Snowboard brands that I like and snowboard brands that I dislike.

Posted: 14 January 2011 10:21 AM

I start this review with brands that I like.

I like brands that make skis and boards.  K2 make boards (and skiis) that are easy to find in any shop anywhere on earth (Europe, Canada, US, NZ. Even Finland.). That´s good and practical. And they have nice boards to. I like K2.

I like Rossignol because they have made skis for over 100 years: it´s hard to deny that some of this knowledge has to be past to their snowboard line to. For the same reason I like Atomic, Head and Salomon. Even though they don´t have the impact of Rossis alpine heritage. So I like them a little less. 

But be sure: there are no rule without exception. I also like Prior boards. I think they stand for true craftsmanship, nice service and al the things that are associated with a small business. Sad that the customs are so high into Sweden and Europe. Otherwise I would have a Prior board. I like Allian boards: mainly because Ingemar Backman is Swedish and comes from a town nearby. And…not to forget I actually rode the lift with Ingemar Backman once when he was testing some new board (yes that name dropping felt soooooooo sweet). I like Jones. Because I like Jeremys videoparts.

I dislike Gnu and Lib Tech.

Why?

LibTech and Gnu have this underground corebrand image about themselves. And that´s not true. I think. To me they seems like really big brands. And being a big brand is, to me,  a good thing. But being double standard about it is not. Double standards always makes me suspicious. Next thing that makes me feel a bit reluctant is that, at least, Lib Tech are opposing them self to Burton. Well - telling your strong sides is one thing. Hacking on your competitors is really another thing.

Then again I like Stepchild for the same corebrand reason: who can dislike a brand that has a board named “Powder Sucks”? That shows some guts! So. Stepchild probably is a corebrand. Not so core as Allian, Jones and Prior. Not to mention Dupraz.  But a corebrand I would say.  I would never buy a Steepchild board. But they for sure got my respect.

My principle of liking big brands does not embrace Burton. They are just to much. I mean: what´s the reason for introducing your own binding system? Now they even got two different binding systems to really make sure their boards (and bindings) are incompatible with the rest of the world.
Again - why?

Even though I dislike Burton I have sold my soul and ride Burton boots and jacket. A true victim for the evil empire or a spineless coward? I really don´t know. I like the boots and jacket anyway. So I like Burton a little to. I also feel a bit sorry for Burton because a lot of corebrand people seems to hate them. Hate is a strong world. I would like Burton if they just had a normal binding system. I mean Burton is really trying. They have a lot of effort to stay underground. Boards named Hate and boards with sexy girls on. They are really trying their best. That I like. A bit.

Finally I like Nidecker. I like Swiss Toblerone, cheese and watches. I like DT Swiss mountain bike parts.  Nidecker just got to be good as god. Plus they have a cool Swiss flag on their boards. I would like that on my board to. I am not so sure I am willing to pay for it though.

Posted: 14 January 2011 11:36 AM

I couldn’t agree less about Lib Tech and Gnu. Mike Olson and Pete Saari who run the brands are two of the nicest guys in the industry. Every time I email them they get a big email train going through the whole company, cracking jokes and generally making me feel like my emails are appreciated. Like Rossignol, Mervin have been through the Quiksilver mill, except Quiksilver slung Rossi and kept Mervin because they could do more with the marketing. So Mervin have grown and have huge presence but at the core of the brand are some great guys with hearts of gold and some great snowboard design minds. They’re also really environmentally concious which takes big investment. Check out our interview with Mike Olson - link here

Agreed about the ski brands, but I guess that’s from being European and on the cusp of turning 30. I don’t care much about the ‘core’ image of the boards I’m riding, as long as the product is well built and the materials are of a high quality. Nowadays these brands are being run by teams of snowboarders anyway.

As far as brands I really respect… Amplid are pushing design and every snowboard looks a million dollars… I like Rossi because they make durable, high quality boards that creep under a lot of people’s radars. Jeremy Jones is doing some great stuff, he also contributed a lot to Rossi. Mervin… those guys are true pioneers. To be honest I don’t have a favourite… Burton make some insanely good product. I’m product minded… I try not to be influenced by brands.

