Salomon prolink

Salomon prolink

Post by Vida Rollan » Tue, 11 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Hello everyone,

I have a question on some Salomon skis, maybe you can help me. Somebody
offered me a pair of brand new skis, it's Salomon Prolink Equipe 3S. It
is probably a last year model, because I did not found it on any online
catalog.
It has two prolink shock absorbers, one in front and one in the back.
Could anyone tell me something about this model? How much do you think
it does worth?

Thanx a lot,

Rolland

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by .. » Wed, 12 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Quote:

> I have a question on some Salomon skis, maybe you can help me.

Not really, but I'll post anyway. ;-)

Quote:
> Somebody
> offered me a pair of brand new skis, it's Salomon Prolink Equipe 3S.

You poor bastard.

Quote:
> It
> is probably a last year model, because I did not found it on any online
> catalog.
> It has two prolink shock absorbers, one in front and one in the back.
> Could anyone tell me something about this model?

They, like all the prolink crap'oshit range, are very bendy and make an
interesting  sound when you snap them. IME snapping them is easy, which
is, I suppose, at least more interesting than having them bend, like K2
skis do.

Quote:
> How much do you think
> it does worth?

Nothing, but then, I refuse to ski Salomon (or K***ingawful2) these
days, so that doesn't help you much, does it? Go and find some Rossi's
or Elans. If you're lucky, you may get a post from someone who likes
them.

HTH



 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by R » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Quote:
>I have a question on some Salomon skis, maybe you can help me. Somebody
>offered me a pair of brand new skis, it's Salomon Prolink Equipe 3S.

Those skis suck.  damp and boring.  too soft and no fun at all.
The only thing I disliked more from that year of demos was the volant.
RL

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by Remingto » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Rolland:  This is Remington, the ski liquidator.  I might be wrong here, but
I seem to remember the Equipe 3S as a race slalom ski.  Conventional ski;
not shaped.  This ski will not perform easily at slower speeds, but with a
little speed, like over 15mph, and up to 36mph, it will perform wonderfully.
My guess is that this ski could be three years old.  Hope I got this right.
Remington.
Quote:

>Hello everyone,

>I have a question on some Salomon skis, maybe you can help me. Somebody
>offered me a pair of brand new skis, it's Salomon Prolink Equipe 3S. It
>is probably a last year model, because I did not found it on any online
>catalog.
>It has two prolink shock absorbers, one in front and one in the back.
>Could anyone tell me something about this model? How much do you think
>it does worth?

>Thanx a lot,

>Rolland

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by http://www.hyperreal.art.pl/cypher/remailer » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Quote:
> Nothing, but then, I refuse to ski Salomon (or K***ingawful2)
> these days,

Its not just me then? K2 really are over hyped? I guess its like
movies, the more pre-release hype, the crummier they are.
Guess that puts K2 (and Salomon) right up there. Too much
marketing budget and not enough ski development. They pick
a "market segment", people, to aim a ski at. Not just making
a ski for, say, going real fast, or handling all the mtn.
This is to my mind more true of K2. look at their stable of
guys who represent them. Real show ponys. Pop Stars!
I always get disappointed trying K2s. Expect more, get zilch.
Pretty designs on them, good marketing...!


When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of,
he always declares that it is his duty - George Bernard Shaw

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by R » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Quote:

>> Nothing, but then, I refuse to ski Salomon (or K***ingawful2)
>> these days....
>Gary says:
>Its not just me then? K2 really are over hyped?

  K2 has made some good skis, but not recently. And I suspect that even if
they were good skis I wouldn't like them.  The SL race ski that was red
white and blue comes to mind.  I liked them but not enough to buy them.  
  My problem with them has always been the people they chose to represent
their company and their product.  And the image they have chosen for
themselves.  They seem to have a stable of arrogant, annoying jerks
peddling their skis.  And its not just that I'm a girl and they don't take
me seriously although that has happened an it soured me on their skis.  The
man who brought his last year's demos to our swap this fall was a toad.  
The arrogance goes along with the image of bad boys on expensive toys.  The
in your face "we're the best because we say so" attitude just doesn't go
very far with me. I wonder how much of it is a conscious decision based on
some sort of marketing strategy?
RL
 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by Vinni » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00


