# Burton - Shutting down NY plant.



## MeanJoe (Jul 20, 2011)

Burton Snowboards to close upstate New York plant | Burlington Free Press | burlingtonfreepress.com

Looks like Burton is closing their upstate NY facility. The article doesn't mention if the production is moving overseas or not.

Anyone know what this facility produces?

MeanJoe


----------



## Justman1020 (Nov 21, 2011)

if you read the article you posted...::

Burton lists the economy as the reason for closing the plant, which employs 72 full-time warehouse workers, supervisors and seasonal workers* who manufacture snowboarding equipment and accessories such as bindings, boots and outerwear*


----------



## MeanJoe (Jul 20, 2011)

Justman1020 said:


> if you read the article you posted...::
> 
> Burton lists the economy as the reason for closing the plant, which employs 72 full-time warehouse workers, supervisors and seasonal workers* who manufacture snowboarding equipment and accessories such as bindings, boots and outerwear*


Well shit. 

Soooo... who else think Marc McMorris got screwed in his qualifier round yesterday?


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

I'd say there's about a 1000% chance that this production unit is moving overseas. Fucking sucks. :thumbsdown:


----------



## Bparmz (Sep 7, 2011)

Damn. That's right near me. All my proform always ships from there. That sucks, now stuff will take longer to ship and those people lose their jobs. Great.

Damned "economy"


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Bparmz said:


> Damn. That's right near me. All my proform always ships from there. That sucks, now stuff will take longer to ship and those people lose their jobs. Great.
> 
> Damned "economy"


Economy my ass. It's corporate greed, plain and simple. You honestly think Burton is having a difficult time turning a profit? Fat chance of that. This is just a way of creating more profit at the expense of the people who've helped you become what you are today. Also known as "the American way". Fuck everyone, generate more profit!

Jake Says Burton Exceeded 2012 Budget Targets - Transworld Business

Kind of like how Burton has been acquiring brand after brand like Forum, Foursquare, Special Blend, etc. essentially just to kill them off. Who knows, maybe those brands were on their way out anyway, but in that case, it wouldn't have been greed and the desire to eliminate competition that drove those decisions, but pure fucking stupidity instead.

I hope Burton finds a way to reinvest this additional profit into their business, but we'll see.


----------



## Northriver1 (Nov 24, 2013)

Pretty simple really.....Don't buy Burton products if you don't like the stuff they do. I don't, there are plenty of great American made brands out there that are of good quality.... just my 2 cents...


----------



## vajohn (Jan 12, 2014)

I just recently found out they also shut down Special Blend, Foursquare, and Forum. I really liked SB, but I just got a pair of gore tex pants and they are pretty bad--I guess quality control fell apart before they shut down. All the pants and Jackets I own are either SB or Foursquare and quality used to be pretty good.

I'm pretty sure the only Burton item I have that is made in USA is my custom x. Most of the stuff I have is pretty high end (cartels, malavita, triad, hail boots), but I think it was all made in China. My hails are already having issues after 6 days of riding. I wonder what they actually made in that NY plant. 

I think all their stuff will now be made in China with the exception of some very high end boards still being made in Austria. Pretty greedy.


----------



## killclimbz (Aug 10, 2007)

Unless something has changed, Burton is a privately held company. Basically meaning Jake can do what he wants with it, he is not beholden to share holders. IMO, closing the plant probably means much worse things are in the pipe for Burton and the other big guys. The word on the street is we may see some pretty large brands fail in the next year or two. Kind of like when the small guys went belly up in the dotcom years. This time around, the big guys are going to take it in the shorts. Burton will still be around, but I suspect this is just the beginning of a lot of slash and burn.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

killclimbz said:


> Unless something has changed, Burton is a privately held company. Basically meaning Jake can do what he wants with it, he is not beholden to share holders. IMO, closing the plant probably means much worse things are in the pipe for Burton and the other big guys. The word on the street is we may see some pretty large brands fail in the next year or two. Kind of like when the small guys went belly up in the dotcom years. This time around, the big guys are going to take it in the shorts. Burton will still be around, but I suspect this is just the beginning of a lot of slash and burn.


