Here we are: September 2025 – two-thirds of the way through the year. Fair to say that trade conditions continue to represent a significant challenge of a kind that’s far from simple to solve.
In the next in a series of features with BikeBiz, Phillip M Lucas explores ‘what next’.
How will our industry evolve, beyond surviving, to make the most of the future opportunity?
[divider style=”solid” top=”20″ bottom=”20″]
Here we are. Surviving.
Sure, things might be a little better. But they’re not good.
So, where’s the good gone? The same place as our outlook. The whole ‘Survive till 25’ mantra seemed to assume an outward solution would arrive; that the market itself would bounce back, that demand would naturally return to the old peaks. It assumed that between 23-25, our main job to fix things was to clear stocks (of course, a lot more happened under the surface).
But time is teaching us something different. We aren’t just going to survive our way into a marvellous new up-thrust. We’ve survived into a more cautious world with a notably softer market. Classic business cycle theory would have us expect a sharp rebound sometime soon, but the global economy (tariff shocks, high financing costs, and consumer caution) is squarely in the way of that pipe dream.
Today’s world is our new baseline. Today is what we build on. Luckily, liquidation waves are waning, and OEM stock asymmetry is falling. In Europe, production dropping ~20% in ‘24 helped clear excess stock. By 2025, many industry players are reporting inventory at more manageable levels, and desperation-driven discounting is starting to fade. But this is only stabilisation, not growth. Those that have fallen have made room for the rest to breathe a little easier; “creative destruction”, which has given us a new bedrock to stand on.
What of growth, then? The cycle has softened, and it will likely stay soft for a while longer. There is no magical high-demand pot of gold hiding under a rainbow waiting for us to “get back to.” So, where to now?
It’s time for a new mantra: Fix in ’26. And this time, the fixing must be inward.
This is about strategic renewal and building dynamic capabilities to operate in a leaner, more disciplined industry. Many companies are already working on internal parts of the following list. But the scope is larger than just one brand, and real change may take moves with a scope bigger than individual companies.
I don’t have a crystal ball, but I have a few ideas on what to fix:
Fix the race to the bottom to end more short-term damage. We’ve done a phenomenal job destroying consumer value perception over the last three years, and we all know this is today’s pain point #1.
Sure, with the situation we were in, it was an ugly necessity. But consumers now expect XT at Deore pricing. Restoring value means a pivot back to value capture and differentiation—through updated stock unfriendly to deep-discount internet comparison shopping, stronger service offers, and improved brand storytelling—rather than continuing a downward spiral of cost competition and products that put us in a weak bargaining position.
Counterintuitively, this might mean finishing that last aggressive clearance push to step into a more stable coming model year. For retailers, this may even mean reducing floor space allocation for habitually overproducing mainstream brands and reallocating it to up-and-coming brands that stand on a new value proposition. Yes: de-emphasise even core brands that don’t help maintain profitability.
Fix the “sell it and they’ll ride it” mantra, start selling the ongoing utility. Congratulations: As an industry, we’ve successfully filled countless sheds with an exciting, fresh new generation of…. dust-gathering bikes. We’ve replicated the Chinese bikeshare crash in sold goods.
We had all better plan our floor stock and assembly lines, knowing this saturation is real because we have already saturated the mildly interested market for the next few years.
The industry must shift from a transactional mindset to one focused on customer lifetime value, emphasising long-term engagement, retention, and usage. That means collective campaigns to get more people consistently using (and discovering how to enjoy) products they have bought. For shops: what are your suppliers doing to boost your shop rides?
Fix the each man for himself mentality and pursue collective action. The industry must unite to push its interests more powerfully.
Because – What will sell more bikes: another shiny ad that shifts market share from one brand to another, or channelling that spend into a joint industry fund to lobby for safe infrastructure or expanding a local trail system?
One captures more obtained market for a single brand, while the other boosts the whole market size.
A local shop or manufacturer-sponsored trail is rare in many areas… why? Infrastructure generates ongoing demand that will become a multigenerational norm.
We have a phenomenally organised claimant of most public spaces: the automotive lobby.
Perhaps a tiny but fierce counterpoint is what we need. Dare we even push back on quick-fix purchase subsidies in preference for safe street, trail or advocacy funding?
