Aceoffix... as good as it gets?

[Bromptonlad]

I had a look at the official website from Singapore. The prices are very reasonable, starting at around 600 GBP, which is 60% of the starting price of a UK made Brompton.

https://www.aceoffix.sg/

Functionally they look identical, so I am aware in essence they are clones. But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.
They look amazing, the colour choice they offer, the attention to detail of the various alloy bits which are made of plastic in the Bromptons.
And yet, I have never seen one in the flesh and I have no idea what their reliability is, as compared to the domestic product.
Frankly, I cannot afford a new Brompton, but I could afford one of these... and since I do my own spannering, I don't need UK shop support.
Thoughts?
 

[ElyDave]

Are you including the import duty on that, and then VAT on top of that again?

[Bromptonlad]

Actually, when I try to buy one, it seems they only deliver to Singapore.
SO is the reason I've never seen one that you actually cannot buy one from here?

[Bromptonlad]

They sell them to the UK from Aliexpress, this one for example. I worked out adding 14% import duty and then 20% VAT and then the delivery to the UK it works out at £ 950, which is the same as a basic Brompton, although this Aceoffix model looks far more upmarket than the basic Brompton C line.
Of course if delivery is considered to be part of the value of the goods, then it would work out more, but that would be wrong by HMRC, right?

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005003476413796.html?spm=a2g0o.productlist.main.9.2b88VOcAVOcAjJ&algo_pvid=88791ada-bed8-49cd-aa30-b90ae3662b39&algo_exp_id=88791ada-bed8-49cd-aa30-b90ae3662b39-4&pdp_npi=4%40dis%21GBP%21623.62%21567.49%21%21%21768.00%21698.88%21%40211b61bb17186245950407872e50ee%2112000036419197436%21sea%21UK%210%21AB&curPageLogUid=8rIYEH3vcCZ1&utparam-url=scene%3Asearch%7Cquery_from%3A

[Adam]

No idea about the bike, but I bought an Aceoffix extended seat post for my Brompton, as it was only £30.  I didn't feel safe riding it, as there was so much flex in it, so I'd really hope the rest of the bike is better built.

[Bromptonlad]

No idea about the bike, but I bought an Aceoffix extended seat post for my Brompton, as it was only £30.  I didn't feel safe riding it, as there was so much flex in it, so I'd really hope the rest of the bike is better built.

you mean the telescopic one? The extended one by Brompton is about 30 pounds

[Paul H]

But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.

I thought the patents had run out and Brompton now relied on copyright, which it seems to have done with enough success to deter clones. 

Of course if delivery is considered to be part of the value of the goods, then it would work out more, but that would be wrong by HMRC, right?

Import duty is based on the goods before adding any shipping charges, VAT is added to the subtotal including shipping.

[Bromptonlad]

But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.

I thought the patents had run out and Brompton now relied on copyright, which it seems to have done with enough success to deter clones. 

Of course if delivery is considered to be part of the value of the goods, then it would work out more, but that would be wrong by HMRC, right?

Import duty is based on the goods before adding any shipping charges, VAT is added to the subtotal including shipping.

I once went to a talk by the managing director, Will Butler, he said that Brompton did not cover their designs wirh patents, in. essence because lotigation in court was not something they wanted to budget for. They claimed a technological superiority as an alternative. I suspect now is more a case of superior branding and good advertising.

[Paul H]

I once went to a talk by the managing director, Will Butler, he said that Brompton did not cover their designs wirh patents

I don't know what he was referring to, maybe some of the proprietary components, Brompton patented the folding mechanism in 1979 and when that ran out they've used copyright to stop anyone making a bike in the same shape! 
https://abg-ip.com/brompton-case-intellectual-property-and-technical-function/

[rogerzilla]

But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.

I thought the patents had run out and Brompton now relied on copyright, which it seems to have done with enough success to deter clones. 

Of course if delivery is considered to be part of the value of the goods, then it would work out more, but that would be wrong by HMRC, right?

Import duty is based on the goods before adding any shipping charges, VAT is added to the subtotal including shipping.

I once went to a talk by the managing director, Will Butler, he said that Brompton did not cover their designs wirh patents, in. essence because lotigation in court was not something they wanted to budget for. They claimed a technological superiority as an alternative. I suspect now is more a case of superior branding and good advertising.

They've used legal means to stop clones being imported before (like the Neobike Merc) so that doesn't really stack up.

[grams]

The complete absence of clones (or anything vaguely similar) being sold through any channels within reach of UK courts says to me that everyone who might do so believes they'd be sued out of existence.

