Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Who has more influence: Level 1 or Tom Wallisch?

profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
I believe Level 1
longevity
things like superunknown jump started tom
would you hit anything but park if it weren't for crews like Level 1 or PBP.
this thread is not a diss. i just want to know the amount of influence.
Jun 19 2011 12:21PM
0 0
profile picture
joshua
Posts: 5046 - Karma: 1,280
Obviously Level 1, they have popularized many more skiers too not just Wallisch.
Jun 19 2011 12:23PM
0 0
profile picture
belden...
Posts: 2914 - Karma: 1,274
I dont really get the thread but im gonna say Level 1 just because of your last point. I'd much rather shred the whole mountain (or at least try to) then just park.
Jun 19 2011 12:23PM
0 0
profile picture
-GL-
Posts: 1696 - Karma: 37
no offense i dont really understand the point of this thread , but id deffinitly say level 1
Jun 19 2011 12:33PM
0 0
profile picture
I.B
Posts: 8137 - Karma: 24,351
Level 1.

Have you seen some of the kids they brought up? IAN COSCO?!
Jun 19 2011 12:38PM
0 0
profile picture
T.R.
Posts: 147 - Karma: 10
haha
Jun 19 2011 12:43PM
0 0
profile picture
A.Eberhard
Posts: 4426 - Karma: 415
Tom Wallisch probably had more influence on the style of skiing. Level 1 though jump started Wallisch's career. I'm really sure what the question is though. Influence on skiers overall, goes to level 1 because the movies they make just showcase all the different aspects of skiing.
Jun 19 2011 12:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Will.T
Posts: 3453 - Karma: 1,281
Personally, neither..

I chose you HENRIK HARLAUT.


[IMG]mypokecard.com/en/Gallery/my/galery/SjfDcWSHNQx.jpg[/IMG]



Jun 19 2011 12:48PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
I think honestly now, its like Inspired Media with the most influence, or you could argue Level 1. As great a skier Tom Wallisch is, he never really did the tail taps, nosetaps, shifty taps out, that Mike Hornbeck, Henrik Harlaut, and B-Dog are famous for. You see those tricks in more and more edits, which is incredible. B-Dog and Edollo are doing new shit erday and keeping it hyphy
Jun 19 2011 1:00PM
0 0
profile picture
AWALLRUS.
Posts: 5762 - Karma: 223
i dont understand.
tom wallisch is part of level1

so level 1 cancels out tom wallish.

right?
Jun 19 2011 1:23PM
0 0
profile picture
dbchili
Posts: 2555 - Karma: 1,657
it's like the chicken and the egg, what came first, the level 1 or wallisch?
Jun 19 2011 1:32PM
0 0
profile picture
timmypearsonEC
Posts: 440 - Karma: 13
nope.
Jun 19 2011 1:42PM
0 0
profile picture
danderson.
Posts: 6560 - Karma: 5,252
Paul Bergeron, John Ware, Jeff Kiesel, Clayton Vila, etc.
Jun 19 2011 1:43PM
0 0
profile picture
have.faith
Posts: 338 - Karma: 97
bit of a rigged question bc wallisch works with level 1 so.... both? tag-team?
Jun 19 2011 1:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Z-Juice
Posts: 3151 - Karma: 1,504
Level 1

