Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Opinion on the the future of Revision Skis

profile picture
Park_Ranger
Posts: 3825 - Karma: 8,634
Revision Skis is currently on the come up.

Recently, I have noticed Revision make two moves that differentiate themselves from industry competitors.

- Alignment with the Bunch
- New line of low price skis that come with 'rail damage warranty'

I believe that these moves summarize Revision's mission and go to market plan: be a creative, rider influenced, "out-of-the-box" ski company that makes cheap skis. Find customers by attracting them to low prices and Bunch trend.

I want to hear NS's opinion on these moves, and the sustainability of revision skis as a company.

IMHO - Revision skis is currently booming, but will bust hard in a few seasons and go under. Here is why, addressing the two points above -

Alignment with the Bunch: Revision has gone to far with this. I get it, the Bunch is hot right now. However, it is a terrible business move to align yourself with a trend to the extent that Revision has. The revision team is basically The Bunch + a few other guys who now ski like the Bunch, all Revision products feature Bunch like style and artwork, and their latest media is influenced by the Bunch. It is no secret that they have become an arm of the Bunch.

You can capitalize on trends if you identify them and cater to that market at the right time, but trends die. Businesses that center themselves around a trend either die or evolve into something else once the trend is over. Revision could one day evolve, but this is unlikely as they are already in a very niche space where competition is heavy.

What happens when the Bunch trend becomes less popular to whatever the next trend will be? What happens when the Bunch stops making movies after Finess? What if the Bunch, as both a whole and as individuals, want to do something new in terms of their style and way of skiing? Revision will have to re-do their entire image; something that costs a lot money and will lose them customers, as they are still a brand new company with no history to go off of.


Low Price Skis with rail damage warranty: You can have one, but not both. I have a hard time seeing how Revision is going to make money with this strategy. It is clear that they are aiming to sell a high volume of skis at a low price. That is fine, if the margins are sustainable. However, what is not fine, is offering the warranty on top of those prices. People are going to to take advantage of the warranty . This takes away sales from your bottom line. When the goal is to sell high volume, you don't want to incentive people to not buy your stuff because they can get a free replacement if they ding the edges up with a hammer. Not everyone will do this, but some will and the business will suffer the consequences. I don't think that the business model is able to sustain the warranty, as it thrives on high volume sales. You want your customer to buy more from you if the ski brakes, not get free stuff from you.

Going back to margins, I wonder how they are for Revision skis. High volume, low price sales (commodity) usually result in low margins, which is why selling high volumes of product is so important. Unless Revision is ran extremely efficiently (asset management... aka supply & demand balance, maximized operating rates, supply chain optimization, etc.) I would guess that their margins aren't so great. This leads me to believe that A.) the materials used in their skis are low quality B.) there will be a lack of innovation in product design and performance.

The reality is that they need a profit to survive. How do they make a profit if they are selling skis for so cheap? They either 1.) use cheap materials, 2.) sell an extremely high volume of skis, or 3.) spend no money on improving the company for the future (or a combo of all three). Either way, it's not a good business model for the ski industry. 1.) People want high quality skis that wont break after half a season or lose pop, 2.) no one sells an extremely high volume of skis because the market is so condensed and niche, not even the corporate players, and 3.) you have to put back into the company so you can be ahead of the MANY trends that will always grow, die, and dominate the ski industry (Armada is one of the best at this).


I realize that I take a lot for granted, but this is what I see: I see the Revision Skis business model to be very unsustainable and I predict that they will go under in the next couple of winters if they stay on their current path.

