I say good riddance to them. Agree with Beech. I like companies who care about their customers and not politics. Turns me off.
Printable View
I say good riddance to them. Agree with Beech. I like companies who care about their customers and not politics. Turns me off.
I spent the day riding in Colorado. They do have some spectacular mountains. I've been giving everyone here the middle finger after hearing the news yesterday. Lol
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...241efd9ebf.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
"Gary's Gas" LMAO
X2Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
The OR folks weren't deliberately targeting their client base....they were targeting the bonehead leadership here in Utah. Their client base was just unfortunate collateral damage.
What I still don't understand is if outdoor recreation is such a multi-million dollar industry, and Herb and the rest of the good ole boys are all about the money....then why didn't they make more of an effort to accommodate the Outdoor Retailers? Why are they dumping all over an industry that is so lucrative? Are they just being obstinate to gratify their own pride, or what???
Good luck with that, at least if you go mountaineering, canyoneering, or climbing. There isn't a mountaineer, climber, or canyoneer in this country that doesn't own gear from any of those retailers. Try to find one climber or canyoneer that doesn't own something from Black Diamond, just one of the retailers. The only hikers and backpackers that might not are the ones that buy their stuff exclusively from Walmart or K-Mart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
Outdoor companies aren't the only ones who have done this. How to you feel about gun-manufacturers moving their production out of states with stricter gun control than other areas? Several gun manufacturers have done this in recent years:
http://www.gunsandammo.com/network-t...panies-moving/
This was a lot bigger scale than the Outdoor Retailer Show.
Isn't this the same thing?
They think that things such as oil and coal are more lucrative. Actually, they are right in this regard, at least for now.Quote:
Then why didn't they make more of an effort to accommodate the Outdoor Retailers? Why are they dumping all over an industry that is so lucrative? Are they just being obstinate to gratify their own pride, or what???
I think Chaffetz blew it with his proposal to sell public lands. Some Utah politicians have been claiming that they have no plans to sell public lands, but when people actually saw the sell of public lands as a bill, it scared them.
High quality gear...lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Scott P
Colorado can bite me. I've never seen so many Subarus. Fake outdoors... [emoji23]
They probably thought it was because you ride a BMW. BMW drivers and riders do tend to flip everyone off. :haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by accadacca
You're saying I'll have a tough time buying gear from a company that puts customer needs first, because I've only got these brands to choose from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott P
At least we can agree these companies don't have our best interests in mind.
That may be true, currently, but thank goodness for capitalism. There will be a customer oriented brand soon enough.
Exactly. Everyone who makes high quality gear was at the Outdoor Retailer Show.:haha: Otherwise, buy your stuff at Walmart or K-Mart. I don't think that they were there.Quote:
Originally Posted by accadacca
Basically. Of course you can always start your own line of 'Beech Climbing Gear. If it comes with the famous Sombeech Afro logo, I might take a look.Quote:
You're saying I'll have a tough time buying gear from a company that puts customer needs first, because I've only got these brands to choose from.
That may be true, currently, but thank goodness for capitalism.
Not all retailers at the show supported or endorsed the move. If you have been paying attention it's easy to know which manufacturers I'll be avoiding in the future. That I've bought gear from some of these manufacturers in the past has no bearing on my future purchases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott P
This move is really going to hurt Utah's outdoor gear cottage industry. To bad they will become collateral damage as they are too small to have much of a voice. Also too bad some of the big boys pushing the move have forgotten their roots.
Here is there newsroom of sorts. They sure moved quickly. Maybe a knee jerk decision or as gremlin said, they had been waiting to make a mockery of Utah.
http://unity.outdoorretailer.com/news/
I agree and I have been paying attention. PS, can you at least send me some of that gear you don't want to use anymore?Quote:
Not all retailers at the show supported or endorsed the move.
It is too bad and it is also too bad that some in Utah are becoming more hostile to public lands and protections. I understand the economy part, but I still think that Chaffetz made a big mistake by actually calling for the sale of public lands in a bill. It really did backfire on him.Quote:
Also too bad some of the big boys pushing the move have forgotten their roots.
Why would I stop using gear I already own? That would accomplish none of my intended goals, but not buying any future products from said companies might.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott P
Here is a good article on the collateral damage I mentioned earlier.
Outdoor Retailer departure draws varying degrees of concern
http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=43222229&nid=1070
There may be a misunderstanding about the OR show here. The "customer base" for OR is not you and me. It's buyers for resale (wholesale and retail). The booths mainly represent manufacturers/producers, with a few large distributors in the mix (e.g. Liberty Mtn.). It used to be a show where a lot of sales business got done - retailers would come, check out the new stuff, and write orders for the next season. Now, it's less a straight sales show and more of a marketing extravaganza (most of the "big" business gets done pre-show).