Brands I’m not bothered about… Bitchboards?

Posted: 14 January 2011 01:26 PM

I am sure you are right Rich!

I don´t have the same inside info from the industry as you do. So I really think your right.

I have spent some hours thinking about this core brand thing ( I am having pneumonia so I am of work and riding as well this week and weekend. That means a lot of time to think about things like brands).

Ok. To the thinking about core and brands.

Burton started out when the carpenter Jake Burton made his first snowboard, at his garage i asume. What could be more core than that? Rossignol also started by a carpenter, named Rossignol, who wanted to ride skis. So he made some. That´s also pretty core.

As for BitchBoards. Well I don´t know. Female specific boards are likely to be a good thing for females. And I like females. So they deserve good boards.

But the name….I would not buy a “MachoMan” board brand. No no no…...I would not.

You are right about the focus on products rather than brands.

Posted: 15 January 2011 10:51 AM

I guess my perception of a strong/good brand is a brand that contributes something different / forward thinking to snowboarding. If a brand isn’t reinvesting money into experimenting with new shapes, materials or production techniques then why should they be selling boards, when a brand with the same price point is. I don’t think it is enough in the current market simply to go to a factory, order 100 stock boards with your own sketches on the topsheet.

I mentioned I respected Amplid in my previous post. Now Amplid produce boards in the Elan factory along with lots and lots of other brands. But the boards that Amplid produce are different because of Peter Bauer’s Passion. Peter is constantly experimentation with new materials, the new core Elan have produced which uses traditional wood laminates through the centre and a bonded sawdust and resin composite around the edges of the core (the WDT core) is a lot of Peter’s hard work, he’s been testing it for years. Amplid design all of their molds which is why the sidecuts are CAD designed and mathematically correct when the board is flexed, we’re not talking a standard radial sidecut.

That’s just a couple of examples, and this work is being done by a company that isn’t selling huge quantities of boards. With old “ski brands” like Atomic, Rossi, Salomon etc etc stepping up to the plate and creating technologies like Amptek, the Equalizer sidecut and the Green Alibi Renu snowboard which is true example of building a environmentally concious snowboard, it really isn’t enough for a brand to stick a nice picture on the topsheet with a striking diecut on the base and say, buy our product because we are snowboarders and that means we are core. I have a lot of respect for Jones and the YES guys for sticking with Nidecker, that factory has some of the most forward thinking engineers in the business and although their products aren’t crazy different to their competitors (although the Hovercraft is a genius shape!)

I think we’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg. Interestingly there is a new brand featuring in the ISPO BrandNew called Silbaerg. Mad up of some uni graduates from some tech uni in Germany they have produced a snowboard with cleverly designed composite laminates which cause the board’s edge to rise when a load is applied to the centre of the board e.g. a board slide and the edge to bite when the board is flexed through a turn. I did work on similar materials at Uni (I studied composite engineering) where you can get composite the propellers and wings to change shape for improved efficiency and reduced drag when more load is applied. I think it’s a really interesting concept. But this is the kind of brand that will suffer the you are not a “core” brand slur. It’s kind of like those petrol heads who say their 1980 Lancia Delta Integrale is the ultimate drivers car, well I’ll lap them in my McLaren f1 full to the brim with mind boggling technology and enjoy exceptional performance, even if the seats are bit hard and the windscreen wipers are temperamental.

Posted: 18 January 2011 10:43 AM

Oh yes. I do agree upon that brands that contributes to the development of new boards are to be viewed as good brands. Maybe.

I just don´t think that a new technology that sounds good is enough. It must pass some benefit to the riders riding to. Otherwise it´s just a sales argument. Having that said; snowboardindustry is a relatively small bussines so one can´t expect to extensive tests on every board. I mean: there are tons of riders out there. Everyone being unique in their own style and demands of a board.

As a rider and a potential snowboardbuyer I can´t really overlook the “objective” factors that affect my choice of a board. In fact I would say that I am not even able to overlook 10% out of it. And again: asuming that I not buy a 150 supersoft parkboard for my backcountry hikes or oposite a 172 splitboard for my parkriding I would probably be pretty good of with any board. Like yesterday: I rode with a guy that proved out to have been a pro rider in 90-95: who had a boards and bindings looking really old and useless. And I did not know about this guy. First time we meet. Honestly I tought he would suck at riding from looking at his gear.

