A quick word on blocking ads
It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
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!
loganimlachAs shitty as it sounds, the suits at Newell are going to look at this from a completely monetary standpoint.
Guy 1: "Why do we have brands under the same parent company that compete with each other for market share?"
Guy 2: "I'm not sure, I don't know anything about skiing but that doesn't make sense."
Guy 1: "Alright, see you later Line and Full Tilt (and K2 OR Volkl). Okay, now that we've consolidated down to one ski brand, one boot brand, and one binding brand, simplified the structure and gotten rid of this fat, lets sell this bitch. I've got a tee time in an hour."
Guy 2: "Sick, I'm going to go home and count my money."
The same thing will happen with 5150, Morrow and Ride; two will get chopped and one will remain.
Marker is not going anywhere, I've heard numbers as high as them owning 40% of the binding market. Some German car company will probably buy them. As much as it absolutely breaks my heart, I don't see Line or Full Tilt making it out of this unless somebody who knows what's going on and what they mean to freeskiing swoops in and saves them, and I hope with all of my heart that happens. Which would be so fucking incredible because they own like 25% of the market of freestyle skis, someone could make great money off of them.
Our whole little corner of the ski industry is fucking crazy right now.
TWoodsJust a little perspective here Logan - I don't work nearly as much in the ski industry as I used to. I work with several brands and companies that have multiple sub-brands, some that *seemingly* compete with each other. I'm almost certain that there's a LOT of extra jobs that exist in each of those companies that could be consolidated and streamlined from a business standpoint, which from a ski industry standpoint might seem crazy or unnecessary, I doubt that they will try to totally axe these programs. (I'm not endorsing this, a lot of good jobs would be lost which would suck, and it'd probably be somewhat shortsighted) Any buyer with half a mind would meet with the heads of each brand and try to determine strategy, and I believe they would quickly see the value of each of them and how the complement each other, even in their competition (much like other huge companies, good examples are the fashion industry - Kering, LVMH, luxotica, etc.)
Although, if they did decide to get rid of any of them, it would make sense for them to just axe the brand rather than selling... so IDK what would actually happen.
loganimlachyeah, i totally understand and agree that lots of companies operate with seemingly competing brands, I said that a couple of posts after. and i also agree with you that it would completely fucking suck. but who knows what they do when it's on the selling block. malczyk is right, they have been bought and sold as k2 sports many times, they'll prolly be fine.
DirtyDruidWhats up with the warranty on new K2 skis?
GORILLAWALLACEhaha andy made a regretful post
SessionRoll of the dice at this point.
DirtyDruidWhats up with the warranty on new K2 skis?
BagelsSpotted David Lesh's helicopter on the rooftop of K2 today.. As lucrative as Virtika is he's probably gonna buy it cash.
freeballerLesh is a baller for sure, but don't think he has the $60,000,000 to $100,000,000 it will take to purchase K2.
FKS_HEEL_PIECEThe most fucked thing about this shitshow is that dalbello was like JUST absorbed by k2, and is already going under. That's so fucked.
.lenconVail will buy them.
brotoplease have your vail approved skis ready to scan before boarding this chairlift. only $500 until november 1st. but after that, it's $150 a day to rent.
brotoplease have your vail approved skis ready to scan before boarding this chairlift. only $500 until november 1st. but after that, it's $150 a day to rent.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
traviasPreach! Do I smell a kickstarter campaign coming on? Donate $5000, get .005% of the company and free skis for life! Only have to actually pay it out we reach the goal of $100,000,000
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevI worked for 7 years at K2 Sports. I've done everything from building skis in my garage, to operating a small and medium size private ski company, sold it twice to keep it afloat and now have gone back to a startup boutique ski company selling exclusively direct at Jskis.com. So over the past 20 years I've worked on every side and for every size ski business. My biggest take away from all of it is that winter sports brands never have, and never will match a public company's financial goals due to their seasonality and limited market size. This is a fact!