Here is a link to the exhibitors.
Everybody should print it out and put on their fridge so it is handy the next time they go shopping for gear.
http://s15.a2zinc.net/clients/emeral...5832&AEID=1234
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlefork
Excerpt from
https://www.utah.gov/governor/docs/O...tionVision.pdf
The State of Utah Outdoor Recreation Vision
With its beautiful and unique landscapes and world-class facilities, Utah leads the nation in outdoor recreation. Opportunities for outdoor recreation in Utah are as diverse as the people who enjoy them. To some, outdoor recreation is as simple as walking the neighborhood trail or a bike ride around the block. To a child, it may be playing at the neighborhood park. Sportsmen and Sportswomen enjoy hunting and fishing in Utah’s great backcountry. Skiers flock to the “Greatest Snow on Earth.” For others, it’s backpacking, boating, motorized off-road vehicles, climbing, or rock hunting. The list of outdoor activities in Utah is vast and growing as innovative adventurers create new sports.
While Utah’s residents and visitors are having fun in the outdoors, they also feed our economy and improve their health. Utah’s outdoor recreation industry is a significant and growing part of the state’s economy, contributing well-paying jobs for highly skilled workers and a tax base that funds essential state services. Our close access to outdoor recreation contributes to a quality of life that a recent Gallup survey concluded was the best in the United States.1 This quality of life is particularly attractive to companies and their employees looking to relocate. And, as one of the more active states, Utah tops the nation in several health categories.
Pace-setters, however, cannot rest on their laurels. To enhance Utah’s leadership in outdoor recreation, Governor Gary R. Herbert charged the Governor’s Council on Balanced Resources with preparing a vision that emphasizes outdoor recreation as a priority in the state and sets a nationwide standard.
The Council undertook this effort fully aware of the challenges. The broad support for outdoor recreation belies many difficult underlying issues. How do we resolve tension among sometimes-conflicting recreational activities? Will increasing participation harm the very resources on which outdoor activities depend? Can we balance access to existing recreational activities with protecting environmentally sensitive landscapes? How will we fund necessary management and maintenance of recreational facilities in a financially constrained world? What is the appropriate balance between necessary resource development and protection of beautiful outdoor places? Could aggressive efforts to promote tourism diminish the opportunities for locals? Can developed recreation and backcountry recreation coexist? With the high cost of equipment, guides and travel, are popular outdoor activities being priced out of the range of average families? And, of course, there are many other issues.
I have to say I have found this discussion to be pretty enlightening. Business in general is changing. Retail especially is very driven by social and environmental issues because the younger generations are into that. There are plenty of studies out there that show that a company's stance on social and environmental issues have more and more bearing on a person's purchasing decisions than ever before. This is mostly true with the young folks, but it's also true with the more experienced among us. You see it here with the calls to boycott this company or that company.
I didn't really have much of an opinion on this and the whole public lands thing before this, but the more I think of it I hate coming across gates on roads out in the middle of nowhere. I hate the idea of getting ticketed for trespassing in an area that I shouldn't have to worry about that. I hate land owners that block the only access to land that they don't own just because you have to travel through a corner of their land.
I love to mountain bike and for me, the real joy of it comes from being as far away from other people as possible. Utah is a great place for that. There are lots of places to go and not see anyone for a long time around here.
I guess after all this, I'm with Scott. I'm not as worried about the oil drilling or whatever out in these areas. I don't think that's the immediate danger here, but I hate the thought of losing access to them. As was mentioned before, I've also been to the east coast to Maryland, New Jersey, and New York. I don't want to live in a place that I have to pay a fee to go hiking, biking, or whatever else I want to do. They can keep that.
I'll be honest, the Bear's Ears, like the Grand Staircase, has no bearing on my life as far as something that affects me personally, but I fail to see how the monument designation really hurts anyone as is is in an area of the state that is far from large populations and not many folks ever visited there before. Now that it's on the radar, I'm betting people will show up. I would think that Bluff and Monticello could use some extra tourism to help them out a bit. Right now, everyone stops at Moab.
Quote:
I like companies who care about their customers and not politics. Turns me off.
Quote:
Besides,my main critique was the Retailers leaving because a policy, instead of rallying more people to get involved in Outdoor Recreation and swaying public opinion.
Quote:
For me, I couldn't care less if they stay or go, but I'll start purchasing from companies that put customer needs first, and personal political opinions last.
Quote:
Not all retailers at the show supported or endorsed the move. If you have been paying attention it's easy to know which manufacturers I'll be avoiding in the future.
I have an honest question for you guys (if you own a gun at least).
