I hope that he can remain healthy, stay in the Austrian system and keep getting WC starts. With the recent change in how FIS points are calculated to reward WC results over EC and Continental Cups, Daniel has a window of opportunity as his world ranking just dropped from something in the 50-60 range to 30-32. Not a single thing to do with any recent race results. He skis just GS, BTW. This creates a huge opportunity.
With a bib number in the low 30’s or less, this is his time to qualify for a second run and score WC points. I hope that his new ski choice propels him to do well, and that regardless of how much of a role it plays, Augment can get some great press and capitalize it. It is a great opportunity....smart move by them. He was very close to being dropped by the Austrian system. His injury history and now good health probably kept him in. Rossignol dropped him, elected not to renew his contract.
The guy has talent but has had no good luck. And unlike the USA, in Europe people tend to know quite a bit about the sport, who is who, etc. If Daniel can produce results, Augment can capitalize.
So now “free” of that Rossi relationship, I am guessing that he took a hard look at what might make him fastest, as he was not in a position to get much of a payday. My hunch is that he was looking for the best skis for him. Not the best {or any} contract. When these things take place you often get an indication of what ski truly performs best for the skier. When the skier is in a position to get paid, the whole process changes. Almost never does the athlete end up on a ski other that from the company offering the best payday. This may be a move to salvage a career, and to get the best skis to do it. Have no insight.
The USST’s Tim Jitloff made this same move late in his career when CROC {now Augment}was launching and after he had been cut by a Fischer, and not pleased with his Stockli deal. He raved about the CROC. And the selection was pretty darn transparent. He tried them, was excited about them, made the move.
There are a large number of factors that play into this game, including the pool fees that a ski company must pay the national federation {the USST’s are just onerous}, the tech support, etc. I won’t cover the whole thing. At the top levels, it’s more than the ski itself.
I am guessing Daniel will be in essentially the same boot. Blue versus white. Lange versus Rossi. That may be a very important thing for him. Varies by athlete. Some learn that a new company building your boots does NOT work that well.
I would love to see Augment get real serious about top level racing in this country. I am VERY excited about this relationship with
@ScotsSkier. I hope that his skis work exceptionally well, and that they listen to his ski and business acumen. He can be a big help. I will be honest, though, what I read and hear about their “plan” seems to confuse me.
“Getting real serious” takes a huge investment and is not easy. It also may take more manufacturing capacity than they may currently have. I think they would need to “comp” a number of athletes, at six-eight pairs each. And those athletes and coaches would need to be “sold” on the performance of the skis. Based on SS’s impressions, that performance piece should be doable.
If I am a top level U16, I, my parents and my coach{es} tend to go with what had proven to work, be fast, and what the national race directors can get me.....from Europe. That piece is important. Same thing takes place as I enter the FIS years and ascent there. NorAm’s and NCAA...yep. Everybody is interested in the very best pairs of skis. As a retired USST skier put it to me last week: “Because they REALLY F****** MATTER!”
I am convicrd these are a great high end race ski. I hope that figure the rest out. These are high end, highest end RACE skis. No offense, folks, but not what many here need, includung those who feel like a “FIS SL” is some silver bullet to your skiing. As in you must have a pair for hard snow carving. You might love a FIS spec ski, but you probably don’t a Hirscher layup!
Sorry to offend anybody with that. Ask anybody who runs the distribution and service of race product, and they’ll explain that we are not who they build skis for. But since it’s hard to sell ANY skis, we do see more race oriented shops putting some women’s and men’s FIS spec SL on the wall. Are those the true high end layup?...almost never, IME. SS and I have discussed this a lot over the years as we have had access to “real” skis....often true WC skis. They would make no difference to me. To my kids. Racing at ages 16-25...big. All of them sourced through different channels.
Having these skis available through a conventional distribution channel is nice opportunity.
Assume these are really great “real deal” skis. For the right purpose and pilot. Have heard that for a few years. When CROC started, the only skis built were race skis. The only people on them were the best older junior racers, and Europa Cup skiers in a few Euro countries. They were not selling a lot of skis. They seee making fewer than 3000 pairs a year. It’s because of the background of the Augment team...race. From Nordica/Blizzard. The results have been astounding. They kick ass.
SS is a good friend. I am convinced that he can be a VERY big help to them. And I hope that whatever plan they have is ultimately a resounding success! I bet it will be subject to change.
I have spoken to three coaches who are coaching younger kids who will likely all end up on the USST or in the top ranks of NCAA. Very skilled U16’s. Thr best. I asked about Augment. Tough sell. They are all being given what they need by a few other companies; not at all like the product a typical U16 would buy through their club. If there was a faster ski, would parents buy it? Probably, as these parents tend to be hyper competitive. No budget. However, questions arise in terms of how many skis will be available, where, when a few pairs need to be replaced mid season. Not unusual to start in July with three pairs of GS, and have two be toast be January. Can they be assured of more?
The big companies have that contingency covered. One of these coaches has about a dozen pairs on hand, new and unmounted to take care of that need. He just pulls them out of his office, mounts them, sets them up and gets them ready to go. Not wringing hands over how to get an elusive pair, mid season.
Gets more demanding at the upper levels. Who is the Augment tech at the NorAm races? There is none? Ohh...maybe when we get some skiers, and need to absorb that cost.
Chicken or egg? You need, I think, great skiers to get the product accepted and in demand.
Unless you start out in a couple of niches, and make nice gains in creating awareness.
One WELL could be masters, SS’s world. That could work well. One could be trying to line up a couple of the top “technical” skiers. Problem there is that those guys want to, and do, get paid. Do they really sell skis? Research would say no. But for the non race skis...might work. It’s worth a try with one or two of them.
Race results create demand among racers. And if the demand is among those who have to pay...and will...all is good. Question is how to get the results? Because in most segments the best do not need to pay. And whether Augment will put $200K of comp’d or free product out there? And whether they are truly that good.
The testing and comparing is quite rigorous at the top levels. Many people on a test hill, lots of effort....and, all about the clock. ALL.
These may be a high end race ski that doubles as an incredible free ski. We’ll see.
Exciting to watch, and exciting to have SS on their team!!!!