Do something for cycling: DO NOT BUY GIRO HELMETS.

I for one will not be buying any Giro product and will avoid buying
other madison imported products as well wherever I can. I would urge
all other cyclists concerned about the misguided emphasis on the
wearing of polystyrene hats (which are about as much use as a
chocolate fireguard should you be hit by a motor vehicle travelling at
speed) to do likewise.

What if we already have one? (or even three) is it OK as long as we
bought them pre this Terry Bowles bloke taking over?

On 15 Nov 2004 03:47:41 -0800, [email hidden] (Howard)

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

Well, there are even better reasons not to buy Giro helmets - Brian
Walker of HPE who tests lids for a living recommends only Specialized,
and not one Bell brand appears in the Snell B90 or B95 certification
lists.

Madison do a huge range of stuff, though, so a boycott would have to
extend beyond lids.

I wonder how much notice importers take of end-customers writing in?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Howard vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

Hi folks,

The issues surrounding the ongoing campaign to get cyclists to wear
polystyrene hats rather than doing anything to genuinely improve their
safety have been well circulated on here. However perhaps it is about
time cyclists took a little more direct action.

Earlier this year, Terry Bowles, chief executive of Madison, UK
importer of Giro helmets, said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

Madison are the only industry body who support compulsory helmet use.
See

http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=4901

I for one will not be buying any Giro product and will avoid buying
other madison imported products as well wherever I can. I would urge
all other cyclists concerned about the misguided emphasis on the
wearing of polystyrene hats (which are about as much use as a
chocolate fireguard should you be hit by a motor vehicle travelling at
speed) to do likewise.

To see what other products to avoid go to

http://www.madisonb2b.co.uk and click on the public page.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
"A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

Howard vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

But you can't say he's wrong in a business sense, it means they _will_ sell
more helmets. Unless, as has been seen elsewhere, cycling declines as a
direct result of the introduction of a helmet law. It seems 'the industry',
therefore, doesn't think it will ...

Quoted message said:

To see what other products to avoid go to

http://www.madisonb2b.co.uk and click on the public page.

That's a lot of products, good, useful products, to boycott. I won't be
joining your knee-jerk reaction, thanks.

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
"A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

Paul - censored said:

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

Quoted message said:

But you can't say he's wrong in a business sense, it means they _will_ sell
more helmets.

In the short term.

Quoted message said:

Unless, as has been seen elsewhere, cycling declines as a
direct result of the introduction of a helmet law. It seems 'the industry',
therefore, doesn't think it will ...

The industry does, with this one exception.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

To see what other products to avoid go to
http://www.madisonb2b.co.uk and click on the public page.

Quoted message said:

That's a lot of products, good, useful products, to boycott. I won't be
joining your knee-jerk reaction, thanks.

Please yourself. I'm going to write to them first.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

In article said:

Howard vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

But you can't say he's wrong in a business sense, it means they _will_ sell
more helmets. Unless, as has been seen elsewhere, cycling declines as a
direct result of the introduction of a helmet law. It seems 'the industry',
therefore, doesn't think it will ...

They could sell more helmets even if cycling does decline. Say 40% of cyclists
wear helmets now and 60% don't; and after compulsion, 60% of former cyclists
wear a helmet, 40% have given up cycling. That's a 50% increase in helmet sales,
and if the 40% die earlier of heart disease because they no longer get enough
exercise, too bad, not the compulsionists fault, they should have driven to
the gym more often if they aren't prepeared to cycle with a helmet....

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 15 Nov 2004 03:47:41 -0800, [email hidden] (Howard)

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

Well, there are even better reasons not to buy Giro helmets - Brian
Walker of HPE who tests lids for a living recommends only Specialized,
and not one Bell brand appears in the Snell B90 or B95 certification
lists.

Madison do a huge range of stuff, though, so a boycott would have to
extend beyond lids.

I wonder how much notice importers take of end-customers writing in?

Guy

My Giro helmet is Snell B90 certified. I'm under no illusions about it's
protective capabilities and against compulsion but Sod's law says if I don't
wear it I'll smash my skull on a kerb.

KC

Alan Braggins said:

In article said:

Howard vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the
compulsory wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward
in the process of advancing our cause as an industry."

But you can't say he's wrong in a business sense, it means they
_will_ sell more helmets. Unless, as has been seen elsewhere,
cycling declines as a direct result of the introduction of a helmet
law. It seems 'the industry', therefore, doesn't think it will ...

They could sell more helmets even if cycling does decline. Say 40% of
cyclists wear helmets now and 60% don't; and after compulsion, 60% of
former cyclists wear a helmet, 40% have given up cycling....

A lot of cyclists would ignore helmet legislation as it would not be enforceable.

If the police don't enforce lighting regulations, can you see them caring one iota
about helmet regulations?

Getronics censored said:

My Giro helmet is Snell B90 certified. I'm under no illusions about it's
protective capabilities and against compulsion but Sod's law says if I don't
wear it I'll smash my skull on a kerb.

Not according to the Snell website :-) Maybe it's not a current
model.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Adrian Boliston said:

A lot of cyclists would ignore helmet legislation as it would not be enforceable.

If the police don't enforce lighting regulations, can you see them caring one iota
about helmet regulations?

They may not care but the insurance companies would.

If you are anti-compulsion don't wear a helmet.

John B

Too late, although at the price I paid (£15) they probably lost money.

