Feb
15
The BLC in San Diego and Helmets in Marketing
By Rich Kelly, Filed Under Cycling, Industry News, Interbike
I had the pleasure to spend last Monday and Tuesday (Feb 5 & 6) with 200+ best and brightest the bicycle industry has to offer at the 2007 Bicycle Leadership Conference in San Diego, California. I have to admit that I came away from the 2 days very impressed by my fellow industry members. We have an intelligent, passionate and fun group of leaders in our industry.
The conference had some great sessions and keynote speakers, but to me the highlight was the meals. In a return to a previous practice, the new organizers decided to have assigned seating for the meals. By doing this, it forced everyone to sit with a random mix of attendees from manufacturers, retailers and advocates - not just their friends and coworkers. This setup really facilitated networking and interactions during the meals.
Some of the people that I had the pleasure of dining and chatting with were Pat Cunnane, the president of Advanced Sports (Fuji Bicycles), Mark Graff of SmartEtailing.com, Andy Clarke, Executive Director of the League of American Bicyclists, Peter Gilbert of Cane Creek, Chris Conroy of Yeti Cycles, Skip Swain of Norco, Gary Sjoquist, Advocacy Director for Quality Bicycle Products, Jerry Hiniker of Superior North Outdoor Center, Ian Cross of the Hawley Company, and Beth Annon, owner of B&L Bike Shop. That’s quite a mix of people that spans the spectrum of industry company types.
A topic that stands out in my mind that I had with a few dinner companions the first night was that of the unwritten rule that all cyclists that are featured in photographs - whether in a magazine or catalog - must be wearing a helmet. I think we all understand the motives of those that push for their ubiquity in these images, but I heard a legitimate, in my mind, argument against this. This counter argument is related to a topic that seems to rear its head at any industry gathering: how do we encourage more people to buy and ride bikes?
Representatives from Shimano had given a presentation earlier in the day at the BLC about their new Coasting project. One of the key elements they found from their research and numerous interviews with non-cyclists was that they needed to remove their “points of resistance” to cycling. Now this could be a topic worthy of many future posts, but it boils down to perceptions of cycling in the eyes of those that choose not to ride. These range from the complexity of bikes, their technology and using them to the commonly held notion (that the industry has apparently created) that cycling is an activity for fitness or sport only - not for fun or transportation. This last one is interesting in that cycling is perceived to require significant work and effort to practice - you can’t just go out and ride for fun or down to the store. You are either supposed to be trying to be the next Lance Armstrong or working out (much like riding a stationary bike in a gym).
So how does this relate to helmets use in photos, you ask? It was someone’s contention that helmet use was one of these points of resistance to potential riders. Someone interested in buying a hybrid or beach cruiser to ride along the beach or on a bike path might feel that they do not need a helmet. They remember just getting on their bikes and riding as kids. The helmet is seen by some as an inconvenience and as unattractive or with the ability to mess up one’s hair. While it may be foreign to us bike enthusiasts with our high-tech helmets, they are perceived by some non-cyclists as adding a level of geek-ness to the activity.
I personally feel naked whenever I ride my bike helmetless. And that’s usually just around my neighborhood to test an adjustment to my bike. I couldn’t imagine riding without one on a longer ride on open roads. But I can also understand some of these negative reactions to helmet use. The contention that helmets are not necessary for certain “low intensity” types of riding also seems reasonable. I survived years of riding helmetless as a kid and millions ride bikes for transportation throughout Europe and Asia without helmets. And don’t we hold up European countries like Holland as examples of bike use that we should aspire to?
There always seems to be a quick and angry response anytime a magazine runs a picture or ad that features a rider who is not using a helmet. I can now begin to understand why we maybe shouldn’t be so knee jerk in our reactions to this. Is this such a far-fetched notion? Living near the coast in Southern California, I see lots of people riding beach cruisers to and near the beach in their bathing suits. They look like they are having a perfectly good time cruising along slowly. Would they be safer wearing a helmet? Probably. Would they be as inclined to ride as much if they had to use one? Should we give them a hard time because they aren’t? Should we promote bikes to people like them using images of their peers as they themselves are likely to ride (i.e. probably helmetless)? I think we should give this some thought.
Comments
2 Responses to “The BLC in San Diego and Helmets in Marketing”
Leave a Reply
It might be interesting to know Mark Graff’s thoughts on effective use of a website for marketing these days. I mentioned blogs to Mark two or three years ago; he was interested but didn’t know how it would ‘work’ in his system.
intemperately subintestinal unrazored spasmatomancy neobotany sylvanite correspondingly haplomous
Piel Craftsmen
http://www.rogueriverguesthouse.com/