Where will Giannis Go? Houston.

Giannis Antetokounmpo is reportedly back on the NBA trade market, and it sounds like this will be done before the 2026 NBA draft. Since the Warriors were part of the rumors this last season, I wanted to review where they realistically stand. My prediction is simple:

Houston gets the deal done for Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., and a future first for Giannis.

But first, let’s discuss the assumptions in my argument.

Core Assumptions

The Bucks have already decided to trade Giannis before the draft.
They need a coherent public story the day after the trade. The return must be clear to fans, media, ownership, and the locker room.
They are not set up for a clean tank. Their future draft-pick control is compromised. Losing more games is not necessarily beneficial, especially considering the proposed draft lottery restructuring built to deincentivize tanking.
They already have No. 10 in the 2026 draft. The ideal trade either adds another premium draft asset or adds a young player who functions like one.
Giannis has practical destination leverage. Because of his contract situation, teams will not pay full value unless they believe he will accept the destination.

Bucks Strategic Assumptions

They want a reset, not a full teardown. The likely goal is to become younger, cheaper, and more flexible, not to become the worst team in the league.
They need at least one fan-facing centerpiece. The return needs someone fans can immediately understand as part of the next era.
They will prefer immediate or near-immediate value over vague distant upside. A 2026 lottery pick matters because it can be used right away. A young player already producing matters because fans can see the new direction immediately.
They will discount distant future picks unless there is a clear reason to believe those picks could become premium assets.
They do not want an old star as the main return. Older stars matter only if they can be rerouted for younger assets or picks.
They will value clean salary and contract flexibility. In a Giannis trade, getting off Myles Turner’s remaining money could be part of the value.

Below I rank the deals that I think could actually get agreement from Milwaukee, the acquiring team, and Giannis himself.

My Prediction: Houston Gets the Deal Done

Houston: Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., 2027 #1 routed from Phoenix
Milwaukee: Giannis

Houston is the cleanest “win-now urgency” bidder because its timeline has already shifted. The Rockets are no longer patiently collecting prospects around Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr., Reed Sheppard, Amen Thompson, and future picks.

By adding Kevin Durant, they moved into a shorter contention window, which makes a second consolidation trade more defensible. Sengun is young and productive, but his best role is as an offensive hub, and Houston may decide that Giannis gives them a higher playoff ceiling next to Durant, Amen, and their remaining defensive infrastructure.

From Milwaukee’s side, Sengun + Jabari + a premium first is one of the few packages that gives the Bucks both salary matching and a coherent post-Giannis story: a young All-Star-level center, a young stretch forward, their own No. 10 pick, and another future draft asset.

This deal is painful for Houston, but they would still have Giannis, Durant, Amen Thompson, (and likely, Fred VanVleet) and enough defensive infrastructure to be a real contender.

A Clean Reboot: Golden State Warriors

Golden State: Brandin Podziemski, Moses Moody, Jimmy Butler, No. 11 + 3 other first round picks
Milwaukee: Giannis, Myles Turner

The Warriors can give the Bucks a full reboot package: immediate draft capital, young rotation pieces, short-term salary, long-term cap cleanup, and future exposure to a declining franchise.

If Giannis is gone, Myles Turner’s remaining long-term money becomes much harder to justify on a reset roster. Golden State can absorb that contract because Turner still helps a Curry-led title push as a stretch big and rim protector.

In return, Milwaukee gets Podziemski, a former Wisconsin Mr. Basketball, Moody, Butler’s expiring salary, No. 11 next to its own No. 10, and three others first round picks.

Moody’s injury lowers his value, but he is still young and on a manageable deal. Butler is expiring salary who could be traded (or more simply, bought out) to a contending team before the 2027 trade deadline.

Podziemski is the key young player in the deal. I am assuming he can be re-signed around $15 million to $20 million per year, which would make him a useful long-term contract for Milwaukee. At that number, he fits the reboot story as a young, productive guard next to two lottery picks. If he costs meaningfully more, his value to Milwaukee drops.

The Bucks argument is that this deal lets them reboot immediately: two adjacent lottery picks, two young rotation players, future post-Curry picks, and a clean break from both the Giannis era and the Turner (3 years, near $90M) contract.

Cleanest Bucks Fit, But Less Likely: San Antonio Spurs

San Antonio: Stephon Castle or Dylan Harper + Devin Vassell + Keldon Johnson
Milwaukee: Giannis

The Spurs are young, good, and can keep following the OKC-style homegrown path. The deal only makes sense if they feel urgency to win it all now. Giannis next to Wembanyama would be an absurd defensive frontcourt, but the cost is abandoning the Spurs’ young core as it is starting to prove itself.

