Has anyone tried the Bigha?

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>
>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]... [...]
>>>>
>>>>> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said
>>>>> anything about the BiGHA being of good value or not.
>>>>> Period. I have never defended it. Period. I have
>>>>> never argued for the purchase of it. Period. If you
>>>>> are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet you
>>>>> claim I have written what I have not, then how are
>>>>> we to interpret that? Simple mistakes, repeatedly,
>>>>> on your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are
>>>>> you going to own up to?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your
>>>> blinders and open your ears. Here it is once again:
>>>>
>>>
>>> The question was asked of you. Here it is again: If
>>> you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet
>>> you claim I have written what I have not, then how are
>>> we to interpret that? Simple mistakes, repeatedly, on
>>> your part? Or deliberate fabrications? Which are you
>>> going to own up to?
>>>
>>>> "I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the
>>>> Bigha'. Just what are you doing? Do you think it is
>>>> worth $3000? Would you buy one for $3000? These aren't
>>>> hard questions.
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo L. Love"
>>>>
>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>>> doing? Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is
>>>> what all these posts on this thread are about. Try to
>>>> cut to the quick of something for just once in your
>>>> life why don't you? Either do that or confine your
>>>> conversations on this newsgroup to lost souls like Jon
>>>> Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of
>>>> anything either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
>>> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike - or
>>> anything at all. I have pointed that out, countless
>>> times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them.
>>> And yet, you can't seem to understand what I've
>>> written. Would you really like to "know what [I'm]
>>> doing"? OK, here it is again: I am pointing out that
>>> the value of a bike is not just pounds per dollar -
>>> there are more criteria used than that. As to the
>>> relative weights of those criteria, that will vary
>>> among the individuals. Racers will care more about the
>>> weight, for example, than the color. Components used
>>> is also another variable - some people would opt for
>>> cheaper stuff, as they would just install some pedals
>>> and things they already have. Some people value the
>>> ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered product, rather
>>> than having to assemble it themselves. These are all
>>> criteria that are used in judging the value of a bike.
>>> This is what I have been saying. Do you understand it
>>> now? If not, I can cut-and-paste the past few
>>> paragraphs and put them in another post.
>>>
>>
>> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about
>> the Bigha: Very heavy - negative criteria; very expensive
>> - negative criteria; poor reputation of the people making
>> it - negative criteria. What positive criteria do you
>> know about the Bigha that outweighs these negatives?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
>
> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight given
> to each varies depending on who is doing the judging.
> How did you pick your bikes, for instance? Was it simply
> a matter of dividing the price in dollars by the weight
> in pounds? Not that this is a bad way of looking at
> things - you're entitled to make your decisions based on
> the criteria that you consider important. By the way,
> "very heavy" is not a critiera, but a judgement. So is
> "very expensive". Weight and price are criteria, and
> apparently the only ones in existence to some people. I
> have mentioned several others numerous times over the
> past 20 or so posts. Did you miss them? Dolan apparently
> has a problem reading what is written, words and
> statements and all, and instead concentrates on what he
> infers are "intentions" instead. Perhaps you and he
> share that problem. Anyway - you seem fixated on this
> BiGHA bike, demanding that people come up with reasons
> why they would or wouldn't buy one. Why is that? I know
> of one other person who has taken on a vendetta against
> a manufacturer, in this other case it was pedals, and it
> all came down to his being miffed that he wasn't give a
> free set. So now he trashes them constantly. And, of
> course, he has never used them. Could this be the source
> of your problem with the BiGHA? Isn't it enough just to
> point out all of the bad things you noticed when you
> rode it? Why do you demand that others provide you with
> their evaluations of the bike?

You're up to around 26 posts adamantly defending this bike
while pretending not to, but you can't say why anyone should
buy one. There are several good reason not to, it costs
twice as much or more then comparative bikes in it's class
for one, but why should anyone buy it?

