Replying to Industry Gimmicks

It's no secret that the skis industry is full of gimmicks. These are additions that go beyond the normal build up of a ski, that supposedly enhance the performance of said skis. Most companies have some form of "technology" that they boast about and claim it as the most advanced system in the world. Obviously these technologies move units for the individual company, which is why it's done, but when considering what advantages are given it's tough to find viability in many of these additions. Some examples are:

Head with KERS

Volkl with the UVO 3D

Lib Tech's magne-traction

among others.

Is there any concrete proof to say a ski with KERS will outperform a ski without? If these technologies are so advanced and futuristic why have they not been applied to other skis within the same manufacturer (not a whole lot of this "high tech" stuff makes it to the park/pipe side of the industry)? You would think if it was so revolutionary that other manufacturers would try to take the idea and create their own variant of it.

I'm sure hours upon hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent researching and developing these attributes, but when it comes down to it, it's tough to see how much of a benefit they actually are. I'm all for furthering ski technology, but a lot of the time these things stick out.

What do you guys think?