Brad's Bike - going going, soon!

Andrew N

Pinarello Dogma, one of five built, owned by 2010 GB time trial champion, 56cm.

All proceeds to Sky Rainforest Rescue

Available for auction on Going Going Bike. Less than 60mins to go.

http://www.goinggoingbike.com/TeamSkyRainforestRescue/

Anonymous

My bid for £30 (with them paying P&P) fell on deaf ears.........

TheHelpfulDevil

WHAT WAS the end selling price?

Anonymous

11,600 for the bike...

Sgt_Pepper

TheHelpfulDevil wrote:

WHAT WAS the end selling price?

According to the article, £11,600




would have been before you nap but it took me 3 mins to work out how to spell "according" :shock:

davelakers

NapoleonD wrote:

11,600 for the bike...

Where are you going keep this one then Napd?

Wheelspinner

davelakers wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

11,600 for the bike...

Where are you going keep this one then Napd?

This one would need the Super-Deluxe Bike Travel Box.

Scrumple

I think that is a bit cheap.... for a charity price.

A bit more publicity and that could have made a fair bit more?

bazbadger

For £400 more you could have had a brand new one

bazbadger

Sir Alan and Piers ride one too.

Now, there's an endorsement.

pedro118118

I don't think Piers would know the difference between a Pinarello and a Pot of Pepper. LS is a true afficionado though - gather he owns a fleed of Dogmas and Princes, spread amongst houses around the globe...................................I suppose if you can afford it..................

Pokerface

Scrumple wrote:

I think that is a bit cheap.... for a charity price.

Agreed. I wonder if the buyer is going to ride it or display it. Depends on who bought it and why I guess.


With the bike you also get a full set of (signed) kit too I believe plus a helmet.

greeny12

I guess the thing is that for most people the bike is not going to fit, so that rules out a lot of wealthy City types who might have been up for a trophy bike to show off at the next sportive they do.

Maybe it would have been better to offer a custom bike to the buyer's own size specification?

calvjones

pedro118118 wrote:

I don't think Piers would know the difference between a Pinarello and a Pot of Pepper. LS is a true afficionado though - gather he owns a fleed of Dogmas and Princes, spread amongst houses around the globe...................................I suppose if you can afford it..................

if he has aspirations to being an afficionado, someone should point him in the direction of any Italian bike company that manages to make light, attractive machines in Italy

giant_man

The green/black was gorgeous imo, nicer than the sky blue/black. *Sigh* ...

Kléber

From my view the bike wasn't that unique. For a charity auction you need several things to go well.

You need an iconic item: for example a burnt guitar by Jimi Hendrix is worth more than a working one. A bike ridden in the Tour of Britain with a green paint job is probably less valuable than the bike ridden to Roubaix by Flecha. Had Wiggins won the Tour de France the bike would be worth a lot more.

You also need a good cause. I know little about Sky TV's rainforest-saving activities, and being a cynic I suspect a coat of "greenwash" here.

Either way someone wins a bike and some cash goes to the charity so everyone wins. Personally the green isn't for me and it's one of the heaviest bikes on the pro tour.

Gazzaputt

Kléber wrote:

From my view the bike wasn't that unique. For a charity auction you need several things to go well.

You need an iconic item: for example a burnt guitar by Jimi Hendrix is worth more than a working one. A bike ridden in the Tour of Britain with a green paint job is probably less valuable than the bike ridden to Roubaix by Flecha. Had Wiggins won the Tour de France the bike would be worth a lot more.

You also need a good cause. I know little about Sky TV's rainforest-saving activities, and being a cynic I suspect a coat of "greenwash" here.

Either way someone wins a bike and some cash goes to the charity so everyone wins. Personally the green isn't for me and it's one of the heaviest bikes on the pro tour.

I agree with everything you said here.

disgruntledgoat

Kléber wrote:

From my view the bike wasn't that unique. For a charity auction you need several things to go well.

You need an iconic item: for example a burnt guitar by Jimi Hendrix is worth more than a working one. A bike ridden in the Tour of Britain with a green paint job is probably less valuable than the bike ridden to Roubaix by Flecha. Had Wiggins won the Tour de France the bike would be worth a lot more.