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
> Larry Varney wrote:
>
>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>
>>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>>
>>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]... [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said
>>>>>> anything about the BiGHA being of good value or
>>>>>> not. Period. I have never defended it. Period. I
>>>>>> have never argued for the purchase of it. Period.
>>>>>> If you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and
>>>>>> yet you claim I have written what I have not, then
>>>>>> how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>>>>> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate
>>>>>> fabrications? Which are you going to own up to?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your
>>>>> blinders and open your ears. Here it is once again:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The question was asked of you. Here it is again: If
>>>> you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet
>>>> you claim I have written what I have not, then how
>>>> are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>>> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate fabrications?
>>>> Which are you going to own up to?
>>>>
>>>>> "I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the
>>>>> Bigha'. Just what are you doing? Do you think it is
>>>>> worth $3000? Would you buy one for $3000? These aren't
>>>>> hard questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lorenzo L. Love"
>>>>>
>>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>>>> doing? Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is
>>>>> what all these posts on this thread are about. Try to
>>>>> cut to the quick of something for just once in your
>>>>> life why don't you? Either do that or confine your
>>>>> conversations on this newsgroup to lost souls like Jon
>>>>> Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance of
>>>>> anything either.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
>>>> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike - or
>>>> anything at all. I have pointed that out, countless
>>>> times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them.
>>>> And yet, you can't seem to understand what I've
>>>> written. Would you really like to "know what [I'm]
>>>> doing"? OK, here it is again: I am pointing out that
>>>> the value of a bike is not just pounds per dollar -
>>>> there are more criteria used than that. As to the
>>>> relative weights of those criteria, that will vary
>>>> among the individuals. Racers will care more about
>>>> the weight, for example, than the color. Components
>>>> used is also another variable - some people would opt
>>>> for cheaper stuff, as they would just install some
>>>> pedals and things they already have. Some people
>>>> value the ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered
>>>> product, rather than having to assemble it
>>>> themselves. These are all criteria that are used in
>>>> judging the value of a bike. This is what I have been
>>>> saying. Do you understand it now? If not, I can cut-and-
>>>> paste the past few paragraphs and put them in another
>>>> post.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about
>>> the Bigha: Very heavy - negative criteria; very
>>> expensive - negative criteria; poor reputation of the
>>> people making it - negative criteria. What positive
>>> criteria do you know about the Bigha that outweighs
>>> these negatives?
>>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>>
>>
>> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight given
>> to each varies depending on who is doing the judging.
>> How did you pick your bikes, for instance? Was it
>> simply a matter of dividing the price in dollars by the
>> weight in pounds? Not that this is a bad way of looking
>> at things - you're entitled to make your decisions
>> based on the criteria that you consider important. By
>> the way, "very heavy" is not a critiera, but a
>> judgement. So is "very expensive". Weight and price are
>> criteria, and apparently the only ones in existence to
>> some people. I have mentioned several others numerous
>> times over the past 20 or so posts. Did you miss them?
>> Dolan apparently has a problem reading what is written,
>> words and statements and all, and instead concentrates
>> on what he infers are "intentions" instead. Perhaps you
>> and he share that problem. Anyway - you seem fixated on
>> this BiGHA bike, demanding that people come up with
>> reasons why they would or wouldn't buy one. Why is
>> that? I know of one other person who has taken on a
>> vendetta against a manufacturer, in this other case it
>> was pedals, and it all came down to his being miffed
>> that he wasn't give a free set. So now he trashes them
>> constantly. And, of course, he has never used them.
>> Could this be the source of your problem with the
>> BiGHA? Isn't it enough just to point out all of the bad
>> things you noticed when you rode it? Why do you demand
>> that others provide you with their evaluations of the
>> bike?
>
>
> You're up to around 26 posts adamantly defending this bike
> while pretending not to, but you can't say why anyone
> should buy one. There are several good reason not to, it
> costs twice as much or more then comparative bikes in it's
> class for one, but why should anyone buy it?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>

Good God, Love! How am I defending this bike? Have I said
anything good AT ALL about it? No! What I have said
applies to ALL bikes, not just this one! Why should
anyone buy it? Why do you care? GET A LIFE!

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Melinda Meahan]

Edward Dolan wrote:

> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are doing?
> Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is what all
> these posts on this thread are about.

My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it is
not the best value for anybody's money.

Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1 and
has the same opinion of it as well.

--
Where no oxen are, the crib is clean, But much benefit is
derived from the labor of the ox.

 

[Melinda Meahan]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote:

> If your primary criteria is losing weight, you should
> definitely buy a Bigha. Peddling a heavy bike like a Bigha
> burns a lot more calories then a light one like your Baron
> Optima. Put a few bricks in your $275 Bigha bags (you'll
> probably want to use gold plated ones) to make it an even
> better value.

My Rebike weighed the same, cost $550 new, and looks better
(more like a bicycle equivalent of a Harley Davidson).

--
Where no oxen are, the crib is clean, But much benefit is
derived from the labor of the ox.

 

[Larry Varney]

Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>> doing? Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is what
>> all these posts on this thread are about.
>
>
> My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it
> is not the best value for anybody's money.
>
> Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1 and
> has the same opinion of it as well.
>

I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that any
individual knows what is best for any other individual,
what they should wear, what they should eat, and what
they should spend their money on. You have judged this
particular bike not to be worth the money (a good value)
- for you. But how can you be so sure that it's not a
good value for someone else? You know the criteria that
you're using to determine the "best value", but is it
the same as someone else's? I wonder about people who
spend thousands of dollars for a watch, when one that
keeps very good time can be had for $25 or less. And
houses. Shouldn't there be a fixed number, based on
square feet per dollar, and that anything over that one
number would be considered not a good value, a sign that
the buyer has more money than sense, and so on? The
thing is, we all have our own criteria, or, at least
those that we share, we view them differently. I wonder
about those who will pay $1000 more for a Gold Rush than
a regular Tour Easy, for instance. Is a Gold Rush not
the best value for anyone's money? I know of quite a few
people who would disagree. Are they all wrong, and I am
right? Who gets to decide?

