Quoting negativenelly from Aug 16 2008 4:28:56:
k2 ownes ride

Quoting 216 from Aug 16 2008 5:21:12:
This is bullshit.....Stop wining about us snowboarders and fuckin ski.

Quoting Ace3+4$ from Aug 16 2008 5:04:21:
OK, so just because burton is big it shouldnt be aloud to have this contest but if they were a small starting company it would be ok?? thats retarded. the idea stays the same, it doesnt matter where it comes from. I thought it was a lame article that just found a way of dissing a snowboard company by taking way to seriously same of the words that they choose to describe their contest. I think burton is right and its pretty lame that some resorts still choose to not allow snowboarders. I went to utah n just because one of my friends snowboarded we couldnt go to the legendary alta resort how fucking dumb is that?

The  only reason Burton should be dissed on is because their trying to prove that snowboarding equal to skiing with this contest while dropping all skiers that were an RED and Anon. Now that is fucking lame

Quoting Caveman.$ from Aug 16 2008 5:06:21:
ughh no

Quoting XtRemE11 from Aug 16 2008 6:16:32:
when you go into a park do you associate the park skier's with the snowboarders who dress the same, have the same attitude, do the same tricks, etc... or do you associate them with the gaper family skiing on the landings?

Quoting negativenelly from Aug 16 2008 3:28:59:
Burton dosent give a fuck. Skiing is so uptight.

Quoting Mezmerize19$ from Aug 16 2008 4:25:23:
eTo those  who said about ski companies swallowing each other, as far as I know The biggest company in skiing is  quicksilver  which has rossignol, dynastar,  lange, and look. Roxy too if you want to count it but I put that in with dynastar. Besides that the next biggest I know is K2 which has Line. I dont think ski companies care so much about a huge monopoly but rather just making a good product.


Burton makes good stuff too . Quality stuff at that. I have a hoodie and a backpack from them and both are really dope. But I think Burtons main objective is more to swallow the competition, in everything they can. Lets look at whats under Burtons umbrella:


Burton, Anon, Analog, RED,  Gravis, AK, Ronin, Channel Island Surfboards, Habitat, Alien Workshop, Special Blend, Jeenyus snowboards,  Forum, Four Square,  and Reflex


I mean, really the only people they havent gotten yet is Ride, and the ski companies that also make snowboards. Its ridiculous. Basically, if you buy almost anything snowboard, your supporting burton. and I think thats what their goal is, to be the main heart and soul of the sport

Quoting Mstchief from Aug 16 2008 4:50:13:
somebody should post this on the burton forums remember how pissed they got when the jiberish breck edit was put on their site, it was hilarious!!!

Quoting XtRemE11 from Aug 16 2008 4:01:51:
that was cool, he definatly destroyed burton. im all for snowboarders poaching these uptight ski resorts, i think its awesome, if you think about it, newschool skiing is much more similar to snowboarding than it is to the normal 50 year old groomer ripper's definition of skiing. so really we are more against these resorts banning snowboarding than with them.the thing that pisses me off about burton's little contest is exactly what this guy pointed out, burton could be the biggest company in snow sports, its probably run by a bunch of old men who hire 25 year old kids to tell them what's cool. they are the opposite of a core "fight the big corperations" company. and they are trying to be all cool by telling kids to rise up against the big corperations. so yeah this guy had a really good point, burton is the last company that should have a contest like this. but if it was some smaller core snowboard company i would be all for it and back the snowboarders 100%plus i bet the guy that wrote that was like 50 years old and has never touched a park, us park skier's and snowboarders are all for each other, not against each other. you will never see a skier or snowboarder telling the other sport to get out of the park or call them fags for not being on their favorite amount of boards. but you will see conflicts between these old gapers riding through the park doing sick slalom turns infront of jumps and us park skier's and snowboarders. and the people banning snowboarders from their mountain are just that type of people that you see in the park getting yelled at or yelling at all the kids.so all im saying is we are closer to snowboarding than we are to what these old men's definition of skiing is.