Are you guys also going to stop buying from the gun and ammo manufacturers that moved their facilities out of states like Colorado, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey, in order to make a political statement?
Magpul Industries, manufacturer of AR 15 parts, moved from Colorado to make a statement about Colorado gun control law.:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ture-colorado/
Kahr Arms, moved out of New York to make a statement against New York's gun control laws.
Remington, threatening to move out of New York to make a statement.
PTR Industries, moved out of Connecticut to make a statement.
Smith and Wesson, Ruger & Company, Sturm, Remington, and Beretta are all either leaving or threatening to leave states with gun control laws that they disagree with.
Would you buy from any of these companies since you only "like companies who care about their customers and not politics"?
Honest question.
It's not clear to me how these companies are not caring about their customers. Would you explain?Quote:
Originally Posted by accadacca
It's a big part of the human condition to see flaws in others while ignoring our own. People tend to align themselves with and buy products from those who agree with them on several levels.
People who value access to public lands tend to buy products from companies that support this notion and provide products that allow them to enjoy themselves while accessing those lands. As far as I'm concerned they are caring about their customers.
To say that it's lame that these companies did this because they're jerks then turn around and say that you'll never buy another Black Diamond product again is also lame. You are doing the exact same thing that they did and you are complaining about.
Are they relocating because of personal political opinions, or to serve their customers better?Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
I don't think that the customers will be served any less than they were before. The real downer about this is the small guys that have built up a business in Utah because this show was local. I think a lot of them will not survive as it's tough to compete. At least before they had a platform to stand on. Now the rug has been pulled from beneath their feet.
Scott, your comparison of the OR show to gun control is not the same on numerous levels. But just to list the most obvious.... the right to keep and bear arms is a right and not a privilege. It's number two in the Bill of Rights for a reason, right next to freedom speach, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, Yada, yada....
Hosting the OR show is a privilege and not a right.... see the difference?
So basically your comparison is apples to elephants... probably best to discuss the OR staying or leaving on its own merits and not try and link it to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
No way to know. An argument could be made that the OR move is the direct result of one man's political opinions (Chouinard's). If Chouinard had not taken the initiative to pull Patagonia out, would OR be moving out now? Again, no way to know, really. My view is that some of OR's customers will be better served by the move, and others won't. In terms of customer service, the move will likely be viewed as neutral by most. As with everything in life, there is no gain without loss, and vice versa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombeech
^^^THIS^^^
Wasn't just Coonyard. Metcalf, who helped get the OR here, has been very vocal about it as well. And a large number of other folks.Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
And, its not like Patagonia is pulling up stakes here. Their retail store on Highland (former home to Frontier Anglers), which is their second location on Highland (nearly across from the old Villa Theater and the original location for IME), doesn't have any plans to close. Nor have we heard that BD is leaving.
So, as far as pulling out on their customers...remember, this is a trade show which put buyers and sellers of outdoor stuff together at the dealer level, not the base primary consumer customer level.
Sure, maybe you could boycott all the retailers who're leaving...but...my guess is their loyal customer base will still support them more than ever (so sayeth me and my four new Patagonia Hawaiian shirts I got this last week). Danged if Patagucci doesn't make some fine fishin' gear too...
Funny to watch the local news media...out on the street, in their North Face, BD and Arcteryx (damn Canadians...ha ha) jackets. All with a heavy booth presence at the show.
Hank...you have to feel for poor ol' Tom, eh? He'd be an interesting chat after all this. Talk about caught in the middle.
Peter and Gary...maybe happier days (August 2010):
Attachment 85932
What I'll miss about it is the buzz of the industry and being able to catch up with the many friends. As a local, was nice to have it here. I can't see myself travelling to another location...
Local company, started by Conrad and Alf...originally as Alfwear:
http://www.kuhl.com/content/press/bears-ears/
Heavy sigh.
Chouinard was the first to take real action, after many years of a few heavies being "vocal" - kudos to him for personal integrity, etc., but...Quote:
Wasn't just Coonyard. Metcalf, who helped get the OR here, has been very vocal about it as well. And a large number of other folks.
I'd guess Tom is mostly there for socializing, variety ogling and free beer. :-) . Tom?Quote:
Hank...you have to feel for poor ol' Tom, eh? He'd be an interesting chat after all this. Talk about caught in the middle.