JohnB said:

Adrian Boliston said:

A lot of cyclists would ignore helmet legislation as it would not be
enforceable.

If the police don't enforce lighting regulations, can you see them
caring one iota about helmet regulations?

They may not care but the insurance companies would.

If you are anti-compulsion don't wear a helmet.

Most cyclists I pass each day do not wear helmets, so I can't see it's going
to make much difference to legislation whether I wear a helmet or not.

There are plans to ban smoking in pubs so by your same reasoning I should
buy myself a pack of cigarettes and patronise my local each night.

Adrian Boliston said:

There are plans to ban smoking in pubs so by your same reasoning I should
buy myself a pack of cigarettes and patronise my local each night.

If you want to avoid the ban that would be a reasonably logical course
of action.

Personally I would like to see a smoking ban as I hate the smell and
segregated "smoking areas" don't work. At least my not wearing a helmet
doesn't affect anyone else's health or "enjoyment" of the roads.

Zog The Undeniable said:

Too late, although at the price I paid (£15) they probably lost money.

It wouldn't surprise me if a helmet cost less than a quid to produce.
The cardboard box is probably worth more.

--
If, as Einstein said, space is curved and occupies ten
dimensions including time; How can you be certain which
is the underneath of a ladder? And how can you be certain
you haven't already walked under one next week?

Alan Braggins said:

In article said:

Howard vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the
compulsory wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward
in the process of advancing our cause as an industry."

But you can't say he's wrong in a business sense, it means they
_will_ sell more helmets. Unless, as has been seen elsewhere,
cycling declines as a direct result of the introduction of a helmet
law. It seems 'the industry', therefore, doesn't think it will ...

They could sell more helmets even if cycling does decline. Say 40% of
cyclists wear helmets now and 60% don't; and after compulsion, 60% of
former cyclists wear a helmet, 40% have given up cycling. That's a
50% increase in helmet sales, ....

When the sales growth you predict in Fat-Eric-hats is combined with a 40%
dive in sales of all the other products imported by Madison, I think they
will be less than happy. As their imported lines include Shimano (spares to
more than half the bikes used?) amongst a host of large names, the
Fat-Eric-hat business wouldn't make up for the sales losses.

- Nigel

--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

Adrian Boliston said:

JohnB said:

Adrian Boliston said:

A lot of cyclists would ignore helmet legislation as it would not be
enforceable.

If the police don't enforce lighting regulations, can you see them
caring one iota about helmet regulations?

They may not care but the insurance companies would.

If you are anti-compulsion don't wear a helmet.

Most cyclists I pass each day do not wear helmets, so I can't see it's going
to make much difference to legislation whether I wear a helmet or not.

Presently its a choice whether you wear one or not but by doing so you
are supporting those whose goal is compulsion. It has already been made
clear that once a majority of cyclists are wearing them voluntarily the
law will almost certainly be introduced.
So the choice you now enjoy (and I also as a non-wearer) will be removed.

Quoted message said:

There are plans to ban smoking in pubs so by your same reasoning I should
buy myself a pack of cigarettes and patronise my local each night.

You could try that if you wish.
The big difference is that you will be causing harm to the health of
others while wearing a helmet (or not) doesn't. Much.

John B

Richard Bates said:

Zog The Undeniable said:

Too late, although at the price I paid (£15) they probably lost money.

It wouldn't surprise me if a helmet cost less than a quid to produce.
The cardboard box is probably worth more.

That's because the box probably offers more protection.

John B

Brian said:

Howard said:

I for one will not be buying any Giro product and will avoid buying
other madison imported products as well wherever I can. I would urge
all other cyclists concerned about the misguided emphasis on the
wearing of polystyrene hats (which are about as much use as a
chocolate fireguard should you be hit by a motor vehicle travelling at
speed) to do likewise.

Umm, they aren't designed for collision with a motor vehicle travelling at
speed....

"Bicycles don't have roll cages or seatbelts! Ban all bicycles! Boycott
everywhere which sells bicycles!" for a similar illogical knee-jerk
reaction.

Of course a helmet importer will see benefits from a compulsory helmet law.

But Madison import more than just helmets. While an MHL might mean a
short term rise in sales in that single product line, it will also
mean a medium and long term fall in sales in all other bike related
products.

So it's a pretty daft stance to take from a business POV.

On 15 Nov 2004 03:47:41 -0800, [email hidden] (Howard)

Quoted message said:

Hi folks,

The issues surrounding the ongoing campaign to get cyclists to wear
polystyrene hats rather than doing anything to genuinely improve their
safety have been well circulated on here. However perhaps it is about
time cyclists took a little more direct action.

Earlier this year, Terry Bowles, chief executive of Madison, UK
importer of Giro helmets, said:

"Speaking on behalf of Madison, I am happy to say that the compulsory
wearing of cycle helmets on road would be a step forward in the
process of advancing our cause as an industry."

Madison are the only industry body who support compulsory helmet use.
See

http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=4901

I for one will not be buying any Giro product and will avoid buying
other madison imported products as well wherever I can. I would urge
all other cyclists concerned about the misguided emphasis on the
wearing of polystyrene hats (which are about as much use as a
chocolate fireguard should you be hit by a motor vehicle travelling at
speed) to do likewise.

To see what other products to avoid go to

http://www.madisonb2b.co.uk and click on the public page.

I'll sign up[1]. I'll also write to the CEO.

[1] The only tricky one to avoid in total will be Shimano.