It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
Are skiers more gullible to marketing compared to other sports?
This thought popped into my head about just how much skiers care about certain things like "park" boots or "freestyle" bindings. And it got me thinking, it seems that I see a fair amount of kids falling for these marketing ploys by companies. Now marketing isn't new by any means and it's not solely in the ski industry. But compared to other industries (football, basketball, whatever) are skiers more gullible to marketing? Discuss why/why not.
Yeah, but on the flipside, how many old dudes do you see out with twin tips/fat skis and fks/pivot 18s cuz they "look cool?" It goes both ways i think, we are all rubes.
Sure its marketing but it has substance behind it. As annoying as it gets, im not gonna sit here and say id choose salomon z12s over STH2 13/16's for my type of skiing. Im sure they have their uses but id be inclined to say things "freeride/freeski" bindings do have their use and arent all gimmicky.
The.Natty.VeganThis thought popped into my head about just how much skiers care about certain things like "park" boots or "freestyle" bindings. And it got me thinking, it seems that I see a fair amount of kids falling for these marketing ploys by companies. Now marketing isn't new by any means and it's not solely in the ski industry. But compared to other industries (football, basketball, whatever) are skiers more gullible to marketing? Discuss why/why not.
Pretty confident they aren't just catchphrases and marketing ploys. There is a massive difference between the freestyle gear and not freestyle gear.
ElbowkushPretty confident they aren't just catchphrases and marketing ploys. There is a massive difference between the freestyle gear and not freestyle gear.
For example:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing
These differences really become apparent after spending a season on each. What might seem like tiny advantages start to mean more and more.
That being said, skiing is always down to circle jerk.
Byron_tha_gr8These differences really become apparent after spending a season on each. What might seem like tiny advantages start to mean more and more.
That being said, skiing is always down to circle jerk.
Absolutely. Theres a reason pro's aren't riding park boots. They SUCK! Pure marketing gimmick to raise the price on low performance boots that have colorful graphics, etc.
KravtZAbsolutely. Theres a reason pro's aren't riding park boots. They SUCK! Pure marketing gimmick to raise the price on low performance boots that have colorful graphics, etc.
Wait? So Andy Parry wears full tilts because they are colorful?
ianrich511Wait? So Andy Parry wears full tilts because they are colorful?
Vast majority of pros are wearing aggressive 120+ flex boots. Maybe andy parry uses some softer FT's for messing around. You really think these dudes are charging on a 90 progressive flex park boot?
ElbowkushPretty confident they aren't just catchphrases and marketing ploys. There is a massive difference between the freestyle gear and not freestyle gear.
For example:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
Full tilts or Raichle's weren't designed for freestyle, they were designed to solve boot warp when flexed. The flex pattern was liked by freestyle skiers and as such was picked up by them, but they were also popular in racing in the 80's.
Pivots, or the original N17 (that the pivot has improved on) was designed so that the heel of your boot wouldn't get stuck on the arms of the heel piece when your toe released horizontally. Also has nothing to do with freestyle, but more so with improving their design for safety purposes. Most skiing inventions come from racing, so I'm pretty sure you can call it marketing ploys and catchphrases and be correct.
ianrich511Wait? So Andy Parry wears full tilts because they are colorful?
ElbowkushPretty confident they aren't just catchphrases and marketing ploys. There is a massive difference between the freestyle gear and not freestyle gear.
For example:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing
The descendent series is not a park specific boot though. The traditional 3 piece design was a racing boot from the old days. A 3 piece boot allows the boot to be more nimble and responsive in tight situations, however an overlap boot allows you to drive through the tongue of the boot more to allow more power to be transferred. Each have their benefit but no one boot is a "freestyle" boot. Aaron Blunck uses a race boot for pipe, none of the Atomic team riders uses a park specific boot.
And as for bindings, again the pivot is not a freestyle binding. It is purely a binding. The binding design itself was actually around before freeskiing was even a thing. It gained popularity because it's durable as fuck and the rotating heal piece apparently saves ACL's. And a touring binding is made for freeskiing. Nothing more free than having no lifts around you and only your own energy to get you up the mountain with no one else around.
The.Natty.VeganThis thought popped into my head about just how much skiers care about certain things like "park" boots or "freestyle" bindings. And it got me thinking, it seems that I see a fair amount of kids falling for these marketing ploys by companies. Now marketing isn't new by any means and it's not solely in the ski industry. But compared to other industries (football, basketball, whatever) are skiers more gullible to marketing? Discuss why/why not.
Whenever people say they aren't affected by marketing I silently chuckle.
Every facet of life is controlled by marketing, and you have no idea how much influence you are under all the time.