Castle or Harper is the type of young player Milwaukee can sell as the next era. Vassell and Keldon Johnson are included for salary matching, but are also good fair contract young players. This deal doesn’t need a draft pick.

For Milwaukee, this is probably the cleanest young-player package. The Bucks get a potential supestar guard, useful salary, and a reset story that makes sense.

The Best “Almost” Team: Atlanta Hawks

Atlanta: Dyson Daniels, Zaccharie Risacher, Onyeka Okongwu, No. 23
Milwaukee: Giannis

I do not think the Hawks include No. 8. If No. 8 and No. 23 are both included, the package is very attractive for Milwaukee.

The other key piece is Nickeil Alexander-Walker, this last season’s most improved player. I do not think Atlanta includes him because he is an amazing value at his contract. If he is in the deal, things look very different for Milwaukee. But if Atlanta is trying to build around Jalen Johnson, and Giannis, Walker is exactly the type of reasonably priced two-way player they should want to keep.

The broader issue with Atlanta is that their young players are all useful, reasonably priced, and under team control. Dyson Daniels is good, but flawed. It is not clear he can become a good enough offensive player. Risacher (former #1 overall pick) had a very shaky second year, so his stock is down. Okongwu is solid, but his development has been slow enough that the ceiling is unclear.

Atlanta has the assets to make a deal happen, but the version they would want to offer probably is not strong enough to beat Houston, San Antonio, or Golden State.

My Ranking

Houston: my prediction to land him
Golden State: cleanest full reboot package
San Antonio: cleanest Bucks young-player package, but less likely
Atlanta: best almost-deal, probably not enough without No. 8 or Walker

But What About XYZ Team?

Note: I did not go deeply into the salary structure for each team below to see if deals are actually possible. I just looked at the core proposal to “get close.”

The pick counts below are conservative estimates. I am excluding swaps, encumbered picks, and picks that may not be legally tradable.

Team	Clean tradable firsts	Bucks want	Why it fails / who says no
Memphis	~5: No. 3, No. 16, 2028, 2031 PHX, 2032	No obvious centerpiece	The picks are strong, especially No. 3, but Giannis acceptance is the blocker. Bucks do not have clear value for Ja Morant in this type of reset.
Clippers	~3-4: No. 5, 2030, 2032, maybe 2029 IND	No obvious centerpiece	Bucks say no unless they love No. 5 or a first-tier player falls. The pick has to carry too much of the package. Clippers’ future sheet is messy after No. 5.
Lakers	~3: No. 25, 2030, 2032	Austin Reaves	Bucks say no. Reaves is good and marketable, but not enough as the main Giannis return at likely $40M+ money.
Heat	~3: No. 13, 2030, 2032	Tyler Herro or Bam Adebayo	Bucks say no on a Herro-led package. A Bam package is more interesting, but Miami probably does not trade Bam if the goal is to pair him with Giannis.
OKC	~3: No. 12, No. 17, one of 2031/2032 under strict rule	Chet or Jalen Williams	OKC says no. They can pay their existing players and are already championship level. They have no need to compress the timeline. OKC has plenty of other young talent that would be attractive, but I just don’t think OKC cares.
Celtics	~3: No. 27, 2027, 2030 or 2031	Jaylen Brown	Celtics probably say no if Jaylen is required. Bucks say no if he is not. Late picks do not carry the deal.
Cavaliers	~3: No. 29, 2030, 2032	Evan Mobley	Cavs say no on Mobley. Bucks say no without Mobley because the picks are not good enough.
Knicks	~3: No. 24, 2030, 2032	No obvious centerpiece	Bucks say no unless a core player is included. The pick package is too thin.
Magic	~1: 2032 only under strict rule	Franz Wagner	Bucks say no because there is no 2026 first and little clean pick flexibility.
Timberwolves	~1: No. 28 only under strict rule	Jaden McDaniels	Bucks say no. Minnesota lacks clean tradable firsts and cannot beat the market without a core player.
Nuggets	~1: No. 26 only under strict rule	Jamal Murray or Peyton Watson	Both sides probably say no. Denver lacks clean picks and does not have a clean Bucks-facing package.
Blazers	~2: 2027 and one of 2031/2032	Deni Avdija or Shaedon Sharpe	Giannis says no. He already played with Dame.

My Creator-Driven Carbon Wheel Brand Strategy for Chinese Wheelbuilders

Cycling is a serious hobby for me, but my professional background is in building technology companies. Because of that, I often find myself thinking about the business side of the cycling industry.

Over the past several years I’ve purchased carbon wheels from a number of direct manufacturers, including Light Bicycle, Light Travel, DFS, and others selling through AliExpress. One thing has become clear: many factories are now capable of producing excellent wheels, often comparable in performance to well-known Western brands.

