It’s easy to criticize. It’s easy to meet up and talk. The harder question is: can you actually change something — and who is willing to do it with you?
After the 11 Brixen Papers from our last Think Tank openly exposed many of the structural problems within the bike industry, one thing became clear: we didn’t need another round of analysis.
We needed action. Alignment. And a new way of thinking — and acting. Because while the bike industry has mastered performance, riders are increasingly paying the price for fragmented systems, rising complexity and disconnected experiences.
The challenge is no longer building capable bikes. The challenge is making cycling feel more meaningful, accessible and relevant to more people again.
That was the goal of the 41 Leadership Summit in Leonberg.
Not another industry event where the usual suspects shake hands and repeat the same conversations — but an attempt to bring together forward-thinking people willing to question old assumptions and rethink what the future of cycling could look like.
And very quickly, one thing became obvious: the industry doesn’t primarily suffer from a lack of awareness anymore. Most people already see the fragmentation, the growing disconnect between industry thinking and rider reality, and the limitations of endlessly optimizing products in isolation.
The harder challenge lies elsewhere: changing behaviors, incentives and deeply ingrained patterns that no longer fit the reality cycling operates in today.
Over 3 days, we shifted the conversation:
- From product… to experience.
- From competition… to growth.
- From selling bikes… to designing systems that grow riders and the market.
- From institutions… to concepts that make our industry more powerful.
- From selling performance… to unlocking it.
- From industry-first thinking… to rider-first systems.
And maybe that was the most important outcome of Leonberg: not consensus — but momentum.
From Diagnosis to Action
New times bring new questions. And new questions require new answers. The structures and patterns that worked for decades no longer fit the reality cycling operates in today.
Large parts of the industry are still operating with assumptions that no longer match how people discover, experience and stay connected to cycling. Riders increasingly feel the friction — while the industry itself struggles with fragmentation, relevance and long-term growth.
The Brixen Papers were never meant to be opinion pieces. They were a diagnosis. Across 11 papers, we openly questioned many of the assumptions, behaviors and structures the bike world has operated around for decades: from industry fragmentation and lack of digitalization to marketing, retail, media and the question of what innovation in cycling should actually mean today.
But criticism alone changes nothing. That’s why we started turning many of those discussions into concrete action — even before the Leadership Summit itself began.
During the E-MOUNTAINBIKE Awards Night, we openly presented both our findings and the first changes we’ve already implemented to help move the industry toward a direction that creates more value for riders, not just more products. Because while the bike industry is incredibly good at obsessing over technical details, it often loses sight of the bigger picture.
The Performance Gap – We Don’t Need Better Bikes.
We live in the most over-equipped generation in outdoor history. People buy high-end bikes. Brands push innovation and marginal gains. Media celebrates superlatives. And technically, modern bikes are extraordinary. But the real performance often never shows up.
As media, we constantly discuss cutting-edge technology and high-end products — while many riders never even experience the most basic foundations required to unlock their full potential. The gap between what modern bikes can do — and what riders actually experience — is enormous. And the data backs this up.
Our recent reader survey revealed an uncomfortable reality: more than half of all buyers (54%) received no individual bike setup when purchasing their bike. Nearly every second customer (47%) was never even offered a professional setup in the first place.
That means many riders spend €8,000 or more on a premium bike — and leave the shop with incorrect suspension settings, poorly adjusted controls and little understanding of how to actually use the product properly. In other words: they are riding a completely different bike than the one they read about in reviews. At the same time, more than 55% of buyers received no proactive explanation around technology, maintenance or warranty at all.
The uncomfortable truth: the difference between a well-set-up bike and a badly set-up bike is often bigger than the technical difference between two model years. Yet setup, onboarding and rider education are still treated as side topics instead of core parts of the ownership experience. And sometimes the industry’s reaction makes things even worse. We all know the jokes: “All the gear, no idea.”
But maybe that reveals a deeper problem. Instead of helping riders unlock the full experience, the industry often assumes too much knowledge too early. A premium product without proper onboarding does not automatically create a premium experience. Which raises an uncomfortable but important question: if the industry sells premium products, why does the ownership experience so often fall short of the product itself?
