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!
Why support "core" companies?
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
There seems to be prevailing attitude on this website that as skiers, we must support "core" companies.
Why?
A lot of core companies are shitty companies and do not deserve my support. I will support companies that provide me with a high-quality product at a competitive price. I like to buy K2 skis because they have a proven track record, construction and shape, cool graphics and a sick price point. K2 also sponsors a lot of movies I watch and cool competitions like the K2 Back9. There are a lot of "core" companies that crop up and don't offer the same quality track record and typically have much higher price points. These guys don't sponsor the movies I watch or help host events and competitions. Why should I support these guys? K2 provides me with a lot more.
It's also the big companies that are innovating the equipment we use to ski. Salomon released a new type of boot last season tailored for park skiing. Its the big companies who make binding and ski innovations. Their R&D is funded buy sales that we as skiers give them (and not just freeskiers). Some of this R&D comes from other sectors such as racing as well.
I don't see the reason to buy from a company like SAGA, they treat their customers and buyers like garbage and their product isn't a particularly great deal. SAGA did not ship most of their outerwear last season. If you ordered from them, you essentially were screwed out of your outerwear. That's absurd! 9thward has fucked over numerous media sources and skiers in the past while charging an arm and a leg for skis. Fuck buying from 9thward. Companies like Orage are much bigger but still core to skiing. They fund movies and host really goddamn cool events like the Masters and the Euro-Open. Their product is top-notch.
Buy whatever you want. I'm going to continue to support "EVIL SKIING CONGLOMERATES" as long as they keep producing dope gear at a low price. And that's whatsup.
Posts: 11149
-
Karma: 1,415
*slow clap rising into thunderous applause*
Great job. I totally agree, but some of the upcoming companies such as moment or surface have incredibly sick skis and with the proper funding from us, the skiers, they could eventually rise up to become a company like orage which does all the great comps and sponsors amazing skiers and such.
Posts: 2204
-
Karma: 11
Posts: 5786
-
Karma: 4,457
I see where you're coming from and i couldn't agree more, last season i rode oakley,orage,nordica skis/boots, salomon/look bindings and could not have been happier with the durability and performance of my ski equipment
Posts: 2631
-
Karma: 57
i think its just that some kids on here want to feel like theyre a visible part of something, like sticking up for a small ski company makes them part of it.
Posts: 2379
-
Karma: 128
Fuck salomon,go high society best skis out there.
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
That's fine but why should I support these companies so they can eventually become what companies like K2 and Salomon?
I can see supporting some of these guys if you really believe in what they are doing or think they really deserve your support. I like what the guys at surface are doing quite a bit. They are just trying to do their own thing in skiing and they seem to have some of the same opinions and views that I have as well. I enjoy reading their blog and think their team has pretty good style (here's hoping Anthony skis for them sometime soon!) I was just checking prices and their skis are actually very competitively priced. They are cheaper than K2. Great job guys. Core companies like this make sense when selecting a new ski as they can compete in terms of price with some of the bigger guys.
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
It's great that you're sponsored by high society and everything but:
1) High Society skis are more expensive than Salomon
2) High Society skis do not have the same track record as Salomon
3) High Society skis have never sponsored a movie or event that I know about. If they have, it's obviously not something I particularly care about. Salomon has been supporting the sport through events and media since State of Mind (or was it Degenerates?) and the 1080.
4) High Society skis have done absolutely nothing in terms of innovating ski technology. Salomon has done tons of this.
Posts: 10887
-
Karma: 2,165
THANK YOU DAN!!!!!!!
I'll support the company that supports me through top notch service and pricing!
Posts: 4740
-
Karma: 40
Dont bring all the other 'core' companies into the same genre as Saga and 9th, they are on a completely different level.
I think it would be gay if everyone just rode Salomons, K2's and Rossi's.
Basically it comes down to choice and which company I want to give my money, which team I like, which graphics I like.
All extreme sports would be lame if there werent core companies. Alot of people dont have big enough names to get sponsored by the big companies so since humans have the freedom to do whatever they want, people start their own companies. Makes sense to me.
