I would suggest that readers might want to consider the following: The current situation does not in anyway benefit Calfree, quite the contrary. I find it difficult to believe that Calfree would intentionally embark on a course that would generate negative publicity during the introduction of a new product. Also, I would suggest that Calfree is entitled to be judged in light of its' past performance and established reputation. I do not own or ride a DF. However, I have heard only positive comments concerning Calfree from my DF riding colleagues. Like any company, I would imagine that Calfree has a number of dissatisfied customers. However, it is my impression that the vast majority of Calfree owners are very happy with their bikes. This appears to be a classic example of two people having an unfortunate misunderstanding. In the "big leagues" both the athelete making an endorsement and the manufacturer would be represented by phalanxes of attorneys and accountants. Small businesses, and even outstanding performers in "minor" sports seldom can afford the same level of legal representation.