At the same time, the market has become crowded and confusing for riders. Many companies sell similar products, and it’s not always clear which brands are trustworthy.

This led me to a simple question:

What would a modern direct-to-consumer wheel brand look like if it were designed from scratch today?

The document below is an attempt to answer that question. I originally wrote it as a strategy memo to share with a few manufacturers, but I thought it might also be interesting to riders and others who follow the cycling industry.

It’s not a business plan — just a thought experiment about how manufacturing capability, simple product design, and creator-driven distribution might combine to build a new kind of cycling brand.

I have spent many years starting and running technology companies, including products that reached millions of users in the United States and Vietnam.

Cycling has also been a serious personal hobby for many years. Because of that, I often think about the business side of cycling and how new companies can succeed.

Over the past several years I have purchased and ridden carbon wheels from a variety of direct manufacturers, including companies such as Light Bicycle, DFS, and other vendors selling through AliExpress and independent websites. These experiences have helped me understand both the strengths of these products and the challenges Western riders face when deciding which brands to trust.

Many Chinese manufacturers are now capable of producing carbon wheels with excellent engineering and competitive pricing. In many cases, these products are comparable in quality and performance to wheels sold by well-known Western brands.

However, many Western riders still hesitate to purchase directly from overseas manufacturers.

The reasons are usually not the product itself, but concerns such as:

uncertainty about quality control
uncertainty about customer support
difficulty knowing which brands are trustworthy.

At the same time, the carbon wheel market has become crowded. Many companies sell similar products, but the differences between brands are often unclear to customers.

Because of this, there is a clear opportunity.

If manufacturing excellence can be combined with clear brand positioning and modern distribution channels, it may be possible to build a trusted direct-to-consumer wheel brand for Western riders.

The Model in One Page

The Opportunity

Chinese manufacturers are already producing high-quality carbon wheels.

However, many Western riders still lack confidence when buying directly from overseas brands.

A brand that clearly communicates trust, simplicity, and value could solve this problem.

The Concept

A modern wheelbuilder brand built around three principles:

Benchmark wheels
Wheels designed around the most respected categories in the market.
Simple pricing
All wheels priced at:

$999 delivered

Creator collaboration
Cycling content creators design wheel builds and explain them to their audiences.

Business Structure

Manufacturer
→ builds high-quality wheels

Creators
→ design builds and share their experience

Riders
→ purchase trusted wheels at a fair price

Brand Philosophy

The philosophy of the brand can be summarized in three lines:

99% of the performance
No hype
$999 delivered

Great wheels come from:

proven rim designs
reliable components
careful wheelbuilding practices.

The goal is not to invent new wheel technology.

The goal is to apply proven engineering principles, similar to how respected wheelbuilders operate.

Product Strategy (Benchmark Wheels)

The product lineup should follow the most respected categories in the cycling market.

Instead of inventing new product segments, the goal is to build wheels that match the purpose of the best wheels already available.

Core wheel platforms:

Wheel	Depth (F/R)	Category
Climb	35 / 40	climbing road
Allroad	40 / 50	everyday road
Aero	50 / 60	aero road
Gravel	40 / 45	gravel race

These four wheels cover the majority of riders.

Benchmark Comparison

Category	Benchmark Wheel	Depth	Typical Price	Our Wheel	Depth	Price
Climbing Road	ENVE SES 3.4	38/42	~$2550	Climb	35/40	$999
All-Around Road	Reserve 42/49	42/49	~$2400	Allroad	40/50	$999
Aero Road	ENVE SES 4.5	50/56	~$2850	Aero	50/60	$999
Gravel Race	Zipp 303	40/40	~$2100	Gravel	40/45	$999

The goal is not to copy products, but to match the same performance categories.

Creator Collaboration Model

Another key part of the strategy is working with cycling creators.

Many riders learn about equipment through YouTube, Instagram, and other content platforms.

Instead of traditional sponsorships, creators can design their own preferred wheel build using the core platforms.

Creators can choose:

hub configuration
spoke type
spoke count.

They explain why they chose the setup and ride the wheels publicly.

Riders can then purchase the same configuration.

Creator Revenue Model

All wheels remain priced at:

$999 delivered

The manufacturer keeps the normal production margin.

Remaining margin can form a creator revenue pool.

Creators can influence their earnings based on configuration choices:

premium hubs → lower margin
simpler configurations → higher margin.

This keeps the model simple and transparent.

Launch Plan

The concept can begin as a small experiment.

It does not require large investment.

Step 1 – Simple Website

Build a simple website focused on:

the people behind the wheels
the company story
brand philosophy
wheel lineup
creator builds.

