Ha! Caved in crevassecreased wrote:Thank you that is all
Not a question mark in sight.
What would you ask 'em? A request
Moderators: jimmy, collnarra, PeepeelaPew, Butts, beach_defender, Shari, Forum Moderators
telling people at parties they're garment merchants is probably a bit of a drag. even 'ceo' is boring. why don't they give themselves grander-sounding titles like 'conquering lion of the surfing tribes and ruler of the seas' or 'fearsome commander of a thousand perfect left barrels'?Code: Select all
Tripitaka as a title would evoke surf as mystical Buddhist experience thing, and make the corporation a lot more "aware" sounding and it would continue on Lucky Al's previous stream of consciousness. Pigsy or Sandy wouldn't really do it though.
-
Nick Carroll
- Huey's Right Hand
- Posts: 26515
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:29 am
- Location: Newport Beach
I think they save that stuff up for evenings out at big surf contests with recently hired marketing assistants.Lucky Al wrote:telling people at parties they're garment merchants is probably a bit of a drag. even 'ceo' is boring. why don't they give themselves grander-sounding titles like 'conquering lion of the surfing tribes and ruler of the seas' or 'fearsome commander of a thousand perfect left barrels'?
I dunno I reckon there's a huge untapped market out there. Just imagine the full "buffed" queen dropping into (sorry in on) Kreepy Krawly.Nick Carroll wrote:Buff_Brad wrote:Are you kidding, it's an automatic touchdown. And I do mean "touch".kreepykrawly wrote:what about the so called "pink" dollars NC? Amazingly the surfing oligarchs haven't targeted that area yet?
No need for specific gay targeting, when 3/4 of your marketing features near naked 25 year old men. We at the surf mags depend on it!
Come on party boy, let's hear a smart question, even Laz came up with one eventually.
Well I started with the question of why $$ aren't put towards enviro friendly artificial reefs to deal with the crowds and encourage more participation etc????
I suppose with the cost of money now seemingly going up daily how much of the big firms' increasing borrowing costs are going to be passed onto the punters? Or should I buy put options on Billabong shares?
ok, i could be very wrong here, and if so i stand correctedCRACKERS wrote:spook wrote:bloody hell there's a lot of negativity towards surf companies here.
i think you're all just jealous about not owning or working for one of em.
who cares how much money they make off a shirt? if you don't want to buy it, don't. nike and adidas don't have to field these ridiculous questions
without big surf companies, what type of boards and wetties do you thing we would be riding? fark, as far as i can tell, companies with money sponsoring talented surfers progresses the sport. the result is better equipment and the quest for better waves. feel free to disagree, but i can't imagine surfing being where it is today without bucks being put back into it
someone's moaning about the rip curl wct comp - well here's a newsflash, sponsored photo and video trips uncovered large areas of amazing waves that none of us knew about. yeah, so bag rip curl on the one hand then happily book you boat trip to the mentawais on the other
there's probably bucketloads wrong with surf companies, but what's wrong with that? are you upset because you think they should represent exactly what surfing means to you - and if they don't you can't rant about how evil they all are?
the beauty of surfing is that none of this bullshit counts for anything. go down to the beach, and whether it's 1 foot or 10 foot, if you're a kook, you're a kook. doesn't matter whether you're wearing $90 t-shirts and rocked up in a surf branded ute or not.
what makes you think nike and adidas dont have to field these sorts of questions? they went through the wringer over sweatshop labour a few years back?
what makes you think they uncovered large areas of waves that none of us knew about? just because they were never in the mags before doesnt mean no one knew about them.....just that they knew not to talk about them?
what makes you think i shouldnt complain to this big companies if i think their environmental record is some what lacking? should i sit back and say nothing because they are making good wet suits and borads?
explain these few points to me as i dont think i quite get what you mean with your little 'rant'.
CRACKERS
everyone has simply assumed that big surf companies are using exploitative labour practices in order to manufacture their products. that may very well be the case, but in this thread at least i haven't seen any proof of it. it may be a fair assumption to make, but i would have thought it would be more reasonable to ask these companies if they endorse "fair trade" policies, rather than instantly assume they are exploiting workers.
if big surf companies (or any other manufacturers for that matter) come under increased scrutiny for the use of unfair/exploitative manufacturing processes, then that can only be a good thing.
