 Poster: A snowHead
|
Amer, the Finnish owners of Atomic skis have bought Salomon skis from Adidas for 485 million Euros including 144 million goodwill. The transaction has been financed by increasing Amer's debt and should be completed by September...
Salomon have a reputation amongst some serious skiers as being rubbish kit - although the guys I saw at the EOSB seemed to be pretty chuffed with their Pocket Rockets in all the Arcs powwow. Will this bring Austrian know-how to Annecy (or Shanghai were most Salomon kit is now made?). After Rossi it seems like there is some consolidation going on in the ski business this year. Apparently the top management of Adidas and Salomon had "artistic differences" and this was a reason for the split.
Source: Liberation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I wonder if Adidas have revealed Salomon's turnover and profit, split from the total?
When I were a lad wooden skis, leather boots and bindings were made in village factories across the Alps. Eee, it were better than Hovis - like little bakeries, they were.
The cartel that now comprises the world's big ski brands is of no benefit to the consumer. The prices are ludicrous - compare the cost of cycles and what you get for your money.
Consumers should be revolting. Of course, that wily old character Georges Salomon - whose dad started the firm by making ski edges in the 1940s - cashed in his chips ages ago and must be having a good laugh. Maybe he'll buy his own name back, on the cheap, in the end?
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Mon 2-05-05 13:19; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Consumers should be revolting. |
ok I'll bite: some of the one's I"ve seen on package holidays are!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Didn't Salomon buy Arcteryks ...??
Still, at least the skis should benefit from Atomic's status as a top ski maker..
Haven't skied on Salomons for some years now but I am aware that they have aquired a wishy-washy name of late....
I am always wary of manufacturers shipping out their Operation to the Far East. When you pay £300.00 for a jacket
I can understand the cost being attributable to western workers salaries but I can't understand how they can justify
the same price when the Far Eastern worker gets nothing like that.
The only big-ish name I know who still makes stuff here...well France and therefore a western salary is Eider...or at least they did when I bought my climbing jacket...
I hope they still do...!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
they do, but they're now owned by soneone based in the uk rather than by the french
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Funnily enough this reported Atomic takeover has echoes of a much earlier ownership of the French ski maker Dynamic - from memory, early 1970s. In fact, I think the Atomic-Dynamic group was about the earliest significant takeover in ski making.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So who owns Dynamic now? Is it still Atomic? Which would explain various similarities in shape! The skis are made in Austria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Article in today's Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1475183,00.html
| Quote: |
| The Amer chief executive, Roger Talermo, said that he wanted to share technology between his Atomic winter sports business and Salomon's. "We can help them on how to produce skis in an efficient and good manner and increase the performance of the products, they can help us to produce ski boots," he said yesterday. He said the plan to shift production of skis from France to low-cost Romania was unchanged. |
| Quote: |
| He said that there should not be any issues with competition regulators as Salomon's ski business is strong in French and Latin markets while Amer's Atomic is strong in north European markets. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Whatever Amer's protestations this takeover should be examined by competition regulators. Maybe someone can search out the current market shares of the most powerful ski brands, because I suspect that an Atomic-Salomon group would further exercise restrictive trade practices and price control (which have been an issue in the ski market for some time already).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adidas has not been happy with Salomon's profitability from day one. In a market that relies on timely snowfall to be successful, a ski equipment maker can never really fit into a logical business model. Amer understands that beter than Adidas. They understand and want to be in the snow sports business. End products to the consumer should only improve. There's still enough competition from the Quiksilver/Rossi/Dynastar/Look/Lange group and the Marker/Vokl/K2 group and the Tecnica/Nordica/Dolomite and the Head/Tyrolia group to keep things competitive. The ski equipment market is not very large, and consolidation, for better or worse, is a fact of business life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
consolidation, for better or worse, is a fact of business life.
|
... Worse. And don't we know it, from the oil cartel downwards. Maybe in the not-too-distant future the multinational cartels and monopolies that seem to control prices will come under check. But since the biggest ones seem to control governments we're into dangerous territory.
--------------
If Salomon has problems, they are probably rooted in a lack of passion for R+D and product originality. Their strongest product ever (certainly in terms of uniqueness and patents) - the rear-entry boot series started in 1979 - resulted from 6 years of intense design work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
David, surely you mean the stiffest ever? I remember those miserable SX91 Equipes only too well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David@traxvax wrote: |
| those miserable SX91 Equipes |
I'd be careful what you say - you never know just whose equipment you might be "dissing"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Actually the SX91 - photo here of non-Equipe version - was a boot that stayed on my feet for more years than any other. It had the only effective flex control ever installed on a boot, was brilliantly easy to enter and exit, held the foot and lower leg very securely and was far easier to walk in than a front-entry boot.