Maybe real progress doesn’t start with another marginal gain in performance. Maybe it starts with helping riders actually access the performance that already exists. Because the next frontier is no longer just technical innovation. It’s education, experience and capability.
Changing What the Industry Rewards
As a magazine, we are fully aware of the influence media has on industry dynamics, product development and ultimately on what brands prioritize. So why not use that influence to help create a shift?
It would be easy to openly criticize the industry while continuing to reward the exact same patterns in our own work. For years, the entire bike world — including media — helped amplify maximum performance, technical superlatives and increasingly marginal differences between products.
That’s exactly why we started fundamentally rethinking not only our testing criteria, but also what we choose to give attention and relevance to. Especially if it does not matter in the way that many might assume.
Because while much of the industry still focuses primarily on components, watts and torque numbers, we started asking different questions: Where does real rider value actually come from? What creates long-term satisfaction beyond the first ride? And which pain points has the industry collectively ignored for too long?
As a result, our focus for our bike tests is shifting toward three core dimensions:
- Ride Quality & Rideability
- Product & System Quality
- Ownership & User Experience
And we’re already putting that into practice.
For the first time, our latest comparison test included a dedicated beginner test session on the trails. We expanded our evaluation through manufacturer interviews about service, warranty and value creation, alongside rider surveys focused on real-world ownership experiences.
At the same time, we deliberately kept all the nerdy details we genuinely love: back-to-back testing and benchmarking, standardized system efficiency measurements, reach-height analysis, center-of-gravity and weight distribution analysis, as well as quantified traction and uphill performance testing.
Because performance still matters. But performance alone is no longer enough. This is ultimately bigger than new test criteria. It’s a broader shift in how value is defined in cycling.
Our vision is simple: Riding a bike is only a fraction of the experience. Winning in the future means owning the entire journey — and helping riders unlock their full potential.
Because if we want different outcomes, we cannot continue rewarding the same things.
Does It Work?
What does a mayor have in common with a bike CEO? At the 41 Leadership Summit, the answer suddenly felt surprisingly obvious: both are ultimately judged by the exact same question: Does it actually work?
One of the most interesting perspectives during the Summit came from Leonberg’s mayor Tobias Degode. Listening to him speak about cities, citizens and public responsibility revealed how similar the underlying challenges actually are.
In cities, people care about simple but fundamental things:
Does public transport run on time?
Does support feel reliable?
Do problems get solved quickly and smoothly?
Cycling is no different.
Does the product deliver on its promise?
Does service work when riders need it?
Do warranty, maintenance and ownership feel intuitive and trustworthy?
Modern bikes have become extraordinarily capable — but also increasingly dependent on systems, software, integration and support structures. And once those systems stop working smoothly, riders end up absorbing the complexity themselves.
Because no consumer — and no citizen — evaluates strategy papers. People evaluate experiences.
No matter how sophisticated the strategy, vision or PowerPoint presentation may be, mayors and CEOs are ultimately judged by exactly the same thing: does the system work in real life? And that applies not only to cities and brands — but also to us as media. If media only amplifies performance while ignoring ownership, accessibility and rider outcomes, then we become part of the same disconnect.
Everybody Wants Change — Until Old Reflexes Kick In
What made Leonberg important wasn’t consensus. In many moments, quite the opposite. What was actually encouraging was how open and self-critical many discussions initially became. People openly acknowledged the fragmentation, the complexity and the growing disconnect between industry thinking and rider reality. There was a genuine willingness to question old assumptions and rethink what growth, value and relevance could mean in the future.
But at the same time, you could feel how quickly conversations gravitated back toward familiar territory: product strategy and technical solutions. Again and again, discussions that started around accessibility, participation, community or rider experience snapped back toward the industry’s traditional logic of performance and competition the moment things became concrete.
And maybe that revealed one of the industry’s biggest challenges: not a lack of awareness — but the difficulty of escaping deeply ingrained thinking patterns. Because if the industry truly wants to reach new audiences, create new relevance and grow beyond its current core bubble, it also needs new perspectives around the table.
More women. More non-core riders. More people with different expectations, experiences and relationships to bikes. Not as a diversity checkbox — but because they bring a completely different understanding of accessibility, usability, communication and value.
