Originally Posted by Takecontrol618
To actually think that fat skis could hurt the industry in any way is absolutely ludicrous. The person who is buying a pair of 100+mm skis is likely also buying 3 or 4 other types of skis- the quiver mentality. Why ski one ski for all of them when you can really specialize? This is a concept that didnt really exist 20 years ago- skis were similar enough that an SG ski could be used for bumps, pow, and groomers alike, although it might not do any of them particularly well. Why spend another $600 on another pair of specialized skis when it wasnt going to offer much of an advantage? Nowadays, different types of skis have far less overlap as far as their uses. I can buy a 65mm SL ski that will be amazing on ice, a 66mm GS ski that will let me approach the sound barrier, an 80mm twin that will offer me great performance in crud and softer groomers, a 90mm midfat that will kick ass in all but the deepest pow, and a 110mm ski for the most biblical of dumps. They'll be far more fun than owning one pair of 74mm allmountain skis. Therefore, I'll have 5-6 pairs of skis, or one or two new pairs each season, as opposed to having one pair that I replace every 4-5 seasons. More money into the industry means more ability for manufacturers to emphasize new ski design and quality control.
As far as someone on the completely incorrect pair of skis for the terrain... who cares? As long as its not me or someone in one of my lessons, its not an issue. If I see some gaper on spats in the midwest, I'll have a hearty laugh. If one of my students brings a pair of spats to a lesson and wants to work on bumps or carving, I'll take them to the rental shop. That gaper is still spending $$$ on skis, lift tickets, clothing, etc. I could care less if they're doing it right or not, as long as they're doing it.