KravtZVast majority of pros are wearing aggressive 120+ flex boots. Maybe andy parry uses some softer FT's for messing around. You really think these dudes are charging on a 90 progressive flex park boot?
You're right, I forgot Full Tilt only came with a 90 flex tongue.
Yeah no one charges in full tilts. Those freestyle boots are so gimmicky, no wonder every one bought them and have tons of praise for them.
Theres definitely an argument for both sides, While its true a Vast majority of gear is designed for a specific style of skiing or for a specific purpose, Outerwear Has a lot of gimmicks. For example theres no such thing as just a "waterproof membrane" any more. Each company you go to has some catchy Name for it so people will think its better. For example: H2NO, GORETEX, Hyperdry, FLOW, it all practically works the same way. When it comes to a competitive marketing field such as Outerwear and gear, companies are going to try and sell you there shit with whatever marketing ploy there is. Its your job as a Consumer to be able to recognize whats a real development, and whats technology that honestly comes with anything you buy.
PoikenzFull tilts or Raichle's weren't designed for freestyle, they were designed to solve boot warp when flexed. The flex pattern was liked by freestyle skiers and as such was picked up by them, but they were also popular in racing in the 80's.
Pivots, or the original N17 (that the pivot has improved on) was designed so that the heel of your boot wouldn't get stuck on the arms of the heel piece when your toe released horizontally. Also has nothing to do with freestyle, but more so with improving their design for safety purposes. Most skiing inventions come from racing, so I'm pretty sure you can call it marketing ploys and catchphrases and be correct.
Truth! 3 Piece design is NOT for jsut freestyle .. it can be used by everyone ... fun fact: Flexon's have 2 olympic downhill gold medals ... Bill Johnson and _______ bonus points on if you can figure this out.
Yes, we're a brand, so we market but try to simply state the facts (boot function, fit, pro literally just asking for them, ect) as we believe the gear we have can make someone's feet happier on the hill if properly fitted to them!
KravtZAbsolutely. Theres a reason pro's aren't riding park boots. They SUCK! Pure marketing gimmick to raise the price on low performance boots that have colorful graphics, etc.
Yeah park boots are a sham I skid park in racing plugs last season and it was just the same if not better!
FullTiltBootsTruth! 3 Piece design is NOT for jsut freestyle .. it can be used by everyone ... fun fact: Flexon's have 2 olympic downhill gold medals ... Bill Johnson and _______ bonus points on if you can figure this out.
KravtZAbsolutely. Theres a reason pro's aren't riding park boots. They SUCK! Pure marketing gimmick to raise the price on low performance boots that have colorful graphics, etc.
KravtZNo...you didn't read what I wrote. People charge in FT's. NO ONE charges in a 90 flex full tilt.
I read what your wrote. You're just an idiot. You are making the assumption that a park boot has to have a 90 flex.
ElbowkushPretty confident they aren't just catchphrases and marketing ploys. There is a massive difference between the freestyle gear and not freestyle gear.
For example:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing:
Designed for Freestyle Skiing:
NOT designed for Freestyle Skiing
FTs were designed for comfort before freestyle was a thing. Pivots were designed for racing. Sorry bub.
As a recent newbie to the sport of freestyle skiing, yes marketing and word of mouth does influence me because I really have no idea what exactly I will prefer until I've spent time trying everything out. Being given limited time means I need to rely on user reviews and marketing and make an informed purchase.
With that being said, I do not think skiers are more influenced by marketing than any other sport. I played 16 season of competitive football, 4 years of that being in college. Kids are being thrown left and right each way on what is the "best gear" purely based off of marketing.
Adidas makes the lightest shoe in the game and is proud of it, but the majority including myself always opted for the Nike version of their low cut lightweight cleat. Kids are looking at the pros (college doesn't count because Nike/adidas/underarmour sponsors particular universities so they have to wear their gear) and are making decisions based off of their favorite players gear. Perfect example is UA with their cam newton cleats, they are absolutely atrocious but this past year at my old highschool they dominated the side line.
Tl;dr marketing influences ALLL sports at a very significant level and that is why companies sponsor elite performers
AnesteeziaI did this too lol. I feel like LINE really attracts beginners (No offense to good skiers with line).
I agree with this....but with that being said, I am a really pretty damn good skier now (don't mean to be asshole ego bitch) and when it comes time to retire the six year old ON3P's caylors (THEY NEVER BREAK OMFG) the mordecai will definitely be my next pow ski.
UPSIDEDOWNDICKyou have no idea how much research and testing goes into that kind of stuff. it's not just a colour scheme and some promotion.