"http://SportToday.org/; says...
Quote:


>> Nothing, but then, I refuse to ski Salomon (or K***ingawful2)
>> these days,

>Its not just me then? K2 really are over hyped? I guess its like
>movies, the more pre-release hype, the crummier they are.
>Guess that puts K2 (and Salomon) right up there. Too much
>marketing budget and not enough ski development. They pick
>a "market segment", people, to aim a ski at. Not just making
>a ski for, say, going real fast, or handling all the mtn.
>This is to my mind more true of K2. look at their stable of
>guys who represent them. Real show ponys. Pop Stars!
>I always get disappointed trying K2s. Expect more, get zilch.
>Pretty designs on them, good marketing...!


>When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of,
>he always declares that it is his duty - George Bernard Shaw

In traditional business school theory, as products become closer and closer in a
physical sense, the pre*** way to differentiate your product from others
with consumers is through marketing/advertising. Over time it isn't unusual to
see marketing/advertising expense make up a larger and larger amount of product
cost. A prime example of this is Nike's Air Jordan. In the beginning (1985), the
physical production cost was about $15 per pr. Retail - $75. Endor***t  and
marketing expenses basically doubled the cost. I'd be very curious to know how
much endor***ts/advertising add to the costs of K2, Rossignol/Dynastar and
Solomon products. The fact is manufacturing costs of skis CAN'T vary that much
unless electric power is supplied by stoned hamsters or massive capital outlays.

I think the tragedy in all of this is that many manufacturers decide that the
endor***ts are more important than the quality of the product. K2 recently
announced some cost cutting moves, they are moving a significant portion of
production to China (causing Vashon Island layoffs) while maintaining the
endor***t deals. From a more socially conscious point-of-view why didn't they
maintain the US production and cut down on the endor***t hype? I would think
that would be more consistent with the "Made in the USA" hype they have been
expousing for years. They have targeted the Young Male segment as the most
important and have gone after it unmercifully (What's ironic is that this
segment is usually pretty poor and depends upon Mommy and Daddy for funds). This
mindset is not unique to K2 but to many companies in mature industries. How to
maintain growth and profitability in the face of increasing pressure?

My personal philosophy would be to 1.) build the highest quality product
possible with a very simple and easy to understand product line 2.)Establish a
stable production environment - I hate the concept of layoffs - it frequently
shows bad planning. People's lives should not be disrupted from bad managment
decisions. Production theory advocates level production throughout the year and
letting finished inventories rise and fall. A conscious decision has to be made
as to acceptable levels of finished goods write-offs vs. lost sales but this can
be done (that's why they pay Mgmt their fabulous salaries) 3.)Identify specific
market segments that are crucial to survival - and develop a comprehensive 5
year plan (strategic planning) 4.) Design and implement program to take
advantage of developing trends and TRY to influence trends. 5.) Get the most
bang for the buck out of any program - Why does K2 need 10 zillion extreme
skiers - For years they just had the Mahres, Plake, Schmidt and Hattrup - now
they have the Village People. They need just a couple of personalities that can
really PROMOTE the product. If they weren't spread so thin maybe they could have
had the money to keep Moseley - A True Media Darling - as opposed to the Tatooed
Bozos. Also maybe to us older skiers, the Mahres are more appropriate than
anyone else they have in the fold. Are they writing off the people with the
money? Instead of having skiers all over the planet - go in big on the
production of ONE ski flick per year and get it out to the public.6.) And this
is a MAJOR problem with the big boys, take advantage of new methods of
distribution and sales. Their current policy of propping up brick and mortar
retailers while exhibiting total hostility towards the Internet is going to
really kick them in the derriere. They are frantically trying to hold on to the
past while the future is*** over them like a 5000 lb lead weight. Some
creativity is demanded here and I just don't see it. For instance - why not let
someone order skis off the net and set the delivery up at a local retailer.
Often times retailers don't carry a full complement of sizes and models, and
this might help. 7.) Realistic pricing - Ski pricing is a joke. Price skis as
low and realistically as possible - This will probably have more impact than any
advertising program.