I would love to hear your opinion on this topic NS.
Aug 24 2015 12:50PM
167 47
profile picture
equinn
Posts: 718 - Karma: 3,673
it will be interesting to see what happens but i disagree with your first point. Look at Armada and how much they aligned themselves with B&E and they are booming atm
Aug 24 2015 1:10PM
13 0
profile picture
kbrando
Posts: 1207 - Karma: 890
It will be interesting to see for sure, I am intrigued by their business model and approach. Like I stated in the other thread, the industry has not changed much in the last few years. Most companies do things the way they have been done for a while. I respect Revision for taking a chance and trying something new. I have a little insight into the cost of producing skis and selling them as I own a snowboard company that works with small manufactures. Going off experience, I know that you can get a high quality, made in America pair of skis or a snowboard for a fairly reasonable price. I know that these companies also sell their stuff for huge markups because they have low volumes. Knowing what Revision sells their skis for and how much it costs to have stuff made in America at low volumes, they must be paying very little to have their stuff made overseas. I do like the idea that instead of jacking the price of their skis way up just because they are a small brand, they are trying to pass the low cost along to the consumer. Ultimately, time will tell if the skis hold up, but if they do I think having a price point ski that actually performs well could be a great thing for the industry. Just my opinion, but I am very interested to see where they are in 5 years and if what their business decision have any influence on other companies
Aug 24 2015 1:17PM
0 0
profile picture
Park_Ranger
Posts: 3825 - Karma: 8,634
equinnit will be interesting to see what happens but i disagree with your first point. Look at Armada and how much they aligned themselves with B&E and they are booming atm


I think that comparing B&E to the Bunch is comparing apples to oranges. Phil and Henrik are two of the biggest names in skiing, and have been for a really long time (before Armada and B&E). The B&E trend is also bigger/more monumental than The Bunch, IMO (way more B&E content, the demo tour, inspired prdouctions backing, henrik is huge on the comp scene, no one dislikes watching phil ski, they own the baggy outerwear look, the bunch was probably inspired by all the nollies, shuffles, and presses that B&E have been doing for years, B&E has been in the game forever, B&E invite is one of the best events of the year and draws the best skiers in the game, etc. the list could go on and on). If the Bunch is a trend, than B&E is a mega trend.

Much smarter idea to put your egg's in the B&E basket than the Bunch basket. However, Armada hasn't put all their eggs into the B&E basket like Revision has done with the Bunch. Armada has so much going on outside of B&E - a diverse team made up of comp, film, back country/big mountain guys who are all unique in their own way, and diverse line of skis and outwear that can meet just about anyone's style/demands.

I don't think that you can compare Armada and B&E to Revision and The Bunch at all.
Aug 24 2015 1:23PM
4 0
profile picture
Park_Ranger
Posts: 3825 - Karma: 8,634
kbrandoI do like the idea that instead of jacking the price of their skis way up just because they are a small brand, they are trying to pass the low cost along to the consumer. Ultimately, time will tell if the skis hold up, but if they do I think having a price point ski that actually performs well could be a great thing for the industry. Just my opinion, but I am very interested to see where they are in 5 years and if what their business decision have any influence on other companies


There are already price point skis that have pretty solid performance out there. The Armada El Rey, Atomic Infamous, Volkl Kink all come to mind. There are others as well.

I also like the idea, but I don't think that it is sustainable business. Especially for a small company that is trying to pick themselves up off the ground. Unless Revision has insane funding from investors, they need to make money and establish cash flow. Without that, they will go under.
Aug 24 2015 1:36PM
1 1
profile picture
kbrando
Posts: 1207 - Karma: 890
Park_RangerThere are already price point skis that have pretty solid performance out there. The Armada El Rey, Atomic Infamous, Volkl Kink all come to mind. There are others as well.

I also like the idea, but I don't think that it is sustainable business. Especially for a small company that is trying to pick themselves up off the ground. Unless Revision has insane funding from investors, they need to make money and establish cash flow. Without that, they will go under.


Those are all price point to a certain extent, but they are also from large companies. There is a certain group out there that love to support small companies such as Revision and it is usually unheard of to have small companies like that selling skis for $275.