Quoting bob_dole$ from Aug 16 2008 10:49:36:
1. you probably have never ridden alta or brighton...

Quoting chipkalback$ from Aug 16 2008 10:22:03:
ha really? links?

Quoting bearapproved from Aug 17 2008 12:01:49:
http://community.burton.com/forums/thread/553602.aspx

Quoting tride from Aug 17 2008 12:00:59:
Oh here we go, another one of those people claiming that Alta "would be shitty on a snowboard anyway". Spare me. I've skied Alta, many times, and there is no substance to that claim whatsoever. Alta-holics claim like it's the only hill in the known universe that has these magical things known as "traverses", what a joke. Try hitting up Fernie sometime, boarders slay that place and they deal with the big traverses just fine, in many cases much better than the average skier tourist. Shit, if you can't get around someone slower than you on a traverse (whether they be a skier or a boarder), then it says something about your ability to get around the mountain. But back to the original point: Irrespective of Burton's business practices, or company, etc: his contest WAS a cool idea, people who feel the need to write articles and whine about it are just proving his point that skiing still has it's fair share of insecure lame-asses.

Quoting EClay46 from Aug 16 2008 5:01:05:


but on what i was saying about messengers post, all the original ski companies are already huge really and i dont think any other companies will be able to achieve anything past that, line was the biggest of the underground companies and thats as big as an upstart company got and they pioneered the twintip movement

Quoting pretzels from Aug 17 2008 12:25:12:
okay so line or whatever  built the twintip ski -  just like burton invented the snowboard. then after like 10 years or something that burton has been around snowboaders don't want to buy it cuz it's everyone, everyone has it, and it's to big of a company. SO what if one day we decide that line is too big of a company and we want to give our money to independent companies making skis out of garages and stuff. then line, that started out as a independent company, is now the big corporate that it once overtook. then more independent companies start up right.

Quoting bikerocker from Aug 16 2008 7:36:57:
hey i just posted this on the burton forum, and it goes for other people here too.

"I think you cats are missing the point.  The article doesn't rip on
snowbaording in the slightest.  It rips on the image burton is
promoting itself with.  Burton being "non-conformist" is the same as
walmart promoting itself as a green company out there for our
beneifit.  It's saying burton should change it's name to CONGLOMO and
change it's motto to "we own you and your dog."
I think this letter respects snowboarding in a big way.  It just knocks on the bullshit burtons spitting."

Quoting 860 from Aug 17 2008 12:21:52:
As much as I don't like burtons gear and things like that. They do soooo much for snowboarding its rediculous. They paved the way for snowboarding and I thought the contest was pretty funny. This is just everyone being mad at the huge company, but the different thing is burton was the company that started it all. They've had a huge influence on snowboarding AND skiing and was the perfect company to do this, they were the originals. They were the ones with pointed tips and split tails. Burton can do whatever it wants and turn it into gold and deserves every penny it gets. They make so much money its out of this world. They have had by the far the most influence on snowboarding over any other company. They put together so much cool stuff and everyone has there gear at some point. Just for the record I dont like burtons over pricing at all, but that doesn't make the contest any less funny, and it was in good spirits to top it all off. There the ones pushing peoples names into houses, how far do you think either sport would be without burton right now? Hell, whoever wrote that article probably wouldn't have a job. They may be worn by some jock now, and many gapers wear it too. But no one can hate on what Jake has made. He got hewlett packard to ask him if he would do a commercial for them. Can any other company come close to doing that? I seriously doubt it. Stop hating on a company that started snowboarding

Quoting pretzels from Aug 16 2008 3:55:06:
burton is a big coreperate company and i bet they take over some of the small companies to. but what i wanna know is if a ski company does this??? like now with snowboarding a lot of my friends boycott burton cuz its to big of a coreperate and buy snowboards from small companies. do you think this can hapen in skiing? will a company like 4front get so big that they arnt cool any more and people will buy other stuff? strange to think about to cuz like, burton kinda invented snowboarding (i think) and probalby started off as a small "cool" thing. now they make to much money so their not cool? so does that mean that small ski companies like moment won't be cool anymore if they make a lot of money form skiing?

