Rapha signs up to Cyclescheme – and there’s a competition to win £700 of kit to celebrate

ClubSmed wrote:

The cycle scheme in my mind is not just about getting someone cycling to work, it's about continually enabling them to do so. To continually able them they need to be able to buy parts, accessories and kit when they run out in subsequent scheme years.

this is true, but enabling people who can 'only afford castelli' to buy rapha instead is surely not the aim. All this does is anble those already heavily invested in cycling and with plenty of means to save tax on the rapha they would be buying anyway.

when corporations follow the letter of the law to minimise their tax bill they are evil, but if wealthy cyclists do likewise all good?

wycombewheeler wrote:

 

when corporations follow the letter of the law to minimise their tax bill they are evil, but if wealthy cyclists do likewise all good?

Ridiculous swivel-eyed nonsense. How far gone must you be to suggest that cyclists are 'evil' for buying clothing on Cyclescheme. And yes that's exactly what you're trying to get at there.

Didn't take long for the myopic whinge to out from the very people who vote for LAB/CON politicians who cosy up to financial institutions openly.

Here's the deal. Cyclists from all industry, especially the financial industry, need to start riding to work. If you're just out of uni, that means you're on a low wage yet need to turn into work looking sharp. A lot of the workforce are on 50 to 70 hours a week, no overtime pay, and will put a lot of moaners work ethic to shame. Most financial institutions still have shockingly low rates of cyclists, yet that's the industry which is keeping the UK afloat. Rapha has the appeal to do what no other brand can do - get trendy people under the highest level of scrutiny and peer pressure to jump on a bike and ride into a highly competitive environment. Hence the expanding City collection. 

At the moment, the only people who're cycling to work in these massive industries are mostly back-office, middle aged guys, who've got so many commitments that they'll rough it out and change at whatever lack of facility they can find. There's also a bit of respectability to it, which these guys care about, so that helps them deal with it. Maybe you'll find a few 20 to 30 year olds - why, because again, they're on the breadline. These ones got married, had a kid, got a mortgage, now they've got little room to move. Decent job, but left bean-counting and the next promotion is a few years away, if they get it. Heaven forbid these evil fuckers get to turn up to work looking alright, or actually get to wear something they enjoy on their commute. 

And no, this pitifully small amount of money is not ever going into creating a better world, where potholes don't exist, or heated sky-high cycle lanes carry you around the country. Utter fantasy. Money for infrastructure is regional, and when you break down the Cyclescheme savings regionally, you're left with bugger all to do anything. Costs millions, tens of millions, hundreds of millions, to get anything done.

The original Cyclescheme was too restrictive. It needs to appeal to all types of cyclists. 

wycombewheeler wrote:

ClubSmed wrote:

The cycle scheme in my mind is not just about getting someone cycling to work, it's about continually enabling them to do so. To continually able them they need to be able to buy parts, accessories and kit when they run out in subsequent scheme years.

this is true, but enabling people who can 'only afford castelli' to buy rapha instead is surely not the aim. All this does is anble those already heavily invested in cycling and with plenty of means to save tax on the rapha they would be buying anyway.

when corporations follow the letter of the law to minimise their tax bill they are evil, but if wealthy cyclists do likewise all good?

Are you suggesting that only the lower income groups should be incentivised to cycle to work? Surely those are the ones who are currently more likely to use public transport to commute? Does it not make more sense from a pollution saving point of view to also incentivise those more likely to drive?
Cycle to Work is a scheme aiming to get ALL cycling to work surely?

check12 wrote:

Buy a speed suit get 3mins longer in bed...

.....and lose 5mins getting into the bugger.

wycombewheeler wrote:

I can't help feeling this is not what the cycle scheme was set up for.

Agree wholeheartedly.

Johnnystorm wrote:

wycombewheeler wrote:

I can't help feeling this is not what the cycle scheme was set up for.

Agree wholeheartedly.

A couple of hundred per year for things other than a whole bike might be justifiable to cover running costs but a grand seems excessive, especially as the scheme already benefits higher rate taxpayers more.

Duncann wrote:

Johnnystorm wrote:

wycombewheeler wrote:

I can't help feeling this is not what the cycle scheme was set up for.

Agree wholeheartedly.

A couple of hundred per year for things other than a whole bike might be justifiable to cover running costs but a grand seems excessive, especially as the scheme already benefits higher rate taxpayers more.

£200? Replacement tyres for the winter and summer wheels (if you commute all year this is perfectly acceptable), add in a spare plus a few innertubes and a new cassette and you could have easily already spent this. Those are all acceptable wear and tear items within a year imho and leaves no room for the kit you need to deal with the british weather or needed accessories like pannier bags, child seats, locks etc.
If you wanted the possibility of a groupset upgrade it would blow a £200 budget out the water by itself.

wycombewheeler wrote:

I can't help feeling this is not what the cycle scheme was set up for.

Yep but not unprecedented.....when I enquired about my work scheme the cycle shop suggested I could buy buy a crappy bike and add a grand's worth of wheels if I really just wanted the wheels....its a gaming of the system

wycombewheeler wrote:

I can't help feeling this is not what the cycle scheme was set up for.

Unless the scheme rules have changed again, I thought the 'equipment-only' option introduced in 2013 was designed to allow people to buy 'safety equipment', not accessories as a whole - see the road.cc article linked above.

Again, unless this is an outdated page, Cyclescheme's own guidance to its retail partners (https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/eops) is that safety equipment includes "reflective and high-visibility clothing and accessories" - so clothing is available on the scheme only if hi-vis or reflective so as to be considered safety equipment. I assume the same proviso is intended to apply to accessories but the wording is ambiguous. 

If that's right then it doesn't apply to 'almost the entire Rapha range' as the article suggests.

Of course this probably isn't enforced and how a retailer chooses to let you use your certificate is another matter. I took my certificate from another C2W scheme to a LBS who were very happy to allow me to top it up with my own money to buy a more expensive bike, which is not technically permitted.    

quiff wrote:

Unless the scheme rules have changed again, I thought the 'equipment-only' option introduced in 2013 was designed to allow people to buy 'safety equipment', not accessories as a whole - see the road.cc article linked above.

Again, unless this is an outdated page, Cyclescheme's own guidance to its retail partners (https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/eops) is that safety equipment includes "reflective and high-visibility clothing and accessories" - so clothing is available on the scheme only if hi-vis or reflective so as to be considered safety equipment. I assume the same proviso is intended to apply to accessories but the wording is ambiguous. 

If that's right then it doesn't apply to 'almost the entire Rapha range' as the article suggests.

Of course this probably isn't enforced and how a retailer chooses to let you use your certificate is another matter. I took my certificate from another C2W scheme to a LBS who were very happy to allow me to top it up with my own money to buy a more expensive bike, which is not technically permitted.    

 

 

The hi-vis business is easy to get around - why do you think all clothes in Evans or wherever have little tiny reflective tabs on the back?

As for accessories... I know a guy who persuaded his branch of Evans to let him get a set of Garmin Vector 2 pedals on the scheme.  Go figure.