How the XC biz should sell its stuff...

How do Scandi countries sell and use ski stuff? I'd think that many
many regular skiers are using 10+ year old equipment.

It seems like the US side of things doesn't like such market behavior.
We see pitches regularly for "freshening" up one's ski stuff to have
more fun, etc.

I went ski-skating for the first time this season today on some 20+
year old skis/boots/poles. They still seem fine.

If more Americans related to the ski market like I do would there be no
ski market in America? ---Or could perhaps XC skiing be sold to many
more people?

Is it possible that it would be a good, even a very good sales pitch to
say "Spend $500 today and have a ski set that'll last for 20 years!" I
mean, it seems to me that XC skis are a GREAT value. The longer they
last, the better the value. And I'm hard on my stuff---yet most of it
has lasted over a decade now. And it still seems fine.

Heck my bikes from the 80's (and my firearms from the 60's and 70's)
all still seem to work excellently. If more shoppers were like me would
we be sunk or would we be better off?

I mean, far more Scandifolk are skiers. What do we want: more skiers
who spend less or fewer skiers who spend more? Whose economics work out
better in the end?

--JP
outyourbackdoor.com
upnorthmag.com
allbikemag.com
hooknbullet.com

On 14 Dec 2005 18:25:25 -0800, wrote:


I went ski-skating for the first time
this season today on some 20+
year old skis/boots/poles. They still seem
fine.

No way boots (or bindings) from 20 years ago are remotely close to
being as good as stuff made in the last few years. Not even the
ballpark.

JFT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Population Scandi countries is about 24 million (Norway, Sweden, Finland,
Denmark)
Population USA about 297 million. One country is 12 times the population of
the other four combined. Many people (like me) can't afford new equipment
every few years, or just don't care. I think it's more market size. Trust
me, there are plenty of people in Scandinavian countries who buy new equip
every few years, there's just 12 times as many in the USA. Don't forget the
32 million Canadians in the North American market.

My skis are 15 yrs old (garage sale $10), my firearm is 30 years old and my
bike was 18 years old... got a _new_ one at a garage sale for $30. (the guy
bought who bought it had to stop riding after only a couple months). Like
my skis, it's a little bit big but I don't care.

Frankly, if I had the money, I'd buy new skis. I let the big money folk out
there buy new every couple years, I support the US Ski Team so THEY can buy
new equipment every four years. When I have enough to spare, I buy garage
sale skis. I think they call that trickle down economics. Then I coast the
corn fields of the great midwest. Uh... what's a groomed trail? One where
the snowmobiles have worn a track.

There will always be people willing to pay top dollar for the newest and
best. People who squeeze every dime of use out of thier posessions. And all
the other people who fall somewhere in between. If more people around the
world thought like you and I do, the technology would just progress a bit
more slowly, and new items would cost a little more for a little longer.
All those people who throw tons of money into new equipment are the ones who
are pusing the technology forward and deciding which lines stay and which
ones go.

On a more personal note, finally had a good snow and I had to work late that
week, new skis would only have gathered dust.


JC (not a capitalistic pig but would still like to ski Norway and hated her
economics class but still got an A)

wrote in message
oups.com...
How do Scandi countries sell and use ski stuff? I'd think that many
many regular skiers are using 10+ year old equipment.

It seems like the US side of things doesn't like such market behavior.
We see pitches regularly for "freshening" up one's ski stuff to have
more fun, etc.

I went ski-skating for the first time this season today on some 20+
year old skis/boots/poles. They still seem fine.

If more Americans related to the ski market like I do would there be no
ski market in America? ---Or could perhaps XC skiing be sold to many
more people?

Is it possible that it would be a good, even a very good sales pitch to
say "Spend $500 today and have a ski set that'll last for 20 years!" I
mean, it seems to me that XC skis are a GREAT value. The longer they
last, the better the value. And I'm hard on my stuff---yet most of it
has lasted over a decade now. And it still seems fine.

Heck my bikes from the 80's (and my firearms from the 60's and 70's)
all still seem to work excellently. If more shoppers were like me would
we be sunk or would we be better off?

I mean, far more Scandifolk are skiers. What do we want: more skiers
who spend less or fewer skiers who spend more? Whose economics work out
better in the end?

--JP
outyourbackdoor.com
upnorthmag.com
allbikemag.com
hooknbullet.com

Jessica Chadwick wrote:

JC (not a capitalistic pig but would still like to ski Norway and hated her
economics class but still got an A)

Make the trip!

As you know I have a more or less standing offer to take any visiting
r.s.n skiers into Nordmarka, to show off some of my favourite trails. If
you get here I'll do the same for you.

I skied saturday with my son, starting from Frognerseteren (the end of
the Holmenkollen tram/sub line), then alone on sunday, starting from
Årnes in the middle of Sørkedalen, just 3 km from Røa and 10+ minutes
from our home.

A little bit more snow would have been even better, but the
Skiforeningen trail setters had still managed to set classic tracks on
both sides of a 3-5 m wide skating lane in the middle.