Quoting chipkalback$ from Aug 16 2008 10:22:03:
ha really? links?

Quoting bearapproved from Aug 17 2008 12:01:49:
http://community.burton.com/forums/thread/553602.aspx

Quoting negativenelly from Aug 16 2008 4:01:25:
4front

Quoting tride from Aug 17 2008 1:07:26:
???????? You trippin'? Smokin' the crack maybe? Spending a little too much time with that Leprechaun in the tree?I don't know what you read, but I wasn't hating on Burton or making any opinion on Burton as a company, in fact I made a point of saying that I was not giving any opinion on the company, because I don't think that really has anything to do with it. If anything I was hating (oh my, such a strong word) on the article and the lameness in the ski community that it showcases. I was supporting the idea of the contest...Methinks you should re-read the post

Quoting tride from Aug 16 2008 9:56:02:
I thought the contest was a great idea. Those discriminatory (yep I said it) resorts are perfect examples of all that is still wrong with the ski industry.

Quoting SkierX$ from Aug 17 2008 2:13:31:
How do you honestly figure? How can you honestly sit there and say a company is being discriminatory over something that the potential customers have complete control of?

The company is providing a product. The product they happen to be providing is skiing. Not snowboarding, not snowsports, not snowsliding. Just skiing. That is what they are open to provide. If someone wants to use their facilities, they grab two skis instead of one board. It's not as if that person has absolutely no option and no feasible way to ever be able to utilize the facility.

There is nothing wrong with the ski industry and there certainly isn't anything wrong with those resorts. There is obviously a market for those areas, or else they would not exist, and if boarders want to create a boarder only mountain, go right ahead.

That's the beauty of capitalism.

Quoting faux_real from Aug 17 2008 3:01:00:
you call that owned???????
That dude owned himself. Does anyone here actually buy the frisbee-golf analogy? There are good reasons you can't play frisbee golf on a golf course. Banning snowboarding is more like banning 3 irons on a golf cours; it's arbitrary. Of course it doesn't amount to racism, but it's wrong for one of the reasons racism is wrong. You shouldn't deny a specific group of people a privilege because of something arbitrary about them. When you don't have a good reason for something like discrimination, it usually means that something besides reason is driving the policy, e.g. fear or dislike of out-groups. If there were good reasons for discriminating against snowboarding, then the author would have placed them front and center. He wouldn't have relied on sentimental trash about the spirit of skiing and our indebtedness to  avalanche scientists. And think about the form of the argument about the avalanche scientists and ski patrollers: Why should that make Alta for skiers only??? Just because a certain group of people have deeper history and roots to a certain place, it doesn't mean they can ban anyone who looks different. The great irony is how fascist these arguments sound.
Sure there is also some irony in white, upper-class snowboarders talking about oppression. But why should white, aflluent people care less about fascism? Sure, they don't resemble your typical oppressed group; there is definitely some irony in there. But it's a distraction to go after someone's cultutral background instead of their argument; it's ad hominem.
If you were fooled by that little screed, I hope you aren't old enough to vote.