I see an industry that suffers from knee-jerk reactions and short-term planning

Darth Dookie

Sez it all

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by First Tracks!! Online Ski Magazi » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00



Quote:
>Rolland:  This is Remington, the ski liquidator.  I might be wrong here, but
>I seem to remember the Equipe 3S as a race slalom ski.  Conventional ski;
>not shaped.  This ski will not perform easily at slower speeds, but with a
>little speed, like over 15mph, and up to 36mph, it will perform wonderfully.
>My guess is that this ski could be three years old.  Hope I got this right.

You did.  I've got the 1S, and absolutely love it (sorry, RL!).  The
1S was their race GS ski, and isn't overly damp at all - very snappy
in the tail and light, yet stable, too.  I would expect the 3S to be
much quicker still, given its target.

They should be awfully cheap, though.  I've heard of brand-new pair,
in the wrapper, going for around $150 USD, even though they originally
retailed for around $700 USD - this is because they're leftover
"straight" sticks, in an age when everyone is looking for shapes.

___________________________________
Marc Guido
Editor and Publisher
First Tracks!! Online Ski Magazine
http://www.FirstTracksOnline.com
Voice & Fax: (212) 894-3797 x0013

  (remove "NOSPAM." when replying)
___________________________________

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by rickknowla » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Quote:

> In traditional business school theory, as products become closer and closer in a
> physical sense, the pre*** way to differentiate your product from others
> with consumers is through marketing/advertising.

True, and this often focuses on creating the perception that one product is better
than another when there is no real advantage.

Quote:
> Over time it isn't unusual to
> see marketing/advertising expense make up a larger and larger amount of product
> cost. A prime example of this is Nike's Air Jordan. In the beginning (1985), the
> physical production cost was about $15 per pr. Retail - $75. Endor***t  and
> marketing expenses basically doubled the cost. I'd be very curious to know how
> much endor***ts/advertising add to the costs of K2, Rossignol/Dynastar and
> Solomon products. The fact is manufacturing costs of skis CAN'T vary that much
> unless electric power is supplied by stoned hamsters or massive capital outlays.

I suspect the marketing professors would tell us that the money Salomon etc. puts
into advertising and endor***ts is an investment in providing better "information"
to help consumers make better choices.  :-)  It helps move towards a "perfectly
competitive market".  :-)

Quote:
> I think the tragedy in all of this is that many manufacturers decide that the
> endor***ts are more important than the quality of the product. K2 recently
> announced some cost cutting moves, they are moving a significant portion of
> production to China (causing Vashon Island layoffs) while maintaining the
> endor***t deals. From a more socially conscious point-of-view why didn't they
> maintain the US production and cut down on the endor***t hype?

I suspect they were convinced that the "Made in USA" "endor***t" wouldn't boost
sales as well as the "Joe Blow Hero skis K2" endor***t.  They may be right.  How
many adventure-seeking hedonists will choose what they perceive as a lesser ski just
to support some schmuck who works on a production line in Vashon Island?  Some will,
but not many.  If you can't establish the perception that your product is superior,
appeal to patriotism will get you a few more sales but won't keep you alive.

Quote:
> I would think
> that would be more consistent with the "Made in the USA" hype they have been
> expousing for years. They have targeted the Young Male segment as the most
> important and have gone after it unmercifully (What's ironic is that this
> segment is usually pretty poor and depends upon Mommy and Daddy for funds). This
> mindset is not unique to K2 but to many companies in mature industries. How to
> maintain growth and profitability in the face of increasing pressure?

> My personal philosophy would be to 1.) build the highest quality product
> possible with a very simple and easy to understand product line 2.)Establish a
> stable production environment - I hate the concept of layoffs - it frequently
> shows bad planning.

Or peaky demand--such as in seasonal industries.

Quote:
> People's lives should not be disrupted from bad managment
> decisions. Production theory advocates level production throughout the year and
> letting finished inventories rise and fall.

That depends on the ratio of fixed costs to variable and the investment in
inventory.  What's the ratio in the ski mfg business?  I don't know.  I'd suggest
the move to "just in time" mfg and delivery is opposite to what you have suggested
above.

