 Poster: A snowHead
|
Bouncing from the helmet study thread and my comments on back protectors brings me to one of my hobby horses. Why isn't safety gear cheaper to buy?
When I rode horses on the road regularly when I was younger things like hi vis jackets were starting to be considered a good idea. In those days though they were an arm and leg to buy and it was years before I saved enough pocket money to afford even 4 thin loops of the reflective material for my horses legs. I could never understand this - surely anything that helps keep folks out of hospitals should be sufficiently well subsidised that everyone can afford to use it.
However, things don't seem to have changed much. Yes, thanks to Lidls and their ilk you can now pick up a ski helmet if they fit you for around a tenner, but more usually you are looking at the £40+ mark for helmets - as you are for riding hats and motorcycle helmets are normally £100+ for anything decent. Back protectors in all sports are astronomical too. OK, kids stuff is VAT free, but why not make all safety gear more affordable?
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Depends - are you talking compulsory safety gear (e.g motor cycling helmet) or fashion accessories (e.g ski helmet)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Guvnor, Smiley noted!
No, I'm talking all safety gear whether you are obliged to wear it or whether you just want to wear it. It's all too expensive IMV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Megamum, who should subsidise the cost of safety gear for comparatively rich people who can go skiing or afford horses? And is this a worthier cause than, say, spending the same amount of tax payers money providing better perinatal care to help prevent life long damage to babies? Or building hospices? Or teaching children to cook healthy food?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
When it comes to saftey gear companies know that people will pay whatever it takes to protect themselves or their little darlings so they jack up the price. Same as medicines etc. But like everything else If you know the right places they will cut the margin they are taking on it for you!
Deginatley thinkg Helmets are way to expensive €100-€130 for the top of the line ones? Seriously the technology is not that complex for helmets is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
It is something I take into account as part of the overall cost - I personally don't wear a helmet for skiing, but I do wear a transceiver and carry a shovel and probe....if I felt I needed the extra protection, then the cost could possibly become a deciding factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The stuff is presumably sold at the price which is believed to generate the highest profit. There is no other motive in market economies; why would anyone sell them for less? It's like suggesting that you should pay twice as much for your skiing hol.
There is no place for the public good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Megamum if your company was say, Giro, and you could sell helmets at £100+ wouldn't you? Makes business sense.
But I do agree, it is too expensive!
(Right thread just got a little confused!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
There is no place for the public good.
|
Maybe, but don't you think that's a shame? If a company makes a wide range of products you would think that they could price some of each type at a sensible amount just to appear a little altruistic - it might make good marketting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just a email sent to me. I wonder if we over do things a bit as i agree with most below.
CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL THE KIDS WHO WERE BORN IN THE
1940s, 50s, 60s and 70s
First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they carried us.
They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a tin, and didn't get tested for diabetes.
Then after that trauma, our baby cots were covered with bright coloured lead-based paints.
We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.
Riding in the back of a van - loose - was always exciting and great fun.
We drank water from the garden hose or tap and NOT from a bottle.
We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle or can and NO ONE actually died from this.
We ate cakes, white bread and real butter and drank cordial with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because.......
WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!
We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.
No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.
We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, No video games at all, No 99 channels,No Pay TV, No cable, No DVD movies or surround sound.
It's crazy! We even had
No mobile phones, No text messaging, No personal computers, No Internet or Internet chat rooms..........
WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.
We played with worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.
Made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we didn't poke out anyone's eye.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!
Local teams had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!
The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!
The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.
We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned how to deal with it all!
And YOU are one of them!
CONGRATULATIONS!
You might want to share this with others who have had the luck to grow up as kids, before the lawyers and the government regulated our lives for our own good.
and while you are at it, forward it to your kids so they will know how brave their parents were.
Kind of makes you want to run through the house with your eyes shut holding a pair of scissors, doesn't it?!
PS -The BIG type is because at your age, your eyes are buggered....