Well. That was untill he trowed a inverted 720 of a cliff ( hey I..I…I…. have had pneumonia! I could do that to if I wasen´t eating antibiotics!). So the rider rides the board - not the oposite.

That gives me with the idea that a brand is something you feel for. For different reasons. Most of those reasons are not realated to the boards they sell. Rather to the image thay communicate.  So I just wanted to state my own perception of diffrent brands. The brands that I dislike can, off course, have great boards. It´s just that the brands that I like has great boards too.

By the way: you got me really interesed in Amplid. Seems like they could be another brand that I like.

Posted: 18 January 2011 11:03 AM

Yeah you are 100% right, the brand is your perception (even if it is completely manipulated by marketing) of the people working on the boards. And equally a brand can dictate people’s opinions of you as a snowboarder. When you see somebody riding a Burton Vapor or T7 you think, wow this guy is going to either be shit hot in the pipe or a complete punter, it’s usually the body armour on the outside of the outerwear, the camel pack and the trousers that don’t make it over the tops of the boots or get ratcheted under the ankle strap that gives the latter away! I guess the reason that “core” as a USP is beginning to grate on me is because it now says nothing about a brand, it’s jaded terminology that means sh*t about the product. A core brand to me is a company like Never Summer that puts a 3 year warranty on a product and says hey we know you guys don’t want to spend lots of money on a board that’s going to break because of crappy craftsmanship, so if it does break and it’s our fault we’ll replace it. Or Jeremy Jones actually getting involved on his facebook page to keep customers up to date with warranty issues or product availability… that’s being down to earth, getting your hands dirty with the customer and in essence being core… or just creating an approachable brand in touch with it’s consumer.

I also love it when somebody turns up in old gear and absolutely destroys everybody else.

Posted: 18 February 2011 09:05 AM

My first board was an Option, and i loved it bought 3 more of em before the company went under in 2009. Rode a Joni Makinen 164w for 5 years, tough ass board. Really bummed when they stopped making their boards in Canada.
This year i demod a skate banana, Id been interested in the mervin line since hearing about the altered genetics back in 2005. Finally went out and got a banana magic and so glad I did. This board rips it up in all conditions, ice pow hardpack love this thing. (plus the 2010/11 top sheet graphics are beyond sick) Those guys at mervin seem to be pushin the envelope with new materials and designs. Plus theyve prolly got the “greenest” production methods out there.
I personally steer clear of burton gear just bc ive tried 3 of their mid range bindings and had all 3 break on me within 5 uses. Seem to be shoddily made, lost 2 Cartels and a mission. Switched to Drake, now Im loving Union for the same reasons as mervin, their focus on quality materials.
When i first started out i rented K2/rossi gear alot and it all seemed shitty but then again it was rental gear, i feel better sticking with companies that focus on snowboarding instead of ones that just make them on the side to grab a larger market share. But thats my 2cents.

Posted: 22 February 2011 09:20 PM

I can to 100% see the point of suporting rider owned brands. So I dig your two cents.  Then again: liking skiing brands is probably a European thing. It´s about culture and herritage.

Up here we start out skiing by 3 or 4 years of age and the skiis we use are probably Atomic or Rossignol. At least to me that makes me want to buy boards of the same brand that the first fun meeting whit snow and winter was made upon.

My 2 year old son has acctually started to ride down the garage slope on Rossignol gear. So the herritage is passed on.  Wheter Rossi, or any other Euro skii brand, makes boards for market share or for the riders who like to ride is a matter of definition. I mean: al brands are in to this thing of market shares. One of the best way to take bits of the market is to produce fine, rideable boards. One other safe bet to market shares are marketing and image. And this fact closes the circle.

Most boards are ok or even more than ok. No matter who makes them. Why we chose boards are not down to objective factors. It´s down to a lot of other stuff. Of course. Having tested the board limits the impact of marketing and image factors.

By the way: cool nick I really like my K2 DarkStar - even if it´s not European - it´s at least sold by a skiing brand =)