Quote:
> A conscious decision has to be made
> as to acceptable levels of finished goods write-offs vs. lost sales but this can
> be done (that's why they pay Mgmt their fabulous salaries) 3.)Identify specific
> market segments that are crucial to survival - and develop a comprehensive 5
> year plan (strategic planning) 4.) Design and implement program to take
> advantage of developing trends and TRY to influence trends. 5.) Get the most
> bang for the buck out of any program - Why does K2 need 10 zillion extreme
> skiers - For years they just had the Mahres, Plake, Schmidt and Hattrup - now
> they have the Village People. They need just a couple of personalities that can
> really PROMOTE the product.

True.  Like "ethical endor***ts"?  Maybe an oxymoron, but if they could find a
highly credible figure, who knows what's possible.  Look at Jordan and Nike.  So
many kids think Jordan wore Nike because they were better.  I have watched many kids
squirm when I told them that Jordan was paid tens of millions to wear Nikes, and
that he would probably wear the shoes of whoever paid him the most.  Many of them
don't really understand that.

Quote:
> If they weren't spread so thin maybe they could have
> had the money to keep Moseley - A True Media Darling - as opposed to the Tatooed
> Bozos. Also maybe to us older skiers, the Mahres are more appropriate than
> anyone else they have in the fold. Are they writing off the people with the
> money? Instead of having skiers all over the planet - go in big on the
> production of ONE ski flick per year and get it out to the public.6.) And this
> is a MAJOR problem with the big boys, take advantage of new methods of
> distribution and sales. Their current policy of propping up brick and mortar
> retailers while exhibiting total hostility towards the Internet is going to
> really kick them in the derriere. They are frantically trying to hold on to the
> past while the future is*** over them like a 5000 lb lead weight. Some
> creativity is demanded here and I just don't see it. For instance - why not let
> someone order skis off the net and set the delivery up at a local retailer.
> Often times retailers don't carry a full complement of sizes and models, and
> this might help.

Maybe what's wrong with the industry is the distribution chain?  We need more
innovative channels, like Remmington.  And the idea of starting a test program that
relies on unpaid skiers has potential.  I think most people want to buy the ski that
will work best for them.  But how to choose?

Quote:
> 7.) Realistic pricing - Ski pricing is a joke. Price skis as
> low and realistically as possible - This will probably have more impact than any
> advertising program.

This suggests that you think somebody in the chain from mfr to retailer is raking
off higher returns than are justified given the risks they are taking.  That may be
true--I have no evidence to support or challenge your position.  But my experience
helping hundreds of mgmt teams create and implement strategies suggests that it's
always a lot harder to make a profit than it seems to outsiders.

Quote:
> I see an industry that suffers from knee-jerk reactions and short-term planning

Ahhhhhhhh, I still have fertile fields to cultivate.
 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by Vinni » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Quote:

>> People's lives should not be disrupted from bad managment
>>decisions. Production theory advocates level production throughout the year and
>> letting finished inventories rise and fall.

>That depends on the ratio of fixed costs to variable and the investment in
>inventory.  What's the ratio in the ski mfg business?  I don't know.  I'd
>suggest
>the move to "just in time" mfg and delivery is opposite to what you have
>suggested
>above.

It absolutely is but the concept of Just-In-Time takes the ultimate position
that labor is a resource to be totally exploited just as materials are. In my
old age and having been treated like that, I have developed a more humanistic
approach towards things. However, I do believe that I could make a very strong
case for a permanent labor force has opposed to seasonal/JIT. If you allowed
inventory levels to rise and fall over the course of a year then you should be
able to exist on a smaller workforce that has overcome all learning-curve ills
making for more efficient and cost effective production. The cost savings of
facilities operation implied by the seasonality factors are smoothed out over
time ie. Power savings in the PNW in the summer as opposed to the winter etc.
The question is whether or not the labor(including hiring and training) and
quality/scrap/warranty savings outweigh additional material inventory costs. The
question that I have to ask is: Has anyone in the ski industry tried to quantify
what their current production methods are costing them?