It is also not a bad thing to start out slow. As we have seen many times in the last decade with companies like Coreupt, when you try and grow too fast it can backfire. I am sure partnering with The Bunch did not cost Revision a lot of money compared to partnering with X Games type athletes. Revision could start with small profit margins to get their name out there and look for steady growth. A company does not necessarily need to make tons and tons of money right away, more importantly they need to get their name out and not lose/spend tons of money.
Aug 24 2015 1:54PM
1 0
profile picture
Daski
Posts: 658 - Karma: 2,316
I just bought a pair, and I'm looking forward to it! On the business side, they seem to have it under control, so I wouldn't worry about them going under any time soon
Aug 24 2015 2:15PM
5 2
profile picture
GroundBeef
Posts: 26 - Karma: 99
Good job, you read a couple Harvard Business Review article in your freshman level business classes, you are now an expert on how to run a ski business.
Please tell more more about these sweeping, baseless generalizations you've made.
Aug 24 2015 2:16PM
30 5
profile picture
Evangelista
Posts: 481 - Karma: 1,583
Doesn't matter. The odds of a small company like Revision being able to sustain themselves for the long term is highly unlikely. With the current rate of climate change and lack of snow in North America, we're on track to see a Jarden and Amer dominated industry.
Aug 24 2015 2:40PM
3 6
profile picture
lion.pappa
Posts: 123 - Karma: 149
from their warranty page..

"NOTE: this is intended to provide you with a replacement for a ski which is essentially trashed, making the ski unridable – we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings) as a result of this type of riding."

is it very likely that someone will damage their skis to that extent within a year? sorry if its a noob question..
Aug 24 2015 2:54PM
1 1
profile picture
Sparta
Posts: 226 - Karma: 313
fwiw Atomic has been LSM's sponsor for a few years now...
Aug 24 2015 3:04PM
0 0
profile picture
413Crew
Posts: 1636 - Karma: 5,612
deez nuts!



























got eeemmm!
Aug 24 2015 3:57PM
5 6
profile picture
humpty
Posts: 1189 - Karma: 3,150
Aug 24 2015 3:58PM
9 0
profile picture
Broy
Posts: 138 - Karma: 724
Park_RangerThe revision team is basically The Bunch + a few other guys who now ski like the Bunch


Couldn't disagree with this more. Skiers like Sam Zahner, Sandy Boville, and Mike King have all different styles which are all different from the bunch. Maybe the bunch wasn't the best decision, but they still have a team of very talented skiers who have all sorts of styles.
Aug 24 2015 4:42PM
12 0
profile picture
SofaKingSick
Posts: 8943 - Karma: 57,643
lion.pappafrom their warranty page..

"NOTE: this is intended to provide you with a replacement for a ski which is essentially trashed, making the ski unridable – we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings) as a result of this type of riding."

is it very likely that someone will damage their skis to that extent within a year? sorry if its a noob question..


it's not implausible but it's not likely. ive never had that much edge rip out from a ski within a year, and i trash skis like it's my job. the people this happens to, that quickly, are dudes who ski 200 foot trash piles in the midwest and therefore hit a trillion rails a year, and/or people who do a ton of street. even then it's not even close to probable that they'll do enough edge damage...

i don't think this warranty is going to be as much of a boondoggle as some seem to think on here. theyre not just replacing skis carte blanche whenever someone wants (not to mention it's a pain to warranty skis), there are rules, so i doubt many people will exploit it by doing it when it's not necessary and appropriate



also OP i think youre getting carried away. they didn't sell their souls to the bunch or do anything crazy there (and i think last time i checked, their one "Bunch" ski is sold out already). might they not survive long term? of course. but i dont think your two main reasons hold as much water as you seem to think
Aug 24 2015 4:52PM
2 0
profile picture
ChillTeenDad420
Posts: 1858 - Karma: 5,512
hopefully the skis won't snap before anyone can take advantage of the rail damage warranty
Aug 24 2015 5:11PM
4 1
profile picture
-Dan
Posts: 7091 - Karma: 50,659
The Bunch is not a trend lol. It's like 13 Swedish kids that have fun skiing together.