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Skip]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... <snip>

> Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply wrote:
> > My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it
> > is not the best value for anybody's money.
> >
> > Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1
> > and has the same opinion of it as well.
> >
>
> I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that
> any individual knows what is best for any other
> individual, what they should wear, what they should
> eat, and what they should spend their money on.

Right Larry. Melinda's dangerous figuring should'nt be
allowed around here.

skip (Who is thinking about getting a McLaren to speed up
his commute)

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Edward Dolan wrote:

> > I don't believe Mr. Varney and I will ever connect on
> > any issue in this lifetime. He is a literalist. I do not
> > get hung up on any particular
words
> > or even particular statements. I go for the overall
> > sense of what is
being
> > said and I infer intention. I can do this because I read
> > like a general reader and not like some kind of
> > confounded specialist who looks at
every
> > word or statement separately. But Mr. Varney could be a
> > more careful
writer.
> > He is always saying conflicting things and not making it
> > clear exactly
where
> > he stands. Thus, the misunderstandings are all over the
> > place. What he
needs
> > to do is focus sharper on exactly what he is saying and
> > not ramble so
much.
> > He also needs to make it clear what his intentions are.
> > Intentions are
at
> > the core of what most writing is about after all.
> >
>
> Nonsense. Do not blame the writer for the inabilities
> of the reader. You claim that you read for "intention",
> and yet you admit that you do not "look at every word
> or statement separately". How do you read, Dolan,
> without looking at each "word or statement separately"?
> And how do you find I am "always saying conflicting
> things", if you don't read the words or statements
> separately?

As stated above, I read for the overall sense of what is
being said. You should try it sometime yourself. As far as
I am concerned, you leave way too many statements just
hanging unconnected to anything. So I have to make the
connections for you. And you never come to a conclusion
about anything. Consequently, many of your posts strike me
as being pointless. But I am very good at completing
other's thoughts and coming to conclusions. It is what I do
best in life. If you do not want others doing it for you,
then do it yourself.

Is Bigha good value or isn't it? That is the question that
Lorenzo and I would like you to answer.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > Mr. Sherman and I are both long time readers of RCN (I
> > have every issue going back to the beginning, except
> > for the very first issue which I
somehow
> > seemed to have missed) and so are more knowledgeable
> > than those who are
not
> > long time readers of RCN. The very best articles that
> > the editor of that publication (Bob Bryant) ever writes
> > are those where he reviews on a
regular
> > basis basic aspects of the different kinds of
> > recumbents. That kind of
information
> > is priceless and is easily worth the subscription price
> > to RCN alone.
> >
>
> I've been reading RCN for years now, too, and I agree -
> lots of great information in that magazine. And, not to
> denigrate Bob Bryant's expertise and range of
> experiences, but you do have to be wary of one thing:
> sometimes what you might interpret as being an
> objective, factual analysis of "basic aspects of the
> different kinds of recumbents" might be tainted with
> some subjective, maybe even subconscious, bias. Some of
> us feel more comfortable on swb, some on lwb. Some
> prefer ASS, some prefer USS. So when you start talking
> about those "basic aspects", our own preferences will
> have a way of coloring the "facts".

Mr. Bryant always makes clear his biases. Most of his biases
I agree with and the few that I don't agree with are
just fine with me because he has told me where he
stands. He is above all else fair. That is all I ever
require of a reviewer.

> It's always preferable, whenever possible - and it
> sometimes isn't - to check things out for yourself. I
> still remember (it was a long time ago) how it was
> common knowledge that swb bikes were twitchy and hard
> to handle, and that lwb was definitely the way to go.
> I accepted that fact for several years, riding my
> Infinity. And then I had a chance to take a brief ride
> on a Vision. It took all of about 15 minutes to
> realize that the "facts" were wrong, that swb were not
> "twitchy". At least, not this one. So, maybe others
> weren't either. Shortly after that ride, I bought an
> Haluzak Horizon, followed by a string of several other
> swb recumbents. And guess what? They weren't twitchy
> at all.

I have always found SWB to be twitchy. The first thing I did
after I got my Vision was to convert it to LWB. However, I
do not have a problem with others who disagree with me about
the basics. It is important for the reader to find a
reviewer that he mostly agrees with so you aren't constantly
at loggerheads with him. If Bob Bryant preferred SWB to LWB
he would not so clearly be my kind of cyclist.

By the way, I still have my first recumbent which was an
Infinity. I also have one of the earliest Infinities which
has the square tubing in the rear triangle. I have always
greatly liked the looks of the Infinity. Somehow, it reminds
me of the Avatar.

> Just a long-winded way of saying that generalizations
> can deliver a lot of valuable information, but they can
> also mask some misconceptions and biases as well. Read
> the reviews, listen to the "experts", but when at all
> possible, check it out for yourself.

Agreed! I greatly envy reviewers who can try out so many
different recumbents. I have always had to buy my recumbents
before I can try them out. Hence, the importance of good and
fair reviews to me.

