J Skis ripping off other brands... again

SendyMcSendyfaceeverybody needs to boycott jskis until they replace the “ski fast loose pass” base with one that says “ski fast eat ass”

zero*I'm not saying there are any 'secrets' about 4Frnt. Your business strategy is pretty out in the open with both brands: Don't pay many (/any?) riders, don't support the industry, keep prices down and keep all the profits.

It's a fine strategy if you're into profit maximization. But people should know, rather than treating a $600 dollar J-Ski like a $600 ski from another brand in terms of what that ski does for all the skiers who work in the industry (other than J who I'm sure is doing great, and his very few staff). By the industry I mean, professional skiers, production companies, ski shops etc etc. Obviously, 4Frnt is the strongest (most profitable) it has ever been. But if you fancy it, how about publishing some numbers on how much money goes to riders salaries/travel budgets, producing ski content generally, heck probably even R&D at 4Frnt now vs pre-takeover (let's say early-mid 2010s), I'm sure everyone would love to see those.

J_skisI'm on board. Who's getting the "change.org" campaign up and running?

Pit Viper has also been begging us to change the "Allplay" to "Assplay" for years... might as well get two birds stoned at once and petition for both of them.

hubbardsjskis are still good skis

J_skisJason is overly transparent with his business strategies because a) he's tried everything over the years and this is what works and b) they're the only way for a small brand to survive in skiing. The way we see it the more small, indie brands doing rogue shit the more opportunity we have as a group to gain market share (ex. craft beer vs. AB InBev). You have super strong opinions on this which is awesome but unfortunately you're missing a lot of realities about the ski industry and business in general that are leading to tons of misinformation in your arguments.

As an example for a brand running via traditional methods (paying sales reps, distributors and shops) to break even they need to sell 25,000 pairs of skis per year. For a brand running direct to consumer they need to sell about 3,500 pairs of skis per year. It's foolish to conduct business like we're the size of Line or Armada, so you have to do things differently in order to get by and continue contributing to skiing as a whole. If we were interested in maximizing profits we wouldn't be a ski company, straight up, and if anyone outside of skiing actually saw our numbers at the end of the year they'd question our sanity.

Jason founded this company on the idea of continuing the revolution he started with Line but by utilizing modern tools and techniques (i.e. e-commerce). As far as athletes/production companies, we do what we can. We run things lean & mean because you need to be scrappy in this industry. We're not going out and signing the next Tom Wallisch because we can't afford him, and we know that. We're working with underground (and yes, sometimes more high-profile people) who fit our vibe and support them well for what they're expected to provide for us.

Truth is even if you are "turning a profit" in the ski industry you're never getting ahead. Whether there's some money in the bank at the end of the year doesn't change the fact that we then have to shell out $1m+ in production costs, money that we don't have and that Jason needs to convince banks to lend us. Sure, we could raise the price of our skis a hundred bucks a piece but we're not going to do that. We want to help the sport of skiing but giving skiers a better performing, longer lasting product at the same or less cost to them than buying from a major brand.

We're also constantly working to test new processes, materials, shapes and innovative features (give it a few months there's something pretty cool in the works), so rest assured the "R&D" budget is maxed out every season.

Basically dude, you need to have the facts before going on a rant about something you actually don't know all that much about. Hopefully this arms you with some more information for the future and that while yeah, we're not Volkl shelling out tens of thousands of dollars towards SLVSH Cup (which is fucking bad ass, props to them for doing it), we're all here because we love skiing and want to make the sport better for the future, even if that's not in the ways you recognize.

Taylor

**This post was edited on Aug 22nd 2019 at 1:18:13pm

zero*Oh, it's the old 'in the know' argument when this is a question of business choices, not facts. To state that Jason knows best is doing things the only way possible is more misinformative than anything I could possibly say (and crazy egoistical). He's a pioneer, but that doesn't make him some kind of oracle. It could potentially be that the J Skis/4Frnt model is the only way for a small brand to make what he/you consider an acceptable amount of money (for him to cash in on his success perhaps?). Obviously, nobody is really making the big bucks on ski production but hey, he's doing pretty nicely right? And then if you wanted to cash in, you'd put some already successful slogans on cheap clothing and... oh wait that's where we started.

The inconvenient fact in all this, and this is a fact, is that other small brands exist using very different strategies to J Skis. Brands that have grown, supporting the ski industry more meaningfully, having initially sold fewer skis. At least a couple I can think of sell far fewer to this day. Yet, they've put their skis in shops, grown factories, supported more significant teams, produced ski content etc. I'm not going to mention names, because they can join the debate if they wish, but I can think of at least 5 examples with different financial models that have existed significantly longer than J.

