As Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, the US bicycle industry finds itself bracing for the resurgence of a familiar challenge: tariffs. The President-elect has promised sweeping taxes on nearly all imports – a policy that has numerous ideological goals, among them bringing manufacturing capability back to the United States. For an industry like cycling, which is heavily reliant on global supply chains – and in particular China, which Trump has publicly made a major target of new tariffs – this has the potential to shake up the markets.
The uncertainty and unpredictability of the proposed tariff and other economic measures are echoed across the cycling industry. “The next four years are going to be quite unpredictable” is the sentiment from most of the brands and companies Escape Collective contacted.
While domestic manufacturers see a glimmer of opportunity, others are grappling with the potential fallout: increased costs, market disruptions, and cascading effects that threaten not just American brands but the global cycling ecosystem, affecting all of us. The question remains whether the industry can adapt without compromising accessibility, affordability, and growth.
The prospect of tariffs has sparked widespread discussion, with some brands reassessing supply chains, exploring diversification, or even considering a return to US manufacturing. Meanwhile, PeopleForBikes, a US-based bicycle advocacy group, has pledged to push for tariff exemptions. However, the industry remains divided on the effectiveness and long-term viability of these solutions – and on the best course of action.
Many of the sources Escape spoke with said that the future of tariffs remains uncertain, with much still up in the air and largely speculative at this point. But they also highlighted that this isn’t just a US-China issue; the ripple effects are expected to have global repercussions. “Unpredictable and chaotic things could happen,” said Jacob Rheuban, founder of children’s bike brand Prevelo, reflecting the industry’s cautious outlook.
What are tariffs and why are they controversial?
If you’ve seen the word tariffs a lot lately but not paid much attention to it, let’s start with a brief recap of what they are and why they matter. At their core, tariffs are taxes placed on goods as they cross a border into a country. Although typically paid by importing companies, they often lead to higher consumer prices as costs are passed along. Trump has argued that these taxes would not burden Americans but rather foreign countries – a claim widely disputed by economists and official data and which numerous studies have proved untrue.
“The US is one of our largest and most important markets and it’s important to know that tariffs will increase consumer prices. And increasing consumer prices now will absolutely have a negative impact on sales,” Joshua Hon, founder of Tern Bicycles, told Escape.
Despite that sentiment, tariffs have been a cornerstone of Trump’s economic policies, including during his first term, when up to 25% tariffs were placed on goods from China and lesser duties on goods from many other countries and the EU – most of which led to pretty heated negotiations. Trump insisted back then and continues to say now that these measures benefit the US. But a 2019 analysis in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, titled “The Impact of the 2018 Tariffs on Prices and Welfare,” concluded that “close to all of the cost of the 2018 US tariffs was borne by US consumers and importers,” with significant disruptions to global supply chains.
In the face of round two of tariffs, an October 2024 report from the London School of Economics (LSE) said that “Proposed tariffs put forward by Donald Trump could reduce gross domestic product (GDP) in the United States by -0.64% and in China by -0.68%, while the European Union would face a more modest reduction of -0.11%.”
Meanwhile, the New York Times reported that a “recent economic study also found evidence that Trump officials had used the exemption process to reward their supporters and punish opponents.” In an interview with Escape, one cycling component brand owner didn’t hesitate to say, “China will always react. It’s going to happen – it’s just how much is the question.”
While the cycling industry is a small segment of the global economy, it’s one that is going to be impacted both domestically in the US and internationally by possible tariffs. The US is one of the largest importers of bikes and most of those are made in China, the very country that Trump has proposed to face tariffs of 60% or more.
In 2023, nearly 8.4 million bicycles were brought into the US from China, and the total value of “Bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorised” imported to the United States totalled US$1.25 billion. This is down from the US$1.3 billion in the previous year, but still accounts for a large sum of money.
In contrast, the US bicycle industry exports to other countries totaled US$142 million in 2023 – making it quite clear that when it comes to bikes, the US imports much more than it exports.
One certainty: tariffs will affect the cycling industry
Would history repeat itself in the next four years? Many of our sources told Escape that they fear the industry and consumers are going to pay for the tariffs, and this is hardly a positive development. Yet, if there was one common thread from the sources Escape spoke with, it was that the industry has been turbulent for years, and as such it’s developed a rather thick skin that mere tariffs would have a hard time scathing.