Revision is a ski company that sponsors 5 of those kids who all ski in their own way, along with probably 8 other people who ski completely differently from BC, to urban, to comps, to rippin around Alta with a helmet cam.

You have no knowledge of their production/factory/materials or margins and can only make baseless assumptions. This invalidates about half of what you said.

Their COC edit was made by McKin. Therefore it's timeless.
Aug 24 2015 8:24PM
13 0
profile picture
corona
Posts: 12753 - Karma: 32,285
one thing I've gotta say is I don't like their ski sizing at all. They need some longer options on their narrower skis.
Aug 24 2015 8:33PM
0 0
profile picture
corona
Posts: 12753 - Karma: 32,285
their prices are pretty ridiculous though. $275 for a brand new next years ski with rail damage warranty and all? That's crazy cheap.
Aug 24 2015 8:35PM
1 0
profile picture
Peter.
Posts: 23796 - Karma: 13,012
i really am interested to see how the whole warranty stuff goes down. i mean with rail edge damage, some east coast rail rat could go through like 4 pairs of skis in a season
Aug 24 2015 11:23PM
0 0
profile picture
gotti
Posts: 4269 - Karma: 4,548
Honestly extremely surprised at the ignorance in this thread. I would compare revision more to vertika than I would coreupt. First off, Revisions idea to preorder at a lower price is genius. Every ski that someone preorders is basically guaranteed profit before they have finished production so they can price it at basically any price point knowing that they will not run out and that they will make that profit margin before the season even starts. This is the same business scheme david lesh built vertika upon.

I bout the revision talismans and anyone who says that they will lose money on the warrantee has never ridden these skis. I rode mine all year through the park and saw zero edge damage. I didn't ride any urban but they looked good as new which is crazy because last season I demolished a pair of icelantics.

Revision is on the come up and I have a feeling they are a dark horse in the game right now. Their business uses many modern techniques that are proven to work so...idk
Aug 25 2015 12:00AM
4 0
profile picture
Lemuel
Posts: 14477 - Karma: 10,515
As long as they have buyers for their products, they will sustain their business. They are definitely creating hype and they have obviously done very well with preorders. As long as they keep a following they will not be going anywhere. Their biggest issue will be getting stale. Their ski designs are really nothing special. To be honest none of their skis interest me at all. The price interests me. And think about how long even the best skis last, or how long you keep your skis. I know I am guilty of buying new skis almost every year or every other year, even when my skis are still usable.

I am not brand loyal at all. I was back in my earlier days with Line, I have owned 5 pairs of Lines. I buy skis based on what I am looking for, I don't decide on a brand and then pick out a ski from them. I think I am rambling now.

I think the big question is what is the priority when buying a ski? Price seems to be what Revision is going for, which can be a huge market.
Aug 25 2015 10:48AM
0 0
profile picture
Huck_Norris
Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627
They will sell a shitload of skis but they will fold as soon as the tsunami of rail damage warranties screams in from the coast and smashes their eco-friendly, sustainably-sourced headquarters into a billion fucking pieces.
Aug 25 2015 11:24AM
3 4
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,178
Probably the stupidest thing I've read.

TallxT is right, bunch is not a trend. Also, if it was a trend, have you ever thought that revision could end the collab? Woah that's a thought.