If anything, I expect Burton to shift their focus more toward things like apparel and other softgoods with higher profit margins. But, they're probably the only brand in snowboarding strong enough to pull off such a shift.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> Unless something has changed, Burton is a privately held company. Basically meaning Jake can do what he wants with it, he is not beholden to share holders. IMO, closing the plant probably means much worse things are in the pipe for Burton and the other big guys. The word on the street is we may see some pretty large brands fail in the next year or two. Kind of like when the small guys went belly up in the dotcom years. This time around, the big guys are going to take it in the shorts. Burton will still be around, but I suspect this is just the beginning of a lot of slash and burn.


Yup, anybody who thinks any of these companies are doing well is in for a huge surprise. It's a shrinking market. Look how hard a time we all have choosing a board, way too many on the market, companies can't survive selling only a handful of each style, expect fewer options but better boards in the coming years.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

lab49232 said:


> Yup, anybody who thinks any of these companies are doing well is in for a huge surprise. It's a shrinking market. Look how hard a time we all have choosing a board, way too many on the market, companies can't survive selling only a handful of each style, expect fewer options but better boards in the coming years.


The market needs a major correction for sure. There's just too many players out there right now.

However, if Burton is in trouble it's because of terrible management decisions. Which based on some of their brand acquisitions in recent years may be the case.

Basically, Burton wants to have their cake and eat it too. They over produce the hell out of their boards and force their dealers to buy up the inventory in order to carry their brand. They're essentially passing the buck to their retailers - the ones they ultimately rely on for the sell through of their product. This is where Never Summer gets it right. You very rarely see deep discounts on Never Summer boards. Why? They don't simply churn out boards at 100% manufacturing capacity. Shockingly, it seems like they actually understand the theory of supply and demand. Instead of pumping out every NS board they can build, they use their factory to also build Icelantic skis, High Society boards, and general shop work.


----------



## Alkasquawlik (Jul 13, 2010)

"That's a warehouse formally used by Burton. Nothing was made there and Burton didn't own it. It was a distribution (storage and shipping) contract with another warehousing company. The new one is someplace near Columbus, Ohio."

per NOGS on EL.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Alkasquawlik said:


> "That's a warehouse formally used by Burton. Nothing was made there and Burton didn't own it. It was a distribution (storage and shipping) contract with another warehousing company. The new one is someplace near Columbus, Ohio."
> 
> per NOGS on EL.


Well, there ya go.


----------



## vajohn (Jan 12, 2014)

Northriver1 said:


> Pretty simple really.....Don't buy Burton products if you don't like the stuff they do. I don't, there are plenty of great American made brands out there that are of good quality.... just my 2 cents...


True for boards. But are there really any snowboarding companies making boots, outerwear, or bindings here? 

I just noticed REI has a whole section on their website for made in USA products.

I pretty much figured that was just a distribution center in NY, I was pretty sure Burton stopped making stuff here in 2009 or so.


----------



## MeanJoe (Jul 20, 2011)

Alkasquawlik said:


> "That's a warehouse formally used by Burton. Nothing was made there and Burton didn't own it. It was a distribution (storage and shipping) contract with another warehousing company. The new one is someplace near Columbus, Ohio."
> 
> per NOGS on EL.


*sputter* *cough* Whut-WHUT?!? I'm in Columbus, Ohio. I need to find out more about this...


----------



## jliu (Jan 20, 2009)

linvillegorge said:


> The market needs a major correction for sure. There's just too many players out there right now.
> 
> However, if Burton is in trouble it's because of terrible management decisions. Which based on some of their brand acquisitions in recent years may be the case.
> 
> Basically, Burton wants to have their cake and eat it too. They over produce the hell out of their boards and force their dealers to buy up the inventory in order to carry their brand. They're essentially passing the buck to their retailers - the ones they ultimately rely on for the sell through of their product. This is where Never Summer gets it right. You very rarely see deep discounts on Never Summer boards. Why? They don't simply churn out boards at 100% manufacturing capacity. Shockingly, it seems like they actually understand the theory of supply and demand. Instead of pumping out every NS board they can build, they use their factory to also build Icelantic skis, High Society boards, and general shop work.


Well I agree...there are some big differences in company size and scope we need to take into account. NS is in a sweet spot right now where they have 1 small local factory that produces all of the worlds supply. So they have the flexibility to limit production...outsource...keep prices high. Signal is probably similar. When you get to the size of the big B where your worldwide overhead is huge (flagship store/showrooms, worldwide distribution network, call centres, warranty depots, stacked pro team, etc.), the only way you can turn a profit is produce as many units as you can to lower your cost/unit. I'm not say thats right or anything...just the fact of size. Smaller agile companies can navigate through the ebs and flows of the economy by doing what you mentioned above (seasonal layoffs, outsource facilities, limit production, etc.). Bigger companies always need to 'restructure', 'downsize', 'focus on core business', 'sell off', etc. to cope.


