Tanner Hall gets cut after 20 amazing years with Oakley

I don't understand why everyone is so surprised? Yeah T-hall is a killer skier and is on one right now but the guy cannot be the easiest person to do business with. I mean look at his history? He's not the warmest or most respectful guy out there and quite frankly has a reputation for being an asshole. I have tuns of respect for the guy, but he doesn't give a fuck about you or what other people think which is all fine and dandy but when it comes to doing business and making deals that doesn't fly....skiers are expendable

No doubt in my mind there would be a very different story from Oakley.

just my 0.02, regardless guy is a legend.

I agree with what others have said. I feel like he was probably seen as a liability. He has a propensity to go off on inappropriate rants and while I understand he is just trying to speak his mind I also understand how Oakley would not want to be associated with that. I do not think that this was about his skiing in anyway.

based off what Tanner said it looks like they dropped him suddenly and without warning, which is pretty cold considering he was with them for like 2 decades

Was his contract up? If so that isn't suddenly without warning.

TOAST.Was his contract up? If so that isn't suddenly without warning.

This, they prob just didn't discuss contract renewal so it's kind of implied.

chris.goodhueI don't understand why everyone is so surprised? Yeah T-hall is a killer skier and is on one right now but the guy cannot be the easiest person to do business with. I mean look at his history? He's not the warmest or most respectful guy out there and quite frankly has a reputation for being an asshole. I have tuns of respect for the guy, but he doesn't give a fuck about you or what other people think which is all fine and dandy but when it comes to doing business and making deals that doesn't fly....skiers are expendable

No doubt in my mind there would be a very different story from Oakley.

just my 0.02, regardless guy is a legend.

In Like A Lion Greg Strokes said that they signed him because he was rebellious and getting into trouble and fit Oakley's image. In my honest opinion when he was wilding out and being a total rockstar in the mid/late 2000s was the time for oakley to part ways, not when hes stamping his mark as one of the most dedicated, hardworking freeskiers in the game. Would you be surprised if Smith cut bobby brown or faction dropped candide?

chris.goodhueI don't understand why everyone is so surprised? Yeah T-hall is a killer skier and is on one right now but the guy cannot be the easiest person to do business with. I mean look at his history? He's not the warmest or most respectful guy out there and quite frankly has a reputation for being an asshole. I have tuns of respect for the guy, but he doesn't give a fuck about you or what other people think which is all fine and dandy but when it comes to doing business and making deals that doesn't fly....skiers are expendable

No doubt in my mind there would be a very different story from Oakley.

just my 0.02, regardless guy is a legend.

That’s true but he’s made some big steps over the last few years trying to improve his attitude and lifestyle.

Sadly, there can't be much loyalty in business, especially with brands belonging to big groups. From a business point of view,it kinda makes sense. Tanner is not the latest swiss skier that has gone viral on instagram or facebook, he's not going to compete at the Xgames or the Olympics, he's not making vlogs... Yet he's still a big name in skiing so I think he should've better negotiated the deal with his agent (if he has any), and I guess whining about it like that on social media will not play in his favor for other big brands. Plus knowing the past of Tanner, I'd wait to hear the other side of the story before burning my Flightdecks.

**This post was edited on Oct 18th 2018 at 9:44:23pm

SPK_Sadly, there can't be much loyalty in business, especially with brands belonging to big groups. From a business point of view,it kinda makes sense. Tanner is not the latest swiss skier that has gone viral on instagram or facebook, he's not going to compete at the Xgames or the Olympics, he's not making vlogs... Yet he's still a big name in skiing so I think he should've better negotiated the deal with his agent (if he has any), and I guess whining about it like that on social media will not play in his favor for other big brands. Plus knowing the past of Tanner, I'd wait to hear the other side of the story before burning my Flightdecks.

**This post was edited on Oct 18th 2018 at 9:44:23pm

Yeah maybe don’t burn the 175 dollar goggles.

Chubz.In Like A Lion Greg Strokes said that they signed him because he was rebellious and getting into trouble and fit Oakley's image. In my honest opinion when he was wilding out and being a total rockstar in the mid/late 2000s was the time for oakley to part ways, not when hes stamping his mark as one of the most dedicated, hardworking freeskiers in the game. Would you be surprised if Smith cut bobby brown or faction dropped candide?

this is a really good point. Tanner isn't drinking anymore. There are a bunch of pro skateboarders that started out as totally wild, took it too far, got sober, and then had a major comeback in their later years. I'm thinking ski boss doing the same.

Honestly, great move by Oakley. Tanner is a pathetic loser, and the ski industry has no need for him anymore. Get out old man douche.

McNocheHonestly, great move by Oakley. Tanner is a pathetic loser, and the ski industry has no need for him anymore. Get out old man douche.

dude go fuck yourself with a rake

Wow apparently cooler heads prevail in this thread. Not the kind of responses I was expecting after reading a few in the front page article and all of the "fuck Oakley" going on in there.

I'm really interested in how the OP thinks Oakley went about it the wrong way, does he know something that the rest of the industry doesn't? We don't know that Oakley simply called up Tanner and said "thanks for the fun but we've got to let you go". I would imagine it was far from that. We're talking business here. The only way a contract ends is 1) it expires and does not get renewed, 2) one or more parties breaches the terms of the contract, or 3) both parties mutually agree to terminate the contract. I would imagine that because of Tanner's instagram postings, it wasn't option 3, I would also hazard a guess that it wasn't option 2 either. Seeing as Tanner is trying to make a resurgence, in freeskiing, I would imagine that it was likely time to renew the contract and he likely wanted more money because skiers are beginning to take more of an interest in him and Oakley said no. But then again, that's all speculation because none of us know the truth.

Yes, Tanner was with Oakley +/-20 years. Yes, he had a major part in changing skiing as a whole and not just with what he did for freeskiing. A lot of kids need to understand that by being a sponsored athlete, you have entered into a business contract with an organization; this contract will outline the organizations expectations of you in regards to performance and conduct as well as their obligations in regards to compensation for your services. Once that contract is up, it's time to renegotiate and agree to new terms.

I will say "good on Tanner" for not being a completely brash asshole about it unlike others in the past when their lucrative sponsorship deals ended. Regardless of the reason for the split (ie contract not renewed, disciplinary action, whatever...) there's no denying what Tanner has done for Oakley over the past two decades.

And people got mad at Kevin Durant for signing with the Warriors.....

(yes this is relevant)

I was thinking earlier if he has to send out some 2 minute "sponsor me" edit to the other goggle companies now. Or just send them a copy of his new film

Donate all OAKLEY gear to the HOMELESS! #BumBrand