AustinBike

13 hours ago, Ridenfool said:

I've been at RHR with others at volunteer work days where Grey cooked barbecue, provided beer, and gave volunteers instructions on how to redeem a free day pass next time, all in gratitude for their efforts.

My question would be who made the offer?

Did anyone bring it up with them after doing the work? This would constitute a conversation, which if it never happened might explain the disappointing outcome. (though there is something to be said about anyone managing something like this taking the steps to assure folks get their due.)

If what you relate happened at any venue, I could easily see how getting volunteers back for more would be a hard sell. Nobody likes feeling taken advantage of.

I agree that any private enterprise should not depend upon volunteer efforts from their clientele as an ongoing aspect of their business model without offering some sort of compensation such as free access passes or something similar.

This was quite some time ago, probably 10+ years ago. I'd have to dig on mojo to find the approximate details and I don't want to have to clean all of the spam off me when I am done. I was planning to go, then dropped when I heard we got nothing, not even a future comp ride. If memory serves correctly, the situation was eventually rectified (not sure if it was before or after the work was done.)

My point was that "spend your time helping build the trails you ride" is a compelling value proposition and "spend your time building my trails so I can charge you to ride them" is not as compelling.

I would have gladly put in a few hours of trail work in exchange for a 1-day pass (essentially meaning that I work at way less than minimum wage) -  may seem like weird personal economics, but in reality it is about principle.

14 hours ago, Tree Magnet said:

Let’s do the math real quick and see how this is going to work. Can $50 per person support a trail crew required to build and maintain enough trail?? Is it going to take volunteers to make this work??

To maintain the trails out there they need a full time trail building team of maybe 3 people? Let’s say they pay them $30k per year (no idea). That’s $90k in just trail support.

If they get 200 riders per weekend average for roughly half the year, that’s $260k. That’s leaves $170k to pay for all the remaining staff, lift, expenses, taxes, yada, yada. Obviously I have no idea if that’s enough but I can’t ride right now so I’m compelled to type something in about bikes. Damn weather.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is the bottom line on this:

If your business requires unpaid work from your customers in order to maintain financial viability, then you don't have a problem with trail work, you have a problem with your business plan. I've talked to dozens of companies that have business plans that include "and then this miracle happens" and that is how they get to profitability down the road. The problem is the miracle never happens. 

Instead of budgeting the cash for 3 trail builders they could instead start a program where you can do trail work and get free comp passes. 4 hours of building trail gets you a one day pass. This business has high fixed costs, high semi-variable operational costs (i.e. opening the doors and running things even if nobody shows up) and almost non-existent variable costs (i.e. one more riding showing up this weekend literally costs them almost nothing.) With a program like that you could get trails built AND preserve your capital for running the business. But, instead they are trying to sell $200 season passes that ran through mid April. 

This is a marketing and PR problem, if they had a "trail crew" program in place and were very vocal about it they would be getting positive headlines from the community now. And while you're at it, throw in an occasional "hooky Friday" and open the trails only to the build crews as an added bonus. Make them feel wanted. Way better than tying up capital on building trails today.

10 hours ago, Ridenfool said:

Some forward-thinking purveyors of products and/or services might see this as observations and feedback from their customers.

For years people riding at Rocky Hill have come to enjoy the trails with the attitude that because they pay for use that someone else should maintain the trails. It has always been a challenge to get volunteers there to help out. Most of RHR's business comes from Houston riders. When the occasional call for volunteer help goes out most who have shown up are coming from Austin. Moral of the story, the largest user group is also the least likely to pitch in to help with maintenance.

This is at a place that offers basic trails through the woods, totally unlike Spider Mountain who targets a specific user group with promise of lift access flow trails.

With a facility offering this and asking five times the price to ride there compared to other private riding areas, it doesn't seem all that far-fetched to expect that SpiderMtn have in place a plan to keep the trails at some minimum state of repair. I suspect their experience with other similar MTB resorts should pay off, though the trail surface here may be made of different stuff that requires another approach than what has worked for them elsewhere.

From personal experience I can whole-heartedly share how taking on the mantle of responsibility by volunteering to maintain trails that others pay to ride will significantly cut into the volunteers' riding time. Though there is much satisfaction to be had from the creative process, and pride to be taken in the work completed, and for those who can Zen out while doing trail maintenance it can be therapeutic. 

These "complaints" seem valid and based upon observable facts regarding the perception of value from a paying user's perspective and it would be foolish for any business to dismiss them out of hand.

 

My issue with RHR was that they once asked for volunteers to do trail work and then offered nothing in return. They might have offered something later after people complained but I was long gone from that conversation. 

Yes, if you charge me, you need to maintain the trails. If you ask me to maintain you need to be real clear up front about what I get in return for my work. I do free trail work on free trails, if I do trail work on a paid trail hen I expect they are going to comp a ride or do some5hing for the volunteers. 