Jun 19 2011 1:48PM
0 0
profile picture
fratskier69
Posts: 1868 - Karma: 1,272
i only hit park?
Jun 19 2011 2:00PM
0 0
profile picture
TheWakes.
Posts: 685 - Karma: 235
lol
Jun 19 2011 2:07PM
0 0
profile picture
CKpolicy
Posts: 2587 - Karma: 2,463
if there were no superunknown, do you think tom would be where he is today?
Jun 19 2011 2:10PM
0 0
profile picture
snowbombz
Posts: 2456 - Karma: 96
Click for larger image
Jun 19 2011 2:11PM
0 0
profile picture
egg.
Posts: 3231 - Karma: 3,477
level 1
Jun 19 2011 2:11PM
0 0
profile picture
faux_real
Posts: 984 - Karma: 250
Jon looks funny with a mohawk
Jun 19 2011 2:13PM
0 0
profile picture
snowbombz
Posts: 2456 - Karma: 96
imagine if jon olsen and glen plake had a child!
Jun 19 2011 2:14PM
0 0
profile picture
DirtyDan
Posts: 1576 - Karma: 158
He would probably wear outerwear that I would expect a homosexual person to wear.
Jun 19 2011 2:23PM
0 0
profile picture
SNOWPARKCHlLE
Posts: 2047 - Karma: 6,727
BOTH.....the park segments are the bests !!
Jun 19 2011 2:24PM
0 0
profile picture
lukewalnuts
Posts: 2730 - Karma: 152
Click for larger image
Jun 19 2011 2:25PM
0 0
profile picture
Inline.
Posts: 4424 - Karma: 432
hhaaaaaaaa
Jun 19 2011 2:36PM
0 0
profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
well a landslide for level 1, exactly what i was thinking....
so if this is the case how come tom wallisch makes more money?
Jun 19 2011 3:33PM
0 0
profile picture
GayWolf420
Posts: 37386 - Karma: 120,063
I was going to take you serious until you said "keeping it hyphy."
Jun 19 2011 3:35PM
0 0
profile picture
LittleFoot
Posts: 1667 - Karma: 57
because he has sponsors other than level 1? i didnt know they gave orange names to 10 year olds
Jun 19 2011 3:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
Shouldn't you be posting some more snowboard edits in Ski Gabber that no one cares about?
Jun 19 2011 3:36PM
0 0
profile picture
Jahrassicpark
Posts: 2075 - Karma: 38
such a good question, i wonder that too
Jun 19 2011 3:41PM
0 0
profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
oh i give up.
i was just wondering how the athletes make hundreds of thousands, into the millions, and the film companies dont.
10 year old. cmon man, seriously? its a legit question. if level 1 has more influence (marketing), then tom wallisch, how come tom makes more money? and as far as sponsors, level 1 has a ton of great sponsors, not just one.

and mike-0, no one cares about the edits for snowboarding? really, the seb toots one seemed to be pretty well liked. im trying to use ski gabber to stoke you guys and get knowledge from people who enjoy watching skiing and snowboarding.

guess haters gonna hate. sweet mike.
Jun 19 2011 4:11PM
0 0
profile picture
Scott0_robot0
Posts: 3291 - Karma: 212
although that was a really good edit, and people did care so try not to make your opinions into facts.
Jun 19 2011 4:12PM
0 0
profile picture
Shenanigans
Posts: 868 - Karma: 455
Thats actually a really interesting point. I would guess tom wallisch makes more money because its easier to market one person than an entire ski film company. Like you wouldn't see level 1 promodel fulltilts but there are t-wall promodels.
Jun 19 2011 4:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Mike-O
Posts: 14593 - Karma: 1,089
'That'? He's been posting stuff on here for years.

I've got nothing against boarding, just not my thing, hence this being Ski Gabber, you know.
Jun 19 2011 4:18PM
0 0
profile picture
McLeod
Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582
A huge percentage of the funds level 1 receives from sponsors goes directly to their budget which im sure is slim and spread thin already. I would argue a much higher percentage of the funds tom receives from sponsors goes to his bank account (ie. profit) than to his budget to cover his personal expenses.

but then again, you already know all this alport, so im guess your posing a more philosophical question rather than looking for a basic answer.
Jun 19 2011 4:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Static
Posts: 8553 - Karma: 4,089
I think it's the exposure, Athletes are all over major media outlets like ABC and ESPN, newspapers, in contests throughout the year; But for a lot of the film companies it's a trailer that comes out 6 months too late, and a single release movie.
Jun 19 2011 4:28PM
0 0
profile picture
reBlocke
Posts: 762 - Karma: 1,502
Having a "Sponsored by The North Face" logo at the beginning of a ski movie does not cause kids to think TNF is cool. However, seeing Tom Wallisch wear TNF at the XGames does. So, TNF is willing to pay Tom Wallisch a lot more money.
Jun 19 2011 4:29PM
0 0
profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
i def. get the spending vs. savings aspect.
but lets say, Billabong Clothing gives athlete A $150,000 a year and pays for much of their travel, not o mention endless clothes, website push, ads, etc....so the total sponsorship goes into the hundreds of thousands vs. film company B which receives $50,000 from Billabong Clothing, no ad support, no clothing, no travel, and is supposed to represent multiple athletes, crew, and ads with this budget, why does this happen? why dont sponsors see the film companies as just as big of an asset as the athletes? minus comps, many of the athletes wouldn't have a platform to push the product.

