"Normal" or "Premium" Skis??

"Roger" wrote in message
m...

I always go for the premium skis not only for the reason above but
also because they are the best, therefore easier (or more rewarding)
to ski on and are thus less effort!

This is simply not true. The "best" skis are simply not going to be the
easiest for beginners.
As I pointed out before - according to teh catalogues the easiest skis for
beginners are also the cheapest

On Thu 11 Nov '04 at 09:59 "Nick Hounsome" wrote:

"Alun Evans" wrote in message
...


Some of my friends being taught to carve by the ESF in La Plagne this year
were told by their instructor to go and dump the planks of wood they were
on for some real skis.

He then swapped skis with one of the girls for her to tell the difference,
which she could. (He was testing some of Salomon's next seasons skis to be
fair).


I find it odd that an instructor would be using beginners skis (unless he
was testing them for usability for beginners).

No no, he was on some poncy racing skis, but they were having difficulty with
carving due to a lack of side cut and the bluntness of their planks.

He swapped for a short run so that she could tell the difference.

I can't believe that anywhere really rents "planks". As far as I am aware
I've never been given anything more than a year old.

Well I'm in the (un)fortunate position of having gone to the same rental place
in Soldeu for 4 years, and they had some skis that went (new) premium,
standard, standard. I'm assuming they'll be gone this year.

The one thing that I would look out for is the condition of the skis - I've
asked for another pair where the edges weren't sharp or the base looked like
it had been skiing gravel.

Yep, if they've got a good choice in your length, it's worth checking to see
if they've got a pair in better condition. When it's busy though, they just
want to get you out of the shop.

And if they don't have another pair, getting them to service your pair is
fairly unlikely.


Alun.

On Thu 11 Nov '04 at 15:06 "Iain Miller" wrote:

Alun Evans wrote:

On Wed 10 Nov '04 at 21:50 (NIALLBRUCE) wrote:

Any chat on whether the "premium" skis offered by most hire-shops are
worth the extra? I know that it's not the most urgent topic of
discussion but it affects everyone. On average, the "premium" skis
demand a 40 pound premium. I've read the sales pitch from the
manufacturers and hire companies but would be interested to hear about
someone's own experience.

So I'm one of the people who still hires skis, and I do go for the
"premium" option these days, though given the total cost of the week's
hire x 2, and the reliability factor, it is making me think I may buy my
own skis this year.

Unless you ski a minimum of 2-3 weeks a year I can't see the economics in
this

hence the "x 2" in my posting.

Yeah, I've done the maths; it's not worthwhile.

However, as you mention, if you factor in having a poor pair of skis, not
enjoying the skiing as much, and wasting the money you spent on the holiday,
then it becomes a bit worthwhile.

Even if you pay to upgrade, the rental shop you've been tied to by your tour
company may not have a decent pair of skis for you in your length.

Ah, the random factor.



Alun.

In message , Nick
Hounsome writes

I always go for the premium skis not only for the reason above but
also because they are the best, therefore easier (or more rewarding)
to ski on and are thus less effort!

This is simply not true. The "best" skis are simply not going to be the
easiest for beginners.
As I pointed out before - according to teh catalogues the easiest skis for
beginners are also the cheapest


The ski has to flex to follow the turn. Inexperienced skiers are likely
to be turning quite slowly, so putting less force on the ski. So softer
skis will be easier for them to turn.

A worthwhile hire shop will have some actual beginner skis made for the
purpose, not just worn-out normal ones. I hired a pair in my second
week and had fun on them.

There's no automatic relationship between stiffness and price, but if
you buy your own beginner skis you're going to outgrow them, so you
won't want to spend as much and you won't care if they don't last as
long. There's every incentive for the manufacturer to use cheaper
materials and charge less.

--
Sue ];(

Last season, myself and two friends ended up in Courchevel 1550. Two of
us hired "Gold" standard the other "Silver" standard (Crystal rating
system where Gold).

Down at (empty) the hire shop my friend who paid for "Gold" was a bit
miffed to see my "Silver" friend being given exactly the same model of
ski, and even after a closer inspection there didn't appear (to our
eyes) to be any significant difference in condition. The "Gold" skis I
was given had definately seen at least one seasons use and the edges
were as blunt as a very blunt thing.

I did swap skis mid week and the next pair I was given were much better,
but they were still bottom of the range skis. My "Silver" friend got
quite a bit of lip when she changed skis - unluckily for the ski shop
guy she is fluent in french and knew exactly what he said when she went
to swap skis!

Quite frankly I was left rather confused and felt a bit defrauded by the
whole experience. So I went and bought my own skis - at the very least
I won't have to go through the lottery of hiring for a while.

NIALLBRUCE wrote:
Any chat on whether the "premium" skis offered by most hire-shops are worth the
extra? I know that it's not the most urgent topic of discussion but it affects
everyone. On average, the "premium" skis demand a 40 pound premium. I've read
the sales pitch from the manufacturers and hire companies but would be
interested to hear about someone's own experience.