I totally clicked on this because I thought it was an O. J. Confession. What a let down. 

Thanks for the trails, glad I was able to turn a shovel or two over the years with you. 

Yeah, no kidding. Gonna be an ugly week again.

Yeah, today did not suck. 

17 hours ago, cxagent said:

My experience is a Presta chuck is a waste of time and money. I bought one. It is too restrictive to seat even the friendliest tubeless MTB tire / rim setup. If you want to seat a tubeless tire, pull the presta valve core and use a standard Shrader tire chuck. That is the only way I have put air in fast enough to seat the tire on the rim.

Yes - that means you have to put the presta valve core in with air coming out the valve stem. If you don't keep a good hold on that core, the air will blow it across the garage where it will never be found. If you let all the air out of the tire before trying to put the presta core back in the tire sometimes comes back off the rim.

I have tire pump with the tank. I still have to take the presta valve core out to seat the tire. But this works at least as good as the compressor and usually a little better. But I still use both methods.

YMMV

I have no issue with a Presta chuck, I made my own:

http://www.austinbike.com/index.php/repairs/109-repair-building-a-low-cost-presta-air-chuck

But I always pull the core before putting Stans into the tire. Never had the core get blown across the garage, but I have a bag of them so losing one is no big deal. I find the best tip is everything time the core is pulled out, clean all the Stans gunk off of the bottom rubber stopper.

13 hours ago, Ridenfool said:

If they have them sign the same sort of liability waiver that any MTB ranch uses the land owner should be protected.

Yes, you wanna bet this does not happen? I am guessing that the $10 fee is designed to keep out the undesirables and has not been thought through totally.

My guess is the waiver could be just as problematic because they might be forced to have the locals sign the waiver as well and that would suddenly create an administrative morass for them.

Think about this scenario: outsiders are forced to sign a waiver that absolves RP of liability for injury on the trail, but residents are not required. Then a resident is injured. And they sue. In court it could be established by their lawyer that the organization understands the liability issues and is choosing to indemnify in certain circumstances and not other. Again, I am no lawyer, but it seems like once you break out the waiver for some you need to do it for all because waivers are tied to actual use of the trail, not the fee.

52 minutes ago, Anita Handle said:

I quite enjoyed hiking there even though it uses copious amounts of cedar stair steps to deal with the steepness and poorly routed design. Not a lot of places in town with this amount of elevation change and nice scenery. 

But it is theirs to control and they don't want the riff raff in there. 

Once they start charging they will have the unintended consequence of a lawsuit. I'm no lawyer but I have to think an open trail provides slightly more protection from a lawsuit than a closed trail that takes money. The first time someone falls down one of those cedar steps the lawyers will clean up.

If only they allowed bikes...

Imagine a dozen mountain bikers with full armor, 8" travel bikes and full face helmets showing up with Hamiltons in their hands. I'd pay for the look on their faces when someone says "hey, we are willing to pay, what's wrong?"

In.

They are all LD axles. The SD axle would be significantly smaller, this one practically fits.

i think the answer is to simply put the 20mm back in the old wheel set and swap wheel sets between bikes. I wanted the newer one on the hardtail but let’s be honest, both sets are bomb proof, so it should not matter. Especially with the way I ride. 

LD is the "large diameter" shell. The LD fits the 20mm and has an adapter for the 15mm. The SD supports a 15mm axle but there is no ability to move up to a 20mm (less flexibility but less weight). 

Started building my hardtail. Step 1 was getting wheels. Got a hell of a deal on some Chris Kings with Arch EX rims and DT Swiss spokes. Everything was great.

My fork is a Rock Shox Reba RL TI (probably ~2011 or so), 20mm. I was using this on my FS and pulled it off to put on a Pike. Since the pike needed a 15mm axle and I had a different set of Kings on that bike, I got the 15mm converter and tossed the old 20mm axle in the parts bin. When my wheels arrived last night I pulled the old 20mm axle out because the new set has an LD shell and it should fit.

But it did not.

Cannot get the axle into the shell, it goes up to the bearing and then I can't get it past the bearing. (in the pic below it goes in to just past the threads, it is a metal on metal issue, not the o-ring). Tried pushing real hard, but do not want to damage the hub. Is there a different bearing size for King hubs?

It seems like the bearing is only marginally smaller than the axle. 

Any thoughts?

10 hours ago, cxagent said:

Everyone should decide for themselves what they ride and what they don't ride. That said, it is SO much easier to ride something like that when following somebody who knows the trail and rides it right in front of you. You can see their line, their moves and their pace. So you know what to do and what to expect.

 

But I'm with you, I would chose not to ride a lot of that.