----------



## deltout (Jan 10, 2014)

the only reason we have anything, is because the company can make a profit at selling it.
put the forum issue aside, if burton were to fail it would be very bad for the sport.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

jliu said:


> Well I agree...there are some big differences in company size and scope we need to take into account. NS is in a sweet spot right now where they have 1 small local factory that produces all of the worlds supply. So they have the flexibility to limit production...outsource...keep prices high. Signal is probably similar. When you get to the size of the big B where your worldwide overhead is huge (flagship store/showrooms, worldwide distribution network, call centres, warranty depots, stacked pro team, etc.), the only way you can turn a profit is produce as many units as you can to lower your cost/unit. I'm not say thats right or anything...just the fact of size. Smaller agile companies can navigate through the ebs and flows of the economy by doing what you mentioned above (seasonal layoffs, outsource facilities, limit production, etc.). Bigger companies always need to 'restructure', 'downsize', 'focus on core business', 'sell off', etc. to cope.


You're right that smaller companies are more "agile", but you're incorrect that larger companies can only swing a profit if they produce at maximum capacity. Producing beyond the market's demand isn't doing you any good. That's why you see Burton's products getting blown out during end of year sales. They're simply flooding the market with their product which at the end of the day devalues their product.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

deltout said:


> the only reason we have anything, is because the company can make a profit at selling it.
> put the forum issue aside, if burton were to fail it would be very bad for the sport.


That's the beauty of the free market. If Burton were to fail, others would take it's place. For the record, I don't think Burton is going to fail. I do think they need to change the way they forecast though and stop the shit of forcing their inventory on their retailers.


----------



## deltout (Jan 10, 2014)

burtons eyes should be set on the global companies like nike and adidas who can run over anybody they want ! then again, maybe they are .


----------



## Soul06 (Dec 18, 2010)

Its funny how everyone always want to attack the company for doing what they must to keep a profit but no one ever looks at our government and the way they rape businesses. For example, I have two friends. Both business owners. One ones a restaurant in Cali. The other a advertising studio in CT. Both say that annually they are hit with a tax, amongst other fees, that they have to pay on items they *already own*, *already paid for* and *already paid tax on*. If Burton, or any company, has to endure that then I can't blame them for moving their manufacturing facilities anywhere that will help them escape that gov't raping.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

deltout said:


> burtons eyes should be set on the global companies like nike and adidas who can run over anybody they want ! then again, maybe they are .


Burton pretty much is the Nike or Under Armor of the snowboarding industry and you damn well better believe they flex those muscles.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Soul06 said:


> Its funny how everyone always want to attack the company for doing what they must to keep a profit but no one ever looks at our government and the way they rape businesses. For example, I have two friends. Both business owners. One ones a restaurant in Cali. The other a advertising studio in CT. Both say that annually they are hit with a tax, amongst other fees, that they have to pay on items they *already own*, *already paid for* and *already paid tax on*. If Burton, or any company, has to endure that then I can't blame them for moving their manufacturing facilities anywhere that will help them escape that gov't raping.


Our entire tax system is completely broken, from both the individual and business perspective. It truly is awful.


----------



## Soul06 (Dec 18, 2010)

linvillegorge said:


> Our entire tax system is completely broken, from both the individual and business perspective. It truly is awful.


You can say that again.


----------



## deltout (Jan 10, 2014)

its nice to see this upswell for american jobs and keeping companies producing products here, which goes well beyond snowboarding.
the north east is almost impossible to do business in anymore and i know new york is getting to be the worst ,not to mention nyc. you can run a company in oh chi ming city easier.


----------



## jliu (Jan 20, 2009)

linvillegorge said:


> You're right that smaller companies are more "agile", but you're incorrect that larger companies can only swing a profit if they produce at maximum capacity. Producing beyond the market's demand isn't doing you any good. That's why you see Burton's products getting blown out during end of year sales. They're simply flooding the market with their product which at the end of the day devalues their product.