Also, if you actually read the other thread, you'd know that you can get new skis if you have an edge crack, your skis have to be pretty messed up to get a replacement, and even then, revision owns the right to void it. So it sounds like they've snagged you in with their marketing and prices. And that's why I don't see them going out of business anytime soon.
Aug 25 2015 11:31AM
2 1
profile picture
Shoey-Ski
Posts: 1649 - Karma: 6,190
Park_RangerLow Price Skis with rail damage warranty: You can have one, but not both. I have a hard time seeing how Revision is going to make money with this strategy. It is clear that they are aiming to sell a high volume of skis at a low price. That is fine, if the margins are sustainable. However, what is not fine, is offering the warranty on top of those prices. People are going to to take advantage of the warranty . This takes away sales from your bottom line. When the goal is to sell high volume, you don't want to incentive people to not buy your stuff because they can get a free replacement if they ding the edges up with a hammer. Not everyone will do this, but some will and the business will suffer the consequences. I don't think that the business model is able to sustain the warranty, as it thrives on high volume sales. You want your customer to buy more from you if the ski brakes, not get free stuff from you.


Op IMHO I think that with there rail damage warentee Revision skis is more trying to make a statement that although there skis are on the cheaper end of what the average cost of skis are today, that they stand by there product and that there products will do what they are intended to (ski the park) and that they are built to with stand park skiing they also cover them selves with in there warentee because from what I understand they won't replace your skis with just an edge crack because that's expected to happen and does happen on any brand.
But I am looking forward to seeing how this effects them as a company maybe it will be a success and other company's will follow there example in the future and rail damage warranted will be the "newest trend"
Aug 25 2015 1:11PM
0 0
profile picture
whackhouse
Posts: 736 - Karma: 939
equinnit will be interesting to see what happens but i disagree with your first point. Look at Armada and how much they aligned themselves with B&E and they are booming atm


This is a god point although Armada was around long before B&E was popular, giving them time to develop their own image before beginning to revolve around that style. Not to mention the fact that Henrik and Phil are some of the most well known world class freeskiers out there. Not to say that what the bunch is doing isn't great, but especially after the Olympics the B&E fan base has grown immensely. Basically what im trying to say is its a much riskier move for Revision to focus so much of their energy promoting the bunch than it was for armada to do the same with B&E. However, it is obvious that Revision supports and backs what the bunch is doing and I think if thats what they want their impact on freeskiing to be associated with then by all means they should do it.
Aug 25 2015 1:14PM
0 0
profile picture
Huck_Norris
Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627
.lenconAlso, if you actually read the other thread, you'd know that you can get new skis if you have an edge crack, your skis have to be pretty messed up to get a replacement, and even then, revision owns the right to void it. So it sounds like they've snagged you in with their marketing and prices. And that's why I don't see them going out of business anytime soon.




So basically what you're saying is that either they honor the edge destruction warranty and end up giving away a shitload of free skis which will really hurt their bottom line given their pricing or they give you the runaround on what they promised and don't- thereby fucking over customers based on the claims they've made about rail damage warranties.


See, if they were smarter they would have offered supplemental rail insurance when you purchase the skis- say another $75-100 that gives you extended warranty coverage to include damage to misuse such as rails for a certain period and the 1st owner. That way they wouldn't be open to broad interpretation of a statement such as "rail damage is now covered by our manufacturer's warranty".


Given the broadness of their claims, the ambiguity of the program itself, their pricing on brand new skis and the propensity for people who hit rails to ruin skis and talk shit on the internet, I'd say there are clouds on the horizon at the very least.


It's a bold strategy, Cotton- Let's see if it pays off for 'em


I say no though fwiw. At their price point, I don't see that being sustainable.
Aug 25 2015 1:41PM
1 0
profile picture
kalle.
Posts: 727 - Karma: 4,525
Huck_NorrisSo basically what you're saying is that either they honor the edge destruction warranty and end up giving away a shitload of free skis which will really hurt their bottom line given their pricing or they give you the runaround on what they promised and don't- thereby fucking over customers based on the claims they've made about rail damage warranties.



