Can graphics on an amazing ski stop its sales?

[SnowHot]

After testing a plethora of 2012 skis over the past 2+ months, I can say that one of the best skis I've clicked in to is the Blizzard Black Pearl
You can see two reviews of this ski here on ski diva
Blizzard Black Pearl review
Review: 2012 Blizzard Black Pearl

Since I've posted my reviews on SkiDiva and EpicSki I've had some women interesting conversations with people (women and men alike) who have checked into getting these skis for next season and are finding that their retailers are holding off on ordering the Black Pearl because they're concerned that the graphics will not be embraced by women. But, why? Why wouldn't we embrace a great ski, no matter the graphics? why wouldn't we embrace the graphics?

Both Maggie(post 5 in her review thread) and I(in the first post of the thread) have described where the Bull graphics came from and the significance to the line, and both of us seemed to get the same inspiration from the purple bull with piercing pink eyes the second we clicked into the bindings, yet........there is a chance that retailers have disregarded the idea that women will buy this ski.

How do we, serious women skiers, get the retailers to get it?
How do we get them to understand that its possible that we like the graphics?
How do we get them to understand that, even if some don't like the graphics, we'll buy the ski because it rocks and we want to rock on it?

 

[litterbug]

Tell you what--when I pick up my Geishas (trust me, I didn't buy them for their graphics!) I'll tell the MotherLode guys that they need to get these for me to demo next year. Maybe I'll bring brownies at the same time so they'll form an association that "Black Pearl" equals "yum".

My favorite graphic so far on a woman's ski is the Blizzard Crush. The Powder Houses carried those along with a men's Blizzard ski, so hopefully they'll have more Blizzards next year.

BTW, I just saw the skinet review of the Crush, which says it's demanding. Funny about that; so long as I was even a little out of the backseat it seemed to do all the skiing for me. I wonder where the Pearl fits relative to the Crush.

 

[SnowHot]

The Black Pearl is a tad narrower, and though I'd like to compare it to the Crush(which is also a great ski) its really in a class all of its own, mostly because of the flip core technology and how it reacts on snow.
The Black Pearl carves better, is better balanced and inspired confidence in nearly every type of skiing condition I've taken her.
The Crush is (to me) a good powder ski for a light weight woman, but I don't care for it much on groomers or as a daily driver.

 

[litterbug]

The Crush is (to me) a good powder ski for a light weight woman, but I don't care for it much on groomers or as a daily driver.

It must be my height/weight (5'3", 155), because I got a kick out of them on blue and green groomers with heavy-ish crud and soft bumps, though I suspected they'd give me a ride in powder, too. From reading these forums it seems that our weight is a big factor in what kind of ya-yas a ski gives us.

 

[SnowHot]

litterbug, it also depends on personal preference. I tend to like a ski in the low 80's mm under foot for a daily driver, which makes me a tad bias for skis in the high 90's +, as an all mountain ski.

 

[litterbug]

Oh, I think I see what you mean--I'm still assembling my little bit o' quiver, but from renting and demoing I do find that a waist in the 80s feels like a 'daily' ski, and while my Geishas will handle groomers fine, I think they'll really excel wandering about the mountain. Which is starting to become possible for me--just possible. Woop!

 

[B.E.G.]

I hate to say it, but graphics are important. Ski Diva is a fairly idiosyncratic community IMO - most of us on here, especially the regulars, are pretty dedicated to skiing, performance and equipment. And for many of us, performance outweighs graphcis/aesthetics - if the Black Pearl, or another ski with unique graphics, is THE ski, well, what can ya do?

But outside this community, graphics could be a make it or break it factor - and let's face it, there are a lot more women skiers who are recreational and looking to buy equipment than hardcore women skiers (at least I assume so).

Take, for instance, a totally anecdotal story My friend's friend has Rossi Attraxions, this is her first season, and she's kind of done with the lessons after the first couple. She and I have had about the same number of ski days in the same place but we have different approaches to gear (i.e. she's not nuts like me). She wants to upgrade to the True Luvs. Why? Not because she's outgrown her Rossis (she hasn't) but because they're blue. And she wants blue skis. And there is nothing wrong with wanting graphics that you like, but for some, it will be a far bigger priority than for others.

My Kenjas? Yeah, they're pretty cool (and I get street cred with the guys, who find it cool ) but not really my thing. But I love the skis so I don't care (not to mention they clash horribly with my orange boots, but oh well).

The Black Pearl isn't really a ski I need in my quiver, but if I skied it and found it to be the best one for me, I'd still buy it. And then OWN how awesome I am to not have super girly skis :D

 

[ski diva]

For me, a great ski is a great ski. If the graphics aren't to my taste and the ski rips, I'll still get the ski. Hey, I have the Volkl Tierra, which a lot of people say is just plain ugly (I agree). Still, a fantastic ski. I love it.