“Yes, the recent election will certainly reshape the supply chain. The tariffs imposed during the first Trump administration and carried forward during Biden’s tenure, along with the COVID-19 experiences of most manufacturers, had everyone rethinking how and where they produce things,” Tom Rodi, product manager at Parlee Composites (previously Parlee Cycles) said in an e-mail response. “The tariffs circa 2016-2019 were significantly lower than what are being suggested now. Globally, however, patterns were changing before Trump due to EU-China policies (i.e. anti-dumping measures) but I am sure we will see a lot more change in the next four years. As an example, many more bicycles are produced in Vietnam now than a decade ago. Also, a lot of assembly is now being done inside the EU vs. Asia.”
Parlee is a boutique brand that started as a US-based manufacturer but later expanded its offerings to include Asian-made bikes, too. The brand now operates under new ownership, after the founder Bob Parlee filed for reorganisation bankruptcy of the company in 2023. [Parlee died in September after a long battle with cancer.] In the wake of the potential new tariffs, Rodi says the company plans to add the US capacity, and many other brands indicated they are also looking at moving production elsewhere in Asia or exploring options in the US.
“We are very optimistic about the next four years,” Rodi stated. “Producing closer to where your customers are is always better and cyclists are more and more cognizant of where their bikes, parts, and clothing are made. Since we went public in April 2024 with our shift to EU production, our dealers and their clients have been vocal that they support the decisions we made. Cyclists are demanding higher quality and are willing to pay for it.”
After years of turbulence, the tariffs could be a tough pill to swallow for much of the cycling industry that was just about to get back on its feet. But as PeopleForBikes – a US-based nonprofit organisation dedicated to promoting cycling and improving bicycle infrastructure nationwide – told Escape, tariffs imposed during both the Trump and Biden administrations are already impacting bike and component companies, but the proposed rates are much higher than before, and hence significantly more likely that costs are passed on to buyers.
“There’s already a 25% tariff on bikes and e-bikes and a 36% tariff on regular bikes coming out of China. So a lot of that margin erosion has already occurred and the excess inventory has forced margins down. You still see 30% off sales, 20% off sales by major brands,” Matt Moore, general and policy counsel at PeopleForBikes said in an interview. “That tells you that they’re already giving on the price to move the excess inventory. So the bottom line: because of the situation we’re in there’s less room for them [cycling industry] to absorb additional hits to their margins.”
Some of those recent tariffs only took full effect in June 2024, after years of repeated exemptions – and left companies little time to adapt to the increase in cost.
While much of the focus has been on tariffs as an import issue, US exporters are also vulnerable. Retaliatory tariffs could affect companies like Abbey Bike Tools, which rely on global markets.
“We’re probably in the range of 25-30% of our stuff getting shipped outside of the US, and I think it has the potential to be at least half of our business,” Abbey Bike Tools owner Jason Quade told Escape in an interview. “We’re always a little proud and bold to be making stuff in the US, but at the same time, it stops short of a nationalistic opinion. We’ve definitely benefited from being able to export and service customers and foreign markets directly because we’ve had enough business over there to justify having a partner or a distributor.”
Quade was also quick to point out that while the potential revenue increase from import duties might seem like a clear benefit, it would likely come with repercussions, as very restrictive policies could jeopardise opportunities before businesses can even establish stable partnerships or distributors abroad.
Shorter, more agile supply chains and staying cautious
The shift in US port volumes over the past year highlights how companies across industries are stockpiling in warehouses ahead of potential tariffs. As various industries try to mitigate future costs, the inbound shipping numbers have surged.
From conversations with the bike industry, it’s clear that regardless of the impact of tariffs, cycling companies have already started to change the way they work to make their businesses more financially sustainable. While some in the industry might explore changing their supply chains, the complexity of replicating production processes and quality standards elsewhere can be costly both in time and money, meaning many brands are staying with what works even with the looming tariff pressures. Many brands have already diversified out of China to begin with, a process that has unfolded over years.
As one of the major component manufacturers, SRAM reflected a cautious approach when asked for comment on the current situation.
“To start, we do not know the full impact of any potential tariffs, and we will only have a better perspective once implemented. Overall, we are for free trade,” Michael Zellmann, SRAM’s global road and corporate communication manager, told Escape. “We no longer manufacture in China. Additionally, we ship a relatively small portion of our product into China, which is exported to the US. We currently manufacture in the US, Europe, and Asia.”
