Shimano released their gravel oriented wireless (Di2) One By derailleur this week.  With this release we have the following options in the market:

Vendor	Wireless/Wired	Speed	Max Tooth	UVP
Shimano GRX Di2	Wireless	12 Speed	51	€2012
Shimano GRX	Wired	12 Speed	51	€1589
SRAM RED XPLR eTap AXS	Wireless	12 Speed	44	Unclear
SRAM Force XPLR AXS (D2)	Wireless	12 Speed	44	€1942
SRAM Rival XPLR AXS (D2)	Wireless	12 Speed	44	€1424
SRAM RED XPLR AXS	Wireless	13 Speed	46	€3883
SRAM Force XPLR AXS (E1)	Wireless	13 Speed	46	€1970
SRAM Rival XPLR (E1)	Wireless	13 Speed	46	€1435
Campagnolo Ekar	Wired	13 Speed	44	€1593

Yes, I’m fully aware that there is also SRAM Apex and that one can have a bigger range on SRAM with a mountain bike rear derailleur.  You can also hack an old SRAM Force 11 speed levers with the fantastic Ratio Technologies upgrade kits, but I’m interested in a different point.

What does the table above say about products and users?

The bike rider has a few considerations. 

1) Too many options, can’t decide.

2) stick to what you know (“I rode Shimano so far, I want to stay with Shimano in my next bike”).

3) Wireless and 13-Speed seems “better” than wired and 12-Speed (More modern and more is better right?).

The bike industry has two dominant components vendors: Shimano and SRAM. It’s pretty obvious that one of them is trying to pull the industry in one direction in which they have an advantage. The other, larger vendor, which also means the vendor with the more entrenched OEM relationships, can dig their heals and even, take a completely different position. And what does it yield? Confused consumers.

Lets consider when do cyclists buy new group sets?  These are the type of purchases that are done when buying a new bike or when there is a very attractive feature in a new group that is just absolutely a must.  We also buy new things for our bikes because these new things are now available and we can’t control our wants (N+1 is the perfect example).  Cycling in most cases is a spend that’s very strongly sits in the “disposable income” category.

So both Shimano and SRAM released new groups in the last few months.  Are they needed?  SRAM seems to be saying “wireless and 13 speed at any price point”.  This is great for consumers since these groups fit any wallet size (within reason).  They are also signaling to the market “we dont believe in wires”.  For cyclists who think that “sorry I can’t join the ride today as I forgot to charge my bicycle battery” is not a reasonable position, SRAM has, of course, extra batteries and chargers for sale. Shimano has a solution.  

Shimano seems to believe that options are not just in price points, but also technical.  Shimano is clearly an engineering driven company.  Their engineers are not asking the consumers to decide which technology they prefer or to force consumers into one direction, but rather they provide a wired and wireless options for the same group.  Price-wise Shimano seemed to have positioned the GRX Di2 RX827 on the same price point as the SRAM Force group.  The group also supports a much larger cassette range (officially up to 51 teeth).

Are these groups actually target the same cyclist or are we confused by Proximity Bias? Both vendors release wireless kits in such close proximity to each other, but are SRAM and Shimano address the same market?  

A rider looking for a very wide range for their adventure rig with cables, basically only have a single off the shelf option: Shimano Wired GRX 12 speed.  A rider looking for a tightly spaced high gear (i.e. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, etc) can pick the SRAM 13-Speed wireless setup (as long as their bike support the UDH derailleur hanger standard SRAM introduced) or go with Campagnolo Ekar.

From a product perspective, these are a lot of options which yield a lot of decision points with both large vendors trying to grab as much market as they can (that’s their job). These options are likely aimed at OEMs and the typical consumer will make a buying decision based on total package cost (the bike).  For the rest of us, loads of options means that we can wax poetics about the cycling industry and we are likely to stick to the groups we have been using forever.

I wish there will be the best of both worlds.  I appreciate a “save my climb” gear like Shimano’s 10-51 cassette or the aftermarket options from Garbaruk or Ingrid.  On all options with a pizza-size cassette, the spacing in the higher gears leaves me looking for that in between gear when riding in relatively flat topographies.  (Typical gears offered are: 10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-33-39-45-51).  It’d be great to have a Campagnolo Ekar like spacing with some changes on the very low end (my own fantasy): 10-11-12-13-14-15-17-20-23-27-35-44-50.  It’s a nice “problem” to have.

Company	Model	Weight (g)	Cost (Euro)
Rene Herse	Switchback Hill Extra Light (650B x 48mm)	413	87
Schwalbe	Thunder Burt Evolution (650B x 53mm)	520	45
Teravail	RAMPART (650B x 47mm)	550	49
Panaracer	GravelKing	520	40
WTB	Horizon Road TCS (650B x 47mm)	564	39
Donnelly	MSO (650B x 50mm)
Vittoria	Terreno Zero (650B x 47mm)	560	35
Sim Works	The Homage Tire (650B x 43mm)	520	60
Pirelli	Cinturato Gravel Hard Terrain (650B x 45mm)	510	45
Terrene	Elwood Light Folding 650×47 Black	462	65
Soma	Cazadero (650B x 50mm) Black	540	65
Soma	Cazadero (650B x 42mm) Black	470	65

The search never ends, but the list above is a good resource.

