ROAD TRIPPIN WITH BIG_SPENCE INVITATIONAL

So, you were with him this season? When did the ski's core actually snap? before or after this shred day was announced?
 
doesn't matter. The fact that he would rather masturbate his internet cred than ski with a sick crew and allegedly get free skis further proves he's a bitch.
 
and they probably politely denied him because WARRANTIES DONT COVER RAIL DAMAGE, GET THAT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING SKULL.
 
I might have to agree with this illiterate fool. I've been fucked over by dozens of businesses in the ski industry but I wasn't enough of a bitch to make it my mission to publicly maim them.
 
direct quote...

do i get new skis yet? i don't want a fucking "Big_Spence Invitational", i want to be able to ski park this year.

 
Can we make this happen over Christmas break, because that's the only time that I can come from PA to be at this?

 
Forget him then. You guys should still all go to WA and shred Snoqualmie. I grew up there and that would be epik. I would definitely go too.
 
could i get a paraphrase or spark notes? Anybody wanna just lay out the key information... puh-lease? I don't want to read through 6 pages of people calling each other dumbasses.
 
Big spence's skis broke.

He complained about it.

Surface wouldn't warrantee them.

He complained about that too.

Surface didn't like the complaining so they called for a peaceful gathering.

Big spence complained about it.
 
A pair of surfaces fell apart unnaturally quickly after Spence skied rails on them for a short period of time. He asked for a warrenty and was denied.

At some point, either before or after the warrenty, they snapped.
 
I want to get a ride from SLC! And if not I will drive my truck and can take people. This is going to be so fun! (And better happen!)
 
Agreed 100% stevens, is the place to be, good snow good park, and its not on a golf course. STEVENS PASS
 
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

But to answer DingoSean: it was after this thread started when the ski totally broke.
 
ummmmm. this ski was created september 17. that means the only way this kid could have 'snapped' them is if he was :
a) skiing in a backyard, on a railb) skiing on a glacier, in rocksc) decided enough was enough and snapped them himself.
dunno seems like little rich kid got in trouble from his parents for breaking his ski on some rails and decided to take it out on surface. what a child.
 
big spence grow the fuck up skis break all the time and the fact that surface is hosting this is fucking insane ass customer service. like for real your prolly getting another pair of skis out of this anyway so stop being childish and thank surface for being this nice jeezuz
 
I dont know that I see this as exemplary customer service. I feel like I have to make a disclaimer here, cause I know I represent a different company, but this is me speaking as a NS'er of 8 years, not as a production manager for 1 year.

Spence was bummed about how long his skis lasted. Yes, any manufacturer will not warranty damage from rails - you'd have to be absolutely crazy, rails wreck skis. The difference was that he allegedly saw some pretty major damage after only a few days of park riding, which, lets face it, shouldnt happen. Either Spence must be lying, or Spence is the most abusive park skier out there to their gear, or there was a manufacturing defect that caused the ski to come apart faster than it should have.

Whatever the case, both parties handled it pretty badly. I dont know if one does have the right to talk shit and say a brand is awful if one does have a bad experience with them - I'd be tempted to do that as a consumer, certainly. I also know that as a manufacturer, what gets warrantied or not can be pretty heartbreaking. If a ski comes back thats absolutely been loved, shredded and abused every day, but has obviously been skied through a parking lot, it sucks, but we cant cover it. If we do, it sets a precedent, and you cant run a business that replaces skis that have seen a full year of rails in the park.

I'm not saying anyone is right, but I really think the "Big Spence Invitational" took this a step too far. If you want to shut up a loudmouth complaining about how a company screwed him, you either suck it up and deal with it or warranty the ski. By having an event in honor of the disagreement, all thats been done is really propel it into the spotlight, piss Spence off even more, and showcase your dirty laundry. You're mocking a genuinely dissatisfied customer, and if this is what customer service will be from now on, do all the other customers that had to get their pairs warrantied get their own invitationals as well?
 
All true, but it already had been propelled bigger than a normal warranty claim. Any time someone posts a thread about Surface skis on this site, someone comes on and says something to the effect of, "Ask Big Spence what he thinks of them!" As a company I'm sure they don't appreciate that. Now I don't know what the entire situation was with his skis, so I can't say who is wrong or wrong, but I can would assume that these comments would get annoying to a developing company.
I don't see this as a sarcastic way to make this a big deal, I see it as a light hearted way to finally stop these detrimental posts. Also, I am from WA and live in SLC so I want to make a trip there when this happens to go ski Stevens because it will be fun!
 
I disagree. Spence clearly got a sour deal (whose fault it is is still undetermined), but him flaming Surface on here nonstop convincing everyone that the same will happen to them if they support the clearly legitimate brand was whiny and childish. Instead Surface decided to make it a win-win situation by coming up here and personally shredding with him (and bringing a few tricks up their sleeve product-wise), which is far better than simply replacing skis to shut him up.

By offering to come to Washington, they weren't mocking anybody. In fact, ignoring the entire situation would have been far worse than this course of action. Mike and the boys just want to turn a messy into a fun event, and this further exemplifies how Surface stands out as a brand. If Spence has a problem with that, then the shit's on his porch, not theirs.
 
However, I do see this debacle as a testament to how tight knit the ski community is. There are very few other sports where this sort of thing could happen. Everything is on such a personal level which is why everyone gets so invested in it. It's been really interesting watching this whole thing unfold. It really gives Surface a personality. Whether that attracts or pushes people away is a whole different story.

The dynamics are just so cool.
 
for once i disagree with rowen. the invitattional was a great idea, not meant to put the situation in a spotlight but to come together as skiers and have a great day. the fact that he keeps whining and bitching just shows he doesnt deserve shit. if he had just accepted and moved on, who knows what would have happened?? oh wait surface would have personally come to HIM and most likely brought some goodies in tow. seems to me like "spence" doesnt deserve any of this due to his shit attitude and "bad guy" persona
 
from talking with spencer about this topic many times now, i have gathered a few bits of information:

He just wants new skis and could give 2 shits about the "BSI", so thats not really a win win, more like a waste of time/money for surface, and a reason to get spencer even more pissed off. Spencer works his ass off as a cook(formerly a baker when he bought the 9 lives) to be able to afford to ski, so when he drops hundreds of dollars on a pair of skis from a brand that is so legit as some of you think, he was probably thinking they would be great skis. I was with him the first weekend he rode the 9s, and we both noticed after a matter of hours that the skis were showing damage similar to a ski that had been ridden for 2+ months. That should be warrantied no matter what, as it is obviously a factory defect. There were other NS members who had the same problems, showing that spencer wasn't a unique case, and when something like that happens, the brand producing that product should man up, admit to their faults, warranty the products, and learn from their mistakes.

But instead they did nothing. Thats not a way to keep customers or run a business. How many people do you think have been persuaded to not by surface because of these few people's bad experiences? Don't you think it would have just been more cost effective in the long run to fix the problems, and in turn keep those people as customers? The same thing happened with salomon, I have been told by a few different ski shops that they weren't able to sell their suspects because of the known problems with them, had salomon just admitted their wrong doing and fixed the problem, I'm sure you would see more people riding their skis. So why can't surface man up, give spencer new skis, admit that they had an issue with a product, and let everyone move on?
 
no what im saying is that derrick baker is a faggot piece of shit who should probably go hang him self in the forrest
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top