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Edward Dolan]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> > Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
> > doing? Is the Bigha
good
> > value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this
> > thread are
about.
> > Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in
> > your life why
don't
> > you? Either do that or confine your conversations on
> > this newsgroup to
lost
> > souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the
> > substance of
anything
> > either.
> >
>
> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike - or
> anything at all. I have pointed that out, countless
> times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them. And
> yet, you can't seem to understand what I've written.
> Would you really like to "know what [I'm] doing"? OK,
> here it is again: I am pointing out that the value of a
> bike is not just pounds per dollar - there are more
> criteria used than that. As to the relative weights of
> those criteria, that will vary among the individuals.
> Racers will care more about the weight, for example,
> than the color. Components used is also another
> variable - some people would opt for cheaper stuff, as
> they would just install some pedals and things they
> already have. Some people value the ready-to-ride
> aspects of a delivered product, rather than having to
> assemble it themselves. These are all criteria that are
> used in judging the value of a bike. This is what I
> have been saying. Do you understand it now? If not, I
> can cut-and-paste the past few paragraphs and put them
> in another post.

You are unable to calibrate which issues are important and
which are peripheral. Weight and price are central to the
issue of value. Those other issues you think are also
important are not important. You are unable to make relevant
discriminations. Therefore, you should not be a bicycle
reviewer. You will lead lesser minds than mine astray with
your analysis of a bike's value because you are unable to
advise a prospective purchaser of what is important when it
comes to getting a bike. Think weight and price and you will
never be too far from wrong. It is not JUST pounds per
dollar, but it is MOSTLY pounds per dollar. Thus spake
Zarathustra!

--
Ed Dolan - Minnesota

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>
>>>I don't believe Mr. Varney and I will ever connect on any
>>>issue in this lifetime. He is a literalist. I do not get
>>>hung up on any particular
>
> words
>
>>>or even particular statements. I go for the overall sense
>>>of what is
>
> being
>
>>>said and I infer intention. I can do this because I read
>>>like a general reader and not like some kind of
>>>confounded specialist who looks at
>
> every
>
>>>word or statement separately. But Mr. Varney could be a
>>>more careful
>
> writer.
>
>>>He is always saying conflicting things and not making it
>>>clear exactly
>
> where
>
>>>he stands. Thus, the misunderstandings are all over the
>>>place. What he
>
> needs
>
>>>to do is focus sharper on exactly what he is saying and
>>>not ramble so
>
> much.
>
>>>He also needs to make it clear what his intentions are.
>>>Intentions are
>
> at
>
>>>the core of what most writing is about after all.
>>>
>>
>> Nonsense. Do not blame the writer for the inabilities
>> of the reader. You claim that you read for "intention",
>> and yet you admit that you do not "look at every word
>> or statement separately". How do you read, Dolan,
>> without looking at each "word or statement separately"?
>> And how do you find I am "always saying conflicting
>> things", if you don't read the words or statements
>> separately?
>
>
> As stated above, I read for the overall sense of what is
> being said. You should try it sometime yourself. As far as
> I am concerned, you leave way too many statements just
> hanging unconnected to anything. So I have to make the
> connections for you. And you never come to a conclusion
> about anything. Consequently, many of your posts strike me
> as being pointless. But I am very good at completing
> other's thoughts and coming to conclusions. It is what I
> do best in life. If you do not want others doing it for
> you, then do it yourself.
>
> Is Bigha good value or isn't it? That is the question that
> Lorenzo and I would like you to answer.
>

ROTFL! You may "read for the overall sense", and yet you
come to completely incorrect conclusions. You claim I am
saying something that is not to be found, not in the
slightest, in anything I've written. You connect what I
have written with things that are only in your mind, and
then blame ME for the result. My points are always clear,
and I state them, over and over again, in the hopes that
perhaps someday someone can help you understand. You do
not need to complete my thoughts on this issue, Dolan,
nor do you need to come to any other conclusions than
this: there are many criteria involved in buying things,
including bikes. Some criteria are weighted more, some
less, depending solely on the individual. Do you
understand, Dolan? Do I need to use different words?
Perhaps put it all in some sort of outline? Maybe if you
thought about what I've said, and tried to see if you
agreed with me or not, that might help. So let's hear it:
do you agree, or disagree, that there are many criteria
involved in buying things, and that different people
weigh those criteria differently? Yes or no, Dolan. Or do
you need me to make it even simpler? As for what you and
Love want - which, apparently, is for me to decide for
you the value of the BiGHA bike - why ask me? Am I the
sole arbiter of worth? Do you trust, or need, me to
decide whether or not a particular bike is a good value?
If I say yes, will you go out and buy one? If I say no,
will you not buy one? You and Love should be able to
figure it all by now, Dolan. It's not a difficult
conclusion to come to. But, just in case you really do
need for me to tell you what to think and what to
conclude, here it is: The value of anything, including
the BiGHA, is determined by each individual. Each
individual should be able to come to a decision as to
whether or not it's worth the asking price. This goes for
bikes, trikes, horses, cars, hamburgers, you name it.
Now, if you truly do need me or anyone else to tell you
which is a good value in any or all of these items, then
you really do have my pity.