That said, I'm not as taken with the Black Pearl's graphics as you are, Snowhot. I find them somewhat schizophrenic and ugly: a purple bull with blazing eyes set against a glittery, star-festooned backdrop (my review here). Not for me. BUT -- the ski is terrific.

Still, a lot of women (and men, too, I'm sure) are swayed by appearance. It's human nature. And probably, the more casual a skier you are, the more this applies. Yes, I'm sure this is a roadblock for retailers. Hopefully, Blizzard will change the way the ski looks next year. But in the meantime it does present a challenge. (BTW, the Blizzard Crush is ugly, too, but what a ski! )

It's all a matter of personal taste, anyway. For everyone who hates a ski's graphics, there's someone who loves it. Don't you think?

 

[Anna]

Top sheets are NOT important for me.

I have 2011 Fischer Watea 84s - I think they are ugly - but DAMN they are GOOOOOOOD & fun & & &!

I did not get to choose what I demoed. I told the guy what I wanted to demo and he had nothing I wanted ... and said, "But I can guarantee that you'll LOVE these skis." And I said, "Well, if i don't I can always swap out." And yup he was right - loved them. Bought them.

I think I am not unusual in that if the gear is GOOD and suits me, I'll buy it. YES, I can be initially attracted (or repelled) by looks, but at the end of the day, if that good looker is NOT the ski for me, I won't buy it over the ugly sister ... ie: Rossi Attraxion 8's over the Watea 84s...

ALSO, when i go into a shop I tell the sales people - usually guys - that looks are NOT important .....

Shop assistants need to learn how to "guilt" someone into getting the "best gear for the user" as opposed to the "best looking gear".
Mind you, totally understand profit is profit .... catch 22 ....

 

[contesstant]

I agree with BEG that a less educated/passionate consumer will be far more likely to purchase based on aesthetics vs. RAWR! :D I'd also hazard a guess that a large percentage of purchasers of skis fall into the category of caring about graphics. This would play right along with many retailers not ordering a ski because of graphics. I would suppose that those retailers are also the ones who cater to the masses vs. the hard core.

On that note, I am dreaming that they will have these for me to demo at Brian Head next weekend :D I can honestly say that the bull probably will inspire me, and hey, I'm a Taurus, so double bonus!

 

[altagirl]

First - I love the graphics and they would be in the plus category if I was looking for a ski with those dimensions.

It must be my height/weight (5'3", 155), because I got a kick out of them on blue and green groomers with heavy-ish crud and soft bumps, though I suspected they'd give me a ride in powder, too. From reading these forums it seems that our weight is a big factor in what kind of ya-yas a ski gives us.

I haven't tried them, but - the dimensions on the website I just pulled up to see the graphics show as 123-88-110. Which to me, is a groomer ski with off-piste/crud capabilities, but I certainly wouldn't want something that narrow in powder. (I own Head IM88's with similar dimensions and that's what I use them for.) I'm about 5'9". (Well, and as a side note, my IM88's are still mounted alpine, so I haven't used them in a year, and my 111 underfoot Justices have turned into my everyday skis).

 

[2ski2moro]

As for the Black Pearl, I have to say that I did not identify the bull at first glance. However, I think that a 'bull' will give a lot of opportunities for jokes. It would not deter me from buying the ski.

Thinking back, I have never had 'pretty skis.' Back in the day, I used to ski on Volkl P9s - with day-glo green and pink topsheets. It was cool, but it wasn't 'pretty.' I ski icky-brown Tierras. The Kenja has a geisha - not my choice. My Auras - black and pink (also with geisha).

I buy for performance, not graphics, but if a great combination comes along, it's a plus.

 

[SnowHot]

The flow of this thread is one of the reasons that this is a great community. Keep it coming ladies.....our voice does make a difference!


Altagirl, I was thinking about you the other day when I was talking to the rep. He and I discussed the line for women with Blizzard and the direction it needs to go.......I mean, why not have a full line of women's skis in the Freeride line, instead of the Black Pearl being lumped into the mens Freeride line as an "also ran".
I can see some amazing things coming down the road with Blizzard for women......keep your eye on them!!

 

[litterbug]

As I've said, I love the Crush's graphics, but although I posted a day or two ago that I couldn't remember why I didn't buy it, this discussion reminds me that I simply liked the Geishas feel and performance a little better. I really wanted to like the Crush because it looks so cool, but it just wasn't the best ski. They handled groomers and were great on skied-out stuff but I never got the edge-to-edge feel I got with the Geishas.

