coleslawed wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 11:13 am
CAPiTA, Burton, Nidecker. just because a brand gets big enough to purchase other brands doesn't take away their ownerships credentials.
idek what Rider Owned even really means. what's the definition of rider? minimum number of days on snow per year? previously professional rider?
isn't Forum technically "owned" by some capital investor who partnered with Peter & MackDawg? if he rides a board occasionally does that keep them rider owned?
I imagine we're just talking about whether or not there's some story of authenticity to justify their place as a business in snowboarding. It's a personal and somewhat arbitrary line that favors some brand over others and often impossible to hold without some compromise.
Most private brands have investors (weather that be a bank or a seed investors or a monied backer). Many brands go through several rounds of fund raising before they get established and make any money. Some never make money. IMO investments often comes from industry outsiders who can afford to throw money into it for a percentage return and if they make money great, and if not it's a tax writeoff for them to shelter other income.
I know this to be true in snowboarding too. But if a venture is privately held we'll never know how much funding of board brands or videos or outerwear, etc. is really just some extremely wealthy guy in real estate or ranching or chocolates or whatever that can throw money into something and not care what if anything comes back.
In the end, for me, I embrace my arbitrary line which roots against brands like Nike, but on the other hand will not do the same for Volcom even though from a corporate holding and product standpoint Nike may be better, but from a story standpoint Volcom is more true to snowboarding and doesn't 'quit' it.
On the other hand an arbitrary line I'm for the most part over is the 'ski brand' thing, in part because when I went to find kid's gear... outside of Burton... all I found were ski brands. Though this has changed in more recent years, not all that long ago the kid realm was more brands like Ride, K2, Rossignol, Salomon and Burton, that were basically holding this whole segment up. (and then just generic brands like 5150, ltd, spice, etc.) I had to acknowledge that ski brand were in some way allowing kids to get into snowboarding a lot more than 'core' brands were.
I've never ridden a Forum board of my own but I still root for Forum because I like the idea... to me I think Forum and thier story belongs in snowboarding as much as anyone. But despite it being in some sense longer established than many brands and just as core as anything else, I somehow don't have a kindred affection for Never summer. meanwhile one of the first real snowboard boot brands is Northwave, who my feet still pledge allegiance to, but most core folks around here won't take a sniff at (y'all missing out tho imo).
Imo what is core and what isn't is just the story we tell ourselves about a brand. And often those will not hold a uniform true line when put under scrutiny.
(note: I'm jut blah blah talking here... not trying to speak for anyone but myself)