this is straight from their site:
EDGE DAMAGE. Revision understands that you are likely to put these skis through the paces on rails, boxes, dumpsters, booters, concrete, trees, chair lifts, etc. If you read the warranties of our competitors, you will see that most would void a warranty for damage which would appear to be caused by this type of riding. We are different, and don’t want you to be out a pair of skis because you are using them as intended. As such, within reason and based on our sole judgement, we will warranty significant edge damage which we feel the ski should have held up to. NOTE: this is intended to provide you with a replacement for a ski which is essentially trashed, making the ski unridable – we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings) as a result of this type of riding. We see a lot of park and street riders who keep riding with cracked edges and smaller missing pieces, and expect that you can, too. Revision reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to void the warranty of any purchaser it finds to have purposefully removed ski edge material for the purpose of filing a warranty claim.

it's not like they're gonna replace your skis if you chip a little bit of edge off, you actually need to really abuse the skis. i mean, even 4" is a lot of edge to destroy in a season (by sliding rails and hitting park, i can imagine it happening on urban tho). it took me 3 years to destroy about 3" of edge from a pair of afterbangs and i abused the hell out of those skis. and if you buy anything, at least in my opinion you should read about the warranty before making the purchase.

and on the topic, i think that revision will only profit, this rail damage warranty has given them a lot of publicity and perhaps more customers.
Aug 25 2015 2:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Huck_Norris
Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627
kalle.this is straight from their site:
EDGE DAMAGE. Revision understands that you are likely to put these skis through the paces on rails, boxes, dumpsters, booters, concrete, trees, chair lifts, etc. If you read the warranties of our competitors, you will see that most would void a warranty for damage which would appear to be caused by this type of riding. We are different, and don’t want you to be out a pair of skis because you are using them as intended. As such, within reason and based on our sole judgement, we will warranty significant edge damage which we feel the ski should have held up to. NOTE: this is intended to provide you with a replacement for a ski which is essentially trashed, making the ski unridable – we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings) as a result of this type of riding. We see a lot of park and street riders who keep riding with cracked edges and smaller missing pieces, and expect that you can, too. Revision reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to void the warranty of any purchaser it finds to have purposefully removed ski edge material for the purpose of filing a warranty claim.

it's not like they're gonna replace your skis if you chip a little bit of edge off, you actually need to really abuse the skis. i mean, even 4" is a lot of edge to destroy in a season (by sliding rails and hitting park, i can imagine it happening on urban tho). it took me 3 years to destroy about 3" of edge from a pair of afterbangs and i abused the hell out of those skis. and if you buy anything, at least in my opinion you should read about the warranty before making the purchase.

and on the topic, i think that revision will only profit, this rail damage warranty has given them a lot of publicity and perhaps more customers.



*sigh*

Honestly, how does anything you wrote defy or undermine anything I said? I simply don't think this is going to work out for them- and if it does good on them but at their price point, if every hard rider goes out and buys a pair as they are hoping to capture that market apparently, they cannot sustainably replace them and still turn a profit.


It's a nice idea but as I said before, it doesn't seem like good business sense in the way that it's been laid out. I wish them the best of luck, but I can already tell some butts are going to be hurt over this down the road.
Aug 25 2015 3:06PM
0 0
profile picture
kalle.
Posts: 727 - Karma: 4,525
Huck_Norris*sigh*

Honestly, how does anything you wrote defy or undermine anything I said? I simply don't think this is going to work out for them- and if it does good on them but at their price point, if every hard rider goes out and buys a pair as they are hoping to capture that market apparently, they cannot sustainably replace them and still turn a profit.


It's a nice idea but as I said before, it doesn't seem like good business sense in the way that it's been laid out. I wish them the best of luck, but I can already tell some butts are going to be hurt over this down the road.


my bad dude, i must've understood something wrong from your post. now i really see what you mean, and i can surely say i agree with you that some of the cases are not going to go as revision is planning.
Aug 25 2015 3:24PM
0 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
GroundBeefGood job, you read a couple Harvard Business Review article in your freshman level business classes, you are now an expert on how to run a ski business.
Please tell more more about these sweeping, baseless generalizations you've made.