If the equipment elitists, professionals and others hadn't swung fashion against quality rear-entry boots, skiers would still have user-friendly products on their feet today.
My memories of the strength of the Salomon brand go back before their boots existed, in the mid-late 1970s. Salomon only made bindings then and I remember them selling like hot cakes in Alpine Sports (the leading London ski shop chain, pre Snow+Rock) where I was working at the time. The Look turntable binding was a far better and simpler piece of engineering but Salomon demonstrated their dominant production and promotion as early as that - which provided the development finance of the boot.
The Salomon ski, which began in 1990, was also an original piece of design with its 'monocoque' shell, but it was largely hyped into popularity. In performance terms there was nothing superior about it, but the cost and complexity of ski production was cleverly reduced. I've no real knowledge about all the other gear they've branched into - walking boots, nordic ski stuff etc. etc., so can't comment on its quality.
The company always used to encourage an 'internationalist' outlook from its staff around the world, with excellent communications. I think that's why they, and Rossignol, decimated the Austrian ski equipment industry, which always 'knew best' but usually misunderstood its consumers around the world.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Tue 3-05-05 16:39; edited 4 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
As NBT implied....da management support SX91 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
David Goldsmith, in answer to your earlier question I can reveal that in 2004 Salomon had sales of €653m, and an operating profit (ie before interest and tax) of €28m. In the first quarter of 2005, sales at Salomon declined by 8%. The disposal includes the brands Salomon, Mavic, Bonfire, Arc’Terx and Cliché and the price is €485m as stated. Salomon was originally bought by Adidas in 1998 for FF8 billion(!) and of course didn't include all of those brands. If my rough calculation is correct, that equates to about €1.2 billion, so Adidas has taken a bath there. Adidas have been rumoured to be selling Salomon for a long time, as they want to focus on "soft" sporting goods (ie shoes and apparel) rather than "hard" goods such as skis and boots, which are expensive to make and (in the case of skiing/snowboarding) very cyclical.
On Amer, they were rumoured to be buying Salomon for many years. The timing, coming just after K2 buys Volkl and Quiksilver buys Rossignol/Dynastar, is very interesting. IMHO they have paid a very full price for Salomon, but Amer may have felt that they had to move sooner than later in order to keep up. Amer have (financially speaking) done a very good job at Atomic, and certainly (as many equipment reviews will attest, including on this fine site) the product is well thought of. It will be very interesting if there is any attempt to integrate the two brand and/or technologies. For me, that would be a mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
M80euf, The trouble with all the makes keeping their names is that you no longer know what you're buying. If I buy a Volkl ski I expect to be buying a german made ski, K2 is american. etc. etc. Now I'm ski-ing on fischers - who owns them? The websites are no help. Who is still independent? We should all try to buy from smaller, independent manufacturers or the cartels will have it all their own way - with the inevitable consequences. 
BTW with Atomic and Salomon in the same hands, how much competition will there be in the WC next year (other than slalom that is?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
The trouble with all the makes keeping their names is that you no longer know what you're buying. If I buy a Volkl ski I expect to be buying a german made ski, K2 is american. etc. etc. Now I'm ski-ing on fischers - who owns them?
|
This is not restricted just to the Ski Market, look at cars, is it a Jaguar? is it a Volvo? is it an Aston Martin?
No its a Ford!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
Who is still independent?
|
Err ... snowHeads. I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
SX-94 still in use (once a year). Perfectly happy with the old rear-entries. Adjustable flex. Clip 'em up and leave 'em all day. Suit my feet and skiing just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
Actually the SX91 - photo here of non-Equipe version - was a boot that stayed on my feet for more years than any other. It had the only effective flex control ever installed on a boot, was brilliantly easy to enter and exit, held the foot and lower leg very securely and was far easier to walk in than a front-entry boot.
If the equipment elitists, professionals and others hadn't swung fashion against quality rear-entry boots, skiers would still have user-friendly products on their feet today.
My memories of the strength of the Salomon brand go back before their boots existed, in the mid-late 1970s. Salomon only made bindings then and I remember them selling like hot cakes in Alpine Sports (the leading London ski shop chain, pre Snow+Rock) where I was working at the time. The Look turntable binding was a far better and simpler piece of engineering but Salomon demonstrated their dominant production and promotion as early as that - which provided the development finance of the boot.
