My history with Yeti bikes is quite limited, mostly revolving around their “For Racing Only” FRO model from the late 1980s. Back then, it struck me as a decent bike, comparable to brands like Diamond Back or Specialized. This was, of course, thirty-five years in the past. Consequently, I never felt compelled to purchase a Yeti.
Interestingly, I did end up owning bikes from Diamond Back and Specialized.
To this day, the allure of Yeti escapes me, not enough to make me want to buy one. I acknowledge Yeti produces excellent bikes – a close riding friend swears by his. However, from a consumer perspective, particularly in the realm of premium-priced bikes, it seems the Yeti Bike Company is as much about strategic market positioning as they are about pure, unadulterated cycling performance.
Make no mistake, Yeti manufactures high-performance bicycles. They are good bikes, undeniably. They are also expensive bikes. Perhaps even more pointedly, they are expensive bikes that appeal to a certain status-conscious buyer, a perception fueled significantly by savvy market positioning. Consider the Switch Infinity suspension system versus the DW Link. Functionally, Switch Infinity achieves the same outcome as DW Link. Yet, technically, SI introduces more friction, added complexity, increased weight, and bulk. Switch Infinity operates by sliding, whereas DW Link utilizes a more efficient swinging motion. Examine them closely.
1988 Yeti FRO – A classic mountain bike from Yeti bike company
So, why Switch Infinity? One plausible explanation is that it allows Yeti to circumvent Dave Weagle’s DW Link patent. This enables them to promote their, arguably, less efficient system while proclaiming “Superiority!” – a classic marketing maneuver.
If I were in the market for a new carbon fiber mountain bike today, my initial considerations would lean towards Pivot or Ibis. But I am content with my aluminum Canfield, appreciating its CBF suspension.
Direct-to-consumer or not, the essence remains. =sParty