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Larry Varney]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>>doing? Is the Bigha
>
> good
>
>>>value or is it not? That is what all these posts on this
>>>thread are
>
> about.
>
>>>Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in
>>>your life why
>
> don't
>
>>>you? Either do that or confine your conversations on this
>>>newsgroup to
>
> lost
>
>>>souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the
>>>substance of
>
> anything
>
>>>either.
>>>
>>
>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
>> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike - or
>> anything at all. I have pointed that out, countless
>> times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them. And
>> yet, you can't seem to understand what I've written.
>> Would you really like to "know what [I'm] doing"? OK,
>> here it is again: I am pointing out that the value of a
>> bike is not just pounds per dollar - there are more
>> criteria used than that. As to the relative weights of
>> those criteria, that will vary among the individuals.
>> Racers will care more about the weight, for example,
>> than the color. Components used is also another
>> variable - some people would opt for cheaper stuff, as
>> they would just install some pedals and things they
>> already have. Some people value the ready-to-ride
>> aspects of a delivered product, rather than having to
>> assemble it themselves. These are all criteria that are
>> used in judging the value of a bike. This is what I
>> have been saying. Do you understand it now? If not, I
>> can cut-and-paste the past few paragraphs and put them
>> in another post.
>
>
> You are unable to calibrate which issues are important and
> which are peripheral. Weight and price are central to the
> issue of value. Those other issues you think are also
> important are not important. You are unable to make
> relevant discriminations. Therefore, you should not be a
> bicycle reviewer. You will lead lesser minds than mine
> astray with your analysis of a bike's value because you
> are unable to advise a prospective purchaser of what is
> important when it comes to getting a bike. Think weight
> and price and you will never be too far from wrong. It is
> not JUST pounds per dollar, but it is MOSTLY pounds per
> dollar. Thus spake Zarathustra!
>

Nonsense. Weight and price are important, certainly. But
to say that the other criteria are not important is,
well, stupid and arrogant. Now, if you were to say that
they weren't important *to you*, that's fine. But just to
make that claim, for everyone, is stupid and arrogant.
Who the hell are *you* to decide for everyone that the
other things that lead them to choose between one item
and another are not important? I do not tell people what
a bike's "value" is; I leave that to the arrogant and
stupid. I tell them what *I* think of a bike, I talk
about various aspects of it, how it rode, what sort of
components it had, and yes, how much it weighed and how
much it cost. I decide *for myself* if something is a
good value. And, if I decide that it is, chances are good
that I'll buy it. If not, I don't. Simple enough for most
to understand. The value is up to the individual. Or do
you disagree? That's a simple question, Dolan. Do you
agree that the value is up to the individual or not?

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Hashim El Amin]

> So you are quite happy to buy something at an inflated
> price from a group of people who have previously walked
> away from contracts, warranties and product support?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

"A group of people who have previously walked away from
contracts, warranties and product support?"

Who is in this group of people, exactly? Can you name the
specific individuals who are not to be trusted? And what
contracts did they walk away from? What were the terms?
Who signed said contracts? Were they personally
guaranteed? By who?

Had Bigha's founder been BikeE's founder, I could maybe see
where you were drawing this parallel. However, it is clear
to me that Bigha is being run by a wise business man who
knows how to turn a profit. Since businesses are designed to
make a profit and profitless businesses eventually shut down
(like BikeE did), this would lead me to conclude Bigha will
be around for a while.