Zellmann further confirmed that SRAM moved production away from China in 2017 and that its manufacturing in Asia takes place in Taiwan. Although Zellmann didn’t share further detail, SRAM’s response was similar to that from other bigger manufacturers Escape approached; SRAM’s diversification of production reflects the adaptability many companies will need to adjust to the shifting trade landscape.
Josh Hon, founder of Tern Bicycles, shared similar insights, explaining how Tern has worked for years to diversify its supply chain to reduce dependence on China – as many others have done, too.
“A majority of our bikes are made in Vietnam because we found an amazing partner there that was recommended by a good friend in the industry – so this was not due to incredible foresight on our part,” Hon said. “In the bike industry, much of a company’s success results from the partners it chooses to work with. China is still an important manufacturing base for some bikes and parts, but diversifying production bases is generally a good idea. We’ve also recently started some production in Portugal.”
Hon’s comment emphasises how many brands have started to proactively prepare for uncertainties like tariffs. The diversification over the last few years has been driven by larger geopolitical and economic factors – such as anti-dumping duties and anti-China sentiment – not simply by tariffs alone. Hon said these changes in manufacturing “are not getting undone anytime soon.”
For one thing, those moves take time because a key aspect of trade is finding partners you can trust. Dominic Loh, director of international business at Funn MTB Component, said that long-standing relationships are important in their supply chains and often outweigh any potential short-term savings. 95% of Granite and Funn products are made in Taiwan, and he doesn’t see that changing.
“We are sensitive to pricing but the way Taiwanese do business is about relationships, so we have gotten used to working with someone. We generally try not to change it, partly because they know exactly what we want, how we want it, and when we want it versus going to start building a relationship all over again, teaching them every single process of how we do things. That can take some time,” Loh explained.
Resistance to change isn’t all about cost; many in the cycling industry echoed Loh’s point that strong supplier relationships ensure the quality is good and the delivery is reliable – both of which are increasingly crucial in the quick-moving market.
Loh also pointed out that beyond tariffs, geopolitical tensions are affecting the industry. “I would say the tariffs will always be a double-edged sword. They will work for someone, and not work for someone and the key question is how long is the term of this tariff? When is it going to change? That’s the key question,” he said. “We also have other things to consider; the war in Ukraine and the Middle Eastern war are affecting a lot more things than just the tariffs. There’s a bigger set of issues we need to deal with – shipping cost is an issue, security becomes an issue, certain raw materials become an issue – which actually brings up the cost of goods for everything right now. That’s probably a bigger thing to deal with than the tariffs to a certain extent.”
While most brands expressed cautious optimism that the cycling industry can weather Trump’s second term, uncertainty about the specifics of tariff policies makes long-term planning difficult.
“I don’t think we’ve had a lot of clarity on exactly what the policy objective here is. But if we knew what that was, then perhaps there could be some kind of more pointed, nuanced approach to this. I feel like we’re kind of lacking some information,” Jacob Rheuban, founder of Prevelo Bikes, said.
But at the same time, this isn’t the first time the industry has faced a situation where predicting the future is challenging.
“One thing that COVID taught me: in March 2020, at the very beginning of COVID, I was terrified that the economy was going to collapse and that no one was going to buy bikes. I was wrong – turned out that when there’s a pandemic, everybody wants a bike, and then it became very difficult to get bikes because of the supply chain,” Prevelo’s Rheuban concluded. “The lesson I learned about myself back then is that I’m very bad at predicting the future. So I’ve kind of given up on it, and chosen to just kind of [be] like, ‘Okay, I’m going to wait and see what happens and then adapt, right?’ Myself and my colleagues in the bike industry, we have some experience in adapting.”
Exemptions, policy and behaviour changes
In the face of potential new and steep tariffs, exemptions and policy changes have become the focus for organisations like PeopleForBikes. The non-profit industry organisation played a major part in getting the cycling industry tariff exemptions during Trump’s first term and continued to lobby for those during Biden’s time in power. Whether the organisation can do all that again remains a question.
“We punched above our weight [during Trump’s first term],” said Moore. “We did better than most industries did in convincing the government to grant exclusions – sometimes for a limited period of time and not everything we asked for, but we did have some big wins, especially on e-bikes. I think that’s a factor in how we work. We work in a bipartisan way – across the aisle, we work with both administrations pretty effectively.”
