# SRAM corp is out of money



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

I guess with all the recent acquirements (especially with Zipp) SRAM is in a financial jam now.
Too fast too soon will do this to a company. 

Im thinking that as soon as SRAM gets more money that they will be looking for a pedal manufacturer to buy up. Thats all their really missing now in their groupo offerings.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*SRAM Looking for External Funds*

CHICAGO, US – To strengthen the financial and ownership structure, SRAM has retained J.P. Morgan to find an investor to be a strategic financial partner. “We are looking for a minority financial investor, ” said Stan Day (photo), president and chief executive officer of SRAM in Bicycle Retailer.

“We feel it’s important for the organization to add some breadth and depth to the ownership structure beyond being a family and management-owned company. We expect a partner to be selected in the August time frame.”

Stan Day unlined that there is no need to start looking for a minority share external investor but it is a part of building a long term foundation of SRAM. There will be no change in the company’s management structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.bike-eu.com/news/2882/sram-looking-for-external-funds.html


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Title and body don't match. They aren't actually out of money.

What's with the relentless anti-SRAM postings? You a Shimano rep or something?


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

Read the first few words on the article... *"To strengthen the financial and ownership structure"*
(And its probably cause they spent over 100mill to acquire zipp)

If you have any background in the finiancial sector you would know that that quote only means one thing and that is that SRAM needs money.

And its not like they are just getting internal financial feelers out there probing for interest when they instead went out and hired J.P.Morgan Chase to help them out. 
Hiring JPMC is not a bad thing thou since JPMC is responsible for working with some of the biggest companies in the world. You cant find a better financial services advisor than JPMorgan Chase.

Im just reporting the news. And its just news, dont like it dont read it
This is no diff than someone posting that Cannondale's bankrupt and being bought out

On a side note SRAM needing cash can mean a couple things. First is to get liquidated cash bank in their banks. A company with just assets to their name is a risky business. Thats just how Trump wen bankrupt. Everytime he'd make a few million he just kept buying up property and then had no cash to bail himself out when things went bad.
Having disposable cash for SRAM can mean they can purchase other interests like a pedal manufacturer as ive already said or better yet to solidify their financial position as a company so they can go public.
Im betting on the latter because if SRAM really wants to blow the doors wide open an IPO would definately do it.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Basically it looks like you are seeing what you want to see. 

They are looking for a financial investor- not uncommon for mid-size private companies, especially those who have made significant acquisitions. Given the amount of private capital out there it makes sense to try and get some. 

If we are playing the parsing the tea leaves game, I would add it looks like you have some experience with the cycling industry and a bit of a anti-SRAM bias. Hence my guess of a sales rep/low level insider.


----------



## MartinsMental (Feb 8, 2007)

_"(And its probably cause they spent over 100mill to acquire zipp)"_

Can you possibly back this up with a link or some other source? 

Your inference of they "need money" is completely subjective to your own view.

SRAM has aquired a lot of business in the past few years but that is far and away not enough of a reason to say they're bankrupt.

I'm not financial advisor but it seems to me that_ the best time to look for investors is when you don't need them._

And SRAM being a privately held company, how can you pretend to know anything about their finances? If you have a source then please sharre it.

Just more internet bullsh!t I guess... Thanks for your contribution...


----------



## Rollo Tommassi (Feb 5, 2004)

*this is the most ludicrous post evar*

Martin is totally correct in saying "the best time to look for investors is when you don't need them.


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

Coolhand said:


> Basically it looks like you are seeing what you want to see.
> 
> They are looking for a financial investor- not uncommon for mid-size private companies, especially those who have made significant acquisitions. Given the amount of private capital out there it makes sense to try and get some.
> 
> If we are playing the parsing the tea leaves game, I would add it looks like you have some experience with the cycling industry and a bit of a anti-SRAM bias. Hence my guess of a sales rep/low level insider.


no, i see a lot more than you think. 
I can see news is beyond you and think its a jab then sobeit
You seem to ignore the keys words of strengthen financial sturcture which says a lot especially if your hiring JPMC. 
And cash rich companies who are structurally sound dont look for investors. Honda and Toyota dont need investors while Ford may.

Any company big or small with the growth they have had will sooner or later hit a brick wall in terms of financial growth. Its not like Chapter 11 is even in the horizon, thats not even thought of but its evident that SRAM has used up its liquidated assets.
And in order for more growth they need help.
As for anti-sram, i tried it i didnt like it. You have stated you hated shimano and campy(horrible and bad). So who cares? Its your choice to take ones opinion personally which it looks like you have.
One thing that you cant deny is the recall from Consumer Product Safety Commission in regards to the Force brake calipers.
You may not understand but for a recall to be made by a Federal Organization it is a major problem. And it takes A LOT of time and negotiating between the CPSC and the manufacturer for it to go that far. 
And for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to make the recall only means that SRAM refuses or wont recognize the fault in the brakes.
It takes literally dozens of complaints to make the CPSC to take notice.
You may brush this off and thats fine but there in this instance safety may have been compromised by component weight and/or poor manufacturing. All n all the riders experience has just became better because of this recall.


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

MartinsMental said:


> _"(And its probably cause they spent over 100mill to acquire zipp)"_
> 
> Can you possibly back this up with a link or some other source?
> 
> ...



No one said SRAM was bankrupt. You should re-read everything and then read it all again.
And yes sure best time to look for inverstors is when you dont need them... lol.. sure you keep on believing that. Then you can explain it to me when JPMC sends SRAM their bill for the consultant fees
And if you want financial info on them you can start at Edgar Online. Have you checkbook ready


----------



## MartinsMental (Feb 8, 2007)

*I'll ask it again...*

_"(And its probably cause they spent over 100mill to acquire zipp)"_

Where are you getting this?

