This article is part of the Brixen Bike Papers – a 41 Publishing initiative from our 2025 Think Tank in Brixen, created with the goal of building a better bike world.
A series of essays diving into the uncomfortable truths, hidden opportunities, and real changes our industry needs. Click here for the overview of all released stories.
The Brixen Bike Papers – Defining Goals – Choosing Direction Before Acceleration. Action Required!
Cycling is no longer marginal but the way the industry thinks still is
What was once a niche culture has become part of public health strategies, urban planning, aging societies, and changing lifestyles. Cycling now matters far beyond sport or leisure.
And that’s precisely why the reflexes many leaders still rely on no longer work.
More innovation alone will not be enough. More technology will not solve this. More growth without intention will only deepen existing failures. What this moment demands is direction. And direction demands leadership.
Over the past Brixen Papers, we have shown that the cycling industry doesn’t struggle because it lacks ideas or talent. It struggles because it lacks alignment. Fragmentation, short-term incentives, and fear of conflict have made action slow, reactive, and defensive even as expectations from outside the industry continue to rise.
The uncomfortable truth is this: the world now expects more from cycling than cycling expects from itself.
The real question has shifted
The real question has shifted. The question is no longer whether cycling can innovate. That question has been answered repeatedly. The real question is whether the industry is ready to take responsibility for the future it is already shaping. Because every product launched, every story told, every sales pitch and distribution decision made sets direction deliberately or by default. Choosing not to define goals is not neutrality. It’s abdication.
Choosing direction before acceleration
The cycling industry does not face a single crisis. It faces a moment of choice.
Industries that accelerate without direction eventually lose credibility, trust, and influence.
Industries that choose direction before acceleration gain something far more powerful: coherence.
And coherence is what allows an industry to grow not just bigger but better. More resilient. More credible. More human. And able to lead decisively, act effectively, and speak with authority where it truly matters.
A coherent industry can tolerate disagreement because it shares a common goal. An incoherent industry argues because it doesn’t. This distinction matters, especially when we look at how the industry currently organises itself.
In many associations today, consensus has become almost impossible. Not because the challenges are unsolvable, but because discussions are fragmented, defensive, and dominated by narrow interests. Too often, voices compete for attention instead of contributing to a shared direction.
We talk past each other in different rooms instead of confronting, respectfully and openly, what actually needs to change. We avoid clear positions to remain unexposed and in doing so, miss the very point of leadership.
Coherence doesn’t require silence. It requires prioritisation.
It doesn’t mean everyone agrees. It means everyone understands what matters most and when to step back so the industry can move forward.
The debates around Eurobike are a clear symptom of this dynamic. Large players often stay silent or disengaged, while smaller voices fill the vacuum. What emerges is not balance, but distortion – where urgency outweighs responsibility and volume replaces leadership. In this environment, the industry does not move forward. It circles around itself, slowly losing relevance.
The illusion of powerlessness
Too often, the cycling industry behaves as if the rules were fixed. We play the game while pretending we cannot change it. Responsibility is quietly shifted elsewhere. Regulation, public perception, and market pressure are treated as external constraints rather than outcomes shaped by our own choices.
This is a convenient illusion. Because as an industry – and as riders – we are the ones who can change the rules. Manufacturers. Retailers. Media. Associations. Platforms. We all can change the rules.
We are the ones who design the products. We are the ones who shape the narratives. We are the ones who choose the systems. And through them, we define the culture of cycling. The question is not whether we have influence. The question is whether we are willing to use it together.
Where we stand – before we ask
Before asking the community and the industry what goals they want to see, we believe one thing is non-negotiable: clarity about where we stand ourselves. Not as consensus. Not as the final truth. But as a clear, accountable position.
Because asking questions without showing direction is not listening. It is avoiding responsibility.
A capable, stable, and intelligent industry
We want an industry that is able to set a clear direction and vision and, just as importantly, turn that vision into reality.
At the moment, this ability is under strain. Large parts of the cycling industry are operating in survival mode: anxious, risk-averse, and focused on avoiding the next mistake rather than shaping the next step. In this state, decisions become reactive, priorities blur, and leadership gives way to caution. Panic does not only slow progress, it actively undermines the conditions required to build something better.
We believe the cycling industry must become capable of action again. Capable of making decisions. Capable of prioritising. Capable of acting beyond individual interests and short-term gains. That requires leadership and structures that hold when markets cool and expectations rise.
