Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => On The Road => Topic started by: maxcherry on 24 May, 2014, 02:55:44 pm
-
How is the data for cycle to Work collected?
Is it by people who have applied and got told that they can have a bike or is it just by people who have applied.
If people get the bike and then sell it on, is that taken into account?
Looking at Gumtree, Preloved and other sites you can tell (sometimes the ads state) what is a cycle to work bike
most are Halfords, the same company that says it is doing so well from the sceheme.
Is the Cycle to Work success just a lie in order to get green points?
-
I'm not sure what data you're referring to - is it available on line?
It's not legal to sell the bike until after the end of the hire period and transfer of ownership - until that point the bike is still owned by the scheme operator. Is this what you're implying? I'm sure a few people do, but there doesn't seem to be much scope for making a quick buck by scamming the system, the discount is not big enough.
-
I'm a crown servant and and I'm not entitled to apply for the ride to work :-[. My dad has one as my mum works for NHS. I think the main benefit is paying in instalments not everyone has the money to go out and buy all singing all dancing bikes especially in today's economy.
-
Not sure what you mean about "Cycle to work is a lie"
The scheme per se is a massive success in that it has put many thousands of bikes out there and helped bolster the creation of a cycling culture. Before the introduction, bike shops were closing left and right, now they are opening again. Sure, not all of that is down to cycle to work scheme, but it is certainly one element of the story if only because the scheme predated this current "surge"
For sure you are going to get some bikes on sale that people are selling before they properly own, you will also see a number that will have been nicked. A number of committed cyclists have also taken advantage of the scheme to feed the n+1 habit (not me of course, I can stop any time I like. The fact that my employer has a £2.5K limit on the scheme is just ... GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN), that's a valid use of the scheme, too.
-
Not sure what you mean about "Cycle to work is a lie"
The scheme per se is a massive success in that it has put many thousands of bikes out there and helped bolster the creation of a cycling culture. Before the introduction, bike shops were closing left and right, now they are opening again. Sure, not all of that is down to cycle to work scheme, but it is certainly one element of the story if only because the scheme predated this current "surge"
For sure you are going to get some bikes on sale that people are selling before they properly own, you will also see a number that will have been nicked. A number of committed cyclists have also taken advantage of the scheme to feed the n+1 habit (not me of course, I can stop any time I like. The fact that my employer has a £2.5K limit on the scheme is just ... GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN), that's a valid use of the scheme, too.
It's certainly driven a cycling culture at my work, the fact we've had to build an additional bigger bike shed to cope says something. Pretty much every new employee ends up getting some sort of bike from the basic to the fancy, and a lot of us are on n+1 (+1+1+1 et al). Currently the limit at my employer is just a tad over 4K and repayable over periods from 12 months to 3 years owing to having a cyclist as our accountant and the company having a credit licence. Plus we can buy from anywhere we like and they'll let you use a company credit card to buy it. I've worked out the savings and while we now have to pay the vat (which we didn't about 6 years ago) I reckon I save about 20% on the list price.
-
Looking at the small ads, i have seen the Halfords carrea's ,voodous and others with the cycle stuff that goes with it. Those bikes
have been bought via the scheme to make a quick buck even though they are new and have not been finished being paid off.
I have talked to people who admit that they get the bikes and sell them as they say 'The employer wont know'
People may hold on to a £1K bike but for anything below that especially the £300 - £700 they have more chance of getting sold, even before
the thrill of getting a new bike wears off.
-
I reckon I save about 20% on the list price.
Those bikes have been bought via the scheme to make a quick buck even though they are new and have not been finished being paid off.
Is it really that easy to sell a bike privately at more than 80% of the list price? They're not exactly "making a quick buck", they're just getting some free credit.
Compared to the amount of good the scheme is doing encouraging people to cycle, it's not really worth worrying about a few people getting a little credit via their employer.
-
It's not the scheme that concerns me, it's the fact that it is over hyped 'IMHO' and
Halfords is getting credit/slap on the back even though a fair amount of those bike (again IMHO) will
be sold,given away or left to rust after a few months.
I would be more interested to know how many people actually kept and used the bikes
by the time they have completed there part in in scheme.
-
In what way is it 'over hyped'?