Subsidies generate a flash in the pan, but generate dependency. We should wean ourselves off the milk. Has your brand (or your shop’s suppliers’) joined an industry advocacy body? Meanwhile, are shops contacting, nudging or pushing back on local representation enough?
Fix the overreliance on niche sport and embrace the bigger market. If Decathlon can reassign floorspace to mobility and succeed, so can your brand or shop.
There are millions of people who can ride bikes that do not own one (this is our real Total Addressable Market), because we haven’t been selling the type they can value (because what we sell does not Service their needs). Sporting bikes are volatile by nature; real, durable volume lies in addressing a broader market.
Do you see more Ferraris and Lamborghinis in your neighbourhood, or Fords and Renaults?
Likewise, in many mobility markets, sporting bikes account for just 10–20% of units.
Yes, this shift takes time, but it’s essential, and if you don’t start today, there will be no tomorrow where you benefit. This calls for institutional work like lobbying for safe urban infrastructure while elevating bikes as a desirable modern mobility tool in your sales team, not just a recreational one. It also means making eMobility easy for new participants to manage: the more powerful the motor, the more we need to offer automatic shifting (even Dutch consumers—perhaps born in a bike basket—struggle to avoid destroying the second cog of eBike cassettes).
And if we want to coax people out of cars, we must mirror the automotive playbook: buy, lease, or rent, on both new and second-hand. Cargo bikes are already becoming the new chic in London school commutes. Let’s seize this.
Ensure forecasting and SKU’ing with open eyes and critical minds to break the bullwhip. Many of us are already very focused on this, but how accurately?
The recent launch of an anonymised purchasing index for the bike industry is a great comparative foresight tool for brands. Membership of your local industry association often comes with rich, anonymised sales stats that should help you optimise your shop floor and clean your balance sheet more wisely.
COVID pulled forward multiple years of potential demand and made it concrete demand, which was a healthy share-of-market capture: the exceptional circumstances inflated our collective and individually obtainable markets. But it became problematic when the following production overshoot (because we thought our addressable market had grown long term) oversaturated the market and led to liquidations.
This is the part of the hangover we are still digesting.
The industry would do well to slow down its habitual overforecasting, or this feedback loop won’t end. (A consumer habituated to smoking deals will wait patiently for end-of-year discounts if they see the summer or even worse, springtime sales waning, because *we* trained them that a bike isn’t worth that official price.
Consider a move from “Spec Wars” to “User Experience”: Instead of cramming the priciest mechanical parts into ever-cheaper bikes, COVID showed riders are open to new supplier names and new ways of thinking.
Think of it like wine: French châteaux used to define aspiration, but then Yellow Tail came along, not as “the best Bordeaux,” but as an entirely new, approachable way to consume wine. In bikes, the equivalent shift could be differentiating on ride feel and control systems rather than spec sheets, bringing aspirational touches like electronic groupsets into accessible price points (especially those selling through traditional brick and mortar).
Just like the car brands, which wine category do you think sells most nowadays? Yes, it’s a risk to spec a component that doesn’t start with S or C on a mid-level bike, but smart choices might well make the test ride compelling. Perhaps that’s why Shimano just brought Di2 down to Deore and Cues: to hold off capable challengers. If so, this might indicate they have something to bring to the table.
Fix the workshop shortage and move it to the middle of our value proposition. The perceived value of bike servicing must rise.
Paying mechanics sustainably might be “risky” overhead for a sales-driven organisation, but it is direct labour for a shop focused on lifetime value. Mechanics aren’t in our workshops just to retighten bolts out of boxes; they’re what keep the whole ownership experience alive. COVID-19 has already proven the lifecycle extending value of service (how many 1970’s touring bikes and 90’s MTB’s came out of the woodwork into your workshop?).
The challenge now is maintaining that momentum, with servicing positioned as a cornerstone of lifetime value. In an extreme adoption of this worldview, internet shops become your allies, providing parts you never had to stock to generate lean, clean workshop hours (with a parts failure waiver, sure).
Ongoing service support is key to ensuring optimal product experiences for mobility users; we should be planning the next maintenance date when a bike is picked up from a service (just like your dentist does).