No it is exactly a colour scheme and a promo. There is no such thing as a park boot. A 3 buckle boot may be a bit more nimble and responsive in quick situations so it caught popularity in freeskiing. But overall the best boot is the boot that fits your foot. None of the atomic boys use a park specific boot. Because there's no such thing. If you want to believe that buying a park boot will make you a better park skier go right ahead, think you're a better skier=be a better skier.
Connor_SullivanFor example: H2NO, GORETEX, Hyperdry, FLOW, it all practically works the same way.
I mean, different membranes do perform differently. Some are more focused on waterproofness, some more focused on breathability, some more focused on weight, etc. There are consumers, maybe not many, but some, who feel it is important for them to differentiate between different membranes.
But to answer your question op, no. Everyone everywhere is influenced by marketing. I don't think skiers are any more influenced by marketing than anyone else.
BogsI mean, different membranes do perform differently. Some are more focused on waterproofness, some more focused on breathability, some more focused on weight, etc. There are consumers, maybe not many, but some, who feel it is important for them to differentiate between different membranes.
But to answer your question op, no. Everyone everywhere is influenced by marketing. I don't think skiers are any more influenced by marketing than anyone else.
It's a bit of a stretch to show an example. But at the same time the only people that are going to be utilizing outerwear to its full potential are big mountain skiers and AT skiers (people who's sweating could get them into a dangerous situation), Which a vast majority of people are not
Connor_SullivanBut at the same time the only people that are going to be utilizing outerwear to its full potential are big mountain skiers and AT skiers (people who's sweating could get them into a dangerous situation), Which a vast majority of people are not
100% agree with this. I think outerwear marketing is more gimmicky in how they stress the importance of even NEEDING a 20k/20k jacket or Goretex's "guarantee waterproof" and all that, when, realistically, 99.9% of the time you'll be kept more than dry with a 10 or even 5k waterproof shell (I remember reading somewhere that a 10k jacket will withstand about 14 psi of water pressure, while a hard rain will exert about 2 psi). Like you said, the vast majority of people simply aren't ever pushing the performance limits of their outerwear.
Honestly, I like that companies are shifting towards making/using membranes that are more breathable but not technically guaranteed waterproof the way Goretex is, and talking about it, especially as the AT market is taking off big time and more and more people are getting into skinning, where, as you said, having a shell that emphasizes breathability over waterproofness will actually make a difference.
Same thing with companies making really high end down jackets for $ 400-500, when in all but the most extremely cold temperatures, a $100-200 down jacket is going to keep you plenty warm.
The.Natty.VeganThis thought popped into my head about just how much skiers care about certain things like "park" boots or "freestyle" bindings. And it got me thinking, it seems that I see a fair amount of kids falling for these marketing ploys by companies. Now marketing isn't new by any means and it's not solely in the ski industry. But compared to other industries (football, basketball, whatever) are skiers more gullible to marketing? Discuss why/why not.
Let me mull this question over while I finish my 8 hour arm workout.
The.Natty.VeganNo it is exactly a colour scheme and a promo. There is no such thing as a park boot. A 3 buckle boot may be a bit more nimble and responsive in quick situations so it caught popularity in freeskiing. But overall the best boot is the boot that fits your foot. None of the atomic boys use a park specific boot. Because there's no such thing. If you want to believe that buying a park boot will make you a better park skier go right ahead, think you're a better skier=be a better skier.
you sound like a real gaper
obviously different types of boots aren't going to affect your ability to ski, they are designed to give you a different feel based on what you are skiing.
have you ever worn racing boots in a park? uncomfortable.
have you ever tried to rip icey groomers on carving skis with full tilts? sloppy.
if you run a track race in skate shoes it's not going to make you a slower runner but it's not going to help you out either.
UPSIDEDOWNDICKhave you ever worn racing boots in a park? uncomfortable.
have you ever tried to rip icey groomers on carving skis with full tilts? sloppy.
Race boots are uncomfortable everywhere, full tilts are sloppy everywhere.
obviously different types of boots aren't going to affect your ability to ski, they are designed to give you a different feel based on what you are skiing.
have you ever worn racing boots in a park? uncomfortable.
have you ever tried to rip icey groomers on carving skis with full tilts? sloppy.
if you run a track race in skate shoes it's not going to make you a slower runner but it's not going to help you out either.
Boots fit for racing are uncomfortable because you typically size down to almost no space in the heel when doing a shell fit. If you got a set of full tilts fit specifically for racing you will experience the same pain and arguably (key word) the same control. The same is true when you reverse it, a classic 2 piece boot that is too big or wide will be just as sloppy as a poorly fitted 3 piece boot. In either situation you won't be comfortable regardless of where or what you are skiing (unless you unbuckle on the lift).