So yes, to his credit, J is pretty transparent with some of his strategy and, to be fair, you have some unbelievable marketing skills. But the reality is that the strategy amounts to cost-cutting, even when those costs are the things that keep much of the ski industry afloat albeit struggling. You've said it here, with some sugar-coating. He's said it in interviews. People can support that or not as they choose.

zero*Oh, it's the old 'in the know' argument when this is a question of business choices, not facts. To state that Jason knows best is doing things the only way possible is more misinformative than anything I could possibly say (and crazy egoistical). He's a pioneer, but that doesn't make him some kind of oracle. It could potentially be that the J Skis/4Frnt model is the only way for a small brand to make what he/you consider an acceptable amount of money (for him to cash in on his success perhaps?). Obviously, nobody is really making the big bucks on ski production but hey, he's doing pretty nicely right? And then if you wanted to cash in, you'd put some already successful slogans on cheap clothing and... oh wait that's where we started.

The inconvenient fact in all this, and this is a fact, is that other small brands exist using very different strategies to J Skis. Brands that have grown, supporting the ski industry more meaningfully, having initially sold fewer skis. At least a couple I can think of sell far fewer to this day. Yet, they've put their skis in shops, grown factories, supported more significant teams, produced ski content etc. I'm not going to mention names, because they can join the debate if they wish, but I can think of at least 5 examples with different financial models that have existed significantly longer than J.

So yes, to his credit, J is pretty transparent with some of his strategy and, to be fair, you have some unbelievable marketing skills. But the reality is that the strategy amounts to cost-cutting, even when those costs are the things that keep much of the ski industry afloat albeit struggling. You've said it here, with some sugar-coating. He's said it in interviews. People can support that or not as they choose.

freeskibum82jay sold his stake in Line to K2. im sure he's doing juuuuuust fine. and Jskis is his way of returning back to when line was smaller and he had more creative freedom.

J_skisJason is overly transparent with his business strategies because a) he's tried everything over the years and this is what works and b) they're the only way for a small brand to survive in skiing, so he wants his thoughts and philosophies out there for other brands to understand, utilize and thrive. The way we see it the more small, indie brands doing rogue shit the more opportunity we have as a group to gain market share (ex. craft beer vs. AB InBev). You have super strong opinions on this which is awesome but unfortunately you're missing a lot of realities about the ski industry and business in general that are leading to tons of misinformation in your arguments.

As an example for a brand running via traditional methods (paying sales reps, distributors and shops) to break even they need to sell 25,000 pairs of skis per year. For a brand running direct to consumer they need to sell about 3,500 pairs of skis per year. It's foolish to conduct business like we're the size of Line or Armada, so you have to do things differently in order to get by and continue contributing to skiing as a whole.

If we were interested in maximizing profits we wouldn't be a ski company, straight up, and if anyone outside of skiing actually saw our numbers at the end of the year they'd question our sanity. Jason founded this company on the idea of continuing the revolution he started with Line but by utilizing modern tools and techniques (i.e. e-commerce). As far as athletes/production companies, we do what we can. We run things lean & mean because you need to be scrappy in this industry. We're not going out and signing the next Tom Wallisch because we can't afford him, and we know that. We're working with underground (and yes, sometimes more high-profile people) who fit our vibe and support them well for what they're expected to provide for us.

Truth is even if you are "turning a profit" in the ski industry you're never getting ahead. Whether there's some money in the bank at the end of the year doesn't change the fact that we then have to shell out $1m+ in production costs, money that we don't have and that Jason needs to convince banks to lend us. Sure, we could raise the price of our skis a hundred bucks a piece but we're not going to do that. We want to help the sport of skiing but giving skiers a better performing, longer lasting product at the same or less cost to them than buying from a major brand.

We're also constantly working to test new processes, materials, shapes and innovative features (give it a few months there's something pretty cool in the works), so rest assured the "R&D" budget is maxed out every season.

Basically dude, you need to have the facts before going on a rant about something you actually don't know all that much about. Hopefully this arms you with some more information for the future and that while yeah, we're not Volkl shelling out tens of thousands of dollars towards SLVSH Cup (which is fucking bad ass, props to them for doing it), we're all here because we love skiing and want to make the sport better for the future, even if that's not in the ways you recognize.

Taylor

**This post was edited on Aug 22nd 2019 at 1:18:13pm

J_skisI'll pass it along to those dudes, also feel free to hit them up with ideas anytime too: info@4frnt.com

J_skisJason is overly transparent with his business strategies because a) he's tried everything over the years and this is what works and b) they're the only way for a small brand to survive in skiing, so he wants his thoughts and philosophies out there for other brands to understand, utilize and thrive. The way we see it the more small, indie brands doing rogue shit the more opportunity we have as a group to gain market share (ex. craft beer vs. AB InBev). You have super strong opinions on this which is awesome but unfortunately you're missing a lot of realities about the ski industry and business in general that are leading to tons of misinformation in your arguments.