From my experience at my employer we have had a noticeable increase in cycle commuting while the scheme has been running, and most of the bikes are bought from the local independents (living 15 miles from the nearest Halfords helps). The scheme is very well received by my LBS as well.
I'm also not sure what your worry about 'hype' is. Even if a few people illegally sell on bikes they don't yet own, the overall benefit of the schemes for local businesses seem to have been substantial, and they are promoting more people cycling to work. What do you feel is the downside of this scheme?
-
It's not the scheme that concerns me, it's the fact that it is over hyped 'IMHO' and
Halfords is getting credit/slap on the back even though a fair amount of those bike (again IMHO) will
be sold,given away or left to rust after a few months.
I'm no great fan of Halfords, but if the scheme gets some people out of cars and onto bikes (and it undoubtedly has), it's OK with me.
-
My employer ( relatively big ) refuses to even acknowledge the info I've passed on and doesn't even reply to email anymore. Sad but where I work it's just a myth , let alone a lie
-
It's not the scheme that concerns me, it's the fact that it is over hyped 'IMHO' and
Halfords is getting credit/slap on the back even though a fair amount of those bike (again IMHO) will
be sold,given away or left to rust after a few months.
I would be more interested to know how many people actually kept and used the bikes
by the time they have completed there part in in scheme.
I'm still trying to figure out what your point is... or if you have one...
-
Lets just bandy some figures around then shall we?
I have no data (real or anec) to rely on so will make them up as I go along.
I am going to throw a ball park figure out ther of 50% of the bikes purchased using the scheme would not have been purchased at all without it. That is a whole lot of bikes out there that wouldn't have been.
Lets say that 50% of the bikes purchased under the scheme were purchased 'just to make a quick buck'. Thats still a whole lot of bikes out there that are in the hands of the scheme purchaser.
Works for me :thumbsup:
-
I was in a meeting recently when someone quite young provided some statistics, mentioning they weren't sure how accurate they were. I did a dead-pan "Did you know that 78% of statistics are made up?" which was rewarded with a "Oh, is that right?" from the perpetrator and much hilarity from everyone else.
-
I contribute to another forum whose tag line is "80% Bollocks 20% Football".
;D
-
Surely even if there are folk selling their cycle to work bike then ultimately that means the person that's getting a cheap bike is still cycling... So can't be bad!
I got my bike through the cycle to work scheme in the £300-£700 range and I've still got it and in really getting into it! Once it's paid off ill likely look to buying one through the scheme again in the £1000+ range! So defo can't be a bad thing! :)
-
I have tried to get my employer to run the scheme, but he wont do it. Its only a small company and I'm the only one interested in using it :(
-
Where I work it has got at least 3 people (so 10%) onto bikes who otherwise wouldn't be cycling to work. One guy got an electric bike for his wife so she could commute by bike instead of car.
A couple of people have bought high-end road bikes for exercise that they otherwise wouldn't have bought (and they wouldn't be cycling without the high-end bikes).
I don't know of anyone who has bought a bike on the scheme and sold it.
Anecdotal evidence says to me that the scheme works.
-
I have tried to get my employer to run the scheme, but he wont do it. Its only a small company and I'm the only one interested in using it :(
If you are the only one interested then that makes it easier for the employer, it means that the company only needs to upfront £1000, instead of (n x £1000).
-
All the companies I've known/worked for who have chosen not to run the scheme have decided so because of the admin effort, not the capital required. N hours worked to administer the scheme for a hundred employees is justifiable, the same effort just for one person... it'd probably be cheaper just to buy them the bike.
-
No effort at all really, you don't need to sign up to any "scheme", just do a salary sacrifice item, much easier than anything else payroll have to do in these days of compulsory pension scheme opt-ins. I'll check with my guys but I would be surprised if it took more than a hour of work after I gave him the invoice.
-
I think in its current iteration the scheme is just rubbish. The benefits are so poorly framed legally that many companies are either unknowingly breaking the law, or being complicit in a scheme which is sailing very close to the wind.
The scheme rules need to be simplified and the level of discount applied needs to be clearly defined.
At present the scheme makes use of tax law that is really intended for something else. They should simply bite the bullet and create an entirely new scheme. For example, if you can buy an electric car and get a government subsidy, why can't you do the same for a bike?
-
Never knew this thread was still alive!