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
ntfarmer, yeeaaayyyy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
PPS it was in big type in e-mail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
much as i like that email, the only problem with it is that the people making these laws, bringing the lawsuits etc were all born in the 40s 50s 60s and 70s
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Megamum, it's hardly everyone else's business to pay for your expensive hobbies, is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Megamum, Horsey back protectors are a different beast to ski/board back protectors. Horsey ones are basically some hard foam in a material cover. Snow related ones seem to have lots more technical stuff to protect against rock imact as well as cushioning the fall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
On a cost-benefit basis, it would have been cheaper for the NHS to buy Megamum a back protector when she was younger rather than have to treat her injury... But why should the perceived cost of the hobby be relevant? If you have a car accident, are you less entitled to care because you were in a Porsche? And why does everyone think riding is so expensive? I ride and ski, and riding costs me a heck of a lot less!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
BEWARE!!
This is a helmet thread in disguise
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Megamum wrote: |
| Quote: |
There is no place for the public good.
|
Maybe, but don't you think that's a shame? If a company makes a wide range of products you would think that they could price some of each type at a sensible amount just to appear a little altruistic - it might make good marketting |
I agree with you, it is a shame, but it's not likely to change anytime soon. Neither our economic system nor the mind set of business people or people in general allows it. Return on investment is the only thing that matters to business, and that's probably the way it has to be in a market/capital led economy, and not paying tax is high up most people's persoonal poltical agenda, making public subsidy difficult to achieve. Who (apart from enlightened snowHeads) will vote for a party campaigning on the slogan 'A subsidised ski helmet for every family!'?
The question you pose is possibly one aspect of a broader one; how to make enjoyable but fairly pricey activities, like skiing, mountain biking and so on accessible to the masses? Do we want to? There are a lot of posts on here being sniffy about mass market resorts and how they're full of ghastly people, and extolling the virtues of darling little resorts that simply no-one has heard of apart from a few agreeable French (or whatever). I don't get the impression from this forum that skiers are anxious to have their activity made more accessible to the proles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ski helmet cost v cycle helmet cost -essentially the same technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO "safety gear" probably costs more because the R&D costs and testing to the required standard will cost a lot more than for "standard" clothing. Also it's sold into a smaller (niche) marketplace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Having refelcted, I doubt that expensive safety eqipment is a serious bar to participation in skiing. The chances of a helmet making any difference to you are, we are all agreed I think, very small (I write as a helmet wearer); if someone really can't afford a ski helmet, skiing without one is clearly a perfectly acceptable risk for most, given the tiny number of skiing deaths/skier each year and the relatively small number of people who use them.
The calculation may be different for safety equipment for some other activities - rock climbing, perhaps, or SCUBA diving (an air supply is considered pretty essential by those in the know), but for skiing, on piste at least, cost of safety gear (helmet) is not really an issue.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Fri 4-04-08 11:22; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kruisler wrote: |
BEWARE!!
This is a helmet thread in disguise |
Dead right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
The problem with safety gear is that development/production costs are high for a niche product. There's a limited market and it's not the sort of thing that someone is going to buy every couple of weeks. Couple the design process with the fact that every item produced has to work 100% and costs spiral.
There was a debate on the cost of climbing kit a while ago and one of the manufacturers gave a very considered response along the lines above (although far more detailed) which in my view completely justified the prices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
These poor skiers, it does make you feel very badly for them. They drink so many pints of beer at so many inflated prices, wearing so many fancy jackets and buying so many fancy skis. Some of them can only afford two ski holidays a year. Let's start a new Trust Fund to buy the poor sods a helmet. It's enough to wring your heart. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Safety gear is too expensive" - on what basis exactly? Do you actually know what the profit margins are?
What benefits would the government get from subsidising safety gear for participants of a minority sport?
Sorry, sounds like a bit of a whinge to me. I wish I could get all my leisure sport gear for free or heavily subsidised too, but I'm not expecting to any time soon. I don't see that safety gear is any more or less expensive than the rest of the gear involved i.e. clothing, skis, boots etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
It is cheap... in the US.