You also need a good cause. I know little about Sky TV's rainforest-saving activities, and being a cynic I suspect a coat of "greenwash" here.

Either way someone wins a bike and some cash goes to the charity so everyone wins. Personally the green isn't for me and it's one of the heaviest bikes on the pro tour.

AND it's Shimano :twisted:

simon_e

Kléber wrote:

From my view the bike wasn't that unique. For a charity auction you need several things to go well.

You need an iconic item:

Like this - http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... 0485036744

Much better value at half the price and one could really appreciate its significance.

Kléber wrote:

I know little about Sky TV's rainforest-saving activities, and being a cynic I suspect a coat of "greenwash" here.

In the absence of any previous green awareness or sustainable business practices by the Murdoch empire IMHO this certainly is proper greenwash.

Pross

Nice to see Cadel's jersey raising so much although I would dispute whether or not it represents "much better value". I would agree that it has more value as a piece of cycling memorabilia (although there would have been many of these jerseys produced)but the bike has more of a value in its own right (about £9k new I think and this is barely used) plus there was all the other kit. Also, why do we end up with some form of charity apartheid where some causes are classified as better than others? I really don't like Murdoch or the Sky / Newscorp empire but as long as the money they raise goes to good causes and do good what difference does it make if it is just a cynical marketing ploy? At the end of the day very few charity contributions from big business or wealthy individuals are more than a token gesture for PR purposes that can earn a bit of tax relief but the money they give is just as useful as if it were entirely sincere.

simon_e

Pross wrote:

Nice to see Cadel's jersey raising so much although I would dispute whether or not it represents "much better value". I would agree that it has more value as a piece of cycling memorabilia (although there would have been many of these jerseys produced)but the bike has more of a value in its own right

Apart from the fact that it's the very WC jersey he wore on the last day of the 2010 TdF complete with race numbers, that it will be signed and dedicated.... that will be worth a great deal more as a collectible (if you're an investor) or valued as memorabilia for any cycling fan than a bike that Wiggins apparently rode for a couple of stages of the ToB. I can buy myself a kitted, resprayed Dogma. It will never have the significance of that jersey.

Pross wrote:

why do we end up with some form of charity apartheid where some causes are classified as better than others?

Apartheid??? FFS :roll:

I'm sure the rainforest project will gladly accept any money, but the term "greenwash" was created with good reason. I don't see much point in making token efforts or donating money to causes while working in a way contrary to what the causes are trying to do. When sky starts making ethical choices, cutting air travel blah blah then maybe it's worth a pinch of sh*t.

Pross

Simon E wrote:

Apart from the fact that it's the very WC jersey he wore on the last day of the 2010 TdF complete with race numbers, that it will be signed and dedicated.... that will be worth a great deal more as a collectible

I don't deny that although I'm not sure what the market for cycling memorabilia is like but I would argue the jersey he wore when winning some of his races this season would be even more valuable. I've seen people buy signed jerseys at charity events and they haven't very often gone on to be worth more in the long term but to me that isn't the point, the main thing is that the charity has done well from the auction and I would commend Cuddles for his work for the charity. However, whatever their motives, I would also commend Sky for the money they are raising. I don't think anyone is fooled that giving money to a 'green' charity shows they have green credentials (the cycling team probably have one of the most thirsty team cars out there for a start) but they are no worse that most other big companies.

simon_e

Pross wrote:

whatever their motives, I would also commend Sky for the money they are raising. I don't think anyone is fooled that giving money to a 'green' charity shows they have green credentials (the cycling team probably have one of the most thirsty team cars out there for a start) but they are no worse that most other big companies.

Agreed. Being described as being "as bad as the rest" is hardly a great accolade.

But I don't want to actively support big companies unless they are at least trying to do something positive. Nothing has ever been improved for the general good by letting big companies sort it out.

If nobody is fooled why are they doing it? Please don't say that they genuinely believe in it, that surely isn't true. "Raising awareness" is shorthand for avoiding responsibility and passing it onto someone else - it's like the government telling us to use low energy light bulbs to save CO2 while building more coal-fired power stations and motorways.

If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem.

The value in Cadel's jersey is more than monetary, it's a piece of cycling history that carries significance for many people.