The 3 places i work at have the scheme, staff openly confess to getting the bike
and accessories just to sell. Not everyone has the thousand pound limit
and it's not like the employers check the bikes have not been sold.
If the data is just going by who has got a bike via the scheme and not who has still
got the bike before the end of the contract, then the data is flawed.
-
The scheme only benefits are very limited number of people. ie those who's employer has agreed to run it, and who know they will have the same job in a year or so.
Then there's scheme providers taking a 10% cut, and limited bike shops you can buy through. So there's only any real savings for high rate tax payers.
-
If the data is just going by who has got a bike via the scheme and not who has still
got the bike before the end of the contract, then the data is flawed.
We still don't know what data you're referring to?
-
Or what that data shows.
-
The scheme only benefits are very limited number of people. ie those who's employer has agreed to run it, and who know they will have the same job in a year or so.
Then there's scheme providers taking a 10% cut, and limited bike shops you can buy through. So there's only any real savings for high rate tax payers.
Only if your employers are lazy and do it that way. Mine (and we are quite a small company in real terms) manage it themselves and we can buy from where ever we like. The discount off is reasonable enough to do it and I'm no where near being a high rate taxpayer.
-
Anecdata, but I know several people who bought bikes through the scheme. None of them have sold them. A couple did get nicked mind you. I've never heard of them being sold on, but I only know the kind of posh folk who hang in Waitrose waiting for the free coffee robot to be fixed.
I'd agree with some of the criticisms. It's more of a perk for higher rate taxpayers – I got a Brompton – and to be honest, I could have gone to shop and bought one at full price. But I'm not daft enough to turn down what is essentially a couple of hundred quid discount (I think I saved about £400).
But it does seem to help by spreading payments through salary sacrifices. I'm not sure anyone needs a £1000 commuting bike (heresy, I know, but I don't think you're going to get to work any slower on a £300 bike) and there seems to be a lot of n+1ing.
I think a direct subsidy would be better. I'm not keen on levering these things through an already complicated taxation system, whose main job should be revenue not incentivising bike purchases.
-
But it does seem to help by spreading payments through salary sacrifices. I'm not sure anyone needs a £1000 commuting bike (heresy, I know, but I don't think you're going to get to work any slower on a £300 bike) and there seems to be a lot of n+1ing.
Spreading the payments helps hugely.
IMO, if you commute many miles, cheap bikes wear out faster. The brakes are crap, the wheels need replacing very soon, cables are often not stainless (and rust).
Then the ride quality is shit.
My £1000 bike bought on the scheme has needed far fewer spare parts (in the same period) than any of my other bikes that I've used for commuting. Chain and tyres so far and that's been it. All of the others needed new wheels, multiple brakepads, cables plus the chains and tyres.
-
But it does seem to help by spreading payments through salary sacrifices. I'm not sure anyone needs a £1000 commuting bike (heresy, I know, but I don't think you're going to get to work any slower on a £300 bike) and there seems to be a lot of n+1ing.
Spreading the payments helps hugely.
IMO, if you commute many miles, cheap bikes wear out faster. The brakes are crap, the wheels need replacing very soon, cables are often not stainless (and rust).
Then the ride quality is shit.
My £1000 bike bought on the scheme has needed far fewer spare parts (in the same period) than any of my other bikes that I've used for commuting. Chain and tyres so far and that's been it. All of the others needed new wheels, multiple brakepads, cables plus the chains and tyres.
I'm unconvinced there's a big delta between £300 and £1000 bikes (and I'm not talking about bling road bikes). My most expensive bike is the Brompton (while the fold is nice, I'm not really sure why it costs twice as much as my next most expensive bike, other than Sturmey Archer gears make me nostalgic for my childhood Raleigh Commando).
Anything between £350 and £1000 seems incremental. Is there really that much performance difference between most middle-tier components? I have bikes with Acera, Sora, and Tiagra gears. I've no idea what the difference is other than some evidently cost more than others.
It's not an argument about shiny bikes, whatever floats someone's boat, just the impression that you need a £1000 bike to commute a couple of miles. One of our mothership operatives just bought one for £850 to follow the Hipster Spice Route from E5. Despite that it still doesn't have mudguards, puncture proof tyres, a rack and the kind of things a commuting bike ought to have.