As an example for a brand running via traditional methods (paying sales reps, distributors and shops) to break even they need to sell 25,000 pairs of skis per year. For a brand running direct to consumer they need to sell about 3,500 pairs of skis per year. It's foolish to conduct business like we're the size of Line or Armada, so you have to do things differently in order to get by and continue contributing to skiing as a whole.

If we were interested in maximizing profits we wouldn't be a ski company, straight up, and if anyone outside of skiing actually saw our numbers at the end of the year they'd question our sanity. Jason founded this company on the idea of continuing the revolution he started with Line but by utilizing modern tools and techniques (i.e. e-commerce). As far as athletes/production companies, we do what we can. We run things lean & mean because you need to be scrappy in this industry. We're not going out and signing the next Tom Wallisch because we can't afford him, and we know that. We're working with underground (and yes, sometimes more high-profile people) who fit our vibe and support them well for what they're expected to provide for us.

Truth is even if you are "turning a profit" in the ski industry you're never getting ahead. Whether there's some money in the bank at the end of the year doesn't change the fact that we then have to shell out $1m+ in production costs, money that we don't have and that Jason needs to convince banks to lend us. Sure, we could raise the price of our skis a hundred bucks a piece but we're not going to do that. We want to help the sport of skiing but giving skiers a better performing, longer lasting product at the same or less cost to them than buying from a major brand.

We're also constantly working to test new processes, materials, shapes and innovative features (give it a few months there's something pretty cool in the works), so rest assured the "R&D" budget is maxed out every season.

Basically dude, you need to have the facts before going on a rant about something you actually don't know all that much about. Hopefully this arms you with some more information for the future and that while yeah, we're not Volkl shelling out tens of thousands of dollars towards SLVSH Cup (which is fucking bad ass, props to them for doing it), we're all here because we love skiing and want to make the sport better for the future, even if that's not in the ways you recognize.

Taylor

**This post was edited on Aug 22nd 2019 at 1:18:13pm

oldmanskiSo if Ford makes a blue car and Chevy makes a blue car is Chevy ripping ford off?? Hmmmmm

StankDankinIf I put a funnel in my rectum...proceed to butt chug a beer and some liquor. You know... to prepare for a big hit. If someone does it after me...am I being ripped off? Every company making twin tips owes J royalties. Pay the man. I’ll always buy his skis because I like having a ski that only a couple hundred people on the planet have.
This isn’t a sarcastic reply to your post. I actually laughed really hard at the comparison. Simple things in life man.

oldmanskiI couldnt agree with you more, that is why I made the post. It is a stupid comparison but simple. I am saving some cash at the moment and will have a set of J skis in my lineup this season.

Biffbarf@J_skis you guys ever gonna make a metal/masterblaster/allplay in big boy flavors? I'd be all about trying the metal if I can get a 189+

CatdickBojanglesI'm about to own my second pair in a few short weeks or third if @J_skis would send me a pair to verify copyright on. Couldn't be happier with them either. Plus customer service is top notch, they warrantied bindings I got from them and the second they saw i shipped them they sent my refund. Best ski company I've dealt with in my 15 years of skiing.

Biffbarf@J_skis you guys ever gonna make a metal/masterblaster/allplay in big boy flavors? I'd be all about trying the metal if I can get a 189+

freeskibum82jay sold his stake in Line to K2. im sure he's doing juuuuuust fine. and Jskis is his way of returning back to when line was smaller and he had more creative freedom.

JGalletta123I’ve stopped liking Jskis these past few years, all their ads don’t seem like they take themselves seriously as a brand

J_skisHeads up (I totally forgot about this last week) we also have these neck tubes in production currently sporting that same design / phrase to accompany our "Hornet" ski. Figured I'd call us out for "ripping off other brands" before someone else does haha

J_skisShit. I also forgot about this sticker. Last one I swear...

Young_pattyBut remember that time when armada,Vokl,Vishnu,ON3P, Nordica,Solomon, and K2 copied J by making twin tip skis?

SofaKingSickVERY debatable. IIRC the salomon 1080 came out in 98, and the ostness dragon (line's first twin tip SKI) came out in 99 i think

one could make the argument that skiboards were part of the evolution of twin tip skis, and line first made skiboards in like 95 i believe the story goes. but if we're going that route, kneissl had the bigfoot in like 91 or 92 i think, and that is 100% a skiboard

also the olin mark IV was a full size twin tip and that came out in like the 70s haha

J_skisJason is overly transparent with his business strategies because a) he's tried everything over the years and this is what works and b) they're the only way for a small brand to survive in skiing, so he wants his thoughts and philosophies out there for other brands to understand, utilize and thrive. The way we see it the more small, indie brands doing rogue shit the more opportunity we have as a group to gain market share (ex. craft beer vs. AB InBev). You have super strong opinions on this which is awesome but unfortunately you're missing a lot of realities about the ski industry and business in general that are leading to tons of misinformation in your arguments.

