Talk:Campagnolo

From the article:

"Campagnolo's highest grade groups, Record (current production) and Super Record (up to 1985), were universally regarded as being unbeatable, some of the lower priced grouppos such as Chorus were often considered to be somewhat overpriced in contrast to the less prestigious competition."

Hmm... So Record is universally considered as unbeatable. Actually, I'd agree that it is the best, but if it is a universal belief, why does Dura Ace sell so well?

The second part hits me more though - I've always known Chorus as a better value and almost identical alternative to Record, offering better value for money. The article says the opposite.

Another point, Chorus isn't one of the "lower priced grouppos" - Veloce, Mirage and Xenon are the lower priced groups. Out of the six, Chorus is second most expensive!

And Campagnolo's lower priced groups are actually really good value for money. More so in Europe than the USA I believe. They really are quite competitively priced against Shimano/SRAM.

WikianJim 09:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the sentence should re-written, as it is it's POV. 17:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Campagnolo components have generally been slightly more expensive than its current main compeitior Shimano. However, as of mid-2007, some Shimano Dura-ace components are slightly more expensive than Campagnolo Record."

Given that the price is slightly higher or lower depending on when and where you look, in my opinion, these sentences should not be included in the article, especially the leading paragraph. It is sufficient to state that Campagnolo's primary competitor is Shimano. RosinDebow 02:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CampagnoloLogo.gif

Image:CampagnoloLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Planned Obsolescence

Planned obsolescence (also called built-in obsolescence or premature obsolescence) in industrial design and economics is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so that it becomes obsolete (i.e., unfashionable, or no longer functional) after a certain period of time.[1] The rationale behind this strategy is to generate long-term sales volume by reducing the time between repeat purchases (referred to as "shortening the replacement cycle"). I recommend that the policy be included in this article and most other articles about the bicycle industry but in no way specific to the bicycle industry.

Other comments: Campagnolo is a manufacturer whose products are extensively unaffordable outside of the targeted (profitable) demographic. Constant changes are necessitated by marketing not by making products a.) more durable or reliably longer lasting b.) "more affordabe" This talk entry is not an opinion piece about Campagnolo with a value or moral judgement or conclusion that the company is "bad" in some way.

Tour de France winners

I have removed this table. If the intention was to list all Tour de France winners who were using Campagnolo equipment then we should say that, and we need to provide reliable sources showing that all of these riders were indeed using Campagnolo equipment. Meters (talk) 18:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Fulcrum

Looking into Fulcrum, is they claim to be started in 2004 from there about page rather than where it is seemingly placed in 2005 in the timeline, not sure what the right way to correct this is: https://www.fulcrumwheels.com/en/fulcrum/company/about WheelsOnForks (talk) 08:30, 10 January 2024 (UTC)