Are the 'technological' advancements significant? If so, how do they affect our
skiing? Is there a material difference?

Do they affect different people in different ways ie. depending on their
ability or style of skiing?

I don't know what standard of skiier I am. I'm just learning how to carve.
Should I opt for the "premium" option?? (nb, I am a student - poor!!)

Has anyone tried the twin-tipped skis? I've seen a few kids use them at the
local dry slope. Do they allow freestyle skiing without any sacrifices? In
particular, do they affect the traditional 'freeride' functionality?

Thanks for any replies!

Niall

Last season, myself and two friends ended up in Courchevel 1550. Two of
us hired "Gold" standard the other "Silver" standard (Crystal rating
system where Gold).


I've booked a holiday to Courmayeur with Crystal! I'm really glad that I didn't
listen to the travel agent (when she advised that we should book our ski hire
in advance)!!

Thanks for all the advice - from everyone using this forum!! It's very helpful!

Any views on whether it is good to book prior to departure?
If so, should this be done using the tour operator (such as Crystal) ...or one
of the other hire companies that offer to give you skis at the terminal (e.g.
edge2edge)

I think we'll shop around at the resort but it would be good to hear any advice
to the contrary!!

Niall

"Nick Hounsome" wrote in message . uk...
"Roger" wrote in message
m...

I always go for the premium skis not only for the reason above but
also because they are the best, therefore easier (or more rewarding)
to ski on and are thus less effort!

This is simply not true. The "best" skis are simply not going to be the
easiest for beginners.
As I pointed out before - according to teh catalogues the easiest skis for
beginners are also the cheapest

I'm not a beginner!

(NIALLBRUCE) wrote in message ...


I've booked a holiday to Courmayeur with Crystal!

.... oh dear

"Sue" wrote in message
...
There's no automatic relationship between stiffness and price, but if you
buy your own beginner skis you're going to outgrow them, so you won't want
to spend as much and you won't care if they don't last as long. There's
every incentive for the manufacturer to use cheaper materials and charge
less.

Do you really believe that any significant proportion of that £450+ goes on
materials?
Its all differential marketing just as with other 'premium' products.

I've booked a holiday to Courmayeur with Crystal!

... oh dear

Yup - I've already had numerous difficulties with this holiday!!

We're departing from Aberdeen so had to book connecting flights. This was done
at a cost of 80 pounds each. (The travel agent told us to book them online as
this would be cheaper than their own price). We booked BA's cheapest online
tickets.

However, Crystal told us last week (without any apology) that the flight times
from Gatwick had been changed. We now left Gatwick 6.5 hours earlier and
therefore couldn't use our connecting flights.

The travel agent (Lunn Poly) refused to help and said that we had assumed the
risk ourselves by agreeing to the terms and conditions. Whilst this is true, we
didn't have any choice (all the operators have these conditions). The senior
manager at their customer service centre even told me that I no longer had any
contract with Lunn Poly as the holiday was booked with Crystal. I'm studying
law and specialise in commercial law. This is definately wrong and I would be
very surprised if the manager in question (Phil White) didn't know this.

Lunn Poly are acting as our agents. Although the holiday is booked with
Crystal, and our contract is with Crystal, we also have a contract of agency
with Lunn Poly. Therefore, Lunn Poly cannot avoid liability. I was extremely
annoyed when I hear their excuse - a lot of people must drop their complaints
when they have a legitimate claim!!

Anyway...
Eventually, a girl from the office where I booked the holiday got involved and
managed to get 40 pounds compensation from Crystal. Lunn Poly also offered 20
pounds. I was prepared to go to court but since that would involve a lot of
expense (with only the possibility of recovering our "loss"), I decided to
accept the meagre compensation.

A flight down to Gatwick was then booked with BMI for 33 pounds. Not bad
considering that BA were asking 200!

Nonetheless, the problems weren't over. When I called BA (out of courtesy) to
inform them that we wouldn't be using the out-going flight, they told me that
the return would automatically be cancelled. I was shocked by this but
apparently agreed to it - again, in the terms and conditions. I spoke to
various managers and eventually found one who said that this rule is rarely
enforced. Here's hoping that it's not! We're all hoping that our bad luck has
been and gone now and can't wait to get to the slopes!!

The moral of the story is don't book your holiday and flights with separate
companies ...if you want to book in advance - and have to use connecting
flights. I'm really annoyed at the whole situation - we're paying the brochure
price of the holiday and booked in August yet are being told that it was a
risky purchase. In future, I think that I'll choose a late deal instead!

I'm sure that this scenario has caught a lot of people out before. It's
particularly problematic for those living away from the SE of England. I hope
that others don't get caught out in the same manner!!

Niall

ps,
What is the situation regarding holiday companies? Does Crystal have a bad
name??
I've looked on websites such as teletextholidays and icelolly and found really
good deals but the price escalates very quickly when I call - the deal shown is
almost always "sold out" but one with a higher price is available. It's a bit
suspicious! They also tend to add taxes onto the price.
I'm still looking for the perfect holiday company - does it exist and if so,
where??