Moore also said that the specifics of how the tariffs are implemented make planning a response to them more difficult this time around. Trump’s threatened “Day 1” tariffs against China, Canada, and Mexico are an example of the kind of fast-moving, chaotic foreign and economic policy that industries will have to navigate. At the same time, the fact that more powerful players, such as the automotive industry, also rely heavily on Chinese production might help in securing exemptions for key parts like lithium battery cells – of which 80% of the world’s supply comes from China.
“There’s no question that if there’s a 60% China tariff or a 10% to 20% tariff on other countries, there will be disruption,” Moore added. “I think everyone is starting to realize that the level of tariff would dramatically increase prices, and those would be passed along to consumers. At that point the laws of supply and demand kick in, and if bicycles and e-bikes and bike products cost more, consumers will be unable to buy as many of them, and fewer people will buy new bikes, and that will have kind of a ripple effect on the industry at a really bad time, when companies are struggling for sales and profitability already.”
In addition to potential tariffs, the cycling industry has existing economic policies to grapple with. One of the key challenges in creating a level playing field for the cycling industry is the de minimis rule – a trade regulation that allows goods with a declared value under $800 to enter the US duty-free. This was originally intended to streamline customs processing for small, low-value imports, but has become a significant loophole in the context of modern direct-to-consumer trade practices. De minimis trade has grown more than 500% in the last decade, almost all of it direct-to-consumer shipping from overseas sellers. According to the US Customs and Border Patrol, 92% of all cargo entering the US – some four million parcels per day – is subject to the de minimis exception.
This loophole essentially allows overseas sellers to avoid any tariffs and effectively bypass safety regulations, which gives them an advantage over domestic companies. The rule has especially affected the e-bike segment, where many of the unregulated bikes, conversion kits, batteries and chargers come to the market under the de minimis threshold. According to industry experts, this undermines safety and accountability for imported products.
“The de minimis exception sure seems like a massive loophole since products coming in that way don’t pay taxes and aren’t subject to any safety regulations,” Tern’s Hon said. “We believe in level playing fields and paying our fair share of taxes and de minimis sure seems to tilt the field in favor of foreign companies and those willing to exploit loopholes at the expense of everybody else. If there are large brands making use of de minimis, then absolutely they would affect all other companies trying to do things the right way. It’s bad for consumers who get unregulated and potentially unsafe products and it’s bad for Americans who lose out on tax revenue that the government should be getting.”
The Biden administration announced in September it would move to end the loophole but the rule-making process is still unfolding. While the incoming Trump administration hasn’t announced its plans, PeopleForBikes’ Moore said there’s strong bipartisan support for ending the de minimis exception.
If the de minimis exemption is ended and the current 25% tariff on Chinese-made e-bikes and batteries is raised further, it could hinder e-bike adoption, particularly among lower- and middle-income consumers. The higher cost of e-bikes due to tariffs could also undermine bikeshare programs that rely on government funding to promote sustainable transport. “It’s pretty apparent that if products have an additional cost or a very high cost added to the retail price, it’s going to affect how many e-bikes are available to the public through these programs,” Moore said.
To counteract this, PeopleForBikes has advocated for measures like the E-Bike Act, which would offer federal purchase incentives, similar to tax rebates for energy-efficient home improvements. This, however, will be an uphill battle under the incoming administration, Moore said. “We’re concentrating on legislative efforts at the state and local levels, where there’s still enthusiasm and resources aligned with our mission.”
PeopleForBikes is also advocating for policies like the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). GSP, which expired in 2020, offered tariff-free exports for companies manufacturing in developing countries. If reintroduced, GSP could provide some relief for companies that have already diversified away from China.
Aaron Stinner, owner of US framebuilder Stinner Frameworks, manufactures entirely in the US and believes that a shift in consumer behavior will also be necessary to support domestic production fully – but that might come at a cost to those who cannot afford the higher prices of domestically produced bikes, even if they wanted to.
“It’s the same reason why people like to go to the farmers market and buy bread and produce that’s locally grown,” he said. “But also, not everyone can afford those prices, right? Not everyone can afford to buy locally produced food or locally produced goods whether that’s clothing or food, or transportation like a bicycle. So, I think tariffs – not just only on bicycles, but on all goods – would mean there are people that can’t afford to buy things. $4,000 in the space that we live in is not that expensive, but to most people who don’t ride bikes, $4,000 is a lot of money to spend on a bicycle.
“People that actually need to actively rely on and can only rely on a bicycle for transportation, they may only have $300 or $400 that they can spend on a bike. And those goods almost need to be made overseas at that price point. I believe people need access to stuff and access to goods that are on the lower end of the spectrum too,“ he says.
