A plethora of bad economic decisions including but not limited to the whole Quiksilver fiasco. Whether these bad investments/decisions led to Rossignol not being able to afford any of the most talented riders they ever had or they just didn't want to pay anybody, I'd say offering riders like Clayton and Dale jack shit (two pairs of skis and no budget), which prompted them to leave the brand a few years back was probably a pretty bad/unfortunate decision. Not to mention, they couldn't afford to keep either of (arguably) the two best pipe riders of all time in their respective time periods - Candide and Kevin Rolland.
do Candide and Rolland sell skis? i know they're good skiers, definitely some of the best of all time, but would you go out and buy Rossis because they are on the team?
not really, I am just asking if people looked up to Rolland and Candide for purchasing decisions. If people did, I would assume Coreupt (and or Rossi) would be wayyyy better and everyone would be riding those skis, because those two skiers are fucking epic, gnarly and have tons of comp results-- film segs..etc.
I think athlete marketing works, but i'm not sure if it's more effective to promote a company as a whole or convince us to buy their skis.
Changing the top sheets every year is a fairly new thing. Back in the day, A Ski model stayed the same for a least a couple of years. S4, Scratch Ghetto, Scratch, whatever you want to call them, they haven't changed that ski in years, with good reason. It's one of the best park skis on the market.
sounds like theyre lazy or just made a shit ton and didnt sell them all and are going to say they 2012/13's are new but really have just been sitting in a warehouse somewhere
Seriously, scrimitars are really nice skis, I have yet to here anything bad about them. They're on my list for next year. People shred the crap out of s7's, scratches are probably the best 'classic' park/pipe ski you could ask for and they destroy all mountain. Its just that they've had to drop a lot of park skiers because they are a race company; it's just the way things are. They get way more exposure at FIS racing events than they would at the Dew Tour. People spend way more money on multiple pairs of high end race skis than people do on park and freeride skis. Trust me, I worked at a major ski shop doing millions of dollars a year in product and they make so much more money on carving skis than they do on park skis. Our market is like 1/1000th of the total ski market. It's unfortunate that they had to drop so many riders but they were going through tough economic times, its just the way things are, they need to run a profitable business.
And I still remember last year when Travis (No_Dub) and I literally went into every thread on gear talk asking about ar7's, Punx, Ace of Spades, ETC. and spent hours convincing them to buy S4's, they are an amazing ski!
And who gives a shit about graphics, as long as they look better than these. Ugliest graphic of all time.
Why would you care unless you work for Rossignol? This makes it better for the consumers. You could buy last years skis for cheaper and theyd be just like this years.
I honestly doubt Rossi makes a ton off of that particular ski. In all actuality companies like Rossignol make most of their money on rental fleets and selling ski's to the average groomer skier.
You do realize that the 11/12 winter season was the worst in 30 years, right? Retailers all over the world can't pay their bills, and this has far reaching consequences. Be prepared to see more "carry over" models from a few companies (Atomic excluded).
They don't make much money of the S4, because once you buy a pair, you don't have to buy another. Seriously... 5 seasons of hard riding, and I don't have a single core shot or edge crack? They made a stupid choice building their skis that durable. I'm not likely to buy another pair anytime soon, mine are still working great.
This. While we all love freeskiing, the mass market pays the bills. Rossi is the #2 producer of skis worldwide and it's not because of their twin tips.
Rossignol makes dope skis and the reason they can be had for so cheap is that even when the ski industry has a bad year, rossi factory keeps pumping out skis and sells for zero profit so they can stay operating and keep people in jobs for the community the factory is in. I think that says a lot about a company. Id rather give my $375 to them each year than $800 to aramada.
I used to love rossi and have owned many products by them over many years, but I have had problems with their gear and they have not responded to my email to help me (probably because I wrote too long of an email and they didn't read it)...
I don't think I will buy/suggest any more gear by rossi unless they read their emails and help a customer...
My next bindings are going to be sth16 steels probably, sorry rossi.
I've been switching between S4's and S5's for about 4 seasons now. Obviously they're not the perfect ski for everybody, but I can positively say they haven't held me back at all.