>>1200157>Baggy clothes also equals swimming in your own sweatWhat are you talking about you Fred kool-aid drinker? Nike, Adidas, Under Armour, Patagonia, North Face, and dozens of other companies make tight fitting moisture wicking clothing from polyester and the price point is often far less than that of cycling specific over-priced crap and more useful(Patagonia, North Face often make very light clothing and it is packable which is ideal for traveling or hiking/climbing/etc or stuffing in a saddlebag, rear rack bag, etc).
>But the fact of the matter is without the Freds and their money, you wouldn't have as nice a bike and gear as you haveAre you delusional as fuck or what? The bike industry is pathetic and gimmicky. In the past road bikes for the average person before the 70's bike boom used to have fenders mounts, be able to accommodate wider tires, a rear rack and gasp weren't really any slower in any noticeable way. The bike industry today in the Anglosphere is just essentially targeting and trying to bilk a very tiny portion of very gullible white professionals who have too much disposable income. Look at the mountain bike industry, especially it has gotten insanse. Now they have 26" wheels, fatbikes with 26", maybe even 26+, 27.5 wheels, 27.5+. 29ers, 29plus, 29 inch fatbikes, etc.
If you go to any mtb or road forum alot of bike geeks will list in their signatures their ridiculous assortment of bikes but if you notice almost none of them will be useful for commuting, traveling or getting anywhere. The stupid Anglosphere Fred oriented bike companies are essentially targeting a late 20's(at the youngest), but mostly 30+ demographic of white professionals who want to pretend like they are athletes. Sure this demographic is often willing to spend alot of money, but eventually they give up cycling because it is not useful or integrated into their daily life, it is just a hobby that they abandon when they have kids, are forced to work more hours, etc.