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>
>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>
>>> Lorenzo L. Love wrote:
>>>
>>>> Larry Varney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:[email protected]... [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read what I have written, Dolan. I have NEVER said
>>>>>>> anything about the BiGHA being of good value or
>>>>>>> not. Period. I have never defended it. Period. I
>>>>>>> have never argued for the purchase of it. Period.
>>>>>>> If you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and
>>>>>>> yet you claim I have written what I have not, then
>>>>>>> how are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>>>>>> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate
>>>>>>> fabrications? Which are you going to own up to?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lorenzo has already answered you. Take off your
>>>>>> blinders and open your ears. Here it is once again:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The question was asked of you. Here it is again: If
>>>>> you are reading what I have posted on ARBR, and yet
>>>>> you claim I have written what I have not, then how
>>>>> are we to interpret that? Simple mistakes,
>>>>> repeatedly, on your part? Or deliberate
>>>>> fabrications? Which are you going to own up to?
>>>>>
>>>>>> "I count twenty posts where you 'aren't defending the
>>>>>> Bigha'. Just what are you doing? Do you think it is
>>>>>> worth $3000? Would you buy one for $3000? These
>>>>>> aren't hard questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lorenzo L. Love"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>>>>> doing? Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is
>>>>>> what all these posts on this thread are about. Try to
>>>>>> cut to the quick of something for just once in your
>>>>>> life why don't you? Either do that or confine your
>>>>>> conversations on this newsgroup to lost souls like
>>>>>> Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the substance
>>>>>> of anything either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
>>>>> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike -
>>>>> or anything at all. I have pointed that out,
>>>>> countless times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has
>>>>> counted them. And yet, you can't seem to understand
>>>>> what I've written. Would you really like to "know
>>>>> what [I'm] doing"? OK, here it is again: I am
>>>>> pointing out that the value of a bike is not just
>>>>> pounds per dollar - there are more criteria used
>>>>> than that. As to the relative weights of those
>>>>> criteria, that will vary among the individuals.
>>>>> Racers will care more about the weight, for example,
>>>>> than the color. Components used is also another
>>>>> variable - some people would opt for cheaper stuff,
>>>>> as they would just install some pedals and things
>>>>> they already have. Some people value the ready-to-
>>>>> ride aspects of a delivered product, rather than
>>>>> having to assemble it themselves. These are all
>>>>> criteria that are used in judging the value of a
>>>>> bike. This is what I have been saying. Do you
>>>>> understand it now? If not, I can cut-and-paste the
>>>>> past few paragraphs and put them in another post.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about
>>>> the Bigha: Very heavy - negative criteria; very
>>>> expensive - negative criteria; poor reputation of the
>>>> people making it - negative criteria. What positive
>>>> criteria do you know about the Bigha that outweighs
>>>> these negatives?
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight
>>> given to each varies depending on who is doing the
>>> judging. How did you pick your bikes, for instance?
>>> Was it simply a matter of dividing the price in
>>> dollars by the weight in pounds? Not that this is a
>>> bad way of looking at things - you're entitled to make
>>> your decisions based on the criteria that you consider
>>> important. By the way, "very heavy" is not a critiera,
>>> but a judgement. So is "very expensive". Weight and
>>> price are criteria, and apparently the only ones in
>>> existence to some people. I have mentioned several
>>> others numerous times over the past 20 or so posts.
>>> Did you miss them? Dolan apparently has a problem
>>> reading what is written, words and statements and all,
>>> and instead concentrates on what he infers are
>>> "intentions" instead. Perhaps you and he share that
>>> problem. Anyway - you seem fixated on this BiGHA bike,
>>> demanding that people come up with reasons why they
>>> would or wouldn't buy one. Why is that? I know of one
>>> other person who has taken on a vendetta against a
>>> manufacturer, in this other case it was pedals, and it
>>> all came down to his being miffed that he wasn't give
>>> a free set. So now he trashes them constantly. And, of
>>> course, he has never used them. Could this be the
>>> source of your problem with the BiGHA? Isn't it enough
>>> just to point out all of the bad things you noticed
>>> when you rode it? Why do you demand that others
>>> provide you with their evaluations of the bike?
>>
>>
>>
>> You're up to around 26 posts adamantly defending this
>> bike while pretending not to, but you can't say why
>> anyone should buy one. There are several good reason not
>> to, it costs twice as much or more then comparative bikes
>> in it's class for one, but why should anyone buy it?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>>
>
> Good God, Love! How am I defending this bike? Have I
> said anything good AT ALL about it? No! What I have said
> applies to ALL bikes, not just this one! Why should
> anyone buy it? Why do you care? GET A LIFE!
>

That's what I been asking. Why should anyone buy it indeed!

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Melinda Meahan - remove TRASH to reply wrote:
>
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>> doing? Is the Bigha good value or is it not? That is
>>> what all these posts on this thread are about.
>>
>>
>>
>> My opinion is that it may well be a good machine, but it
>> is not the best value for anybody's money.
>>
>> Melinda, who would never pay $890,000 for a McLaren F1
>> and has the same opinion of it as well.
>>
>
> I think it's always dangerous to start figuring that any
> individual knows what is best for any other individual,
> what they should wear, what they should eat, and what
> they should spend their money on. You have judged this
> particular bike not to be worth the money (a good value)
> - for you. But how can you be so sure that it's not a
> good value for someone else? You know the criteria that
> you're using to determine the "best value", but is it
> the same as someone else's? I wonder about people who
> spend thousands of dollars for a watch, when one that
> keeps very good time can be had for $25 or less. And
> houses. Shouldn't there be a fixed number, based on
> square feet per dollar, and that anything over that one
> number would be considered not a good value, a sign that
> the buyer has more money than sense, and so on? The
> thing is, we all have our own criteria, or, at least
> those that we share, we view them differently. I wonder
> about those who will pay $1000 more for a Gold Rush than
> a regular Tour Easy, for instance. Is a Gold Rush not
> the best value for anyone's money? I know of quite a few
> people who would disagree. Are they all wrong, and I am
> right? Who gets to decide?
>

For someone into racing, the four pounds difference between
a Tour Easy and a Gold Rush may be worth $1000. As has been
pointed out to you several times, there is a inverse ratio
between weight and cost. But most people don't buy it for
that reason. It's a status symbol. I once had a guy stop me
on the street while I was on my Tour Easy and said something
to the effect "I see you have a Tour Easy, well _I_ have a
Gold Rush!". Not that he ever actually rode it much. He was
in a SUV at the time. I suspect that many of the people who
actually buy a Bigha will do so for the same reason, it
simply costs more then the guy next door's bike, therefore
it has more status. Just like that expensive watch. If you
need to buy status, a Bigha may be a good choice for you.
Just leave the price tag on and stay away from bent riders
who know better.