Quote:

>> A conscious decision has to be made
>>as to acceptable levels of finished goods write-offs vs. lost sales but this can
>>be done (that's why they pay Mgmt their fabulous salaries) 3.)Identify specific
>> market segments that are crucial to survival - and develop a comprehensive 5
>> year plan (strategic planning) 4.) Design and implement program to take
>> advantage of developing trends and TRY to influence trends. 5.) Get the most
>> bang for the buck out of any program - Why does K2 need 10 zillion extreme
>> skiers - For years they just had the Mahres, Plake, Schmidt and Hattrup - now
>>they have the Village People. They need just a couple of personalities that can
>> really PROMOTE the product.

>True.  Like "ethical endor***ts"?  Maybe an oxymoron, but if they could find a
>highly credible figure, who knows what's possible.  Look at Jordan and Nike.  So
>many kids think Jordan wore Nike because they were better.  I have watched many
>kids
>squirm when I told them that Jordan was paid tens of millions to wear Nikes, and
>that he would probably wear the shoes of whoever paid him the most.  Many of
>them
>don't really understand that.

It really takes a special kind of person to do that - Jordan, Arnold Palmer.
Right now the two people in skiing that come the closest are Moseley and Picabo
Street. With K2's track record, they're probably looking for the Dennis Rodman
type. The thing they might look to is to find a very famous athlete that wasn't
a professional skier and promote THEM - Joe Piscopo - maybe.

Quote:

>Maybe what's wrong with the industry is the distribution chain?  We need more
>innovative channels, like Remmington.  And the idea of starting a test program
>that
>relies on unpaid skiers has potential.  I think most people want to buy the ski
>that
>will work best for them.  But how to choose?

We don't know but it takes trial and error and I applaud those who try to break
out of the same old rut. You never know until you try and as far as I'm
concerned, I'm going to support those who try.

Quote:

>> 7.) Realistic pricing - Ski pricing is a joke. Price skis as
>>low and realistically as possible - This will probably have more impact than any
>> advertising program.

>This suggests that you think somebody in the chain from mfr to retailer is
>raking
>off higher returns than are justified given the risks they are taking.  That may
>be
>true--I have no evidence to support or challenge your position.  But my
>experience
>helping hundreds of mgmt teams create and implement strategies suggests that
>it's
>always a lot harder to make a profit than it seems to outsiders.

Well, everyone knows that Suggested Retail is a joke - If you don't get 15% off
the top, go someplace else. Why play this game? If a neophyte is glancing at a
magazine and just sees Suggested list they might get spooked as opposed to a
greater willingness to buy at a lower price point.

I really believe it's possible to produce a topnotch product and treat the
customer well while not screwing your employees and, actually, any company's
long-term survival depends upon that balance. I know it's idealistic but I
really think that as consumers we should reward manufacturers that meet our
expectations and ignore those who don't.

Quote:

>>I see an industry that suffers from knee-jerk reactions and short-term planning

>Ahhhhhhhh, I still have fertile fields to cultivate.

My fields have lots of rocks and moss.

Darth Dookie

Sez it all

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by rickknowla » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Quote:

> It absolutely is but the concept of Just-In-Time takes the ultimate position
> that labor is a resource to be totally exploited just as materials are. In my
> old age and having been treated like that, I have developed a more humanistic
> approach towards things. However, I do believe that I could make a very strong
> case for a permanent labor force has opposed to seasonal/JIT. If you allowed
> inventory levels to rise and fall over the course of a year then you should be
> able to exist on a smaller workforce that has overcome all learning-curve ills
> making for more efficient and cost effective production. The cost savings of
> facilities operation implied by the seasonality factors are smoothed out over
> time ie. Power savings in the PNW in the summer as opposed to the winter etc.
> The question is whether or not the labor(including hiring and training) and
> quality/scrap/warranty savings outweigh additional material inventory costs. The
> question that I have to ask is: Has anyone in the ski industry tried to quantify
> what their current production methods are costing them?

I'll be the big guys (owned by conglomerates) have--they have all the cost accountants
and MBAs.  I'd bet most of the small companies like K2 are run by people who love
skiing and making skis.  Their dedication to their craft steers them into more
interesting pursuits--like making a ski that will perform great--and bottom-line
practical pusruits--trying to stay alive doing it.

snipped

Quote:
>  I have watched many
> >kids
> >squirm when I told them that Jordan was paid tens of millions to wear Nikes, and
> >that he would probably wear the shoes of whoever paid him the most.  Many of
> >them
> >don't really understand that.