And it requires a more intelligent industry: one that reflects on its own behaviour, learns from failure, and engages with reality instead of hiding behind ideology or marketing narratives. In short: a professional industry.
Professional doesn’t mean corporate. It doesn’t mean investor-driven. It means reliable, accountable, and built for the long term.
Grow and grow up
We believe in growth. But we do not believe in growth without responsibility. The Corona years exposed a structural failure: sales exploded, but retention collapsed. The industry brought many people onto bikes and then failed to guide them.
The result was predictable:
- less skill
- less confidence
- less ambition
- less accessibility
- less community
- less commitment
Not because people didn’t care. But because there was no system to support them. Our position is simple: If you guide people through the journey, outcomes improve. More confidence. More usage. More enjoyment. More progression. More long-term attachment to cycling and yes, more sustainable value creation.
Growth without systems is short-lived. Growth with structure lasts.
From products to responsibility
The cycling industry still thinks primarily in products.
We believe it must start thinking in journeys.
From first contact,
to first ride,
to learning, failing, improving,
to belonging, identity, and ambition.
No product can replace this journey.
And no ecosystem builds itself.
If you bring people into cycling, you are responsible for what happens next.
Realism over ideology
We believe the industry needs less moral posturing and more honesty.
We are not against sustainability.
We are against self-deception.
Many riders drive to trailheads.
Many products are premium, disposable, and driven by desire more than necessity.
Many of us travel the world to ride bikes increasing our carbon footprint in the process.
Consumption alone will not save the world.
Still, cycling has enormous value.
Not because it is perfect.
But because it makes people healthier, more confident, more connected, and happier.
Our goal is not moral superiority.
Our goal is to make cycling the most attractive and enjoyable way to move.
The side effects like health, nature, mental well-being, community and pushing limits are real. And they matter.
The premium bubble and the obligation to translate
We acknowledge a reality: as an industry, we live in a premium bubble.
We ride the best bikes.
We use the most expensive parts.
We normalise what is inaccessible to many people.
That creates responsibility.
Innovation that never reaches accessible price points is not progress.
It is insulation.
If cycling is to grow, innovation must be translated downward and not just upward.
That requires distribution channels and communication that can explain value, not just price.
Selling through status alone is not a strategy. It is a dead end.
Distribution must evolve or be replaced
The traditional bike shop is no longer enough to reach new audiences.
New riders do not wake up one day and decide to enter a bike shop they have never set foot in before.
If we want to grow cycling, bikes must appear where new audiences already are:
- schools and institutions
- new mobility contexts
- partnerships outside the traditional bike world
- yes, even car dealerships
This is not an attack on retailers.
It’s a reality check.
Competition in distribution is not cruelty.
It’s the mechanism of improvement.
Good systems will evolve and thrive.
Bad systems will disappear.
That is how industries mature.
What this means for us at 41
For us, this is not an abstract debate.
We intend to initiate change, not just comment on it.
To lead conversations that matter and push them toward action.
We believe in collaboration with associations and institutions worldwide.
And we recognise their limits when too many voices prevent decisive action.
Many of the challenges facing cycling can no longer be solved at a purely regional level.
What is missing is a global, cross-stakeholder perspective.
That is where we see our role.
This is where we stand.
Not as a conclusion.
But as a starting point.
Now we ask.
Questions to the community & industry
We’ve shared where we stand. Now we want to listen. These questions are an invitation to riders, decision-makers, and everyone in between to help define what the cycling industry should stand for in the years ahead – honestly, critically, and constructively. If you care about the future of cycling, this is your moment to speak up.
1. Looking 10 years ahead: what kind of cycling industry would you be proud to have been part of?
2. What behaviours should never again define our industry?
3. Where have we optimised too hard for growth and forgotten responsibility or purpose?
4. What should success mean beyond revenue and unit sales?
5. What must the industry take responsibility for that it currently avoids?
6. If we could agree on just one shared goal as an industry, what should it be?
7. What uncomfortable truth are we currently afraid to say out loud but should?
This article is part of the Brixen Bike Papers – a 41 Publishing initiative from our 2025 Think Tank in Brixen, created with the goal of building a better bike world.
A series of essays diving into the uncomfortable truths, hidden opportunities, and real changes our industry needs. Click here for the overview of all released stories.
Did you enjoy this article? If so, we would be stoked if you decide to support us with a monthly contribution. By becoming a supporter of GRAN FONDO, you will help secure a sustainable future for high-quality cycling journalism. Click here to learn more.
Words: Juansi Vivo, Robin Schmitt Photos: Diverse