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!
Basically like half the ski industry is hung in the balance of this whole deal. K2 is the largest action sports equipment manufacturer in the world. Shit's going to change if this goes down. Hopefully for the better (i.e. people buying from small ski companies more)...
loganimlachAs shitty as it sounds, the suits at Newell are going to look at this from a completely monetary standpoint.
Guy 1: "Why do we have brands under the same parent company that compete with each other for market share?"
Guy 2: "I'm not sure, I don't know anything about skiing but that doesn't make sense."
Guy 1: "Alright, see you later Line and Full Tilt (and K2 OR Volkl). Okay, now that we've consolidated down to one ski brand, one boot brand, and one binding brand, simplified the structure and gotten rid of this fat, lets sell this bitch. I've got a tee time in an hour."
Guy 2: "Sick, I'm going to go home and count my money."
The same thing will happen with 5150, Morrow and Ride; two will get chopped and one will remain.
Marker is not going anywhere, I've heard numbers as high as them owning 40% of the binding market. Some German car company will probably buy them. As much as it absolutely breaks my heart, I don't see Line or Full Tilt making it out of this unless somebody who knows what's going on and what they mean to freeskiing swoops in and saves them, and I hope with all of my heart that happens. Which would be so fucking incredible because they own like 25% of the market of freestyle skis, someone could make great money off of them.
Our whole little corner of the ski industry is fucking crazy right now.
Just a little perspective here Logan - I don't work nearly as much in the ski industry as I used to. I work with several brands and companies that have multiple sub-brands, some that *seemingly* compete with each other. I'm almost certain that there's a LOT of extra jobs that exist in each of those companies that could be consolidated and streamlined from a business standpoint, which from a ski industry standpoint might seem crazy or unnecessary, I doubt that they will try to totally axe these programs. (I'm not endorsing this, a lot of good jobs would be lost which would suck, and it'd probably be somewhat shortsighted) Any buyer with half a mind would meet with the heads of each brand and try to determine strategy, and I believe they would quickly see the value of each of them and how the complement each other, even in their competition (much like other huge companies, good examples are the fashion industry - Kering, LVMH, luxotica, etc.)
Although, if they did decide to get rid of any of them, it would make sense for them to just axe the brand rather than selling... so IDK what would actually happen.
TWoodsJust a little perspective here Logan - I don't work nearly as much in the ski industry as I used to. I work with several brands and companies that have multiple sub-brands, some that *seemingly* compete with each other. I'm almost certain that there's a LOT of extra jobs that exist in each of those companies that could be consolidated and streamlined from a business standpoint, which from a ski industry standpoint might seem crazy or unnecessary, I doubt that they will try to totally axe these programs. (I'm not endorsing this, a lot of good jobs would be lost which would suck, and it'd probably be somewhat shortsighted) Any buyer with half a mind would meet with the heads of each brand and try to determine strategy, and I believe they would quickly see the value of each of them and how the complement each other, even in their competition (much like other huge companies, good examples are the fashion industry - Kering, LVMH, luxotica, etc.)
Although, if they did decide to get rid of any of them, it would make sense for them to just axe the brand rather than selling... so IDK what would actually happen.
yeah, i totally understand and agree that lots of companies operate with seemingly competing brands, I said that a couple of posts after. and i also agree with you that it would completely fucking suck. but who knows what they do when it's on the selling block. malczyk is right, they have been bought and sold as k2 sports many times, they'll prolly be fine.
loganimlachyeah, i totally understand and agree that lots of companies operate with seemingly competing brands, I said that a couple of posts after. and i also agree with you that it would completely fucking suck. but who knows what they do when it's on the selling block. malczyk is right, they have been bought and sold as k2 sports many times, they'll prolly be fine.
Fuck. I got some new Lines and K2s for noodling around, and they'll probably be fine, but I knew I shoulda just stuck with ON3P or Praxis... for peace of mind.