> It really takes a special kind of person to do that - Jordan, Arnold Palmer.
> Right now the two people in skiing that come the closest are Moseley and Picabo
> Street. With K2's track record, they're probably looking for the Dennis Rodman
> type. The thing they might look to is to find a very famous athlete that wasn't
> a professional skier and promote THEM - Joe Piscopo - maybe.

Good choice. :-)

Quote:

> >Maybe what's wrong with the industry is the distribution chain?  We need more
> >innovative channels, like Remmington.  And the idea of starting a test program
> >that
> >relies on unpaid skiers has potential.  I think most people want to buy the ski
> >that
> >will work best for them.  But how to choose?

> We don't know but it takes trial and error and I applaud those who try to break
> out of the same old rut. You never know until you try and as far as I'm
> concerned, I'm going to support those who try.

I'm currently off the boards--suspected torn meniscus--but next season I'll give Rem a
try.  Even though I'm happy with my current boards, I applaud what he's trying to do
and want to support it.

snipped

Quote:

> Well, everyone knows that Suggested Retail is a joke - If you don't get 15% off
> the top, go someplace else. Why play this game? If a neophyte is glancing at a
> magazine and just sees Suggested list they might get spooked as opposed to a
> greater willingness to buy at a lower price point.

> I really believe it's possible to produce a topnotch product and treat the
> customer well while not screwing your employees and, actually, any company's
> long-term survival depends upon that balance.

Hmmmm--customers, employees--there's an important "stakeholder" missing--the
shareholders.  If your formula can't generate adequate returns, it will be "game over"
as the capital moves to greener pastures.

Quote:
> I know it's idealistic but I
> really think that as consumers we should reward manufacturers that meet our
> expectations and ignore those who don't.

I'll do my best.  :-)

Hope you enjoy Fernie.

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by John R. Hayde » Thu, 13 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Quote:

> > If they weren't spread so thin maybe they could have had the money to
> > keep Moseley - A True Media Darling

> What does Moseley ski on these days ?

> In Fistful of Moguls (a sour sounding) Plake complains that a world mogul
> champion can't even get free skis. Anybody knows who he was he referring
to ?

> Fistful is an interesting movie BTW. It kind of grows on you. Not as much
> ski *** as the current crop of movies from the like of TGR but lots of
> great bump skiing action (although the camera works isn't the
> greatest in my opinion)

> bruno.

Rode up the lift at Copper with Moseley when they had the bump contest last
month. He was on Heads. Also, a recent Ski Racing snip said he might sign
with Head.


Evergreen, CO

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by pigo » Fri, 14 Jan 2000 04:00:00

Quote:
> You did.  I've got the 1S, and absolutely love it (sorry, RL!).  The
> 1S was their race GS ski, and isn't overly damp at all - very snappy
> in the tail and light, yet stable, too.  I would expect the 3S to be
> much quicker still, given its target.

I've been on a version of the 9000/9100 E for the last several years (2S).
Love them.
The way it's been explained to me is the the number designates the number of
turns in a given distance; ooooor 1S = giant slalom, 2S round turning
slalom, 3S rapid gate slalom (more of a Z type turn).

But what the ***, I just go up and down.

pigo

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by Throcke » Fri, 14 Jan 2000 04:00:00



Quote:
> Rode up the lift at Copper with Moseley when they had the bump contest last
> month. He was on Heads. Also, a recent Ski Racing snip said he might sign
> with Head.

Most guys like free Head.

-E "still have mine" L

 
 
 

Salomon prolink

Post by Vinni » Fri, 14 Jan 2000 04:00:00


Quote:


>> If they weren't spread so thin maybe they could have had the money to
>> keep Moseley - A True Media Darling

>What does Moseley ski on these days ?

>In Fistful of Moguls (a sour sounding) Plake complains that a world mogul
>champion can't even get free skis. Anybody knows who he was he referring to ?

>Fistful is an interesting movie BTW. It kind of grows on you. Not as much
>ski *** as the current crop of movies from the like of TGR but lots of
>great bump skiing action (although the camera works isn't the
>greatest in my opinion)

>bruno.

Bruno,

According to media sources, he has moved over to Head.

Darth Dookie

Sez it all