Whereas I don't like the Geisha's topsheet at all, especially the colors. And the geisha with sunglasses. And the US Mint-style curlicues. They look like they're simply trying too hard, like a woman with too much makeup. So I bought them despite their looks.

The Black Pearl's bulls aren't real attractive to me, but they sound great. Are there enough wild women out there to buy them? I dunno, but Blizzard is a small but growing company, despite their graphics. It could be that their women's line isn't selling well, but for all we know they could have sold more Crushes than they could manufacture and feel encouraged to go further.

 

[vanhoskier]

I'm not much influenced by a ski's graphics until I ski the ski.

For instance, I borrowed a ski instructor friend's Volkl Fuego this season. Pretty ski...neat red/pink color. I did not like the ski...too stiff and not versatile enough for my liking (sorry, all you divas you love the Fuego)! I was happy to get them off my feet and hand them back to my friend. And all of a sudden the pretty red/pink color of those skis wasn't so pretty to me anymore. Blech.

A few weeks ago, I started skiing a Dynastar Exclusive Legend Powder. The white ski with its brown flowered design is not to my liking. However, I am in love with the ski. So, now, the graphics have grown on me, because the skis have become my friend.

My Fischer Progressors have pretty boring graphics, but the ski rocks. The new Progressors certainly look cooler, but would I trade my old ones in for the newer graphics? NO! It's the same damn ski!

So, if I hopped on the Black Pearl, and loved it, then when I looked down at that bull, I'd think, (as SnowHot says) RAWR! But if I didn't like how the ski felt, then I'd look down at that crazy bull and say, "Curse you, psychotic bull!"

I think a lot of women are influenced by graphics, maybe more so than by the performance characteristics of a ski. However, it is sad if a ski shop makes a decision not to carry a ski because of graphics. They are the first ones in line who should be putting performance ahead of appearance when they determine their inventory. A good salesperson should be able to get a good feel for the needs of the consumer and sell the ski by its advertised performance (and quality of construction). It also comes down to how the ski is marketed and advertised as well.

I do have to admit that I like the Black Pearl's graphics. I think they're pretty cool and I like the cartoon-y bull. The Rossi S110w, on the other hand, has UGLY graphics, but that's just my opinion. However, some women think they look awesome. That said, if I loved how the S110w skied, it wouldn't stop me from buying it.

 

[SnowHot]

As I've said, I love the Crush's graphics, but although I posted a day or two ago that I couldn't remember why I didn't buy it, this discussion reminds me that I simply liked the Geishas feel and performance a little better. I really wanted to like the Crush because it looks so cool, but it just wasn't the best ski. They handled groomers and were great on skied-out stuff but I never got the edge-to-edge feel I got with the Geishas.

Whereas I don't like the Geisha's topsheet at all, especially the colors. And the geisha with sunglasses. And the US Mint-style curlicues. They look like they're simply trying too hard, like a woman with too much makeup. So I bought them despite their looks.

The Black Pearl's bulls aren't real attractive to me, but they sound great. Are there enough wild women out there to buy them? I dunno, but Blizzard is a small but growing company, despite their graphics. It could be that their women's line isn't selling well, but for all we know they could have sold more Crushes than they could manufacture and feel encouraged to go further.

Blizzard has been producing some amazing skis in the past few years, especially the Magnum and Viva line. The Titan/Crush line has sold great and several co-workers rave about them, although I wasn't terribly excited about the Crush for my taste. My "go to ski" in that category was the Kastle MX98 with early rise tip.

So, blizzard didn't leave the women out in the freeride line, which is a good thing, but they are seeing a demand for more womens' skis that kick butt and take names........and I think they're ready to deliver!

 

[litterbug]

I'm glad to hear that Blizzard is thriving and that enough women are responding to their lineup for them to keep producing quality skis. Even if I'm as broke next season as I expect to be I'll be demoing some Blizzards for giggles. I believe in supporting inspired upstarts with good ideas, and who knows, maybe they'll come up with something I can't live without.

 

[SnowHot]

Broke? That is the beauty of Blizzard skis......The price point on them is one of the most affordable on the market considering the profound quality of their products and design.

One of the reviews of the Blizzard Bonafide on EpicSki said "Its the best 899.00 ski out there, except that its 699.00"

 

[Swamp Dog]

not exactly an upstart either. Blizzard's been around for 65+ years. Getting better with age if you ask me!

 

[lynseyf]

If I really liked a ski the graphics would not put me off, they're covered with snow all the time anyway

Unfortunately Blizzard don't even seem to have a distributor in the Uk so the chance of me finding any for sale, let alone demo, is slim to none :(