[Bromptonlad]

In other words, pursuing the Aceoffix route might turn up to be a waste of time.
Shame, they really look the dogs

[Adam]

No idea about the bike, but I bought an Aceoffix extended seat post for my Brompton, as it was only £30.  I didn't feel safe riding it, as there was so much flex in it, so I'd really hope the rest of the bike is better built.

you mean the telescopic one? The extended one by Brompton is about 30 pounds

Not the telescopic one.  The official black extended one isn't available on the Brompton website, but the cheapest I found it at retailers was £36 + postage.

[fruitcake]

I joined a Brompton factory tour in 2011 led by one of the designers. He claimed there is enough information in the Brompton triptych (the full graphical logo) about the frame shape and the sequence of the fold for them to use copyright law to protect the design of the bike with reference to that logo, without the longer timeframes needed to fight cases of patent infringement.



Brompton had outsourced manufacturing overseas briefly but brought production back to the UK because of accuracy issues. They were getting too many that didn't fold properly. The sentiment was that it was a difficult frame to make within the tolerances needed for the fold (the pivoting rear triangle was especially difficult to make accurately), and so relatively few factories were likely to succeed and those that did would be best challenged quickly.

I don't know how much, if any, of this was marketing puff. It seemed credible.

Another thing I don't know is whether a reliance on copyright law will be enough with future developments in factory technology, but I suppose in 2011 robotics hadn't really been applied to bike frame manufacture. We saw a robot being used to check frames but not to make them.

[Paul H]

without the longer timeframes needed to fight cases of patent infringement.

I suppose that was technically correct, it's a very long timescale to fight patent cases after the patents have expired 
For detail see previous link.

[fruitcake]

They spent a lot of time fighting about intellectual property. The article suggests allowing patent to expire was an oversight. Do you think it would have helped them to have had patents to challenge the clone-bike makers?

[Paul H]

The article suggests allowing patent to expire was an oversight. Do you think it would have helped them to have had patents to challenge the clone-bike makers?

Patents expire after 20 years, they can't be extended.  The use of copyright was the only option left open to Brompton, it wasn't a choice.  That manufacturer waited till the patent expired believing that left them free to copy. The claim for copyright went to such a high court because it wasn't as clear cut as a patent would have been.  If you google it, it's very well reported because it was such an unusual case. 

[mrcharly-YHT]

Functionally they look identical, so I am aware in essence they are clones. But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.

Can't agree with you there. They are ripoffs.

There are two problems with that.
The first is that they are riding on someone else's hard work.
The second is 'brand dilution'.

Brompton has worked hard to maintain quality, and an image of quality (we know they've made mistakes along the way). People see a Brompton-shaped bike and there is an assumption of decent quality.

Along comes a manufacturer, rips off the design, maybe isn't as careful about quality control, cheaper bits. People start seeing brompton-shaped bikes that have issues; suddenly the general belief that 'Brompton = well-made bike' is gone (and nearly impossible to get back).

[Bromptonlad]

Functionally they look identical, so I am aware in essence they are clones. But it was Brompton's decision not to cover their designs with patents, so technically there is no infringement and nothing legally or morally wrong with these bikes.

Can't agree with you there. They are ripoffs.

There are two problems with that.
The first is that they are riding on someone else's hard work.
The second is 'brand dilution'.

Brompton has worked hard to maintain quality, and an image of quality (we know they've made mistakes along the way). People see a Brompton-shaped bike and there is an assumption of decent quality.

Along comes a manufacturer, rips off the design, maybe isn't as careful about quality control, cheaper bits. People start seeing brompton-shaped bikes that have issues; suddenly the general belief that 'Brompton = well-made bike' is gone (and nearly impossible to get back).

Owner for 5 years… they are OK, but anything built to be robust tends to be OK. There isn’t a lot that can go wrong to be honest. Most bits rely on 1970s standards… thinking about the wedge that holds the stem is the same you would find in a quill stem. The headset is threaded, the frames are made with the proverbial gas pipe, the wheels are massively overbuilt.

[mrcharly-YHT]

There are plenty of folding bike brands that have had problems with frames cracking - even good brands like bike friday and airnimal.

Like I said, if someone rips of a design and makes things to a lower standard, it damages the original brand.

[Bromptonlad]

I think my original question was whether these Aceoffix are a lower standard (or not). They seem to do trendier bikes, for example the G3 spoke pattern is not something you will see on a Brompton, but I quite like it, and I don’t mind 16 inch wheels with a low spoke count, as I don’t believe they need as many spokes as large wheels.
Lots of metal parts, where Brompton use horrible black plastic. Overall, they seem to be a tad lighter than Brompton, which again is nice, if you have to log the folded bike up two flights of stairs…