Many of the industry’s current discussions are still shaped by people who already deeply understand bikes. But future growth will increasingly come from people who don’t think like the industry itself. And that changes the questions we need to ask.
Not just: “How do we build a better bike?” But: “How do we create a better experience for people who are not already insiders?” or “What makes cycling more attractive?”
That tension became one of the defining dynamics of the Summit. Because everybody wants change — until change starts challenging familiar assumptions, established business models and the industry’s own perspective on itself. And maybe meaningful progress starts exactly there: not with another optimistic keynote, but with the willingness to let new perspectives genuinely influence the conversation.
The Industry Still Talks Mostly to Insiders
One of the most recurring themes throughout the Summit was the growing gap between industry language and rider reality.
The bike world still spends enormous amounts of energy talking about: torque, kinematics, integration, performance.
And while all of that absolutely matters, it also revealed a deeper issue: the industry often communicates the mechanics of cycling while people are actually searching for the meaning of cycling. Because most people are not looking for a technical object. They are looking for: freedom, health, adventure, connection, escape, identity, experience. The bike itself is no longer the story. What it enables is.
And that shift changes everything: how brands communicate, how media evaluates bikes, how retailers onboard riders, how communities are built, and ultimately how new people enter cycling. Because growing the market requires speaking beyond the existing core audience — while much of the industry still communicates almost exclusively to insiders.
Retail Is No Longer Just a Sales Channel
Another important realization throughout the Summit: the retail perspective was underrepresented — even though retailers remain one of the most critical touchpoints in the entire rider experience.
Because while the industry continues to push increasingly advanced products into the market, the service and workshop infrastructure is struggling to keep pace. Modern bikes are no longer just mechanical products. They are complex systems built around software, electronics, integration and increasingly demanding service requirements.
And yet, many brands still rely heavily on retailers to close the loop with the rider: setup, education, service, trust, ownership experience. And often leave it entirely to retailers to explain the product, onboard the customer and ultimately make the experience work.
At the same time, qualified workshops and trained service staff are becoming harder to find. That creates a growing disconnect between product complexity and real-world support capabilities.
If the industry is serious about improving rider experience, retail can no longer be treated primarily as a downstream sales channel. Retailers are not just distribution. They are onboarding. Education. Trust. Community. And in many cases, they are a brand’s only physical touchpoint. At the same time, entirely new retail formats and direct-to-consumer approaches entered the conversation. If retail increasingly defines the ownership experience, an obvious question emerges: why rely entirely on multi-brand dealers if brands could own more of that experience themselves — or create entirely new experiences around it?
A rider rarely remembers a spec sheet. But they remember whether somebody took the time to help them.
Which also means the future of cycling cannot be built through isolated conversations between brands alone. The industry needs a far more honest and collaborative exchange across the entire value chain — including the people who interact with riders every single day. Because increasingly, the limiting factor is no longer the bike itself — but whether riders are actually supported well enough to unlock its full potential.
Industry Growth Requires More Than Competition
Another strong realization during the Summit was that the bike industry has become extremely good at competing — but often surprisingly weak at aligning around bigger shared goals. Competition itself is not the problem. Quite the opposite. Competition drives innovation, creates differentiation and pushes products forward.
The real challenge is understanding where competition creates value — and where fragmentation weakens the entire industry. Because when every topic becomes a competitive battlefield, the bike world struggles to build the kind of collective relevance and influence that other industries have mastered long ago.
Trail access. Advocacy. Political representation. Dealer education. Sustainability. Shared standards. Public perception. These are not areas where isolated thinking creates strength. And yet, the industry still often behaves as if every conversation needs to be approached from a defensive brand-first perspective.
The result is fragmented messaging, weaker lobbying and an industry that frequently underperforms when it comes to creating real political and cultural impact. That becomes especially visible around topics like trail access and rider infrastructure. While other industries operate with coordinated interests and clear collective positioning, the bike world often speaks with too many fragmented voices — or sometimes no shared voice at all.
