I think there can be a lot argued about "exclusive access to the technology" or similar issues.
Look at Lance Armstrong and his $1 Million?? TT bike.
Not to many pros have the money or backing to get all that technology and laborers behind them.
Watching and reading about that bike a while back made it seem that Lance had a team of R&D just for him. 5 guys from Trek and others just to go to Lance's house to build up a bike after they built it for him. That might be EXCLUSIVE and is definitely EXCESSIVE.
I think the UCI rules that say bikes and components have to be commercially available are good but not tough enough. Teams and manufactures bend that every way they can though. That rule should be modified to exclude "in the works, prototype, $10,000+, ETC" statements and the like excuses.
Look at Lance Armstrong and his $1 Million?? TT bike.
Watching and reading about that bike a while back made it seem that Lance had a team of R&D just for him. 5 guys from Trek and others just to go to Lance's house to build up a bike after they built it for him. That might be EXCLUSIVE and is definitely EXCESSIVE.
I think the UCI rules that say bikes and components have to be commercially available are good but not tough enough. Teams and manufactures bend that every way they can though. That rule should be modified to exclude "in the works, prototype, $10,000+, ETC" statements and the like excuses.