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
>> "Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> Like Lorenzo, I too would like to know what you are
>>>> doing? Is the Bigha
>>
>>
>> good
>>
>>>> value or is it not? That is what all these posts on
>>>> this thread are
>>
>>
>> about.
>>
>>>> Try to cut to the quick of something for just once in
>>>> your life why
>>
>>
>> don't
>>
>>>> you? Either do that or confine your conversations on
>>>> this newsgroup to
>>
>>
>> lost
>>
>>>> souls like Jon Meinecke. He never likes to get to the
>>>> substance of
>>
>>
>> anything
>>
>>>> either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The issue is not the value of the BiGHA, but what
>>> criteria are used to judge the value of any bike - or
>>> anything at all. I have pointed that out, countless
>>> times. No, wait a minute, Lorenzo has counted them.
>>> And yet, you can't seem to understand what I've
>>> written. Would you really like to "know what [I'm]
>>> doing"? OK, here it is again: I am pointing out that
>>> the value of a bike is not just pounds per dollar -
>>> there are more criteria used than that. As to the
>>> relative weights of those criteria, that will vary
>>> among the individuals. Racers will care more about the
>>> weight, for example, than the color. Components used
>>> is also another variable - some people would opt for
>>> cheaper stuff, as they would just install some pedals
>>> and things they already have. Some people value the
>>> ready-to-ride aspects of a delivered product, rather
>>> than having to assemble it themselves. These are all
>>> criteria that are used in judging the value of a bike.
>>> This is what I have been saying. Do you understand it
>>> now? If not, I can cut-and-paste the past few
>>> paragraphs and put them in another post.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are unable to calibrate which issues are important
>> and which are peripheral. Weight and price are central to
>> the issue of value. Those other issues you think are also
>> important are not important. You are unable to make
>> relevant discriminations. Therefore, you should not be a
>> bicycle reviewer. You will lead lesser minds than mine
>> astray with your analysis of a bike's value because you
>> are unable to advise a prospective purchaser of what is
>> important when it comes to getting a bike. Think weight
>> and price and you will never be too far from wrong. It is
>> not JUST pounds per dollar, but it is MOSTLY pounds per
>> dollar. Thus spake Zarathustra!
>>
>
> Nonsense. Weight and price are important, certainly. But
> to say that the other criteria are not important is,
> well, stupid and arrogant. Now, if you were to say that
> they weren't important *to you*, that's fine. But just
> to make that claim, for everyone, is stupid and
> arrogant. Who the hell are *you* to decide for everyone
> that the other things that lead them to choose between
> one item and another are not important? I do not tell
> people what a bike's "value" is; I leave that to the
> arrogant and stupid. I tell them what *I* think of a
> bike, I talk about various aspects of it, how it rode,
> what sort of components it had, and yes, how much it
> weighed and how much it cost. I decide *for myself* if
> something is a good value. And, if I decide that it is,
> chances are good that I'll buy it. If not, I don't.
> Simple enough for most to understand. The value is up to
> the individual. Or do you disagree? That's a simple
> question, Dolan. Do you agree that the value is up to
> the individual or not?
>

I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at
$3000. Nor is it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good value
for YOU? If no, then we all agree! You're up to about 30
posts now defending this bike. What's the attraction?

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand

 

[Larry Varney]

Lorenzo L. Love wrote: <snip>
>
> I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at
> $3000. Nor is it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good
> value for YOU? If no, then we all agree! You're up to
> about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the
> attraction?
>
> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>
> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>

I give up. You are either deliberately obtuse, or one of
the stupidest people I have ever seen posting. I have
said nothing good about this bike, and yet you claim that
I'm defending it. Have I said good things about the bike?
No. Have I disputed any claims that you have made about
the bike? No. Of course, there's little point in
disputing the claims of someone who has never seen, much
less ridden it. Have I bought a BiGHA? No. And yet you
claim that I'm "defending" the bike. On what grounds?
That I keep telling you, over and over and over again,
that there are many criteria involved in the evaluation
and purchase of EVERYTHING, not just this one bike? That
is a defense of the bike? How? Love, if I were defending
the bike, I would talk about how smooth it rode, how fast
it was, how the weight didn't matter, how the price is
justfified for one or multiple reasons, and so on. Have I
done that? No. Have I done anything even remotely like
that? No. Of course, it's not necessary for me to have
actually written anything like that, is it? Both you and
Dolan love your little game, your little childish antics
of making obviously baseless accusations, based not on
what was actually written, but on what Dolan calls
"intentions". It would be funny, except that I suspect
there might be some medical condition behind it all. So
which is it, Love? Deliberate? A medical condition? Or
are you honestly stupid?

