April 23, 2015, 9:26 a.m. -  Kristi Kagy

#!markdown So…if I understand this correctly, the benefits of a 27/29+ bike which were outlined could be obtained by, well, becoming a better rider? So, in short, better cornering technique and skills practice could give you every benefit you would get from a brand new, pointless, 5K steed? And how does the unskilled rider that, supposedly, these individuals are targeting handle the obvious penalties of a fatter, heavier tire? At what point does innovation become a handicap? At what point do we solve issues with skill with technology? I love many of the progressive ideas and technologies emerging today (to see this much creativity in the bike industry is awesome), but, I really don't see the need for a different bike for every single thing - especially something so minor. Wouldn't energy be better spent looking at exciting suspension/frame designs or ways to get technology onto bikes for less $$? Why don't you listen to your consumers? You aren't Apple. We know what bikes we like; we know how bikes are made; we know the geometry and the numbers better than you might. We're creative - playing and tinkering in our garages, wondering what if…We know what we want. Try giving it to us - as opposed to distracting the market with another gimmick. Your consumers aren't saying "innovate" - they are saying "get smarter with those innovations; make them more affordable." Try listening. And you know what happens when we stop talking? We stop giving you money.