And why are you completely ignoring this:

_"Stan Day unlined that there is no need to start looking for a minority share external investor but it is a part of building a long term foundation of SRAM. There will be no change in the company’s management structure"._

You titled this thread _"SRAM Corp is out of money."_

And then you just said this, _"No one said SRAM was bankrupt."_

Umm... I think you're chasing your tail trying to muckrake but hey, enjoy your random inference backed up by NOTHING...

If you don't like SRAM, don't ride SRAM and don't trust their leadership then why do you even care? It just seems odd and quite suspect that you choose to post in the SRAM forum when you have nothing factual to contribute.


----------



## Rollo Tommassi (Feb 5, 2004)

*Incorrect*

"And for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to make the recall only means that SRAM refuses or wont recognize the fault in the brakes."

Again, this is not true. SRAM fully complied with the recall, and make it quite easy for dealers to get replacements for customers. The fault in the Force brakes were only in the center titanium bolt and was of a specific manufacturing run.


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

double post oops...


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

MartinsMental said:


> _"(And its probably cause they spent over 100mill to acquire zipp)"_
> 
> Where are you getting this?
> 
> ...



nd ill say it AGAIN... go get your own subscription to Edgar Online and then you will know. If you really need to know more indepth info then pay up for Edgar Pro.
And youre quoting Days statement when they acquired zipp back in Nov 07. That has nothing to do with this newest news.
And yes a company can have zero money/liqudated assets in the bank and NOT be bankrupt. Seems you cant differentiate the the two


----------



## roadieKill (Jun 6, 2008)

Rollo Tommassi said:


> "And for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to make the recall only means that SRAM refuses or wont recognize the fault in the brakes."
> 
> Again, this is not true. SRAM fully complied with the recall, and make it quite easy for dealers to get replacements for customers. The fault in the Force brakes were only in the center titanium bolt and was of a specific manufacturing run.



no, you're incorrect!
the CPSC is the last place you as a manufacturer ever want a recall to come from. Lots of companies will do their own involuntary recalls. Namely the automotive sector. Remember when Ford Explorer had their recall due to faulty tires? That blew up in Fords face because they didnt act fast enough and all hell broke loose when Federal got involved.
And of course SRAM complied with the recall. It had gone Federal so they had no choice. And it doesnt matter if its a nut a screw or a titanium bolt. Its still a manufacturing default. If someone died from a fall due to the brake failure you gonna tell them its no big deal as it was only the center titanium bolt?
And yeah it was a certain run... 5400 units of that run. I guess thats not a big enough number for your 'were only'


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

roadieKill said:


> no, i see a lot more than you think.
> I can see news is beyond you and think its a jab then sobeit
> You seem to ignore the keys words of strengthen financial sturcture which says a lot especially if your hiring JPMC.
> And cash rich companies who are structurally sound dont look for investors. Honda and Toyota dont need investors while Ford may.
> ...


You misread, I didn't hate Shimano and Campy, I still ride them. My cross bike is Chorus and my TT bike is Dura Ace (as was my last two race bikes). After tons of miles, it is clear to me Red is better right now. 

Additionally, I am not to keen on 7900 incompatibility with 7800 on the Shimano front, and wonder just how massive the price increase will be.
Still, Shimano normally make solid gear once they get some competition (if they don't, they start to play "you will do it our way and like it" with consumers see i.e. "dual control xtr levers"). 

Campy on the other hand was my first true love. Watching them flounder the last 5 years has been tough. The QS/non-QS line was stupid, as was their complete inability to make a group match 105 for price and performance. Is Fulcrum the future or a distraction? Super Record, really? Why all the cash and time on E-shifting? 11 speed smacks more of Spinal Tap, rather then actual innovation. Campy is in danger of irrelevance outside the EU. 

And by the way, you headline states "SRAM corp is out of money" yet the story didn't say that, and you provided no proof. And you seem to have had serious obsession with SRAM = bad since you got here. So yeah, you certainly did state they were- what does "out of money" mean in your world?

Someone else already refuted your misunderstand of the brake bolt issue, so I won't bother. But thanks for playing.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

For details on the recall (which appears voluntary BTW):

http://www.sram.com/_media/pdf/news/SRAM_Recall_Poster_Final.pdf


----------



## MartinsMental (Feb 8, 2007)

*Put your money where your face hole is...*



roadieKill said:


> no, you're incorrect!
> 
> And yeah it was a certain run... 5400 units of that run. I guess thats not a big enough number for your 'were only'


Of that 5400 (or whatever) how many _actually_ broke in the field? Wait wait, I know you're going to vomit out some number that is AGAIN not backed up by a legitimate source. Curious to see what you dream up this time.

Did you have affected brakes?

If so, what was SRAM's reponse? How did they handle you as a consumer?

If you didn't have a recalled brake how is this relevant?

SRAM's recall was a non-issue for most shops and consumers. 

Their actions have never been anything less than outstanding when it comes to customer service and their transparancy through the recall is a sweet example of responsibility and accountability.

Accountability - something which you have yet to prove with your baseless claims and random numbers.

Hooray for nonsense!


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Ok everyone- take a deep breath. I think this one's run its course. 

Also, quick reminder. When tempted in the heat of argument to start insulting the other poster- don't. See the forum guidelines if you have any confusion as to this point. 

Locked.


----------