YMMV, I joyfully bounce along on my regular commute (now about forty miles) on my commutified Saracen. Riding it is a bit more aerobic than the lighter bike, but it's bombproof and isn't scared of Lambeth-maintained roads, and someone would need to be mental to steal it. It deposits more oil than the Exxon Valdez.
-
I'm unconvinced there's a big delta between £300 and £1000 bikes (and I'm not talking about bling road bikes). My most expensive bike is the Brompton (while the fold is nice, I'm not really sure why it costs twice as much as my next most expensive bike, other than Sturmey Archer gears make me nostalgic for my childhood Raleigh Commando).
Brompton tax. (A bit like recumbent tax - it's the premium you pay for small volume manufacturing somewhere that isn't the Far East.)
Of course, a Brompton's killer advantage is that it's compatible with BloodyTrains at commuter o'clock. The alternative being a couple of hack bikes to leave at the stations, which only works if there's somewhere half decent to lock them up, and assumes you're not travelling to multiple sites or something.
The £300-400 band is definitely the sweet spot, if you just want A Bike That Works, though.
-
Agree with Ian. The bike industry has been pretty smart and has convinced everyone that a £1000 road bike is the ideal thing to commute on (despite lacking sensible things like mudguards, racks etc.).
I am amazed by some of the bling I see these days on my commute. Whilst I accept that, here in London, average commutes are considerably longer than many places in the UK and Europe, it does seem odd to commute on a bike that a few years ago would have been something a decent club rider would have been delighted with but is now defined as 'entry-level' (how on earth can £1000 be entry-level?!?!).
Still - more bums on saddles - all good by my reckoning.
Just wish they wouldn't get upset by a bloke in jeans on a scrappy fixed passing them. Or even worse, if I take the shopping bike into town (20Kg Japanese city bike).
-
As I joined the Tour de Commute on the Pershore Road the other day, it occurred to me that you can no longer use drop handlebars as a heuristic for whether someone is an experienced cyclist. Lots of people with no road sense trundling along on some very shiny (and evidently new looking) road bikes. Fingers crossed they keep at it (and hopefully invest in some mudguards).
-
As I joined the Tour de Commute on the Pershore Road the other day, it occurred to me that you can no longer use drop handlebars as a heuristic for whether someone is an experienced cyclist. Lots of people with no road sense trundling along on some very shiny (and evidently new looking) road bikes. Fingers crossed they keep at it (and hopefully invest in some mudguards).
You can still spot the inexperienced cyclist though - they are usually the ones on the drops all the way through their commute. (I guess cos that's what that Wiggins chap does on telly).
I am always amazed to see people filtering through dense traffic wobbling about on their drops.
-
As I joined the Tour de Commute on the Pershore Road the other day, it occurred to me that you can no longer use drop handlebars as a heuristic for whether someone is an experienced cyclist. Lots of people with no road sense trundling along on some very shiny (and evidently new looking) road bikes. Fingers crossed they keep at it (and hopefully invest in some mudguards).
You can still spot the inexperienced cyclist though - they are usually the ones on the drops all the way through their commute. <snip>
That would be me then :P
-
You can still spot the inexperienced cyclist though - they are usually the ones on the drops all the way through their commute. (I guess cos that's what that Wiggins chap does on telly).
I am always amazed to see people filtering through dense traffic wobbling about on their drops.
I did a local "gentle ride for newbies" a while ago, where a woman turned up on a shiny new road bike (with Look style pedals) wearing trainers. I had to ask, and she was training for an end to end and hadn't got the hang of clipless pedals yet. Or, as it became quickly apparent, braking from the hoods. She was doing a surprisingly good job of starting off from the drops, in far too high a gear, with feet that kept slipping off the pedals, as we trundled around some of Bourneville's finest pavement-cycling attractions.
I suggested that she go to the bike shop and ask them to fish some naff plastic flat pedals out of the spares bin, then take it to the park on a quiet afternoon when there aren't too many kids about and practice until she felt confident with the bars.
-
Ian specifically said he wasn't talking about road bikes.
I upgraded from an aluminum road bike (with mudguards) to a bike with a decent steel frame, decent disc brakes, mudguards, ability to take luggage rack (so I can also tour on the bike), space for fattish tyres (up to 35mm).
There is nothing on the market under £1000 to match that spec.
-
Ian specifically said he wasn't talking about road bikes.