And maybe that’s one of the most important mindset shifts still ahead: understanding the difference between competition and co-opetition. Knowing where brands should compete aggressively — and where collaboration creates exponentially more value for riders, the market and the entire ecosystem.
Because future growth will not come from endlessly fighting over the same riders. It will come from growing the category itself. Every new rider strengthens the ecosystem. Every positive riding experience benefits the entire industry. Every improvement in access, infrastructure and perception creates value far beyond individual brands.
That requires a different kind of thinking: less focus on protecting territory, more focus on building relevance. And maybe that was one of the most encouraging signals coming out of Leonberg: leaders increasingly started asking bigger questions.
Not only: “How do we grow our business?” But also: “How do we grow cycling itself?” One workshop in particular brought the conversation back to a blank page.
If none of today’s established structures existed — no associations, trade shows, sales channels or legacy systems — what would we actually build today? What would still be needed? What would no longer make sense? And which structures, platforms and responsibilities would create the biggest positive impact for riders and the industry as a whole?
Because transforming an industry is bigger than any single company, media platform, association or trade show format. It requires collaboration across the entire value chain, a fresh perspective on what the industry truly needs today — and a willingness to contribute beyond immediate self-interest.
This Wasn’t About Agreement. It Was About Starting.
Leonberg was not about consensus. It was about momentum. New conversations started. Old assumptions were challenged. And perhaps most importantly: people began questioning not only products — but the systems, incentives and behaviors shaping the entire industry around them.
Everyone agreed on one point: the bike industry risks becoming irrelevant outside its own core bubble if it continues optimizing products without equally improving accessibility, onboarding, ownership experience and cultural relevance. The challenge is no longer building capable bikes. The challenge is making cycling feel more meaningful, accessible and relevant to more people again.
And that shift will not be driven by one breakthrough product, one trade show, one media platform or one brand alone. It will be shaped by hundreds of smaller decisions happening across the entire ecosystem: how brands communicate, how retailers onboard riders, how media defines value, how communities are built, how products are developed, and how the industry chooses to collaborate when larger collective challenges emerge.
Despite all the uncomfortable discussions in Leonberg, one thing became equally clear: people still deeply want what cycling can offer. Freedom. Adventure. Fitness. Connection. Perspective. The emotional power of cycling has not disappeared. If anything, its relevance is growing. The real opportunity now is making the entire experience around cycling finally live up to the emotional power the sport itself already has.
First Movers: Are you ready for a challenge?
Leonberg marked a turning point: from analysis to action, from observation to responsibility, from protecting old systems to building better ones.
The industry needs leadership. Not theoretical leadership. Practical leadership. And the first movers are already visible. Change rarely starts when everyone is ready — or through the biggest players. It starts with individuals willing to act with clarity, courage and vision.
The ones improving not only products — but onboarding, ownership, retail experience, communication, community, service, culture and trust. The ones understanding that the future of cycling will not be won through marginal gains alone, but through emotional relevance and stronger human connection.
Think about the success of Netflix, Amazon or the iPhone. Their breakthrough was never just the product itself. It was a fundamentally better user experience. They removed friction, lowered barriers, simplified complexity and changed behaviors by making things feel easier, more intuitive and more relevant to people’s lives. And this is exactly where the bike industry still has massive untapped potential.
The industry’s challenges will not be solved by building slightly more modern versions of the same systems or simply updating old formats. What the industry needs now is new energy, new thinking and platforms capable of creating real cultural relevance again.
At 41 Publishing, this shift is already influencing how we test, how we evaluate products, what we reward and what we choose to give attention to. But meaningful transformation will never come from one media company alone. It will come from the people willing to act.
So here is the challenge: If you are building better experiences, better systems, better relationships and better reasons for people to ride — we want to hear from you. And more importantly: we will make sure others hear about it too. Because transforming an industry is not about making it bigger at all costs. It is about making it healthier. More relevant. More human.
We have made our first moves. Now it’s your turn.
If you are ready to challenge old thinking, create better experiences and help shape a more relevant future for cycling, reach out. This should not remain a closed conversation or isolated initiative – it has to become a collective effort across the entire industry.
robin@41publishing.com
The future belongs to the first movers.
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 & Photos: Robin Schmitt