But Burton isn't loosing money on those blow out sales. You see, the products that they sell at huge markdowns still pay to keep the lights on...while the ones they sell at regular price or high markup is where they turn the profit. The retailers and competition are the ones hurting from this. Don't get me wrong, you and I are on the same page in terms of 'max capacity' is not healthy for the industry. They are definitely hurting the industry in general. But given *their current make up*...with high over head...they have to do this. If they produce lower amounts, their per unit cost goes up, margins go down. So something has to give. Again, not saying what they are doing is right...its a tactic given their make up and composition. They could go the route of cutting the fluff (e.g., flagship stores that make no money in high rent locations, reduce sponsorships and pro teams)...then yes, definitely they can reduce production and become more boutique. But with the way they are now, "flooding the market" is keeping them afloat. Will the rug get pulled out from under them if they keep doing this. Its a definite possibility.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

jliu said:


> But Burton isn't loosing money on those blow out sales. You see, the products that they sell at huge markdowns still pay to keep the lights on...while the ones they sell at regular price or high markup is where they turn the profit. The retailers and competition are the ones hurting from this. Don't get me wrong, you and I are on the same page in terms of 'max capacity' is not healthy for the industry. They are definitely hurting the industry in general. But given *their current make up*...with high over head...they have to do this. If they produce lower amounts, their per unit cost goes up, margins go down. So something has to give. Again, not saying what they are doing is right...its a tactic given their make up and composition. They could go the route of cutting the fluff (e.g., flagship stores that make no money in high rent locations, reduce sponsorships and pro teams)...then yes, definitely they can reduce production and become more boutique. But with the way they are now, "flooding the market" is keeping them afloat. Will the rug get pulled out from under them if they keep doing this. Its a definite possibility.


You're not understanding how it works. Burton isn't selling those boards at a steep discount. They're selling them at standard wholesale to their retailers. Burton has the power in the industry to force product on their retailers or simply not allow them to be a retailer. You can't carry just a couple of Burton boards in your lineup. You have to carry a shit ton. That's why a lot of small shops don't carry Burton. They simply can't afford to. They can't carry that type of inventory, especially when they know they'll be blowing out a lot of those boards for hardly any profit. Burton can't even really enforce MAP because of this. The only high profile case they've ever forced was against Sierra Snowboards which was just being egregious with their discounting and finally enough other retailers caused enough of a fuss for Burton to pull the plug on them. I actually respect Burton for doing that. They could've kept turning a blind eye due to the volume Sierra did, but ultimately they did the right thing for their other retailers. But ultimately, the discounting isn't so much caused by the retailers, the discounting is a Burton overproduction problem. Those retailers want to make a profit, but they can't just keep hanging onto inventory as it sits around and loses more and more value. But, as long as Burton has the power in the industry to bully retailers, it'll keep happening.


----------



## jliu (Jan 20, 2009)

linvillegorge said:


> You're not understanding how it works. Burton isn't selling those boards at a steep discount. They're selling them at standard wholesale to their retailers. Burton has the power in the industry to force product on their retailers or simply not allow them to be a retailer. You can't carry just a couple of Burton boards in your lineup. You have to carry a shit ton. That's why a lot of small shops don't carry Burton. They simply can't afford to. They can't carry that type of inventory, especially when they know they'll be blowing out a lot of those boards for hardly any profit. Burton can't even really enforce MAP because of this. The only high profile case they've ever forced was against Sierra Snowboards which was just being egregious with their discounting and finally enough other retailers caused enough of a fuss for Burton to pull the plug on them. I actually respect Burton for doing that. They could've kept turning a blind eye due to the volume Sierra did, but ultimately they did the right thing for their other retailers. But ultimately, the discounting isn't so much caused by the retailers, the discounting is a Burton overproduction problem. Those retailers want to make a profit, but they can't just keep hanging onto inventory as it sits around and loses more and more value. But, as long as Burton has the power in the industry to bully retailers, it'll keep happening.


Yes I agree with everything you said above. By them overproducing, the burden is going to the retailers...they still make the money regardless of what huge markdowns the retailers have to perform to clear inventory at the end of the year...hence their high volume strategy pays for their overhead. Maybe I'm not saying it right...