The site should feel like a modern wheelbuilder workshop.

Example costs:

Website platform: ~$50/month
Domain: ~$25/year

Step 2 – Simple Ordering

Initial orders could be handled through:

PayPal invoices
email
WhatsApp support.

This keeps operations simple while testing demand.

Step 3 – Creator Testing

Start with 2–3 creators.

Each creator could test up to four wheelsets.

Examples:

Allroad 40/50
Aero 50/60
Gravel 40/45.

Creators may launch their own builds or simply produce review content.

Possible content includes:

ride testing
wheel design discussions
wheelbuilding process
behind-the-scenes videos.

Why This Is Worth Trying

This strategy requires very little upfront investment.

Most manufacturers already have the most important capability:

the ability to build excellent wheels.

Testing the idea only requires:

a simple product lineup
a simple website
a small number of creator partnerships.

If the idea succeeds, it could grow into a strong direct-to-consumer wheel brand.

If it does not succeed, the cost of testing the concept is very small.

Closing

I wrote this proposal because I believe Chinese manufacturers have a unique opportunity in the Western cycling market.

Manufacturing capability already exists.

With a clear brand story and modern distribution through creators, it may be possible to build a trusted wheel brand for Western riders.

Even if this exact strategy is not adopted, I hope these ideas are helpful.

If you would like to discuss the concept further, I would be happy to talk.

How to Buy a New Car Without Haggling, Stress, or Wasted Time

A few weeks ago, I purchased a 2026 Kia Carnival Hybrid SX minivan for nearly 10% off the MSRP alongside the special financing interest rate (2.9% for 60 months) offered by Kia Financial.

The time from my first contact with any dealer to making the deal took just six hours, and I drove home the new car that night. To be clear, I wasn’t in active discussion for six hours, this is just the time it took for a dealer to agree to my terms – I was at work and I returned messages over email and SMS during breaks.

I didn’t visit anyone until the deal was made and I came in simply to sign papers after sharing my documents and doing my credit application online.

In this post, I’ll talk about my process, how it’s a bit different from conventional wisdom, and how you can save yourself time, stress, and money doing the same thing. The entire approach boils down to three steps. It works best if you have strong credit, no trade-in, flexibility on timing, and access to multiple dealers.

Know What You Want
Know the Dealer’s Situation
Commit to a Price and Make the First Offer

First, know what you want. This step is about eliminating uncertainty before you ever negotiate, so price becomes the only variable. Research the car and trim level(s) that you want along with any options you want and anything you absolutely do not want. This helps you be clear on where you’re flexible.

If needed, go to a dealer, tell them you’re not looking to buy right then, but want to test drive and look at cars. You can also watch video reviews on YouTube or ask LLMs like ChatGPT to help you explore exactly what you want. This preparation time prevents you from making an error during negotiations.

For me, I knew I wanted a Hybrid SX with 8 seats (not 7) and I didn’t need any options. I definitely did not want the Entertainment Screens in the rear rows – I would not have taken them for free. I was not particularly interested in the highest level trim, the SX Prestige, but I was open to it if there was an 8 seat model for a screaming deal – meaning if the dealer could offer a better value price on the SX Prestige than the SX, I would be open.

I was open to any interior and exterior colors, and my approach was I want the cheapest SX trim available.

Second, it’s helpful to understand the dealer situation. This step is about timing and incentives, not price. Do they have any previous model years (2025 versus 2026) they need (typically late summer, early fall) to get rid of? Is this an end of month, end of quarter, or end of year timeline in which a dealer may be focused on hitting sales targets? Basically, think about whether a dealer has a strong incentive to sell. At the same time, consider your own timeline. Do you have to buy now, or can you wait for the best situation? Obviously, the latter is better so you don’t place stress on yourself to close the right deal. Ideally, giving yourself a few months allows you to wait for the right situation – this could be in financing, end-of / holiday promotions, or other aspects that give you more leverage.

Essentially, think through what are their incentives to offer you the right deal right now?

I was not in a rush to buy but suspected that the best deals would be in December rather than in Q1 2026 – I thought that with December marking the end of the year, dealers might be more open to selling at discount, even though minivans in general are a popular, low discount car type. When I saw that Kia offered strong financing (2.9% for 5 years / 60 months) in November and then December, I was confident the time to buy was now.

Finally, decide what price you want. This is where most deals stall, because neither side wants to make the first real commitment. I had already watched the Carnival market for months and had a strong internal sense of price ranges. You can shortcut this by establishing a number using Edmunds, forums, and recent listings.