Megamum, it is agree market. Unless these items become compulsory I can see no reason why they should be subsidized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
| Unless these items become compulsory I can see no reason why they should be subsidized. |
? that's an odd bit of logic. Safety belts in cars, and helmets on motor bikes, are compulsory but not, as far as I know, subsidised. If they became compulsory, and therefore more frequently bought, there would be more competition in the market place, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
It's very unlikely that sports safety gear of this nature will ever become Nationally compulsory. Individual resorts might consider it (as already starting to happen across the pond), but in any case I very much doubt there would be any subsidised safety gear involved. I really don't see a valid case for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| pam w wrote: |
| These poor skiers, it does make you feel very badly for them. They drink so many pints of beer at so many inflated prices, wearing so many fancy jackets and buying so many fancy skis. Some of them can only afford two ski holidays a year. Let's start a new Trust Fund to buy the poor sods a helmet. It's enough to wring your heart. |
Gosh, I don't think I've ever seen you goaded into sarcasm before! I entirely agree, by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
ntfarmer, It's a funny e-mail, but I'd rather live in this environment than back in the 40s, 50s, 60s etc. We visited a Welsh slate quarry museum the other week and you wouldn't have wanted to work there back then for sure. Many of the workers died prematurely from inhaling the quarry dust and ski holidays were definitely not on the agenda! So perhaps H&S is not so bad afterall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
There is a European answer to this question -
Decathlon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| richmond wrote: |
| I don't get the impression from this forum that skiers are anxious to have their activity made more accessible to the proles. |
I agree but its not a snobbery thing, one of my best days of skiing this year was at a rinky dink local ski hill. Its more the don't want to be fighting for lifts, swerving round crowds on the mountain etc thing. I've never been to Andorra but it used to have that reputation. Bansko now is probably in that position if the reports of half term crowds are true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| fatbob wrote: |
There is a European answer to this question -
Decathlon |
Although now, more and more, the cheap Decathlon products are caused for controversy in some forums I have come across.
It's the usual " they kill other business/brands, they're a pile of tat" etc etc
So there's always someone to moan...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pam w, Agreed, but there have been parallels in other countries. Australia launched baby carrying "capsules" which were compulsory for parents carrying kids in their cars. I believe these were subsidised.
uktrailmonster, agreed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| So perhaps H&S is not so bad after all. |
yes indeed, it's easy to scoff until you realise, for example, the scale of industrial accidents which is still surprisingly high; poor health and safety at work probably kills more Brits than all sports put together. One member of my brother in law's family died recently of asbestosis apparently contracted because his dad worked in the Glasgow ship building yards; the deceased used to dash to give his dad a hug when he came home from work, and the dust he picked up subsequently killed him, many years later. The ship yard worker himself died in his early 50's, probably of the same thing, but nobody gave a sh*t.
And loads of kids were killed because of having no seat belts etc. Despite the huge rise in road traffic over the last 50 years, the death toll has dropped because of things like safety belts. And drink driving laws.
That email, superficially funny, is really a load of rubbish, when you come to look at it a bit harder.
I agree with the sentiment that kids ought to go out and play though - that's fine. The hysteria over a very small annual toll of dreadful murders of children (a toll which, incidentally, is no worse now than 50 years ago) is creating a generation of over-protected, over-fed, over-indulged, kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Purchase repitition is another factor in helmets that is often overlooked.
You have an impact, you have to get a new helmet.
You don't have an impact for 3 years, no matter how many days skiing you've done, you have to get a new helmet.
That adds up too!
I don't know if the same technology limitations apply to back protectors though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
flowa,
| Quote: |
You don't have an impact for 3 years, no matter how many days skiing you've done, you have to get a new helmet.
|
Really?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Especially how many ski hols (hopefully) one will last you for. Can't remember when I got mine, but its been a couple of years. Say I've worn it for 6 weeks - it cost me about £60 I think. £10 a week?