The Salomon ski, which began in 1990, was also an original piece of design with its 'monocoque' shell, but it was largely hyped into popularity. In performance terms there was nothing superior about it, but the cost and complexity of ski production was cleverly reduced. I've no real knowledge about all the other gear they've branched into - walking boots, nordic ski stuff etc. etc., so can't comment on its quality.
The company always used to encourage an 'internationalist' outlook from its staff around the world, with excellent communications. I think that's why they, and Rossignol, decimated the Austrian ski equipment industry, which always 'knew best' but usually misunderstood its consumers around the world. |
I agree entirely with your comments on Salomon rear entry boots.
I personally never liked the Look turntable bindings. I like my bindings to close with a definite click. With Look (and indeed Rossignol Axials) I was never sure that the binding was properly closed. I never had problems with a Salomon binding.
I disagree with you about the early Salomon skis. The Superforce 3S was a fantastic ski. It was light and nimble and was like skiing on railway lines. The Axendo Series was another great ski - but I never cared for the XScream or Pilot in their various incarnations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't the Superforce a second-generation Salomon ski?
I'm surprised at your dislike of the Look bindings. The rear cylinder sprang up on closure very dramatically, indicating you were in the binding very clearly. Funnily enough I experienced the reverse with a Salomon of that era (the 555), which gave me a pre-release in no uncertain terms through not being properly closed.
A Look binding of the late 70s: the N77. I'd still confidently use it today, personally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
easiski, what choice do we have for "independents"? I can think of FIscher, Stockli, Head, Zag, Line, Armada, Movement and I'm sure many others i have forgotten. Sadly it is likely that if any of these more "niche" brands are successful then one of the bigger "conglomerates" will snap them up, and their respective founders/owners will not be able to resist the temptation of cashing in, a la Ben and Jerrys and many other examples.
Returning back to the original thread topic, I have always associated Atomic with making solid, heavy skis in the teutonic style. Salomons, on the other hand - well, lets not start that debate again, we all know the reputation, deserved or not. I wonder if there will be any perceptible changes to either brand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| easiski wrote: |
| K2 is american |
Made in China I think. I also have some Salomon boots that are made in China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Strange, in the bike industry there's seems to be a bit of this kind of attitude amongst punters epsecially - some people pay a premium for frames "made in america" such as Ellsworth or Santa Cruz, but it's generally acknowledged that the Taiwanese produce the best frames. HNaving said that I know of at least one manufacturer who refused to move production to CHina because he couldn;t be 100% sure of the accuracy and error-checking, whereas he was happy with the work done in Taiwan
I guess it's a similar thing for any industry - the move to the far east is simply motivated by profit, since they can get away with paying less. It just depends how much less they want tp pay, as it's all relative, they can still get the best workers by paying higher wages relative to the local economy while paying less than they would in their original manufacturing base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
nbt, I was just thinking about cycling analogies too. I tend to buy my gear from local, smaller companies, with decent reputations and, if possible, who make their own stuff rather than import.
These companies tend to have a fairly loyal following as the gear works well, lasts well and the customer support is great.
As easiski, said, Pheonix would have been in that sort of group - I had a jacket 'n pant set of theirs that lasted well over ten years and worked well. But I have no idea about similar sorts of companies in the skiing field though, so I'd be interested in someone adding to M80euf's list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The two brands feel quite different to ski on. One is softer, making it much easier to turn, but at the cost of a certain amount of edge grip and stability, and the other is stiffer, providing good edge grip and stability, with a big kick of acceleration at the end of the turn, but is not as easy to handle at lower speeds. (More than my life is worth to say which is which, you'll have to work that out for yourselves!) From that point of view, it could be said that the two brands will complement each other quite nicely.
Also in alpine racing there is a certain amount of dovetailing; Atomic is much stronger on the Men's World Cup, Salomon on the Women's World Cup.
Even after this consolidation, I hope there'll still be enough competition amongst the big conglomerates (and also from the rental market and the small brands which keep popping up) to maintain prices at the current level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Martin Bell,
Does the fact that Atomic is stronger on the men's and salomon on the women's have any relation to the question of which is stiffer and which is softer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
In theory it shouldn't do because shop skis and race dept skis have totally different flex characteristics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Martin Bell wrote: |
| The two brands feel quite different to ski on. One is softer, making it much easier to turn, but at the cost of a certain amount of edge grip and stability, and the other is stiffer, providing good edge grip and stability, with a big kick of acceleration at the end of the turn, but is not as easy to handle at lower speeds. (More than my life is worth to say which is which, you'll have to work that out for yourselves!) |
I just love that big kick from my M:B5's 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
