word choice is inflammatory and > honestly insulting to the designers and builders of these bicycles. I > also admit that I cannot understand the heated reaction to Grant's > post. As always, we have options when we purchase bicycles. If a > particular builder is committing an "offense" by designing bicycles > the way they believe best, perhaps we should look elsewhere.
Sorry, I used the word "offense" and didn't mean it to be inflammatory - I mean it in the same sense that I would use the word "offensive" to describe a lingering bad odor in a room I just entered. I consider TCO an annoyance, and fairly mild, but it would annoy me on a continuing basis if I had to deal with it. And I agree, all customers should consider how important TCO is to them when selecting a bike. That's why I wanted this perspective given proper consideration by Grant and others in the business of designing bikes for customers! I've read many reports over the years of people falling from their bikes because of TCO. It hasn't happened to me, but I wouldn't want to tell anyone that the thing that made them fall over was purely user error and not an attribute of bicycle design. Further, I submit that the heated reaction you perceive was essentially begged for by Grant's comment, and he knew it was coming, and we gave it to him. And he probably did regret it in the morning, as he said he would. And I think I've now said all I have to say on this stimulating topic. Thanks, James Black -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