Traditional wisdom suggests you shop around for price. Get an offer at X dealer, ask Y dealer to beat, and so on. The problem here is that every dealer is happy to beat another dealer’s price, but they don’t want to commit to a low price first because they know you’re going to just use it against them. From my professional experience, I find that business deals stall because neither side wants to make the initial proposal. This is why I’ve gotten used to doing so, even though I know that invites scrutiny. My approach is to know what I want and then move things forward as much as I can.

There are a few ways to get a sense of a “good” price.

One option is Edmunds.

Another is popular communities for your targeted car, like on Reddit or Facebook Groups. If you’re browsing communities, people will often quote OTD numbers, but those are only useful once you strip out taxes, DMV, and trade-ins. If you want specific options, like colors or features, you have to understand how that disrupts the comparison. You also need to consider if someone got that OTD price because of a particular financing method – manufacturers often tie discounts to financing. You’ll see an example of this later.

Finally, use Cargurus and look for all the lowest prices within your area. Your area means the distance you would be willing to drive to get a car.

Your goal in this step is to get a sense of what people are paying: 5 examples from the last month, a reference from Edmunds, and a sense of which dealers are offering the best prices on Cargurus.

I had been watching Cargurus for a while and noticed that one dealer almost always had the best Carnival price in the area, like a doorbusters type of price. On the day I started my outreach, I saw they were selling a 2026 Hybrid SX for around $46.9K.

My thinking here was well, this dealer always advertises the best rates in this area. Let me see what they’ll offer me. If I could push this down to $46.5K, I would be in great shape, at least 7.5% off MSRP for SX trims in the area.

However, the dealer explained that this pricing was only for those who took the default financing, not the special Kia rates. Essentially the discount was paid by the higher interest rate. They ended up coming back with a formal offer of $48.9K, $2.4K higher than my target, at the lower interest rate. You can see an example of this kind of cash rebate for higher interest rate promotion here:

This is when I decided to push more aggressively because the gap from $48.9K to $46.5K was quite large and I assumed would take significant effort to pull off.

I contacted every dealer I was willing to drive to so no single dealer could wait me out. If no dealer engaged, that would have told me my number was wrong. I sent this message:

Hi, I am looking to purchase a 2026 Kia Carnival Hybrid (8-seater) this month.

Here is exactly what I’m ready to sign on:

SX Hybrid

Target OTD: $46,500 before taxes & DMV

Kia Financing at 2.99% for 60 months, $0 down

SX Prestige Hybrid (8-seater)

Target OTD: $49,000 before taxes & DMV

No dealer add-ons, paint packages, or markups.
I have excellent credit, no trade-in, and I can sign immediately for the right unit at the numbers above.

I’m currently collecting written offers from several dealerships.
If you can match or beat the pricing above on a specific VIN, please reply with:

The VIN

The exact OTD breakdown before taxes/DMV

Confirmation of the 2.90% rate

If the numbers work, I will come in and buy the vehicle.

Thank you.

Breaking down the offer, I used the 3 components we discussed above.

1) I shared exactly what I wanted and didn’t want. I gave an alternative (SX Prestige) just in case that trim would be more available to deals. I also made it clear I didn’t want dealer add-ons or forced packages.

2) Traditional thinking suggests that you go in to buy at the end of the month because that’s when dealers want to make sure they hit their targets. But the counterargument is that everyone knows this and tries to get deals at the end of the month. My thinking was, why don’t I try the beginning of the month and if I don’t get what I want, I’ll have the entire month to get one dealer to bite. But they’ll all know I am ready to give them money, and one dealer’s sale is a loss for everyone else.

3) I actually had not looked at pricing on Edmunds or communities before settling on $46.5K. But calculating from MSRP and general research about new car sales, it felt like 8% and above MSRP would be a strong discount. I also had seen pricing from when 2025 models were being heavily discounted to make room for 2026 models, so this had given me another reference for “good” pricing.

They all had an equal opportunity to compete for my business and knew what would get me to sign. They also knew I was committed and ready to buy that day.

If no one engaged, that would have been a clear signal that my price was unrealistic.

This is where my approach diverges from how most modern negotiation advice focuses on tactics: when to ask, what to say, how to anchor, and how to apply pressure. That advice is not wrong, but it assumes the negotiation itself is the main problem.

My experience has been the opposite. Deals stall not because people use the wrong tactics, but because the situation itself is poorly structured.

Instead of trying to “negotiate better,” I try to structure the situation so there is very little left to negotiate. I define exactly what I want, when I am ready to buy, and what would cause me to walk away. That turns the conversation from persuasion into a simple decision.

This is why I was willing to make the first offer, knowing I was contacting enough dealers that someone had an incentive to say yes. The goal was not to outmaneuver anyone, but to remove uncertainty. Once the numbers were clear and my willingness to transact was credible, the negotiation largely ran itself.