Is reshoring the answer?
So if the prices to import go higher perhaps the solution is to move production closer to home – something that was heavily lobbied by some during Trump’s first term, too. Yet, even for smaller brands, shifting production to the US presents significant hurdles. Prototyping and tooling in the US compared to countries like China is more expensive, and some industry experts Escape spoke to also questioned whether the know-how and skill of producing in the US is really there. As one source said, “made in the USA isn’t really a guarantee of quality.”
Stinner sees tariffs as a potential catalyst for reshoring. Speaking to Escape soon after the election result, he noted that in the last six months, he had had several conversations with brands that are importing from Taiwan, and are seriously considering moving production to the US just to get in front of the tariffs.
“I think you’ll see a lot of smaller brands consider [moving production to the US], but they’re probably more on the premium side,” Stinner said. “There’s a lot of unknowns; I don’t think you’re going to see the big [brands like] Trek and Specialized – they’re not going to move production to the US – it’s just probably not financially possible for them to do that.”
Stinner and PeopleForBikes’ Moore both pointed out that even if frames were made in the US, components and raw materials would still originate from Asia, primarily China. Groupsets, tyres, any of the finishing kit – most of that is made outside the US.
“I don’t think that there’s anyone making tires on a mass scale in the United States for bicycles,” Jacob Rheuban, founder of children’s bike brand Prevelo pointed out.
Stinner, focusing on metal frames, said that even though the materials could be sourced in the US, his company still relies on aluminium from Italy and steel from China (in addition to some domestic product). Titanium comes from either Canada or Russia. And when it comes to carbon fibre, manufacturing is very much dominated by Asia.
“There’re other parts of the world where we can manufacture things for less money. I think it is a question of ‘How hard is it to actually get that stuff here?’ And if we’re looking at conflict that is much longer than four years, if you’re looking at something that’s eight to 10 years of a problem I think [companies] may be looking more specifically to bring manufacturing to the US,” Stinner said. But there are limits.
“I don’t see mass carbon fiber coming over here. I think that’s going to be a real big challenge – I’ve also heard that the likes of Specialized and Trek have pivoted to Vietnam or Cambodia, or other areas of the world and those might get a blanket tariff of 10 or 20%. But that’s going to be a tariff they can probably live with a little bit more than 60% out of China.”
Escape approached the big brands for a comment, but neither confirmed if they are moving their production – but it’s publicly known that both manufacture in Taiwan and China.
Moving production is, however, also an expensive process. On the other hand, automation and technological advancements could speed up reshoring. “We see the increased influence of technology on the supply chain. Additive manufacturing (like 3D printing) is reshaping some parts of the market. Better production techniques and higher technology at the factory level are enabling more efficient flows,” Parlee’s Rodi said.
“As an example, we produce smaller quantities more frequently to make our supply chain work better. It was common in the past for a boutique manufacturer like Parlee to take six months or a year’s worth of frame production from Asia in one large batch. That can easily become a problem if there is a delay or you forecast sizes or colors incorrectly. With a shorter, more agile supply chain, we produce every month and we do a lot more finish-to-order work. This allows us and our dealers to be more responsive to customer demand.”
The availability of skilled labor is another concern for Stinner. He argues that without investing in workforce development, reshoring production could lead to bottlenecks that stall growth rather than foster it.
“We are probably producing more frames than most shops now in the US and we’ve noticed it with our business: as the scale gets larger, as we’re producing more, labor is going to be our biggest expense,” he said. “As we get more volume, that labor spread out over more and things are getting less expensive to produce as we get that scale and I think getting that scale is the hardest part – and has been the hardest part for US manufacturers.”
That’s more than a theory: after getting a massive federal grant to build a chip factory in Arizona, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company has struggled to bring it online, which the company blames in part on a lack of skilled workers (workplace culture issues and union safety concerns have also played a role).
Stinner said that if more people were willing to make an investment in US-based manufacturing, it could become much more financially viable and even rival Taiwanese or Chinese prices – especially if taking into account possible tariffs, shipping costs and lead times.
Stinner is in the midst of an ambitious effort on that exact idea, shifting from its all-custom approach to a mix of custom frames and stock steel production, which the brand calls Select, and which will be available at far lower prices (models will roll out sequentially, starting with the Carrizo all-road). “It takes an amount of volume to come into our shop in order to hit that. We can’t do that at 50 frames a month – we need to be at 200 to 500 frames a month to get that scale in order to make that happen,” Stinner said. “But it takes a concerted [industry] effort – we’re not going to be able to just do that only with Stinner; the brand’s just not large enough.”