If I'm reading this right, it seems like consolidation may happen. And given The Marker/Volkl/Dabello relationship (currently under their own banner, separate from K2 Skis, line, etc.) and the fact that those three brands are very successful in each of their respective categories (binding/Ski/ Ski boot), a good chance they will remain. I certainly hope so, as volkl makes a great ski...
DirtyDruidWhats up with the warranty on new K2 skis?
The company is still operating. Its the holding company that will change names. I highly doubt this company will be shut down. I do see some consolidation happening though to keep revenue up.
idk if some of you can speak German but Newell published a new press release on German referring to the statement of their CEO Micheal Polk from Tuesday. The important stuff translated for you:
-reasons of throwing their winter sports section on the market isnt their economical development over the last few years
-Newell is looking for a buyer who wanna "invest in winter sports and continue the success story of each brand"
-Aim of the new direction Newell is going is NOT to give up (aka. sell) any companies (Line, FT...)
-All companies are already working on their 17/18 (lets call it) innovations
Maybe onenerdykid can sum this up better than I do. Its not the lack of my German haha:D
This whole thing sounds like a shit show, if anything the Dalbello family should buy back the company since theyre the best people to run it like before. Line and FT could be bought for cheap but otherwise wouldnt make it out likely. I cant see Volkl and Marker going out, Volkl is a pretty big race brand and Marker sells a shit load of bindings especially among freeskiing. Wouldnt be shocked if Lesh bought k2, probably wouldnt be making boots or goggles though.
Maybe Roxa will become the new Full Tilt, I can say that theyre a comfy motherfuckin boot.
Now a press release, in German, from Newell Brand states: “The reasons for streamlining the portfolio are not due to the economical development of these renowned and rich in tradition winter sport specialists, but in a changed focus of Newell with the goal to build a strong and pioneering company in the consumer goods industry.“ Sports-Business | 07.10.2016 Völkl produces as innovative ski manufacturer with 400 employees in Straubing, Bavaria. Bild: Messe München GmbH The goal is now to “find a new owner, over the next few months, who is willing to invest into the winter sports and continue the success story of the brands.“ K2, Marker, Dalbello, Volkl Supposed to Stay “It is not the goal of the process of Newell to abandon one of the companies or to shut it down, but to find a suitable buyer, who will then develop the traditional brands further.“ Employees and customers of K2 and Marker Dalbello Völkl can adapt to the thought that they will continue to find the traditional brands in stores the next few years. “At the moment both companies work steadily on their innovations and developments for 2017/18, corresponding investments will be made“, writes Newell Brands. And further: “The companies received positive feedback and a strong demand for the running collection 2016/17, according to that the companies and their employees are highly motivated for this season.“
please have your vail approved skis ready to scan before boarding this chairlift. only $500 until november 1st. but after that, it's $150 a day to rent.
brotoplease have your vail approved skis ready to scan before boarding this chairlift. only $500 until november 1st. but after that, it's $150 a day to rent.
Honestly if vail bought them I wouldn't be surprised. Don't think it will happen, but it would put them one step closer to having a monopoly on the ski industry which they seem to want haha
brotoplease have your vail approved skis ready to scan before boarding this chairlift. only $500 until november 1st. but after that, it's $150 a day to rent.
That would actually be a pretty scary possibility.
I worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
Does Ellon Musk ski? Maybe hit him up and then you can do a teslar collaboration ski with rockets like the ones from the old James Bond.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
Preach! Do I smell a kickstarter campaign coming on? Donate $5000, get .005% of the company and free skis for life! Only have to actually pay it out we reach the goal of $100,000,000
traviasPreach! Do I smell a kickstarter campaign coming on? Donate $5000, get .005% of the company and free skis for life! Only have to actually pay it out we reach the goal of $100,000,000
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
Thank you Jason, for taking the time to write such an insightful op-ed piece on what's happening at K2. Your perspective is most likely the one skiers can benefit most from, and it must not have been easy to write so objectively given your personal investment in Line & Full Tilt. It fucking sucks you can't buy them back, especially considering you never dealt directly with Jarden or Newell in their acquisition of the Line brand. But for what it's worth, I don't see what you could do with it that you're not already doing better with J Skis.....this way is gonna take longer, but you'll have full control every step of the way.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLev for president (or at least king of the skiers)
JLevSo if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
How are you going to fix the weather and make people more resilient to being injured? I think you just want a cushy corporate job, but I might be wrong.. care to lay out your ideas and reasoning on what you know that other people don't?