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

linvillegorge said:


> You're not understanding how it works. Burton isn't selling those boards at a steep discount. They're selling them at standard wholesale to their retailers. Burton has the power in the industry to force product on their retailers or simply not allow them to be a retailer. You can't carry just a couple of Burton boards in your lineup. You have to carry a shit ton. That's why a lot of small shops don't carry Burton. They simply can't afford to. They can't carry that type of inventory, especially when they know they'll be blowing out a lot of those boards for hardly any profit. Burton can't even really enforce MAP because of this. The only high profile case they've ever forced was against Sierra Snowboards which was just being egregious with their discounting and finally enough other retailers caused enough of a fuss for Burton to pull the plug on them. I actually respect Burton for doing that. They could've kept turning a blind eye due to the volume Sierra did, but ultimately they did the right thing for their other retailers. But ultimately, the discounting isn't so much caused by the retailers, the discounting is a Burton overproduction problem. Those retailers want to make a profit, but they can't just keep hanging onto inventory as it sits around and loses more and more value. But, as long as Burton has the power in the industry to bully retailers, it'll keep happening.


All very correct so then the next step, maybe shops should stop carrying Burton if they aren't making money on it :dunno: No need to lock up money in a brand that you're getting bullied by and isn't bringing a return right?


----------



## Evizzle (Jan 25, 2014)

If the board retails for $600, the retailer probably buys it for $300. The cost to build and ship the board (cost of production labor, warehouse rent, utilities and shipping) probably costs the manufacturer $200 when they produce at full volume. If you produce at half volume, your labor cost drops by 40%, your utilities drop by 40%, shipping cost per board might even go up a bit. Rent costs the same. Probably costs them $230 per board. Then you have to pay the engineers, the r and d folks, advertising/sponsorships. Those costs don't go down much if you produce less. Unless you scale, they might stay the same.

The manufacturer has to be producing at full capacity or be able to recoup costs by letting someone else use the place, and then you run into the gray market goods problems, but that is another story.

The manufacturer wants demand to be high enough so that retailers sell all of their inventory, and are able to place future orders. Retailers keep the retail price high until the stuff goes clearance, and then try to get as much as they can before they go away. When you see year old boards selling within 10% of each other at multiple locations, it is because the retailers are still wanting to make money on them, and year old boards at $100-$200 off will sell pretty quickly. Retailers that don't follow the rules ruin the product life cycle and make $200 per board from day one, but soon the other retailers and the manufacturer get mad as the brand loses luster, margin shrinks, etc.

As a retailer, you don't want your new product sales to be eaten into by old stuff also, so you generally pull it during new product launches and prime time selling times (holiday for example) and re-release it during slow times (summer and February being the biggest times).

So for the brand to be successful, they need to maintain production, maintain happy retailers, and need future orders. For retailers to be happy, they need to sell enough soft goods and current hard goods to be profitable, and clear out enough old stuff at prices that still make money, don't eat into new product sales, and free up cash to buy new stuff and have a chance at a more profitable sale. Burton is no different in this equation than any other major manufacturer. They don't want unhappy retailers, but they also don't want small shops that can't maintain inventory to be able to put their name on their sign and only get in on the sales when margin is richest, because those are the types of shops that will cut $100 off of a new board, place an order for one, and make $200 by simply having the ability to buy direct at wholesale pricing. By requiring a shop to carry a realistic amount of the product line, plus an inventory of products, they are going to play by the rules and have an investment in the brand. That is the difference.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

lab49232 said:


> All very correct so then the next step, maybe shops should stop carrying Burton if they aren't making money on it :dunno: No need to lock up money in a brand that you're getting bullied by and isn't bringing a return right?


This is why a lot of small local shops don't.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

linvillegorge said:


> This is why a lot of small local shops don't.


Oh I know, I'm just saying there are a lot of poor business people out their enabling the catastrophe and they are as much to blame as any brand. But it's ok because they're the ones who go under after three years...


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Evizzle said:


> If the board retails for $600, the retailer probably buys it for $300. The cost to build and ship the board (cost of production labor, warehouse rent, utilities and shipping) probably costs the manufacturer $200 when they produce at full volume. If you produce at half volume, your labor cost drops by 40%, your utilities drop by 40%, shipping cost per board might even go up a bit. Rent costs the same. Probably costs them $230 per board. Then you have to pay the engineers, the r and d folks, advertising/sponsorships. Those costs don't go down much if you produce less. Unless you scale, they might stay the same.
> 
> The manufacturer has to be producing at full capacity or be able to recoup costs by letting someone else use the place, and then you run into the gray market goods problems, but that is another story.
> 
> ...