Even if you've never even studied economics or business you could easily tell this isn't sustainable. Skis break, that's a fact. If they're going to give away a free pair of skis for every person who breaks their skis then they'll be giving away more skis than they sell. Unless they're making enough money from each ski to warrent making two skis.
Aug 25 2015 3:57PM
0 0
profile picture
.Rybak.
Posts: 9017 - Karma: 9,864
I bet everyone said the same about line 15 years ago too...
Aug 25 2015 4:25PM
1 0
profile picture
GroundBeef
Posts: 26 - Karma: 99
S.J.WEven if you've never even studied economics or business you could easily tell this isn't sustainable. Skis break, that's a fact. If they're going to give away a free pair of skis for every person who breaks their skis then they'll be giving away more skis than they sell. Unless they're making enough money from each ski to warrent making two skis.


Are you dumb, or just stupid?

They're not just "giving away a free pair of skis for every person who breaks their skis," it's a warranty policy, design to help out some people who severely damage their skis.
Quoting the policy, "within reason and based on our sole judgement, we will warranty significant edge damage which we feel the ski should have held up to... we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings). We see a lot of park and street riders who keep riding with cracked edges and smaller missing pieces, and expect that you can, too. Revision reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to void the warranty of any purchaser it finds to have purposefully removed ski edge material for the purpose of filing a warranty claim."

It's a business decision that they obviously put thought into, it's not like they're giving skis away to everyone who gets topsheet chipping or an edge crack.
Aug 25 2015 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
GroundBeefAre you dumb, or just stupid?

They're not just "giving away a free pair of skis for every person who breaks their skis," it's a warranty policy, design to help out some people who severely damage their skis.
Quoting the policy, "within reason and based on our sole judgement, we will warranty significant edge damage which we feel the ski should have held up to... we consider this as damage of a minimum of 6″ continuous section of ski edge that has fallen out (or 4″ directly underfoot, between the bindings). We see a lot of park and street riders who keep riding with cracked edges and smaller missing pieces, and expect that you can, too. Revision reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to void the warranty of any purchaser it finds to have purposefully removed ski edge material for the purpose of filing a warranty claim."

It's a business decision that they obviously put thought into, it's not like they're giving skis away to everyone who gets topsheet chipping or an edge crack.


They use a 2.2 mm full edge wrap. Not even the thickest edge option. Not even ON3P who use 2.5 full wrap give full edge warrenty. Because edges crack and rip out. It's part of the sport and necessary evil if you want to hit rails. I know it's super hard to disagree with any major company but if honestly think giving free skis to people who fuck up their edges is sustainable then you're living in a dream world.
Aug 25 2015 4:42PM
1 4
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
Eazy-E.I bet everyone said the same about line 15 years ago too...


Line pretty much made no money til K2 bought them out. Just saying.
Aug 25 2015 4:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Kazabazua
Posts: 3529 - Karma: 1,128
That's gotta be the worst name for a ski company.
Aug 25 2015 5:18PM
4 6
profile picture
SofaKingSick
Posts: 8943 - Karma: 57,643
S.J.WEven if you've never even studied economics or business you could easily tell this isn't sustainable. Skis break, that's a fact. If they're going to give away a free pair of skis for every person who breaks their skis then they'll be giving away more skis than they sell. Unless they're making enough money from each ski to warrent making two skis.


see but i think you guys are overestimating how many skis will be sent in. i skied a pair of talismans all year with no mercy and theyre in great shape. im the kind of person who loses edges on skis sometimes but it's NEVER happened within a year, even on the first edition troublemakers (not everyone was so lucky with those tho, haha)
Aug 25 2015 5:18PM
2 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
Titsandwich11see but i think you guys are overestimating how many skis will be sent in. i skied a pair of talismans all year with no mercy and theyre in great shape. im the kind of person who loses edges on skis sometimes but it's NEVER happened within a year, even on the first edition troublemakers (not everyone was so lucky with those tho, haha)