I upgraded from an aluminum road bike (with mudguards) to a bike with a decent steel frame, decent disc brakes, mudguards, ability to take luggage rack (so I can also tour on the bike), space for fattish tyres (up to 35mm).
There is nothing on the market under £1000 to match that spec.
Yes, but that's a different kettle of narwhals. The purpose of Cycle-to-Work ought to be just that, not buy people more bikes. Which I admit I used it for. It's a good job I'm not an MP. Which is why I think there's an argument for a more effective scheme. I'd rather we directly subsidise a useful, cheaper bike, than make £1000 bikes more affordable. Bikes shops and manufacturers would, of course, disagree.
The other problem with expensive bikes is utility. First off, you're scared of locking them somewhere. Fine, you have secure parking at work, but what if you want to pop to the pub, a restaurant, the park? There's that worry. Plus the first time you ride in the rain, you'll rue those missing mudguards, and you'll rue the rain when you're trying to remember how to change a tube in that rain, all numb fingers and frustration. Then there's the drop bars in traffic. It's a package that the novelty quickly wears right off and you're back on the bus, tube, or in the car. That bike ends up an expensive trip hazard in the hallway.
I think it's a valid point to measure the success of the intervention in getting people to – well – cycle to work. I was cycling to work anyway, scheme or not.
-
The purpose of Cycle-to-Work ought to be just that, not buy people more bikes.
Nope. The stated reason for the scheme is to get people cycling, and improve the health of the nation. The means by which this is encouraged is a "cycle to work scheme" which, without any legislation or excessive administration, works. It's not a sanctimonious "You can only use this bike to go to work" it is a pragmatic "get off your lardy arses and get cycling".
The proliferation of bikes through the scheme has many other side effects. for example, it has resulted in bike repair shops springing up, it has increased the size of the market and improved the value of the bikes on sale.
Really, it is all good.
-
The purpose of Cycle-to-Work ought to be just that, not buy people more bikes.
Nope. The stated reason for the scheme is to get people cycling, and improve the health of the nation. The means by which this is encouraged is a "cycle to work scheme" which, without any legislation or excessive administration, works. It's not a sanctimonious "You can only use this bike to go to work" it is a pragmatic "get off your lardy arses and get cycling".
The proliferation of bikes through the scheme has many other side effects. for example, it has resulted in bike repair shops springing up, it has increased the size of the market and improved the value of the bikes on sale.
Really, it is all good.
Well I confess I've not seen the stated reason for the scheme, I'm going on the basis that it's called Cycle-to-Work. And, all said, I've no issues with collateral benefits. I'm less comfortable with giving effective subsidies through the taxation system. And there should be some assay of the success of such schemes since they're relieving the public purse of some spare change. Buying bikes for people who already have bikes probably isn't the best outcome, and to be honest, I feel a bit Jimmy Carr for pocketing my undeserved £400. Of course, without data, who knows. I don't believe, for instance, that they're being resold in quantity, most people who sign up have a genuine interest in getting a bike, but that's a bit anecdotal too. It would be useful to know how many of those bikes purchased through the scheme are in regular use at the end.
I'm not against it, but I think a direct subsidy might offer a better option. The benefits as the scheme stands are somewhat cryptic and they're only fully enjoyed in the higher tax bands.
-
A vat reduction or exemption on bikes (and kit) would be fairer and simpler, I reckon. But that seems to be impossible for some reason.
-
I think the cycle 2 work scheme is excellent , my employer states on the scheme paperwork that the bike is mainly used for work but can be used for personal use.
I often wonder how they would know, I use the bike for going to work or I have sold it before I'd paid for it or got it for my partner.
Back to OP question what data are you referring to ?
As far as I am aware of the data they have is price of the bike etc, the amount I have to pay back
-
I think the cycle 2 work scheme is excellent , my employer states on the scheme paperwork that the bike is mainly used for work but can be used for personal use.
I often wonder how they would know, I use the bike for going to work or I have sold it before I'd paid for it or got it for my partner.
Back to OP question what data are you referring to ?
As far as I am aware of the data they have is price of the bike etc, the amount I have to pay back
This ^^^^. A mate topped up his C2W wossname to the tune of a Several of hundreds of the BRITONS' pounds and bought a full-sus mountain bike. His commute is fifty miles each way.