“In order for that to happen next year, we need more partners that are willing to invest in US manufacturing,” he added. “And if that happens, we’ll continue to see those prices come down and things become more affordable. And there’s automation that we can add in – there’s a lot of things that we can do in order to be much more competitive. So from a pricing standpoint, the more US manufacturing we’re doing, the better it’s going to get.”
Still, frames are one thing, parts and tires another, and it’s hard to see that a 100% domestically made bike would really become a reality for many outside Taiwan or China. Even Detroit Bikes, which manufactures in the US, and Kent International – which assembles domestically – rely on foreign-sourced components.
Many of the sources Escape spoke with said they don’t see them reshoring as a likely move anytime soon. Established and diversely distributed production in Asia makes it challenging for them to justify the cost, both financially and logistically, of moving operations to the US or even altering supply chains drastically unless this is seen as a longer-term crisis.
For companies like Tern, diversification can offer stability and supply chain flexibility – both things that many mentioned are needed in the coming years. But Tern’s founder, Hon, echoed Stinner and other sources in the view that while moving production closer to end markets can be a long-term plan for many brands, it faces challenges like the lack of skilled labour and manufacturing infrastructure in the US.
“Manufacturing requires an entire ecosystem of suppliers doing things like forging, casting, machining, welding, and anodizing. While they exist in the US, these suppliers are much harder to find, and you need skilled workers trained in these fields,” said Hon.
The industry-wide pivot to diversifying manufacturing locations is clearly a response to the unpredictability of the trade policies, and likely more feasible than something like completely reshoring production inside western nations. “Producing closer to end market is a good thing that we believe in, but it’s a lot harder in the US without the necessary infrastructure and workforce,” Hon concluded.
As Stinner and many others noted, a 10% tariff on products from countries like Vietnam will likely be manageable for most brands, even if the production costs were slightly higher than in China. This means that even for mid-sized companies that have diversified out of China, it’s hard to see reshoring as a viable solution.
An example of the cost disparity is Ibis’ Exie. The American brand offers both a US- and Vietnam–made version of the XC bike, with clear differences in pricing. The US-made model is a premium product made in the brand’s own Santa Cruz, California factory, while the Vietnam version is still high-quality, but available at a more competitive price.
Ibis’ dual approach is an insight into what might become more of a trend. While some consumers are willing to pay a premium for “made in the USA” products, the majority would likely prioritise affordability, particularly in a market and economic situation that grapples with uncertainty.
This unpredictability also complicates efforts to reshore production further. While reducing reliance on a single country like China may be appealing, shifting to other international hubs often proves more practical and economically viable than moving production to the US entirely. For brands, the challenge lies in navigating the possibly frequent policy changes while also maintaining cost efficiency and safeguarding supply chain stability.
What’s in the future?
While manufacturers might grapple with sourcing and production challenges first, retailers are also bracing for the potential impact of tariffs. The whole cycling industry, already shaped by the pandemic-induced cycling boom, now faces yet another period of heightened uncertainty as rising costs are likely to dampen consumer demand. Despite this, many in the industry remain measured in their outlook, and emphasised the importance of avoiding panic and hasty decisions in the face of uncertainty.
“We hope to see greater stability return to the cycling industry, as the loss of so many respected brands and businesses in recent months has had a significant impact on everyone involved,” said Bryson Ross, Hunt Wheels marketing director. “A thriving, competitive industry is essential – not just for ensuring that customers have access to a range of high-quality products, but also for innovation and pushing all of us to do better. We anticipate that companies will increasingly focus on developing more efficient and durable business processes, which could lead to advancements in sustainability efforts and manufacturing technologies, hopefully benefiting both companies and consumers.”
Tariffs, when implemented, are bound to have an impact across the industry. As one source noted, it’s not a question of if, but when. However, this is not the bicycle industry’s first experience navigating turbulent markets. The sector has shown great adaptability in the past, and the proposed tariffs, while unwelcome, are unlikely to derail the whole industry.
Prevelo’s Jacob Rheuban put it succinctly: “There’s always going to be bikes, right? One way or another the bike industry is going to survive, and there will be people riding bikes.”
Did we do a good job with this story?