And now, to the rest of the story:

In my message, I also mentioned I wanted SMS or Email follow-ups but not phone calls since it was a work day. I believe all the dealers got back to me within a few hours (they have automated systems with template messaging), and I simply repeated the messages. Anyone who called I didn’t respond.

Some dealers asked if I had an offer already, and that they would beat it. I told them I was in process. Other dealers didn’t read what I said, so I deprioritized them.

One agent told me my offer was quite reasonable (remember, this would have been lower than any advertised rate AND included the special Kia financing) but they couldn’t move unless I got an offer for them to beat or match.

The original dealer, the doorbusters, stuck to their price, so I said no problem, happy to come back later in the month.

In general, everyone was playing the game. Some dealers will not negotiate without a competing offer. That is not a failure of this approach. It is a signal to move on.

And so one dealer did. They offered $47,395 with the low interest financing with a deadline of that day. Not fazed by the deadline, I told them I needed some time to look at it. This was my being silent, adding a pause to the SMS conversation.

They had given me a link to a video of the car, and so I confirmed the colors were good. Also included were special options: premium floormats, exterior color, and “dark edition” aesthetic package. $1,800 of options that I did not mind but would not have paid for.

Within an hour, they came back with an additional $500 off, so we were at $46,895. That was pretty good, but it got me to think, they gave me that completely unprompted. I don’t think that’s the absolute bottom offer. So I waited another hour, deliberately doing nothing, and then reiterated the same target, $46.5K.

If you can bridge the remaining $395 and get the selling price to $46,500 with the same terms we discussed (2.90% for 60 months, $0 down, no add-ons or markups), I will come in this afternoon to finalize everything.

Two hours later, they replied, “Thank you for the offer Michael. However, we are already all in at $46,895 plus tax/fees (no add-ons or markups) at 2.90% for 60 months. Offer is valid for 12/5/25.”

I was disappointed, but I remembered 1) I had the whole month to make this deal 2) the signals so far suggested I could do it – they couldn’t be the only dealer willing to make these large concessions 3) they might be bluffing.

I responded immediately with “I am sorry to hear that. Thanks for trying! We were so close.” to suggest I wasn’t going to budge but to also be respectful and kind to the individual working with me.

I then gave them 30 minutes – if they didn’t follow-up I’d start approaching another dealer who seemed like they wanted to enter negotiations and not just wait for an offer to beat.

40 minutes after my thank you note, I got: “Hi Michael! Great news! My manager says he will do! $46,500 plus tax/fees (no add-ons or markups) at 2.90% for 60 months”

We had a deal! From my first message with this specific dealer over SMS to the final confirmation took about 5 hours, 6 hours from my first message to the original doorbuster dealer.

I could have tried to shop that deal around, but I felt a responsibility to honor my commitment. I got the price I wanted, based on knowing what a good price was beforehand. I drove the deal quickly and didn’t have to stress any further.

In the end, the car was 9.5% off its MSRP, but most importantly, was well below anything publicly advertised at any interest rate. It ended up being more than $1K below Edmunds’ price even though Edmunds was using the MSRP (4% off) with no options and I fared exceptionally well with comparisons on Reddit.

The discount was the outcome, but the real win was in controlling the process. If you are not rushed, not defensive, and willing to walk, the other side is forced to decide instead of negotiate.

The World’s Most Useless Canyon Aeroad CFR 1,000 Mile Review

That’s my 2024 Canyon Aeroad CFR in size 2XS.

And this is me last week, at the 2025 Foxy Fall Century, a 100 mile “century” ride event in Northern California.

I’ve owned my Aeroad since the end of 2024 but I don’t ride outdoors that often. In fact this 1000 mile review is a lie – Strava says I’ve only done 865.7 miles. I guess this review can only get worse from here.

Still, I am confident in the following statement: The Aeroad CFR is a good looking (to me) bicycle that feels comfortable / compliant (enough), stiff (enough), fast (enough), and fun (enough).

Big emphatic words, I know. Let me provide more context on me and why I have these conclusions.

I am 5’6. My FTP has generally fluctuated between 250W and 265W, and my weight has been 145 to 150 pounds over the last five years. This is basically 3.8 to 4.0 W/kg. Max sprint is around 900W. I don’t race, but I like to ride fast by myself, more as a steady power rider. My Zwift racing score is around 650.

My absolute power numbers are around 50% of all riders my age, while my w/kg (power relative to weight) will be around the 90th percentile across different durations:

This is all to say, I am strong for my size but an average strength rider overall as a small human. That is why I feel like my real world impressions would match more riders than not.