As an example for a brand running via traditional methods (paying sales reps, distributors and shops) to break even they need to sell 25,000 pairs of skis per year. For a brand running direct to consumer they need to sell about 3,500 pairs of skis per year. It's foolish to conduct business like we're the size of Line or Armada, so you have to do things differently in order to get by and continue contributing to skiing as a whole.

If we were interested in maximizing profits we wouldn't be a ski company, straight up, and if anyone outside of skiing actually saw our numbers at the end of the year they'd question our sanity. Jason founded this company on the idea of continuing the revolution he started with Line but by utilizing modern tools and techniques (i.e. e-commerce). As far as athletes/production companies, we do what we can. We run things lean & mean because you need to be scrappy in this industry. We're not going out and signing the next Tom Wallisch because we can't afford him, and we know that. We're working with underground (and yes, sometimes more high-profile people) who fit our vibe and support them well for what they're expected to provide for us.

Truth is even if you are "turning a profit" in the ski industry you're never getting ahead. Whether there's some money in the bank at the end of the year doesn't change the fact that we then have to shell out $1m+ in production costs, money that we don't have and that Jason needs to convince banks to lend us. Sure, we could raise the price of our skis a hundred bucks a piece but we're not going to do that. We want to help the sport of skiing but giving skiers a better performing, longer lasting product at the same or less cost to them than buying from a major brand.

We're also constantly working to test new processes, materials, shapes and innovative features (give it a few months there's something pretty cool in the works), so rest assured the "R&D" budget is maxed out every season.

Basically dude, you need to have the facts before going on a rant about something you actually don't know all that much about. Hopefully this arms you with some more information for the future and that while yeah, we're not Volkl shelling out tens of thousands of dollars towards SLVSH Cup (which is fucking bad ass, props to them for doing it), we're all here because we love skiing and want to make the sport better for the future, even if that's not in the ways you recognize.

Taylor

**This post was edited on Aug 22nd 2019 at 1:18:13pm

JLevBigfoot was like not like twin tip and stuff, but you've got some correct dates for Salomon so thanks for bringing it up!

I didn't invent the twin tip ski, and neither did Salomon. There were wooden twin tip skis photographers used in the early 1900's, and ballet skiing twin tips in the 70's.

I just brought to market a modern day version twin tip ski, in 1995 that were 99cm long called "skiboards". I wasn't the only brand, there were others that simply went out of business shortly after so they didn't get the long term credit. I got credit because Line stayed around long enough to earn the recognition. Then in 1997 Salomon released the "Snowblade". In spring 1998 we at Line were making and skiing longer twin tip skis the 193cm Ostness Dragon at Camp Of Champions Whistler glacier BC at same time Canadian Airforce was skiing 1080 named after a trick unrelated to going backwards.

Remember very few new things are actually new inventions, more so new variations that enable a lot of change to happen that were previously not possible, so it's recognized & remembered as "first". It really isn't about claiming who did what first. What's more important is how are you going to use the most recent new, to create something even newer, which will later fuel the next newer new. It's all about staying one step ahead of the future!

TnskiI'm somewhat neutral on the subject but ran across a article I think New York times/post dated 1996 that may stir the pond a bit.

dan38Been saying this for years boys... pay Zahner

J_skisSam's got a pro model ski this year called the "Street Rat" that he's making royalties off

StankDankinYour Bob Ross Allplay is also gorgeous J. Aside from that Sam is a sick skier and his collaborations are dope.

BruzoteLOL! In marketing, there is no such thing as bad press. Are you trying to help them?

DercumDogsLol either way who cares

JLevRemember very few new things are actually new inventions, more so new variations that enable a lot of change to happen that were previously not possible, so it's recognized & remembered as "first". It really isn't about claiming who did what first. What's more important is how are you going to use the most recent new, to create something even newer, which will later fuel the next newer new. It's all about staying one step ahead of the future!

jakeordieThis is a great quote, I feel like it sums up JLev's character in context of what he's achieved in skiing.

Since you're answering questions in this thread Jason, is there anything you're doing with J skis today that you couldn't have done before going to work for K2?

I don't mean to disrespect all that you got done with Line and Full Tilt, just curious how you see this quote playing out in your own ski company.

Emma_Watsondude fuck u and fuck j skis