and it is also a positive thing that other companies (be they nike, adidas etc) also come under scrutiny
but everyone here seems very anti-major surf companies on this front. are smaller surf companies any different? and do you question where other everyday products come from? i know these issues have come to light because NC is attending a forum where he can ask industry heads about these issues, but it would be very hypocritical of everyone to bash surf companies for their use of asian factories, but not to question other companies in their daily life. that was the point i was trying to make
as far as enviro issues go, yep fair call and i'm happy to stand corrected. launching BS campaigns about being green and caring for the earth, while badging V8 utes with your logos seems like a load of crap. but companies will only change if they have to, and i'll warrant that most of their target demgraphic doesn't particlarly care (at this point in time at least). when this becomes a big enough issue, companies that are slow to adapt will die
as far as publicising new spots, yep, spots get discovered by solo adventurers and word spreads through word of mouth, but it's undeniable that most spots are now well-known through their exposure in surf media. most documented trips feature professional surfers and the trip is paid for by their sponsors. exposing spots in this manner necessarily makes them more crowded. but how many spots have you surfed or wanted to surf because you saw em in a vid or a magazine? maybe you know indo like the back of your hand and already knew about the mentawais. but would you have known about tons of other areas without exposure through documented surf trips? think of all the spots in the south pacific alone, many of which have become prominent destinations after articles, photos and videos of trips paid for by surf companies were exposed.
and who is it bad for? you, who has to share the lineup with more travelling surfers? what do the locals think? are they stoked to have an influx of visitors or are they jaded because their sleepy way of life has been disturbed. now we are getting into the ethics of tourism, and this discussion could go on forever.
for every place that seems blighted by tourism, i would say there are many more that are appreciative of what tourism has brought them. money, modern technology and science, and new ways of life. we might think that we have 'ruined' remote communiies but many of them might be appreciative for having been exposed to modern ways of life
if that sounds terribly patronising, it's not meant to. tourism isn't always bad. sure, places change, but who is to judge whether they change for better or worse - look at this issue for someone else's perspective. for instance, the work surfaid have been doing in the mentawais seems to be a positive change. for the locals there, what do they care if HT's is more crowded? from their perspective they would be happy to have been exposed to modern medical treatments and reduced infant mortality
Is it true a surf shop won't stock clothes from a new or up and coming maker cause the big boys will threaten them with "you take their stuff you no get our stuff". Just heard it a few times, including from a bloke in the industry.
Did the medical centre/town hall/whatever which was to be built at that Mexican point break Rip Curl raped, ever get built?
Do they fear the Levis Syndrome; cool jeans for decades then, when ma and pa and even grandma and grandpa were wearing them, the kids naturally decided they were not gonna buy Levis.
Will they admit, on the record in public, for them it's now how a surfer looks and not how he or she surfs which detremines their sponsorship dollars. Look em in the eye and ask why none would sponsor Bede Durbridge. Are they that far removed from real surfers, and Realsurfers, that they believe an inability to string a sentence together on camera actually matters (Beded ain't that great at the video grab). Have they forgotten that some of the best most loved surfers of the past were the same.
Why bother asking marketing men and women. Paid to spin. Talk for hours and say nothing. And as some-one else pointed out, you'll have given em about $500k's worth of market research for free. So go hard please.
Also do they understand that by alientaing their core they will eventually be seen as uncool by the masses. Brits, Euros, Japanese etc have pretty finely tuned fashion/trend radar. They eventually realise, on their year backpacking Oz or whattever, that those way cool surfer duded aren't wearing the brands they know as surf wear. They'll soon hunt elsewhere.
Did the medical centre/town hall/whatever which was to be built at that Mexican point break Rip Curl raped, ever get built?
Do they fear the Levis Syndrome; cool jeans for decades then, when ma and pa and even grandma and grandpa were wearing them, the kids naturally decided they were not gonna buy Levis.
Will they admit, on the record in public, for them it's now how a surfer looks and not how he or she surfs which detremines their sponsorship dollars. Look em in the eye and ask why none would sponsor Bede Durbridge. Are they that far removed from real surfers, and Realsurfers, that they believe an inability to string a sentence together on camera actually matters (Beded ain't that great at the video grab). Have they forgotten that some of the best most loved surfers of the past were the same.
Why bother asking marketing men and women. Paid to spin. Talk for hours and say nothing. And as some-one else pointed out, you'll have given em about $500k's worth of market research for free. So go hard please.
Also do they understand that by alientaing their core they will eventually be seen as uncool by the masses. Brits, Euros, Japanese etc have pretty finely tuned fashion/trend radar. They eventually realise, on their year backpacking Oz or whattever, that those way cool surfer duded aren't wearing the brands they know as surf wear. They'll soon hunt elsewhere.
You mean the Milky Wave, right? And Marsbah.Lucky Al wrote:jokes bro, what i really want to know is if the industry potentates are prepared for surf exploration and discovery in other sun systems and galaxies. what if a great wave is discovered off the shoulder of orion and we're not prepared to surf it? if our ggarment merchants don't draw up outer-space surf policies soon they could lose one potential customer for good (coops@dy)!
Hey sNickers, your new glasses have arrived for time.
http://forum.realsurf.com/forum/viewtop ... 995#268995
time.http://forum.realsurf.com/forum/viewtop ... 995#268995
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 123 guests