My first serious road bike was a 2010 Kestrel Talon (rim brake), purchased in 2016. This was a carbon frame aero focused bike. A couple of years later, I bought a 2018 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX disc brake bike, a do-it-all / climbing bike. I’ve used aluminum wheels, then 50mm depth carbon v-shaped rim profile wheels on the Talon, then Roval CLX 32 (32mm depth) and Light Bicycle AR465 (46.5mm depth) wheels on the Ultimate. I now run Enve SES 4.5 wheels (50mm/56mm depths) on the Aeroad. The CFR model is their top-of-the-line race bike, with my setup weighing in around 7.2 kg (16 pounds) with pedals, a relatively light aero bike setup and the same weight as the Ultimate.

After nearly 10 years of training and trying various bikes and equipment, I don’t see that much of a difference in everything. When I switched from the Talon to the Ultimate and then back, I did feel the Talon was a bit vague in the power response. But, was that due to the frame, the wheels/tires (I used to run Gatorskins on the Talon), the aluminum (Ultimate had a one piece carbon handlebar/stem) handlebar, or something else? Or my imagination? I don’t really know.

I’ve gone from solid entry level to the highest end of frames, groupsets, and wheels. I’ve gotten stronger in my personal fitness.

I went a few months between riding the Ultimate and Aeroad, and I didn’t feel anything significantly different other than the bike fit. On the Ultimate, I was a size XS, and on the Aeroad I ride a smaller 2XS.

They both felt like good bikes. They feel comfortable on wider tires (I run 53 PSI on 28/30mm tires), I never feel weird in terms of too much stiffness, or “noodleyness”. I can ride them how I want, and they perform great. As my friend Marc told me years ago when I had the Ultimate, all modern bikes are great.

And I’m inclined to agree. I suspect that you want to find a low-cost bike with electronic shifting that fits you well and looks great. After that you just ride – while I am sure there are subtle differences between bikes, I suspect that the chatter from people who confidently spout how X bike is so much better or worse than another bike in Y attribute is overblown.

Unless I’m going to do apples to apples comparisons (change the frames, keep all other equipment the same), I don’t see how I can confidently say this feels a certain way because of this specific part. Bikes are systems of components, and you’re part of that system. Most hardcore cyclists are always changing one part or another, so it’s hard to really know what goes into what.

Chris from the Nero Show made a sharp point recently: reviews of race bikes by non-racers are inherently limited, because those riders are not using the bikes as intended. That is fair. I am not a racer, so what could I really say about its performance at race pace?

But here’s the irony: most cyclists aren’t racers, yet almost every high-end bike is a race bike. If that weren’t true, brands wouldn’t emphasize UCI compliance on frames that will never see a start line.

I actually learned something about the negatives of bike stiffness in the latest Silca podcast, at 42:50.

Because especially on these modern, you know, very stiff bikes, and he says an aero bike, so, you know, I mean, a lot of those are, you know, they’re pretty stiff these days. You think when you’re climbing out of the saddle and rocking the bike, Your front wheel is able to go with the loads, right? And so you don’t have a ton of lateral scrubbing, but you can hear, like that sound you hear when you’re out of the saddle, that is rear tire scrub. I think we’ve talked about on the channel before, you know, I like to call it skating. Like so many of the modern bikes have gotten so stiff that they’re actually less efficient climbing because you’re putting so much energy into like lateral scrub in that tire. Whereas a lot of the older bikes had sort of a, we call it a modal flex. They had flex in a mode or a direction that allowed the rear tire to sort of almost steer, you know, the forces of the pedal stroke help kind of steer the tire in the direction that the forces are pushing it. And so that reduces the lateral scrubbing in the tire. And I call it skating if you think of like a cross-country skate skiing, right? So not the parallel type of skis, but you see them skate skiing and how like when you angle the ski out and then you put that force and that weight onto it, that lateral movement can translate into forward movement, right? With some efficiency.

You know, bikes that are less stiff seem to have this natural ability and can climb a little bit more efficiently, but you’re also going to wear your tires out a lot less when you’re out of the saddle climbing because you have so much less of that scrub. And that’s something you can hear. You know, we’ve done a lot of testing around this and a lot of work with teams, companies, athletes. But it is kind of cool. Some of these old, like, you know, you guys know how much I love old bikes from the 70s and 80s. I mean, a lot of those bikes, like, you kind of don’t hear any tire noise when you’re out of the saddle climbing on them because they’re flexy. And then you get on some of these modern bikes and you’re like, whew, that’s, you know, that whoosh whoosh sound that’s coming up through your modern carbon wheels. You know, that is the sound of rubber being harmed.