Carved+DangerousHow are you going to fix the weather and make people more resilient to being injured? I think you just want a cushy corporate job, but I might be wrong.. care to lay out your ideas and reasoning on what you know that other people don't?
Haha I wouldn't have spent past 20 years working in ski industry if I wanted a cushy corporate job. Learn your history and you'll understand yo future!
JLevHaha I wouldn't have spent past 20 years working in ski industry if I wanted a cushy corporate job. Learn your history and you'll understand yo future!
I think we can all see past the facade that your years of brutal honesty and insight into the industry have brought. Suit.
JLevHaha I wouldn't have spent past 20 years working in ski industry if I wanted a cushy corporate job. Learn your history and you'll understand yo future!
You wanna be a rockstar? Grow JSkis to something enormous. Now is your chance with the hole in the market. You sold out of Line and FT years ago, now you want them back?
Carved+DangerousYou wanna be a rockstar? Grow JSkis to something enormous. Now is your chance with the hole in the market. You sold out of Line and FT years ago, now you want them back?
You're a kook dude, pretty sure id rather have those companies in Jay's hands than another international group of investors or some shit. Its unfortunate, but he sold the companies to keep them afloat. When faced with the ultimatum of selling out or going under there is a pretty clear choice. They get too big for their own good and suddenly some investor wants in who doesn't give a shit about me or you and thinks he can cut corners and turn things around. Growth can be the death of companies in niche action sports because once a business goes public it's all about the money and they push away their roots. And the margins are already veeerry slim in skiing. If you think small, private, "core" companies exist in the ski industry to get their owners rich you are delusional. Small brand owners are often working other day jobs to pay the bills and keep putting money into their company.
C_dubYou should start mass producing your skis to fill the coming gap in the industry. Oh wait, no one wants them
U don't need special skis to h-carve, although it enhances the experience a lot. I invited JLev into the HC cult (I'd hardly call it a cult) but he's yet to join. HAHAHA. Large companies often fire startup founders, not recruit them.... that's part of the reason why I asked him to post his ideas...
Carved+DangerousYou wanna be a rockstar? Grow JSkis to something enormous. Now is your chance with the hole in the market. You sold out of Line and FT years ago, now you want them back?
Are you saying that already building one of the first and most influential freestyle from the ground up hasn't been enough?
Twintips? Wasn't that Armada, oh wait, wasn't that idea taken from Salomon?
Full Tilt? Wasn't that from Raichle moulds?
Skiing. Sorry about that.
Armada came out years after Line was already an established ski company. Salomon had one of the first freestyle twin-tipped skis (the 1080), although as far as I know, Line is the first company to only produce twin-tip skis.
Full Tilt never claimed it was anything other than re-branded Flexon's.
RparrOh my god, is this really how the shartcarve guy is trying to stay relevant?
JLev didn't invent the full-length twintip. Line were putting out a mini twintip in 1997 (a type of snowblade.. but did he invent the snowblade?)
At that time the (pre)Armada guys probably saw them (from Line or other brands,) and then came up with the idea (as inspired by snowboarders) to do full-length trick skis (ie twintips) in the Air Carve video as a pitch to Salomon who then built them. Those mogul skiers could then use them and went on start Armada. But prior to that, Line copied (if that is the right word) Salomon and expanded their product line.
Why does this matter anyway? I just asked JLev to post his ideas on how he could save (or kickstart) the industry. So now that I've gone into some of the history... it's his turn. So far he mentioned reinvesting profits back into the industry... anything else?