Terje

PS. My current skis (Madshus classic/cold snow) are about 5 years old,
plus I had to buy new skis for my son one or two years ago, so he got
the wet/clister base. This way I can borrow his skis when he's not using
them. :-)

Before this I skied for 10-15 years on the same pair of Fisher skate
skis, I'd use the same pair for classic, skate, backcountry and even
downhill Telemark when we got a powder dump.
--
-
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

? You mean I didn't glide, or go fast, or have fun, or have stability,
or ski in all styles of skating without effort? C'mon. It's not rocket
science. Equipment makes a diff at the top 10% but not in a HUGE WAY at
my level. Sure, top stuff woulda been nicer to use but I still had a
85% level ski outing easily.

(I'd say from my outing that ski-flex is still very impt and
pole-height and wax---but I still had a great time even though I was
too fat for my skis and I used old poles that were too long---and I
found some fast wax on the tails of my skis by leaning back a bit.)

I could go out and get, what, into the top quartile in any state-size
race on my old stuff. Heck I could maybe even do it on wood skis. Heck
I even got top 10 in a couple races in the past few years on 10+ yr-old
ski/boot/pole. But I think I could also do it on my 20+ yr old stuff.
It's not the equipment that slows me down so much---it's the fat first
and the fitness next. (I find that if I'm fit and fat I'm still very
slow. If I'm just decently fit and skinny I'm right in there.)

I'm still wondering what folks are skiing on in the 1000th-to-5000th
ranks at the big Euro ski-tour-marathons. I bet a lot of older stuff is
in use. And how bout those eastern-bloc countries---with those huge ski
clubs full of people using old stuff, most of whom could whup our
butts.

I think it's first know-how (skiing since you were a kid) then
fit-skinny then ballpark ski equipment (close enough counts very
well!).

It just seems like 90% of marketing goes to the converted in the USA
and little effort is made to sell how essentially cheap XC is, how
accessible it is in every way. It's democratic, not elitist---it's
cheap and anyone can do it anywhere there's snow. Such a sport could
seemingly be sold to far more people than the $1000 nth-degree elitist
approach. But if you're going to be content with selling to a total
main-player market of only, what, 10,000 people in the US then you're
going to have to try to turn them into fanatics who'll spend everything
on skiing and who will keep buying new and microscopically-better stuff
every year or two.

Sure, it takes all kinds. I'm just wondering about the emphasis. I
suspect the industry in the US has decided that the sport is
ungrowable. How bout that.

--JP

Well when the popular sports in America change from baseball,
football, rodeo...etc to skiing,skating,cycling, etc., then we might
see a change. Until then it's a pretty small market we're talking about

Interesting thoughts Jeff. Here's one small piece of data. I can't
comment on anything other than the race sector. In terms of market
share, the US is the second biggest market for race skis. I think
Fischer sells about sis or seven thousand pairs of RCS skis here every
year. That's about twice what most of the european countries sell.
Sweden, Germany, Italy, etc. They're all at about half of our total.

Norway is somewhere close to 30,000 pairs of RCSs every year.

So, especially given the population observation thatsomebody else made,
I think it's safe to say that the Norwegians, at least, are probably
pretty "up to date".

Zach

Zach Caldwell wrote:

Interesting thoughts Jeff. Here's one small piece of data. I can't
comment on anything other than the race sector. In terms of market
share, the US is the second biggest market for race skis. I think
Fischer sells about sis or seven thousand pairs of RCS skis here every
year. That's about twice what most of the european countries sell.
Sweden, Germany, Italy, etc. They're all at about half of our total.

Norway is somewhere close to 30,000 pairs of RCSs every year.

Wow, it wouldn't have guessed that!

Are these numbers up to date? Over the last 3-4 years Madshus seems to
have made a big comeback here in Norway, i.e. the last two pairs I
bought were both Madshus, while the previous three of four were Fischer.

So, especially given the population observation thatsomebody else made,
I think it's safe to say that the Norwegians, at least, are probably
pretty "up to date".

:-)

Terje

--
-
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

On 15 Dec 2005 06:33:33 -0800, wrote:

? You mean I didn't glide, or go fast, or have fun, or have stability,
or ski in all styles of skating without effort? C'mon. It's not rocket
science. Equipment makes a diff at the top 10% but not in a HUGE WAY at
my level.

There are aspects to equipment that make a huge difference to
beginers. Skating on mid 1980s bindings and boots means the beginning
skier will fall more, be tired more, and perhaps quit more easily.
The differences of then to now are perhaps even more important for
someone new to the sport than an experienced skier.

JFT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"Terje Mathisen" wrote in message
...
Jessica Chadwick wrote:

JC (not a capitalistic pig but would still like to ski Norway and hated
her
economics class but still got an A)

Make the trip!

As you know I have a more or less standing offer to take any visiting
r.s.n skiers into Nordmarka, to show off some of my favourite trails. If
you get here I'll do the same for you.

I'm learning Norwegian as we speak... type... whatever (Thank you
NorWord)
Be patient, I need worthy equipment and a few years to save up.
I'm going to do my first marathon next year and hopefully will be able to
keep up on the ski trails with the Scandi folk the year after. Until then
it's waiting for the ski economics to trickle down to me and dodging the
snowmobilers.