again, this isn't a hate thread, this is looking for answers to real a question.
:)
Jun 19 2011 4:33PM
0 0
profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
And, I get the importance of Comps exposure, but man, I sure see the longevity of a movie over the longevity of x games gold. i.e. 1242, TBC, shanhai 6, thats it thats all, etc.
Jun 19 2011 4:36PM
0 0
profile picture
jamesnunya
Posts: 84 - Karma: -90
well i would say tom is the one doing the work, he should benifit the most no tom (or skiers) no level one,pbp, ect, i understand media influence and marketing does alot but u cant market what you dont have. Also in the begining the skiers are not getting any money and being marketed (used) by the film compainies, level one invested in tom by giving him a chance in their network and he took advantage and stepped up
Jun 19 2011 4:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Static
Posts: 8553 - Karma: 4,089
there are magazines and websites, which generate far more traffic than movies, why arn't companies giving NS millions of dollars? without the internet, film companies wouldn't have many other platforms to push their product.
Jun 19 2011 4:40PM
0 0
profile picture
pikupfulofsnow
Posts: 2077 - Karma: 9,696
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY:
i dont think the athletes should get paid any less, thats for sure.
i think the film companies should be compensated more.

Jun 19 2011 4:42PM
0 0
profile picture
casual
Posts: 6712 - Karma: 6,748
I think it boils down to the fact that a face and a personality are more relatable, marketable, and effective at pushing a product than an entity. Ski flicks, outside of wme, are really only watched by the core gear and style savvy skiers. Comps, athletes, and people reach a lot more wallets than a once yearly released flick. I see your point though, and its unfortunate that such a crucially integral aspect of our sport that we all cherish is so under valued. I wish Berman and crew were millionaires.
Jun 19 2011 4:44PM
0 0
profile picture
t_rob
Posts: 6433 - Karma: 11,458
wasn't that rage?
Jun 19 2011 4:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Alex_G
Posts: 11902 - Karma: 1,019
why do you give a shit? go get a life
Jun 19 2011 4:47PM
0 0
profile picture
reBlocke
Posts: 762 - Karma: 1,502
I think the difference is that I can still picture the yellow and pink Oakley pants that Tanner wore while hitting Chads Gap in TBC, but I have no clue what companies sponsored the movie.
Jun 19 2011 4:50PM
0 0
profile picture
hawaiiansteeze
Posts: 3255 - Karma: 3,226
The North Face isnt going to put Level 1 on ads, TV commercials or anything else. so realistically to the average consumer Wallisch has wayyyyy more marketing influence, hes the one they see in the X-Games and on the Dew Tour. Hes the one they see and want to buy gear to look like him.

So im my opinion even though the movies level 1 puts out for us to see have a big impact on us, they dont have a big impact on the people that ski 5-10 days a year. which is where a shitload of the money in skiing comes from.

wallisch is set himself up to make alot of money over his career, not only from his skiing but from his marketability.
Jun 19 2011 4:51PM
0 0
profile picture
Rosbif
Posts: 2543 - Karma: 930
You'd have to really ask the companies that, but the way I see it, the athletes earn more because are physical marketable identities, a film company is not. Obviously some people do know who Freedle, Decker etc are but only those very involved in skiing. You are never going to see those guys winning the X-games/Olympics, or doing those backflips gapers love so much, so they just are not as marketable as TWall.

I guess to earn more money, the ski movie companies will have to sell more movies, which is a hard thing to do in an age where piracy is rife.
Jun 19 2011 5:22PM
0 0
profile picture
WikiWiki
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 426
this- sounds like someone who is pissed that no one will sponsor his films


tom does the skiing- which is the whole point of everything- without tom or the other skiers what would the filmers record?-

also the film companies make their own money thru sales- its not like tom can run around and say that 450 I just did will cost you 20 dollars since you watched it


and finally I say tom wallisch- think of how many east coast newschool skiers there are now because of his superunknown- now you cant have a good edit without some banging rail shots
Jun 19 2011 5:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Broseph_Stalin
Posts: 3745 - Karma: 178
people watch more tom wallisch than level 1. simple as that
Jun 19 2011 6:03PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)