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!
Coleg55Unrelated but for some reason people who ski J skis wear virtika a lot
Icant_kfedAh shit is that a bad thing?
LemuelCheck out the roof box reviews on the site, and this should be posted in gear talk.
without knowing more about how aggressive you ski, you ability level, etc etc etc it’s tough to make a good recommendation. Allplays are easy to ski, and are a good ski for a wide range of ability levels. See if you can find some demo days to get on a variety of skis. Then you’ll have a group of skis to compare what you like / don’t like to narrow down your search
SofaKingSicki still don't understand how j skis will tell you that they sell only direct to consumer to save money, yet they're more expensive than other similar options
idkmyogusernameI’m thinking of getting the J Skis All Play, potentially moving out to SLC this year after skiing in Indiana at Perfect North my whole life. I’m thinking this ski in particular because of its versatility but if anyone had any other recommendations im open minded.
SofaKingSicki still don't understand how j skis will tell you that they sell only direct to consumer to save money, yet they're more expensive than other similar option
yavoneBro thats crazy i ski at pns and im going to slc next yr for college
BurritoShoutout to another PNS alum. I think you'd be super happy with something in the 100-ish waist range as an all-arounder for SLC.
There is a lot of nuance to go into when it comes to pricing/quality as it relates direct-to-consumer brands, but essentially there are two basic business models:
Model 1: Create a product with similar materials, spec's, etc. as your competitors and undercut them on price because you are removing the layer of profit normally reserved for a third-party retailer. This is the classic business model for retailers' in-house brands and is still pretty popular in the direct-to-consumer startup world.
Model 2: Create a product with better materials, spec's, etc. but sell it at a similar (or often slightly higher) price as your competitors with the idea of getting a better product for the same money (again because you are removing a third-party retailer's layer of profit.) This model came to prominence with Lululemon and is the value proposition J Skis is trying to put out there, though it's arguable whether or not their product is superior enough to justify their price.
**This post was edited on Mar 9th 2022 at 1:29:17pm
SofaKingSickyeah, but i don't think there's any indication that their skis are superior like Model 2 so they're selling a medium product for a premium price AND they're gonna tell you with a straight face that they're saving you money by cutting out shops etc? so the claim is if they sold in shops they'd be even more expensive? it makes no sense, i think they just want to enjoy the benefits of acting like a fledgling company when they're not
plus all their contrived limited edition nonsense, selling trump-style red hats, their virginity-protecting graphics (that i doubt actually licenses all the other people's IP used), and marketing to kids like they're a cereal brand. just the tackiest company ever
BurritoI don't disagree with any of that. At least when it comes to marketing and graphics J Lev still seems to have the taste of a 12 yo boy. Perfectly fine if your target market is 12 yo boys, but I don't know how much relevance J Skis has with the broader market regardless of the quality of their product.
That said, I do have a bit of a soft spot for them for a couple reasons:
1. They are one of the few brands left that seem truly committed to park, freeskiing, and staying indpendent. All of the formerly indie brands that were gobbled up by ski industry corporations (Line, Armada, 4FRNT, etc.) have spent the past 5-10 years all but outright telling people park is lame and carving groomers is where it's at. Fuck that. At least J Lev is committed to the kind of skiing I love.
2. I am almost certain they are actually paying licensing fees for the IP they use. They made a big deal about meeting with the Bob Ross family/trust when they dropped that collection, and I gotta believe they wouldn't dot their i's and cross their t's for one collection and not for the rest. As a professional designer IP protection hits very close to home for me, and I'd be the first in line to slam them if I thought it wasn't the case.
idkmyogusernameU of U SLC?