--
Larry Varney Cold Spring, KY
http://home.fuse.net/larryvarney

 

[Lorenzo L. Love]

Larry Varney wrote:

> Lorenzo L. Love wrote: <snip>
>
>>
>> I know a slow heavy comfort is not a good value for me at
>> $3000. Nor is it for Ed Dolan. So is the Bigha a good
>> value for YOU? If no, then we all agree! You're up to
>> about 30 posts now defending this bike. What's the
>> attraction?
>>
>> Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
>>
>> Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>>
>
> I give up. You are either deliberately obtuse, or one of
> the stupidest people I have ever seen posting. I have
> said nothing good about this bike, and yet you claim
> that I'm defending it. Have I said good things about the
> bike? No. Have I disputed any claims that you have made
> about the bike? No. Of course, there's little point in
> disputing the claims of someone who has never seen, much
> less ridden
> it. Have I bought a BiGHA? No. And yet you claim that I'm
> "defending" the bike. On what grounds? That I keep
> telling you, over and over and over again, that there
> are many criteria involved in the evaluation and
> purchase of EVERYTHING, not just this one bike? That
> is a defense of the bike? How? Love, if I were
> defending the bike, I would talk about how smooth it
> rode, how fast it was, how the weight didn't matter,
> how the price is justfified for one or multiple
> reasons, and so on. Have I done that? No. Have I done
> anything even remotely like that? No. Of course, it's
> not necessary for me to have actually written anything
> like that, is it? Both you and Dolan love your little
> game, your little childish antics of making obviously
> baseless accusations, based not on what was actually
> written, but on what Dolan calls "intentions". It
> would be funny, except that I suspect there might be
> some medical condition behind it all. So which is it,
> Love? Deliberate? A medical condition? Or are you
> honestly stupid?
>

You are just incapable of answering a simple question,
aren't you? Is the Bigha a good value for YOU?

If you are not defending the Bigha in the last thirty odd
posts, just what are you doing? Is this some sick personal
attack? Why does it matter so much to you that many people
think the Bigha is grossly overpriced?

Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove

"If you would know the value of money, go and try to borrow
some." Benjamin Franklin

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Hashim El Amin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > So you are quite happy to buy something at an inflated
> > price from a group of people who have previously walked
> > away from contracts, warranties and product support?
> >
> > Lorenzo L. Love http://home.thegrid.net/~lllove
> >
> > Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand
>
> "A group of people who have previously walked away from
> contracts, warranties and product support?"
>
> Who is in this group of people, exactly? Can you name the
> specific individuals who are not to be trusted? And what
> contracts did they walk away from? What were the terms?
> Who signed said contracts? Were they personally
> guaranteed? By who?
>
> Had Bigha's founder been BikeE's founder, I could maybe
> see where you were drawing this parallel. However, it is
> clear to me that Bigha is being run by a wise business man
> who knows how to turn a profit. Since businesses are
> designed to make a profit and profitless businesses
> eventually shut down (like BikeE did), this would lead me
> to conclude Bigha will be around for a while.

I think the jury is still out if BigHa has made a profit
yet, the bike's not been out very long and we don't know
specific sales figures

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Lorenzo L. Love" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So what are these criteria? There is what we know about
> the Bigha: Very heavy - negative criteria; very expensive
> - negative criteria; poor reputation of the people making
> it - negative criteria. What positive criteria do you know
> about the Bigha that outweighs these negatives?

If you read the reviews there were plenty of positives,
here's one so try reading, in fact I have yet to see a
negative review of the bike, might be because they actually
rode them instead of just *****ing at it

http://mountainbike.about.com/cs/recumbents/a/bighareview.h-
tm

 

[Mark Leuck]

"Larry Varney" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There are many criteria for bikes, and the weight given
> to each varies depending on who is doing the judging.
> How did you pick your bikes, for instance? Was it
> simply a matter of dividing the price in dollars by the
> weight in pounds? Not that this is a bad way of looking
> at things - you're entitled to make your decisions
> based on the criteria that you consider important. By
> the way, "very heavy" is not a critiera, but a
> judgement. So is "very expensive". Weight and price are
> criteria, and apparently the only ones in existence to
> some people. I have mentioned several others numerous
> times over the past 20 or so posts. Did you miss them?
> Dolan apparently has a problem reading what is written,
> words and statements and all, and instead concentrates
> on what he infers are "intentions" instead. Perhaps you
> and he share that problem. Anyway - you seem fixated on
> this BiGHA bike, demanding that people come up with
> reasons why they would or wouldn't buy one. Why is
> that? I know of one other person who has taken on a
> vendetta against a manufacturer, in this other case it
> was pedals, and it all came down to his being miffed
> that he wasn't give a free set. So now he trashes them
> constantly. And, of course, he has never used them.
> Could this be the source of your problem with the
> BiGHA? Isn't it enough just to point out all of the bad
> things you noticed when you rode it? Why do you demand
> that others provide you with their evaluations of the
> bike?

His problem isn't with the bike, its with the company who
makes the bike