Not this Tom...that Tom (formerly of Petzl and Liberty)...you know, the one that works directly for the Guv. The one who's wife makes awesome cookies...Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
Oh,THAT Tom - yeah. mMMmmmm. Gwendo's cookies...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian in SLC
Update: FAQ Available on Outdoor Retailer's Decision to Move the Show
Hello Outdoor Retailer Community,
Our decision to review venue options was a business decision for Outdoor Retailer. We’ve been exploring a change of dates for some time to better suit the evolving buy/sell cycle, optimize our hotel blocks and work with the city to provide adequate space for our growing show. We were at a fork in the road—extend our current contracts in Salt Lake City, or look for other options that would best support our efforts. We sought to co-locate with Grassroots Outdoor Alliance and respond to the growing concerns of the industry for a location that was more in line with the values of the community. On February 6, 2017 we announced that we would issue requests for proposals to seek a new home for Outdoor Retailer.
It is clear that the heart and soul of our decision was not fully understood in light of recent news stories about public lands and the larger political discussions. Our goal is to continue to host a show that serves the needs of the industry. The overwhelming support of the show from retailers and brands, both publicly and privately, confirms the value and vitality of Outdoor Retailer as fulfilling a critical need. It is the only gathering where the entire industry comes together to build community, conduct commerce, share best practices and exchange ideas. This show is essential for iconic brands and retailers of all sizes, and will endure through this current challenge.
Perhaps it’s serendipity, but the entire situation has shed light on the value of public lands, and unified our community. Without access to public lands, our industries will not thrive.
In an effort to clarify fact from passionate discussions, the Outdoor Retailer team has answered questions we have been asked most frequently. You can access the FAQs on outdoorretailer.com. If we haven’t answered your question, please feel free to reach out to our team:
Retailers and Reps can contact: Larry Harrison, Brand Development Director or Joe Bustos, Retail Relations Manger
Exhibitors can contact: Krista Dill, National Sales Director
Media can contact: Kate Lowery, Director of Public Relations
On behalf of our team, I thank you for your continued support of Outdoor Retailer. We ask that you share this information with your team and visit unity.outdoorretailer.com to learn more about the opportunities to talk about U.S. public lands at Summer Market. We look forward to seeing you in Salt Lake in July.
Thank you,
Marisa Nicholson
VP & Show Director, Outdoor Retailer
I don't get it. Why do they keep bringing up the issue of "access" to public lands? Monument status, wilderness designation, National Recreation Areas, etc. are all about RESTRICTING access.Quote:
Originally Posted by hank moon
I don't understand the lost revenue issue either. Is the state loosing 40+ million in lost taxes? That would mean these people spend A LOT of money. Or is it lost revenue for local businesses like hotels, restaurants and bars?
Calling bullshit on this statement.Quote:
It is clear that the heart and soul of our decision was not fully understood in light of recent news stories about public lands and the larger political discussions.
the faq in hank's post provides some clarity. what exactly are you calling bullshit on?Quote:
Originally Posted by accadacca
Maybe I am reading it wrong, but it sounds like they are saying the lands issue wasn't the primary reason for leaving. Kinda trying to back peddle.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefan
they are not at all backpedaling on that. they say "wasn't fully understood" which might mean they felt they needed to supplement incomplete information or counter misinformation or misunderstood information.Quote:
Originally Posted by accadacca
Acca, your not reading it wrong. The OR Show received some bad press for several legitimate reasons when they announced they were pulling out of Utah. The FAQ is their attempt to spin the narrative into their favor.... in other words.... just politics as usual.
Their FAQs contradict this statement. They talk about the land issue and politics quite a bit.Quote:
It is clear that the heart and soul of our decision was not fully understood in light of recent news stories about public lands and the larger political discussions.
After we got off the phone with the guv, we decided to pull out of Utah, but ya know it wasn't really about all that. We had been wanting to do what is best for the community...it was purely a business decision. Nothing to do with stroking a few egos.
the faq makes it pretty clear that it's the opposite of what acca interpreted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceaxe
Quote:
Did Outdoor Retailer agree with the ultimatum that appeared to have been issued by industry leaders after the conversation with Governor Herbert?
Outdoor Retailer strongly believes in the importance of preserving our national public lands and places where Americansrecreate. We agree with the outcome of the meeting, that leaving the state of Utah is what we need to do. We stand withour industry.
The media coverage of the telephone call between industry leaders and Governor Herbert from Utah characterized thediscussion as “curt.” Were you part of the call and would you agree with the characterization?
Outdoor Retailer was part of the call and has been part of discussions with Utah legislators regarding public lands for along time. Industry leaders did present their points of view in the conversation in question, as did the Governor. Ultimately,as a result of the telephone call, Outdoor Retailer will not include the state of Utah in the RFP process for future showlocations.
If the Governor were able to change his position on public lands would Outdoor Retailer consider Utah and include themin the RFP?
Timing is very important now. We are already in the RFP process and intend to stay with our original timeline of 60-90days in order to find our new venue. If the Governor of Utah were to change his position to be more in line with the outdoorindustry’s values, then perhaps we would be able to consider Utah as a location in the future.