Posts: 759
-
Karma: 33
i agree with you on some points but some core companies make good shit too
Posts: 2706
-
Karma: 12
This issue was relevant 8 years ago when there was only a handful of twins to choose from. Back then each company produced only one or maybe two twins. And if you remember quickly other than graphics skis did not change. It took progressive companies like LINE or Armada to show the bigger companies they had small startups pushing the industry and that jump started some major ski designs. Riders who molded this industry jumped ship from bigger companies so that they could have more say in product development. Things have changed drastically since then. Every racer has a pair of twins in their quiver for the days its snows and their not hitting gates. Freestyle teams, are now focused on big airs, slopestyles and pipe, where as 6 years ago, those features were only for "fun days". Big companies have definitely noticed this and now have superior products and alot of them. I definitely agree that ill give my money to a company that makes a dependable product. I do think alot of smaller companies make a dependable product. I always ride Armada, I love some fo the line skis and although ive never tried surface im stoked to try and pair and make up my mind for myself.
Posts: 2379
-
Karma: 128
salomon fucked over CR, they under pay mike douglas, they sponsor peter olenick , they gave candide and cr pro models that were exactly the same as the 1080's just differnt graphics (which is lame and insults the whole idea of a pro model ski), there skis suck and are way too soft... ect ect. ect.
They have done mad shit for freeskiing but always in the name of money there is no love or loyalty involved in that company......
shit they even droped mike d's pay after he got video part of the year. they fucked over cr big time ect ect ect.
there boots are sick though mad respect on that front ... Dalbellos are better though...
Posts: 773
-
Karma: 12
I agree in some aspects... If it weren't for big companies like K2 and Salomon we wouldn't have a lot of the comps and movies that we all love. But there is something to be said about the Core Companies. Let us not forget the original core ski company - Line. They certainly did a lot for the sport. The thing about core companies is that while they may not have immediately visible impact on skiing in the way that the biggies do, when a smaller core company does something different and it starts to catch on... the bigger companies usually mimic it... and a lot of times make it better. And then they bring the price point down and add in their more proven technology and better company resources. But if it weren't for those smaller companies to take a risk the a larger company may not have been willing to take or even thought of... the idea may never have come to fruition. So the place of the small core companies cannot be over looked. We need to support the core companies so that the sport can be pushed in new and fresh directions and then the bigger companies can take their visions (the ones that actually work) and make them available to the masses.
Posts: 4877
-
Karma: 141
I’ll use Line skis as an example of why you should support “core” companies.
With the support line received in the early days they were able to work on all these innovations that have now become industry standards. Think of all the things we would be miss out on if we did not support line way back. Now look at dynastar(non core) about 4 or 5 years ago when the trouble maker came out they were the shit and everyone had trouble makers… well guess what, its pretty much the same ski today and the only other skis they developed for us was the big trouble that only have like a 90 something waist. What happen to all that money they made off us? It didn’t going back into research to give us innovated and better products did it? No. This is the benefit to support core companies they give back and in the long run you will get better products
Posts: 444
-
Karma: 5
that's fine and you can continue to buy from larger conglomerates. i think the reason some people support smaller brands is because they like to feel like they are a part of something that is growing and developing. each sale that is made by a smaller company has more of an impact on the maturation of that brand. the hope is that as those brands grow they will continue to support the sport it was derived from but do so in an alternate way. spending their money on unique parties, photoshoots, and events. thinking the way a skier thinks and not the way a 50 year old chairman thinks. companies like salomon and k2 do a great job of supporting the sports they are involved in, i give them no disrespect. but they also take a while to adapt to a changing market (look at ski graphics as an example, it took armada to push these brands to make some adjustments). yes, there are smaller brands out there which cannot keep up with the big dogs, but there also smaller brands out there which are doing more than the big brands are for their sports. just because you have had some unpleasant experiences with "core" brands does not mean that all of them are the same. just like not all of the conglomerates are as easy to deal with as salomon and k2.
Posts: 11149
-
Karma: 1,415
Because some of them make really, really nice skis. Look at igneous. Theyre well over what k2 sells their skis for, but their quality is 10x better and they (IMO) make some of the best skis ever created.
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
I think is definitely true to some extent. I think companies like Armada and Line were great in showing some of the bigger companies that they needed to produce a wide range of skis so people could keep pushing the sport. However, K2 was doing the same thing at the same time. They kept stride with these guys and they have offered one of the biggest quivers for many, many seasons.