Quoting faux_real from Aug 17 2008 3:01:00:
you call that owned???????
That dude owned himself. Does anyone here actually buy the frisbee-golf analogy? There are good reasons you can't play frisbee golf on a golf course. Banning snowboarding is more like banning 3 irons on a golf cours; it's arbitrary. Of course it doesn't amount to racism, but it's wrong for one of the reasons racism is wrong. You shouldn't deny a specific group of people a privilege because of something arbitrary about them. When you don't have a good reason for something like discrimination, it usually means that something besides reason is driving the policy, e.g. fear or dislike of out-groups. If there were good reasons for discriminating against snowboarding, then the author would have placed them front and center. He wouldn't have relied on sentimental trash about the spirit of skiing and our indebtedness to  avalanche scientists. And think about the form of the argument about the avalanche scientists and ski patrollers: Why should that make Alta for skiers only??? Just because a certain group of people have deeper history and roots to a certain place, it doesn't mean they can ban anyone who looks different. The great irony is how fascist these arguments sound.
Sure there is also some irony in white, upper-class snowboarders talking about oppression. But why should white, aflluent people care less about fascism? Sure, they don't resemble your typical oppressed group; there is definitely some irony in there. But it's a distraction to go after someone's cultutral background instead of their argument; it's ad hominem.
If you were fooled by that little screed, I hope you aren't old enough to vote.

Quoting tride from Aug 17 2008 2:45:00:
Hmmmmm, well, if you put it that way, then I guess I just got........ owned. I really have to agree that you are corrrect in that capitalism allows for anyone to set whatever rules they want for who to sell to. I guess in a sense it's no different than starting a restaurant and saying that you will only serve people who wear green shirts. It might be kind of dumb and make no sense, but it is the option of the restaurant to do so if they choose.I'm going to have to concede that "discriminatory" was a bad word choice.I think what really bothers me is the excuses that people come up with for the no-snowboard policy. Eg "snowboards don't work well on our lift/in our terrain/they are all thugs, etc." The stereotyping that goes on there really.... grinds my gears.However if they were to just put it the way that you do, then I guess it is an acceptable (albeit still unreasonable, stupid and unnecessary, in my opinion) policy. Good post, definitely made me think. You must have a massive brain :) Peace

Quoting tride from Aug 17 2008 12:00:59:
Oh here we go, another one of those people claiming that Alta "would be shitty on a snowboard anyway". Spare me. I've skied Alta, many times, and there is no substance to that claim whatsoever. Alta-holics claim like it's the only hill in the known universe that has these magical things known as "traverses", what a joke. Try hitting up Fernie sometime, boarders slay that place and they deal with the big traverses just fine, in many cases much better than the average skier tourist. Shit, if you can't get around someone slower than you on a traverse (whether they be a skier or a boarder), then it says something about your ability to get around the mountain. But back to the original point: Irrespective of Burton's business practices, or company, etc: his contest WAS a cool idea, people who feel the need to write articles and whine about it are just proving his point that skiing still has it's fair share of insecure lame-asses.

Quoting faux_real from Aug 17 2008 3:32:06:
The guy you quoted made a good point.

Quoting bob_dole$ from Aug 17 2008 3:36:58:
chief, did i claim that argument? no. try to call me out on shit i actually say.

Quoting tride from Aug 17 2008 2:45:00:
Hmmmmm, well, if you put it that way, then I guess I just got........ owned. I really have to agree that you are corrrect in that capitalism allows for anyone to set whatever rules they want for who to sell to. I guess in a sense it's no different than starting a restaurant and saying that you will only serve people who wear green shirts. It might be kind of dumb and make no sense, but it is the option of the restaurant to do so if they choose.I'm going to have to concede that "discriminatory" was a bad word choice.I think what really bothers me is the excuses that people come up with for the no-snowboard policy. Eg "snowboards don't work well on our lift/in our terrain/they are all thugs, etc." The stereotyping that goes on there really.... grinds my gears.However if they were to just put it the way that you do, then I guess it is an acceptable (albeit still unreasonable, stupid and unnecessary, in my opinion) policy. Good post, definitely made me think. You must have a massive brain :) Peace

Quoting Mezmerize19$ from Aug 16 2008 4:25:23:
eTo those  who said about ski companies swallowing each other, as far as I know The biggest company in skiing is  quicksilver  which has rossignol, dynastar,  lange, and look. Roxy too if you want to count it but I put that in with dynastar. Besides that the next biggest I know is K2 which has Line. I dont think ski companies care so much about a huge monopoly but rather just making a good product.