Asher
Well-Known Member
I've been following ebikes for a couple years now and I still have a very limited understanding of the manufacturing and logistics side of things, which doesn't get discussed nearly as much as the bikes themselves.
Consider Juiced. It has its own factory, it's been at it for a decade or so, the founder spends tons of time in China sourcing, designing, testing. But Juiced bikes and batteries sell for more, appear to have more QC issues (though hard to definitively say), on older models lack the finish and finesse of Ride1Up bikes, with the exception of the torque sensor on the LMTD which is very new anyhow. In short, Juiced puts a lot of effort in for a product that seems worse and costs more, the slightly higher 52 voltage aside.
Is vertical integration overrated? Does using open mold frames and batteries like Ride1Up does more efficient at the scale these brands are selling at? What's the point of putting in all that effort if the value isn't there? Perhaps Juiced is cashing in its chips a little, and coasting on its name for everything but the latest model (the Scorpion). Plus, until recently, Ride1Up was chronically sold out and Juiced wasn't, so Juiced had an effective convenience premium.
It just seems bizarre that R1 can show up and offer a more compelling product for its segment than really anything else out there stateside (Class 3 hub drive commuter under ~$2500, esp under $1800).
I see a lot of tech/biz bros talking up vertical integration but given the struggles of brands like Vanmoof and the absence of price savings there, this sounds more like a hustle for venture capital than an accurate description of affairs. Plus, the bike and car industry have been around for 100 years and they still extensively rely on an ecosystem of third party suppliers.
Maybe @Deleted Member 4210 or @Ravi Kempaiah could answer this well.
Consider Juiced. It has its own factory, it's been at it for a decade or so, the founder spends tons of time in China sourcing, designing, testing. But Juiced bikes and batteries sell for more, appear to have more QC issues (though hard to definitively say), on older models lack the finish and finesse of Ride1Up bikes, with the exception of the torque sensor on the LMTD which is very new anyhow. In short, Juiced puts a lot of effort in for a product that seems worse and costs more, the slightly higher 52 voltage aside.
Is vertical integration overrated? Does using open mold frames and batteries like Ride1Up does more efficient at the scale these brands are selling at? What's the point of putting in all that effort if the value isn't there? Perhaps Juiced is cashing in its chips a little, and coasting on its name for everything but the latest model (the Scorpion). Plus, until recently, Ride1Up was chronically sold out and Juiced wasn't, so Juiced had an effective convenience premium.
It just seems bizarre that R1 can show up and offer a more compelling product for its segment than really anything else out there stateside (Class 3 hub drive commuter under ~$2500, esp under $1800).
I see a lot of tech/biz bros talking up vertical integration but given the struggles of brands like Vanmoof and the absence of price savings there, this sounds more like a hustle for venture capital than an accurate description of affairs. Plus, the bike and car industry have been around for 100 years and they still extensively rely on an ecosystem of third party suppliers.
Maybe @Deleted Member 4210 or @Ravi Kempaiah could answer this well.