I love hearing that sound when people climb out of the saddle. I feel like I never hear it when I’m riding, so I get jealous of others, but it turns out that this is the sound of damage to the tire!

So I’ve spent all this time basically saying the Aeroad is a good bike, as much or as at least, I suspect, as other bikes. But is it a fast bike?

At the Foxy Fall Century, I ended up doing 100 miles in 5:43, a bit above 17.5 miles per hour. 3,500 feet climbing. Roughly 12 minutes in stoppage time for bathroom breaks, water, stop signs. Speed without that was a bit over 18.3 mph.

Average power of 164w, normalized power (np) of 183w, and intensity factor of around .7. These power metrics are all personal records at this duration. I spent much of the first 1/3 of the ride in a group, and then spun off on my own.

So, I did go relatively fast. I would assume some of that comes from having a supposed top-tier aero bike, top-tier aero wheels, and a low and narrow aero position (no spacers, 37mm handlebar width, 28mm between shifter hoods) on the bike. But I was also stronger than I’ve ever been. So how do I separate all this? I can’t.

I can only just, as Ben Delaney would say, “enjoy the ride”.

Best Zwift Result Ever! 1st Place on Zwift Racing Makuri May Round 2 – 2025

First out of 24 riders (I thought 30+ started) on Turf N Surf.
Started with a Zwift Racing Score around 560 so I was in the lower middle of the 510-650 tier, not necessarily a favorite for the race. Zwift Racing Score now at 578.
ZwiftPower ranking now at 166.3. Achieved best all time ZwiftPower race score: 143.50.
Personal 5 Minute Record of 5.1w/kg to close the race uphill on a 2024 Aeroad + DT Swiss disc combo. 92.6% percentile score in w/kg for my 40-49 age group of 17K+ athletes on Intervals.icu.
Intervals.icu FTP now predicted at 270w.

This is a snapshot of the power on the final climb to the finish line. I fluctuated from 4.6 to 6.9w/kg for those 5 minutes.

The approach to the race was pretty straight forward: hang in the group and see if I could separate on the two short climbs – you can see them roughly in the altitude map above at the 15km and 22km marks.

I don’t think there is much to Zwift strategy when you are riding by yourself. Do as little as possible until there’s a point where you can show your strengths. In a flat map, for example, there isn’t a particular strength for me, so that means I hang out to the fastest group I possibly can for as long as I can and then try to try to use momentum in pack dynamics for a strong finish at the sprint.

Turf N Surf is an ideal type of map for me, a climb towards the end where I can use my relatively light weight and high power to weight to separate myself from people who have bigger builds and more power.

You can see this recording of the race, taken from another competitor’s perspective (1hr:05:14), to see the start of the deciding climb. I am “M.Nguyen” wearing a gray jersey with squirrel in back pocket.

In this race, almost the entire race group stayed together, perhaps until the second and last sustained climb. There was an early breakaway, but I let that go. Two riders built such a big lead so quickly, I didn’t think there was any way I could catch up without killing myself in the process and bringing the rest of the group with me so I just stayed in the group, conserving energy. Surprisingly, those lead riders were brought back quickly.

As we hit some small rolling hills, I just had to make sure I adjusted my power so I wouldn’t get dropped off the back of the group and did a good job. When we hit the first climb, I accelerated through the group and realized I was going to pass everyone, but didn’t think that was a good idea with a descent and second climb coming, so I slowed down to stay with the lead riders. I wasn’t sure whether everyone else was taking it easy and waiting for the second climb, or whether I had a good advantage in climbing. Even if it were the latter, I didn’t want to risk using all my energy and not having a final burst for the second climb.

As we hit the final climb, I went all out. From early research, I knew that this final part would take me about 5 minutes. I didn’t sprint up but I went really hard out of the saddle and just tried to sustain power. I had a feather power up (to reduce my weight and improve my speed up the climb) but used it towards the end of the climb to give my avatar a boost towards the end. I would rather end strongly with a boost then begin with it, to discourage anyone who goes all out at the beginning.

As I got close to the end of the climb, with about 1km to the finish line, I noticed I had a two second gap on the group. Otherwise, I wasn’t even looking at the screen – I just wanted to put power down and not worry about what anyone else was doing. I didn’t think two seconds was going to be enough as I neared the crest and would have a final .6km slight downhill left so I just kept the power and decided to put as much power down as I possibly could until I finished the race because the other riders could have some reserves available for a sprint. I needed to do what I could to discourage other riders from thinking they could make up the gap back to me – this was a push until I broke apart move.

In the end, that was enough, and I won by over 4 seconds, which is a lot considering almost all the riders were together with 5 minutes left in the race.