Yeah, but the counter to that is following someone who knows the lines but is soooo much better than you. I suffer from this all of the time chasing Chuck and Nando. I've gone down things I shouldn't have trying to keep up.

Very cool, building one myself (the bike, not the frame.) I thought that as I got older I would be more of a FS bike guy, but the more I ride my hardtail SS the more I think that I don't need all of that suspension for most of what I ride.

I was promised there would be no math

9 hours ago, ATXZJ said:

Are they really? To me, it would seem as the resort is private property and the owners/managers control the trails and access, e-bikes being used to bypass the lifts would not be an issue. At MSA they were only seen in the lodge/pit area shuttling riders ETC. 

As others have said, it can indeed add up fast. However, if my wife and I can do a three day weekend and ride RPR and SM, then it'll still be cheaper than loading up and heading to NM or colorado. And for the record, f@ck new mexico

What I mean by a threat is what you are seeing reflected in the pricing. $50 for lift pass and trail access or $50 for trail access. If they priced it at $50 for lift and $10 for trail (to match RPR) then people with e-bikes could pay the $10, ride everything down and use the battery to take them back up. In essence, they are not able to amortize the cost of the lift as quickly if they allow people to bypass it.

They already have a tenuous business model to begin with (lift access in a region without huge elevation and a very high per-usage cost relative to alternatives.) Add in a competitive threat to their lift service and their high fixed (and sunk) cost will give them razor thin margins. When you consider that AF can do bikes in the summer and skis in the winter, they have an almost year-round service. While, theoretically we have year-round seasons as well here, when it is 100F for 12 weeks straight or rains every weekend for 2 months, what happens to that season?

Realistically, because Austin is not a "destination" for biking like AF is, people are more likely to skip a ride there because there is nothing compelling them (like a 12-hour drive does for AF). When you are at AF you drove that distance, you will ride every day that you planned to, but if you were going to go to SM this weekend and it rained on Friday you might skip it.

I am highly skeptical of their business model and unfortunately, from what I am seeing, they are taking more of an elitist view of the market ("we're the ONLY lift in TX") instead of having an ear to the community. Why are they not being more forthcoming to the market? Why have they not reached out here? Why have they not said more through social media. Bikers are a very talkative bunch. Everyone here is frustrated on the lack of information - that will eventually bite them in the ass because they are not taking the time to cultivate the market they plan to serve.

44 minutes ago, Anita Handle said:

They're basically saying that if you are going to be using the trails, just pony up for the lift. I'm also surprised that they don't have a lower price for people who are willing to ride to the top. Maybe it's a hedge against eBikes zipping their way up to the top with ease?? ha.

Their pricing generally seems a bit in need of massaging but, hey, it's not my business. I'm excited to have it and I'll just have to see how often I take advantage of it.

You are 100% correct on this. They do not want anyone on the property that does not have a lift ticket, so the way to enforce it and keep people like me away (cheap and like to climb) is to say that it is $50 whether you use a pass or not.

And yes, e-bikes are the real threat to a lift system.

1 hour ago, biga9999 said:

Spider replied to my question on their opening FB post.

 

The $199 Season pass is good/valid for riding through 04/30/19.  

I asked what happens after that?  How much for the next season?  How long is the next season?  No reply yet.

Interesting that the season pass that was supposed to be from 12/18-04/19 for $199 isis still $199 for 02/08/19-04/30/19.  

But I am not their target audience.  A day lift ticket makes more sense for me and the amount I will ride out there. 

This is stupidity. They were supposed to open a few weeks ago and the season pass was $199 through April 19. Shave 3-4 weeks off of that and it gets reduced to the bargain price of $199, for a savings of $0. Either shift the season or drop the price, you missed your deadline, that is not the way to endear yourself to customers.

Said a marketing professional.

Who is currently working on a marketing plan for mountain biking.

Fools.

They will learn, but probably not soon enough.

49 minutes ago, aki aki said:

 

Wow, that's a long reach. Here are some numbers for what seem to be popular 27.5 HTs I've been comparing. 

 

Well, you know what they say about men with a long reach...

Urban ride leaving from my house @ 5, ride for 60-90 mins, then Draught House for beer.

My steel hardtail is a Vassago Verhauen (single speed) and I am in the process of building up an identical geared hardtail. I believe this is the perfect bike for Austin. 

I may be biased.

Here is the approximate geometry:

That is a really good point. As someone who just watched a fellow rider walk his bike out of the GB a couple of weeks back, I'd hate to drop $50 and eat it bad on the first run down. I know ski resorts don't do a per-ride ticket, but I could see the value of getting in a couple runs after a day at RPR.

First of (unfortunately) many. 

I would think that riding a scooter drunk is as punishable as DUI in a car. I know it is for bikes. This needs to be investigated more.