A lot of truth in this even though you probably pulled the numbers out of your ass.

The problem that firms get into is that they get blinders. They only look at the market from their internal view. Can we produce more? Sure, let's do it! They don't pump the brakes and stop to think what it'll do to the market. They just grow, grow, grow with no long-term viability plan. They think their brand is so powerful that the market will absorb whatever they produce. Then they get to a point to where they've outgrown the market and have gotten themselves way overextended. I've seen it happen time and time again in business. Burton simply outproduces what the market will absorb and then strong arm their retailers into carrying the inventory. The big dealers are willing to do it because of the strength of the Burton brand. They know they probably won't make a great margin on those products, but it gets people in the door and that gives them an opportunity to sell those people additional higher margin products. In the meantime, the value and prestige of the Burton brand gets damaged because a ton of those products end up getting sold well below MSRP in late season and off season blowout sales.

I'm not sure if Burton is in trouble, but if they are in trouble, I'm willing to bet the above is why.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

I like my Cartels, the channel, and heavily discounted last years products. So Burton can stay. Also I heard that Forum was already dead when they bought it, so they didn't just buy it to kill it. Everyone makes up stories on the internet though so that might be made up too, who knows.


----------



## john doe (Nov 6, 2009)

linvillegorge said:


> This is why a lot of small local shops don't.


You might be thinking in terms of mountain central shops. Any shop that carries snowboard stuff that isn't near a major mountain has no choice but to carry Burton. That's the power of the Burton name and by forcing the shops to over buy they keep the cycle going. I don't like that Burton does this but by doing it they will stay on top and sell all the boards they want.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

killclimbz said:


> Unless something has changed, Burton is a privately held company. Basically meaning Jake can do what he wants with it, he is not beholden to share holders. IMO, closing the plant probably means much worse things are in the pipe for Burton and the other big guys. The word on the street is we may see some pretty large brands fail in the next year or two. Kind of like when the small guys went belly up in the dotcom years. This time around, the big guys are going to take it in the shorts. Burton will still be around, but I suspect this is just the beginning of a lot of slash and burn.


Technically all corporations are beholden to their shareholders. Public companies just have a lot more of them. That said, if Jake holds 100% of the shares then he can do what he wants.


----------



## Evizzle (Jan 25, 2014)

john doe said:


> You might be thinking in terms of mountain central shops. Any shop that carries snowboard stuff that isn't near a major mountain has no choice but to carry Burton. That's the power of the Burton name and by forcing the shops to over buy they keep the cycle going. I don't like that Burton does this but by doing it they will stay on top and sell all the boards they want.


I don't want to come across as simply defending burton, but don't you understand why companies do this? If you can't keep enough of the product in stock, the manufacturer has to fill more, smaller and inconsistent orders. The retail store has less of a stake in the product if they hold less inventory and are more of a risk to the manufacturer.

On the other side of things (large retailer and small manufacturer) has the same problem. If the manufacturer can't produce enough of a product to maintain inventory for the large retailer, the retailer often times can't afford to keep the product on stock because they need to run advertisements, have demo stuff, and want to be able to fulfill customer demand.

Being small in either side sucks. You have problems all around, and you have so much out of your control. The best situation for a small manufacturer is to sell at your own locations. Scaling beyond that is so hard to do. When you are a small retailer, you have to create a reason to come into your shop, and it can't simply be knowledge at this point. You have to be as competitive on pricing as the big guys, you have to be able to get stuff that you don't have in stock in a reasonable time frame, and you need to have a good to great staff. When you are big, you can have price, inventory, an online presence and really not worry about the quality of the staff.

When I went bike shopping, I went local, because of the after purchase benefits (free yearly tune ups, I can bike to the shop) and there was a sale that made me feel like I got a good enough price to not shop around. The staff was great, and I never looked back. When I went board shopping with a bit more knowledge (I snowboarded quite a lot 10 years ago), I went local, had a poor experience (they weren't able to tell me the difference between two boards, not great staff). I ended up doing research on my own, found a board online through REI that was exactly what I wanted at a great price, and had it shipped to the store. They didn't have the color bindings I wanted so I went local and bought clearance boots and got current bindings (same price everywhere). Had REI had the bindings, I may have not gone back to the local shop. It really is tough to be small.


----------