Leverage circularity to sidestep online junk eBikes and reactivate saturated clientele. If given the choice, many consumers will stretch slightly for a Patagonia Worn Wear jacket over a no-name online knockoff — but only if they can see it online.
Brands and retailers have this “easy” lever to offer vastly superior products at a price step-up not too far above online junk. But if the better alternative is invisible, cheap junk wins. For brands, this may mean creating a page on your website, giving shop stock of used bikes credibility.
For shops, this means listing second-hand bikes on online classifieds to allow price comparisons in the digital verticals. Bundle small high-margin accessories to create value anchors, then remove them strategically to allow price negotiations with online hagglers and maintain baseline profit.
And let’s not stop at passive trade-ins. This could be a tool to reactivate corona buyers with buyers’ remorse or an ultimately dysfunctional buy: Go on offense: post “In Search Of” ads for trade-in deals: “Trade in your COVID mountain bike for a commuter eBike”.
Aggressive circularity creates a new acquisition funnel, draws idle bikes out of sheds, and turns latent value into fresh sales.
We should promote and embrace certified trade-ins from Factory to Store, to offer bikes that won’t catch on fire, have brakes that work, and don’t have left-hand pedals forcibly installed on the right. Seize every backward-fork e-bike service request to funnel sales of certified, high-quality products.
Rebuild our strategic moat for long-term structural defence. During corona, many brands did the LEGO thing: diversified into too many areas and diluted focus and brand identities.
Right now, cycling’s moat is filled with the ruins of 2021’s overforecasting and the me-too stock of failed COVID opportunists. To rebuild, brands need to double down on brand identity sharpening, distribution and retail partnerships (not just treating them as one-way sales channels), invest in after-sales ecosystems. Savvy repositioning means bringing back quality and value-added features that opportunists can’t replicate.
Rapha shows how cultural impact doesn’t always equal a defensible, profitable market position. Meanwhile, Assos seems to have kept its more technical allure. Bosch is further proof: consistent innovation and brand equity create a moat so strong that bikes with their motors are amongst the last price-haggled.
Moats are rebuilt by offering lasting products that better serve real consumer needs, just as much as by strengthening brand equity through communication.
Which means: Restore value for medium-term repair. Both in product perceived value and in company book values.
This means more than trimming stock. It’s about re-establishing what our brands stand for and leaning on Valuable, Rare, Inimitable, and Non-substitutable qualities — strengths that competitors cannot easily undercut.
This can be done in image or tech.
Look at LVMH: they operate in a world flooded with discount fashion and Chinese webshop goods, yet they’ve built resilience by protecting perceived value and making sure their products remain aspirational rather than transactional.
Their brand equity comes with anchoring product stories, quality, and identity so firmly that discount-driven competitors can’t touch them. For consumers that aren’t attracted by that, shops can hedge with stock of better-designed mid-market bikes that anchor in functionality, and for price-sensitive buyers, there is certified used stock.
Rekindle innovation to elevate the ride experience enough to drive modified rebuys. Considering the saturation discussed earlier, we need to boost and innovate our top-end lines to offer dedicated cyclists a real pull to upgrade.
When most features are a commodity, consumers have little nudge to place value on a product refresh.
We need more than incremental innovation here; another electronic spin on existing categories to inspire people’s dreams. We need disruptive innovations that reset and elevate the ride: maybe those 32” wheels in XC/Gravel, 3D-printing that extends factory customisation beyond paint and build kits, and going deeper, how about e-bike suspension systems that truly redefine performance for structurally heavier bikes, rather than classic forks and single-pivot solutions to grab me-too market share?
Our industry needs a new 29’er, aero…. “Dyson” moment.
Also, Legacy brands need to get a fire under them. If they don’t realise the same Asian shift we’re already seeing in the automotive industry is going to hit cycling by the next upturn, they’re asleep at the wheel. Legacy brands must anticipate this global shift and return to their core values now, rebuilding moats around authenticity before others seize that space.
Surviving till ’25 was about waiting for the storm to pass.
Not every fix will fit every brand or shop. But if we fail to act, 2026 will look just like 2025: flat, with no clear path to improvement in 2027. Fix in ’26 must be about rebuilding into something stronger, leaner, and more relevant for the long term.