Public companies exist for one simple reason... to make more money every year. As an investor or shareholder you can't disagree with this. Reality is the ski industry is not growing, it's shrinking so the only way to accomplish annual growth is by spending less while selling the same. In a flat business this can only be accomplished by making cheaper product, reducing the number of employees, reducing athlete and media support, less marketing, ultimately investing less and less of the money made back into the brand and the sport. This leads to an automatic death spiral driving sales down, thus requiring more cutting and so on. Eventually the public company comes to the conclusion that they are done squeezing blood from a rock and it's time to sell it and look for the the next brand to purchase to do the same. Successful public companies know that the best brands sell the same product year round for decades to 100% of the population, everywhere on earth (paper towels, shoes, toothpics, etc.). The ski industry sells to a tiny nitche of consumers, for only 5 months a year... and only if it snows!
That said as you all know, the passion of winter sports consumers is second to none and is the reason that these brands do have a strong future and can be very profitable IF managed correctly which requires being privately owned. For this reason selling these brands is inevitable and can be an amazing opportunity and long term best for the brands and the ski industry.
The problem however is that Newel's goals are not driven by what's best for the brands, they want to sell it as as one giant conglomerate for efficiency and cost savings of doing one deal. I've talked to Newel directly this past week inquiring about the potential to buy Line and FT and they confirmed it will only be sold all as a whole, no option for someone to buy a single brand/brands, this includes the Euro division as well.
Thus it's unlikely the brands will be in any better hands than now and likely worse similar to when Quicksilver bought Rossignol and ran them into the ground before a private equity firm bought them back and got them back on track to where they are today. My guess is whoever buys it will either immediately break them up and sell individually to make profit or try to live the ski industry dream for a couple of years before bleed to death and eventually give in to re-sell separately or as a whole again down the road for even less.
I truly believe each and every brand has amazing potential to be sustainable stand alone or part of the right group if owned & operated by the right people. The industry can be rejuvenated with the profit made, being reinvested back into the sport (instead of wallstreet) so we actually have a chance of our sport not only surviving but growing (climate change aside). So if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
JLevSo if anyone has access to a couple hundred million dollars, hit me up and we can take a crack at saving 30% of the ski industries brands with the power to fix a lot of what's broken in skiing and snowboarding.
Carved+DangerousI think you just want a cushy corporate job
Carved+DangerousHow are you going to fix the weather and make people more resilient to being injured? I think you just want a cushy corporate job, but I might be wrong.. care to lay out your ideas and reasoning on what you know that other people don't?
JLevHaha I wouldn't have spent past 20 years working in ski industry if I wanted a cushy corporate job. Learn your history and you'll understand yo future!
JLevHaha I wouldn't have spent past 20 years working in ski industry if I wanted a cushy corporate job. Learn your history and you'll understand yo future!
Carved+DangerousYou wanna be a rockstar? Grow JSkis to something enormous. Now is your chance with the hole in the market. You sold out of Line and FT years ago, now you want them back?
brotoYou're a kook dude
Carved+DangerousI had a reply all lined up but f*** it.
C_dubYou should start mass producing your skis to fill the coming gap in the industry. Oh wait, no one wants them
Carved+DangerousYou wanna be a rockstar? Grow JSkis to something enormous. Now is your chance with the hole in the market. You sold out of Line and FT years ago, now you want them back?
saskskierAre you saying that already building one of the first and most influential freestyle from the ground up hasn't been enough?
Carved+DangerousFreestyle what?
Twintips? Wasn't that Armada, oh wait, wasn't that idea taken from Salomon?
Full Tilt? Wasn't that from Raichle moulds?
Carved+DangerousFreestyle what?
Twintips? Wasn't that Armada, oh wait, wasn't that idea taken from Salomon?
Full Tilt? Wasn't that from Raichle moulds?
RparrOh my god, is this really how the shartcarve guy is trying to stay relevant?