Since the global pandemic started, many of us have been working from home, keeping to the same time zone and meeting colleagues on zoom calls. Since the spread of SARS-CoV-2 you fell into a routine that is great for productivity but not ideal for creativity.

So when the crew asked who is up for a session of #CoffeeOutside it was a great opportunity to break the routine and start the day very differently. Instead of the typical morning routine, you got on the bike, packed a coffee kit and field stove, some home made cookies, and rode out to a lake to meet the crew.

The weather was perfect and the lake blue as the sky. Everyone brought food from home such that a smorgasbord breakfast outdoors was formed. 6 coffee kits were set out and a great chat was had by everyone.

On the way home, you feel rejuvenated. It was only an hour outdoors with about 30 minutes ride to the lake and 30 minutes ride back. That little change in the routine, seeing some people in real life, enjoying coffee next to a lake, are all the ingredients of a small change that leaves a large impact. Having a routine is great. One can only break the routine is one has a routine.

Orange, the incumbent operator in France, and Google Cloud announced a partnership that’s worth some closer inspection just yesterday. Ray Le Maistre had a good explanation about the initiative on TelecomTV.

The problem that Orange is trying to solve is that it needs/wants to roll out a 5G network. That network upgrade is astronomically expensive and is a multi-years investment. Orange announced in time for MWC 2018 that it was running 5G trials both in Romania and France for example. It will take time.

What Orange is trying to do is to find ways to monetize the roll out as it is happening. Instead of waiting for a complete coverage, it makes sense to start now, gain experience, see where the business opportunities are and where can Orange innovate. In fact, unlike past mobile technology upgrades, reading from a large network operator that “we need to figure out how to make money and we are asking Google for help” is a pleasant display of humility.

The key to exploring the business model that Orange and Google are trying to build together is the last sentence of the press release introduction: “The collaboration will also pave the way for the development of new advanced cloud, edge computing and cybersecurity services that will open up business opportunities for both Google Cloud and Orange.” This goes back to democratic computing and providing access to application developers at the edge of the 5G network. The statement also clearly points out that this is about both companies’ monetization. Google is not in the charity business.

Google know how to handle the scale and agility required to operate infinite amount of compute power and Orange is banking on two key assets it has:

• License to operate mobile network in France and other countries as well as frequencies allocated to them.
• Brand trust. Orange is a French company which, especially in today’s political climate, is likely to have more trust around data sovernity by the French consumer than Google. Data and AI-based services that can ensure the data remains in France and follow EU and French laws, will help build unique capabilities while leveraging google technologies.

We live in exciting times. 5 years ago, the notion that a European operator will forge strong technical collaboration with an American hyperscalar were unimaginable. In 2020 these announcements are becoming the norm. As someone who cares deeply about connecting people and democratizing compute power, this is a welcomed announcement.

In a white paper published earlier this year, the GSMA, the organization responsible for mobile standards and development, introduced a new project called Operator Platform. The white paper is available here. The idea is to provide a cohesive and global Telco Edge Cloud platform with a unified infrastructure and consistent APIs for application providers.

The key to the initiative is the target consumer of the Operator Platform. The initiative is aimed at the folks developing applications (or services) that depend on capabilities that can only be met by the advances provided by 5G and the abundance of computing power at the edges. You can call it democratic computing.

The introductory white paper dives very deep very quickly. It clearly focused on the point of view of the operators rather than the application providers which will be the actual consumers of the Operator Platform. That is understandable since the initiative comes from the GSMA – an organization led by network operators rather than developers of mobile applications. Initially, the white paper must convince other operators that this idea has merit.

The really interesting part of the white paper is the holistic vision of APIs. The APIs to be developed under this project will consider every direction.

• Northbound – towards the the application provider. This is key for monetization. One can think about this API in the same way that the App Store works on an iPhone or Google Play on an Android phone. In essence both stores provide a unified API ensuring that an App will run on the mobile device. The Northbound API should address security, deployment requirements, charging and monitoring.
• East-West – This API will focus on other Operator Platforms. It is meant to provide the global coverage we all are used to from our mobile devices. For example, if a self-driving car drives across Europe, we can not expect it to stop just because it crossed from Poland to Germany. So the Operator Platforms have to be federated and publish to each other which capabilities they have. One can imagine an API stating “eMBB Yes/No” to indicate bandwidth capabilities of the mobile network.
• User-Network – This interface focuses on the user equipment (UE). UE is one of these common terms in the mobile world to indicate the mobile device. These days this is not longer just a mobile phone. it seems that this interface will allow UE to request capabilities from the network.
• Southbound. This interface connects the OP abstraction layer with the actual Telco Cloud Edge.

This is a much needed development. If successful, it will enable network operators to offer a global platform for application developers which could end in everybody winning. The operators will have a new revenue stream to help pay for the astronomical cost of rolling out 5G; application developers will be able to consume these new capabilities and develop new services, tools and games; and the end consumer will benefit from a brave new world with compute power everywhere.

It will take time, but this is a step in the right direction.