Sorry, this is nothing new. It has been going on for a while and I just get fed up enough to type out this rant regarding why the ski industry's pricing of gear, if you really think about it, just does not make sense. Why is it that two skis using the same construction from tip to tail and in the same length, one 88 mm underfoot and the other 96 mm, the 96 is $50 to $100 more? It cannot be the amount of materials it takes to make the ski because, if that were the case, a 185 cm size should be more expensive than a 170 cm or 177 cm, right? Because of the higher price point, the wider one is presumed to be a better ski because the price is higher, when it is just not the case. It is just a different ski.
This issue is not just limited to skis and boots. Binding brands are also guilty. Why is a binding that is offered in an 11 and 13 or 12 and 14, when both use the same exact housings, construction, and design, be priced $30 to $50 differently when the only variation is the spring that is in the binding? Do the higher rate springs cost enough more to warrant the $40-50 price increase? I think not.
I think there needs to be some sort of restructuring in the thought process on how prices are set. In changing the model some, I think we can bring some equity and simplification for the consumer which could, in the end, help them decide what might be the best ski boot or binding for them. It could take the price dependency out of the decision process and could help them get the best gear for what they need.
There are some instances where we do not see this pricing concept. Here are a few examples: Head’s Supershape collection all have the same price regardless of waist widths. Kastle's MX collection, be it a 75, 83 or 88 mm wide and different lengths are the same price. Look’s Pivot 15 and 18, with the same construction, are the same price. It doesn’t, however, explain why the Pivot 12 and 14 are priced differently when, other than a spring, the two bindings are identical. If more is more, why are 115 mm brakes not more expensive than a 85mm brake?
Honestly, we don’t expect a change in the model unless every brand agreed and that could be considered collusion. There is no logical reason for the industry to have a model like this other than the current belief of needing a heirarchy in pricing. The industry feels it "needs" certain price points to to be addressed ... or is it just a simple cash grab? Thank you for letting me vent.