It's too bad Line sunk all that money into their binding which turned out to be hot trash. They were really trying hard to expand but tried to do so much too fast. I hope they can recover someday.
Posts: 5610
-
Karma: 28
again look at some of the new formats of skis that "core" companies are making k2 is pretty good about developing new skis (hell bent), but look at companies like Line who developed the invader, elizabeth, sfb's and ep pro's, also moment has rockered park skis. i agree that some of the products "core" companies make can be shit, but it's the innovation that these small companies put into their products that causes people to support them. I've demoed elizabeths and have to say they are one of the most fun skis i've ever been on, and you'll never get a product like that from the bigger companies.
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
Well, Dynastar is a pretty good example of shitty management. They produced a really hyped up ski at a cheap price. The skis were absolute pieces of shit. Many people didn't make it through a season, mine lasted two before falling apart. They were essentially the worst edges and bases in a twin tip ever. The company didn't even change the graphics for three years or produce a different ski. Their rep got out and when everyone had to reup, they turned to other skis which had a good rep over the past few seasons. I don't know a single person with Dynastars today.
I don't think its fair to say that all core companies reinvest their capital in R&D and that no large companies don't reinvest in R&D and new skis. However, Dynastar is a very good example of a shitty, big company that doesn't deserve my business.
Posts: 773
-
Karma: 12
Well seeing as K2 now owns Line... i dont think that the money they spent on the binding is much of an issue any more... They now have pretty much whatever funding they need.
Posts: 12055
-
Karma: 911
Line and Armada were the first noticible companies that I found that had skis for my little park rat down around 130cm
Question, why didn't the big guys have those skis back then?
Posts: 5610
-
Karma: 28
agreed and the quality of their skis is now much better, and their starting to go back to sidewalls which is a positive step in getting back to better products
Posts: 2631
-
Karma: 57
i had 1080 groms (145cm i think) way back when, those things were pimp
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
I think the Maidens (earlier hell bents) were a huge innovation when first released. No one could believe a ski that fat! They really got things rolling.
It's the big companies that invented the twin tip, new boots, bindings, the reverse sidecut, poontoon style skis, experimented with race bases, "Springblade technology" (hahaha), and many other things.
Smaller companies have definitely done things as well. I believe Line created the first true-twin. That's pretty huge!
Posts: 2379
-
Karma: 128
dynastar skis are way better than salomon,the legend pros are one of the best big mountain skis on the market, trouble makers are awesome . but they fall apart
Posts: 11149
-
Karma: 1,415
Aussie, I agree, but I think he's talking about twintips only since thats what 99% of newschoolers.com is focused on.
Posts: 4462
-
Karma: 298
You are soo wrong you have no idea. Mike D is a top designer at salomon. He has his hand in every twin you see, and is one of highest paid skiers on salomon. CR got hurt, and was out for a while, but he was going to move before he even got hurt.
Look at the Dumont......that is not just a 1080 ski with a different graphic, and CR's weren't either. Its about the specs, the lenght, the sidecut, camber, stuff like that that make a pro model, not just the core. My Vinny Dorion 1080s are still in incredible shape, which is a testament to how well built they are. Most skis now don't even last a year, hell i still see people kicking around on the x-scream 1080s.
Your just bashing them because they are the biggest company out there. They support skiing, and us skiers ( not just the pros) way more then any company out there ( Jib acadamy, grassroots comps, X-games, etc).
Posts: 8345
-
Karma: 25
have you ever talked to the customer service from a big company like k2?
Posts: 2598
-
Karma: 236
this is a good debate. i don't entirely agree with all the hating on dynastar though. i might be making this up, but i believe their 07 tms were the first skis to have specific edge reinforcement for rails?
and aussie's right, legend pros are a truly sick ski, but i suppose not veru new-school orientated. they fucking rip though!
in general though, i agree with sushi but for a few excpetions here and there.
Posts: 12967
-
Karma: 3,451
never had to because they're products and gear are first class IMO.