In my opinion, this is a big gamble with even bigger rewards. If it works out for them then props, but a 2.2mm full edge isn't the most durable and I have seen a few threads asking about their durability.
Aug 25 2015 5:23PM
0 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,178
S.J.WThey use a 2.2 mm full edge wrap. Not even the thickest edge option. Not even ON3P who use 2.5 full wrap give full edge warrenty. Because edges crack and rip out. It's part of the sport and necessary evil if you want to hit rails. I know it's super hard to disagree with any major company but if honestly think giving free skis to people who fuck up their edges is sustainable then you're living in a dream world.


ON3P doesn't use a full wrap
Aug 25 2015 7:53PM
4 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
.lenconON3P doesn't use a full wrap


Curious to how you know that? I tried looking on their website and I can't see anything.
Aug 25 2015 9:06PM
0 5
profile picture
-Dan
Posts: 7091 - Karma: 50,659
S.J.WCurious to how you know that? I tried looking on their website and I can't see anything.


hahaha I'll go easy on you. He owns a pair of them according to his signature.
Aug 25 2015 9:09PM
8 0
profile picture
.lencon
Posts: 6753 - Karma: 17,178
S.J.WCurious to how you know that? I tried looking on their website and I can't see anything.


TallxThahaha I'll go easy on you. He owns a pair of them according to his signature.


Lol tallxt nailed it. Here's proof. Maybe I just got ripped off lol.

Aug 25 2015 10:41PM
3 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5206 - Karma: 20,187
The referenced post has been removed.


this, basically it seems like they are covering you if your edges start falling apart immediately, whereas under any other warranty a company could just deny warranty because the skis hit a rail.


My question is, are your skis illegible if all 4 inches of edge dont come out at once?
Aug 25 2015 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
.lenconLol tallxt nailed it. Here's proof. Maybe I just got ripped off lol.



That's pretty rad, never knew that.
Aug 25 2015 10:54PM
0 3
profile picture
-emile-
Posts: 6610 - Karma: 8,583
413Crewdeez nuts!



























got eeemmm!


I'm glad I don't come on ns anymore
Aug 25 2015 11:01PM
1 1
profile picture
Big_Mtn
Posts: 551 - Karma: 1,647
S.J.WThey use a 2.2 mm full edge wrap. Not even the thickest edge option. Not even ON3P who use 2.5 full wrap give full edge warrenty. Because edges crack and rip out. It's part of the sport and necessary evil if you want to hit rails. I know it's super hard to disagree with any major company but if honestly think giving free skis to people who fuck up their edges is sustainable then you're living in a dream world.


Side note: J Skis doesn't use a full edge wrap and JLev knows his shit about skis. I'm not too rough on skis but I've heard good things about the durability of them from people who are tough on skis.
Aug 25 2015 11:45PM
0 0
profile picture
boodizzle
Posts: 120 - Karma: 148
No different than countless relationships in the past. Stept and K2, B&E and Armada, Line and the Traveling Circus. Also, Revisions team is not just Bunch dudes. The more exciting thing is that Revision is trying to do something unique. New ski companies are showing up every season.
Aug 26 2015 12:04AM
1 0
profile picture
S.J.W
Posts: 7609 - Karma: 31,182
-emile-I'm glad I don't come on ns anymore


NS is glad you don't come here as well
Aug 26 2015 6:04AM
2 2
profile picture
dbchili
Posts: 2555 - Karma: 1,657
does anyone know what the cost on a pair of these skis is aprox? Im just wondering if they could still afford to break even if they warranty a pair for every pair they sell at $275

the warranty policy might be tough to actually meet the criteria for a new pair, but there's no doubt that there will be some adverse selection in that people who break skis more are more likely to buy their skis, and therefore that they're likely to see more warranty claims as a result
Aug 26 2015 7:26AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)