Message #21090

[Liam]

Here are my thoughts.

First off, I agree with Dan's basic assessment that skis labeled intermediate are usually defined by their poorer construction and general 'softness.'   Higher End or Top of the Line skis will perform better for everyone from low intermediates to true experts (heck, even for the stem-twister the dampening qualities of a laminate-constructed skis will add performance advantages).  Honestly I hate selling lower end skis (which are sometimes barely a step above rental) to anyone, but alas, in our shop they represent a huge chunk of our sales as the price dictates most of our customer's habits.

Now, assessing customers and the nature of expert skis.  This is similar to what Heluva skier is getting at: There are high end skis, and then there are skis that are for true experts.  We had great success with the Rossi CX80 (which later became the Straton 80ti)-lot's of people came looking for this ski, however, IMHO, this is/ was a true expert ski that was truly only suitable for faster, hard chargers with a racing background who wanted a race-like ski for their all mountain ripping.   In the hands of the right pilot, it was an amazing ski, however, I'd say that less the 3% of self-identified expert skiers had any business buying this ski with the hopes of it becoming their all-mountain ripstick.  Heluva would be the prototype of this sort of skier.  I had long discussions with people whom I didn't know before I let them drop some serious change to walk out with that ski.  Same caution went with the Elan Waveflex/ speedflex 14-it was a great east coast ski...under a very skilled pilot with real carving skill and a penchant for power.   Anyway, these are example of expert skis that would actually suck for an intermediate-and many experts as well.

Compare that ski, with something like the Blizzard Magnum 85ti (or the even more broadly appealing Magnum 80 CA)-certainly an expert ski, but not one that is really all that demanding, and if someone was looking for a 1sq type ski for the east, it's a choice that fits a lot of bills, including intermediate ones.  Honestly, I'd put the Hart Pulse in this same category (with the Phoenix being the more true 'expert' ski...and better ski).  These are 'expert' skis, in terms of the quality of construction and high envelope of use, but not in skills required to enjoy these skis.  Yep, better skiers would get more out of these (or any) skis, but the intermediate would get benefits as well.

Now, the final piece of the puzzle: trying to actually counsel customers into purchasing skis that they could really learn to ski on.  That's the hardest sell of all.  We carried the Fischer Progressor Line for years (top to bottom great skis), and when most intermediates came in, described what they skied, and what they wanted to accomplish--I'd say that for 8 out of 10 I'd recommend the Fischer Progressor 8+, or depending on the skier the 9 or the 7.  All great skis, very versatile for primarily front side east coast skiing with forays into moguls and skill acquisition all on the table. 

But, those skis were just dogs that wouldn't hunt--nobody wanted them, whether it was adverse marketing, self-percetion, I don't know, but you almost can't give those sort of skis away.    The prospective buyer would either demand something more 'low end', because they didn't need to spend the extra 70 bucks on a fancy ski (really, that was the difference), or they wanted something fatter and more rad like their friends. 

So, it's tough.  The easy sell are more focused skis:  I want a ski for crud and trees, I want a powder ski, I am a park and pipe guy, etc: just about any remotely knowledgeable shop employee can meet these requests.