Posts: 2379
-
Karma: 128
I have no idea hey then why quote un quote did mike douglas say in an interview that he got a pay decrease the year after he won the powder award for skier of the year.I know this becasue Ive discussed it with mike himself hes under paid and should have gotten a pro model years ago , salomon fucked cr big time again I know the guy he almost die and then they run a few adds about how hes better then they drop him real loyal company that guy skied his ass of for salomon for years and then they do that too him.. soo before you acuse people of not knowing the TRUTH learn your ski history. I still have the original 1080's (original meaning 1st year they came out) on my wall my, 2nd parir of twin tips after the dynastar deep grooves.. salomon only care about money if you like ther product then sweet man use it till your hearts content ,I myself would never support a corprate giant that dont give 2 shits about skiing..
they make sik boots though
Posts: 641
-
Karma: 50
Slightly off note.....
Line engineered the first ski for the center mount...
I liked it.
Posts: 8491
-
Karma: 4,063
the more companys the better. Maybe instead of telling kids not to buy "core" company products you should tell the "core" companys to give more back to the sport. Or tell them ("core" companys) to start making rental skis to sell to resorts so they can afford to sponsor events, and superhomes for their investor relations.
Posts: 4122
-
Karma: 222
Just because K2 owns Line doesn't mean they'll just keep dishing money out to them. Line was an investment for K2. A pretty loyal customer base, a quality ski line, and a company struggling to survive bankruptcy equals a cheap purchase price and thus a good investment. From a business standpoint Line is it's own business unit as part of K2. Line is most likely given a budget each year which is dependent on their profits from the previous season. If their product fails, it's doubtful that K2 is going to plug all the holes in the sinking ship.
Posts: 8491
-
Karma: 4,063
you're thinking of line weapons there.
Posts: 7837
-
Karma: 3,347
I didn't say you shouldn't buy from core companies, where did you get that idea? I just asked why those purchases are justified and broke down what I look for when purchasing a ski.
Posts: 13839
-
Karma: 7,704
hows this for a philosophy? if i like something and the price is right, i'll buy that and not worry about it after that.
Posts: 9221
-
Karma: 9,939
word this thread doesn't make much sense. Without core companies the ski industry wouldn't be where it is today. amen
Posts: 16253
-
Karma: 538
Good discussion going here.
I won't support a "core" company just because. I support a company based on what the product is, what it costs and how it performs.
Just so happens all my twins have been Line skis. A large reason for that was price. I didn't buy them just because they were Lines.
Posts: 1515
-
Karma: 1,715
My friend is still rocking Salomons from I think 4 or 5 years ago. He still beats the shit out of them to. Salomon builds a good ski, they just grow soft after lots of use.
Posts: 10887
-
Karma: 2,165
i'm really interested to see how the new salomon product stands up over time with the wood core. i know they've been composite for years and now they're moving to wood.
the entire line skis really well this year
Posts: 8830
-
Karma: 214
PWN
I agree with you man. I've been buying K2 for years now. They make a solid product, the price is right, and I know they'll be around next year if something happens.
Some of these companies pop up 1 year and are gone the next.
Posts: 6680
-
Karma: 1,602
Yes, and it worked perfectly. My brother's had 3 pairs of PE's warrateed, and they did it quick and gave him the next year's model. I also ride K2 and am extremely happy with them.
Posts: 7266
-
Karma: 127
I agree. From my experince, Armada has excellent customer service. My T-hall's edge was barely sticking out, I sent them to armada to be repaired, and BAM, new Ar6's at my door.
I will continue to buy from brands that PROVE themselve quality wise. Surface is the next brand im looking into, but i want o give thier skis a little more time to see thie durrability, and gather some more information on thier warranty system and customer service.
I feel its important to support the little guy, but only if he is supplying me with a good product, and a good price.'
I would gladly buy a salomom/rossi ski over an Armada skis if the price difference was enough, and the quality was similar.
Posts: 7558
-
Karma: 926
yes armada is small but also the greatest along with k2 in my opinion... otherwise i support what is good for me
Posts: 3396
-
Karma: 25
you should support good companies who value everything they get.
know what im sayin?
Posts: 2121
-
Karma: 345
i almost completely agree with what youre saying but for me i chose 4frnt because i love the specific msp and stl models, i dont chose a ski based on the companies other skis
Posts: 4120
-
Karma: 41
so, support companies that deserve support?
ok, ill do whatever you guys tell me to do
All times are Eastern (-4)
