I’m stoked the forum is busy on a Sunday morning.
I’m stoked Les is triggered by our banal drivel.
But again wally, that whole post missed my very specific point.
Revive are hijacking the concept of skateboard sponsorship for their own unique sales pitch techniques, they need to come up with their own angle. The pro accolade is not for their level of riders. Maybe they need to be gold/silver/bronze riders, based on the amount of content and revenue they produce/attract.
Your mates dream of being a sponsored skater is being manipulated.
1 Like
Again, I didn’t miss your point mate. I’m getting it every time.
I just vehemently disagree. Anyone can be sponsored if somebody wants to sponsor them and if the market decides they’re worthy of it they’ll shift product, regardless of whether you or I think they are “good enough.”
2 Likes
And my mate doesn’t dream of being a sponsored skater, he dreams of earning a wage through creating YouTube content.
Well that’s good, because that’s what he’ll be doing, stoked he’s gonna do it. tell him to tell Andy to drop the sponsorship tag to his contract and be real about his title and what he’s going to be doing.
But he is “sponsored.” He’s being sent product to represent the brand and, if things go well, he’ll be paid a salary.
Different world mate. We’re dinosaurs.
ok so his job is being paid in product, that’s cheap labour but if he’s ok with that then cool. Andy is wrongly using the sponsorship term, this is earmarked for others.
I get you, I get that you disagree, that’s cool but you are personally driving down the bar with your way of thinking. I’m not talking best vs worst, skateboarding is more diverse of course, but there needs to be an inbuilt knowledge of what has enough credit to be worthy of prize. I want the bar to be raised again not lowered to the point where nothing is special.
This shouldn’t matter, old bitter folk aside, value is value, quality is quality.
But that’s exactly what sponsorship is.
1 Like
Some of his riders get hundreds of thousands of views on Thrasher, in what way is that “driving down” any more than, say, Colin Fiske being on Heroin?
I know where you’re coming from mate but you’re arguing against the standard model with just a different type of advertising.
we know that Skateboarding has evolved it’s own unique way of sponsorship, it’s become less a contractural obligation like traditional sports, it’s become it’s own beast one where the skaters and the brand almost seem separate in the fact that they hold each other up in different regard one not profiting from another. But yes, under the hood, the skaters are kinda working for their prize.
I’d say that Revive is more job based than skate sponsorship so why hide it under the guise of that. Kids don’t see sponsorship as a job, it’s something to elevate themselves not the brand, and that’s because skating built it that way.
Anyway, this isn’t getting anywhere, no beef dude!
i’m gonna make some music.
Of course no beef mate, love a good convo!
Probably should get off my phone at work…
nice little back and forth, thanks for keeping it civil - not typical of online discussion these days and a convo that I’d usually enjoy from afar until:
In reality, does this choice actually exist for this brand?
If it did, they wouldn’t be setting up their own distribution in the UK. Which indicates that board sales at the SOS retail level are being held back by a model based on an outdated concept - that of certain brands owning the ‘right’ kind of mystique. This means that they are likely to be widely stocked in toy shops, fashion outlets or worse because, well - it’s a business. It’s all business.
In my view, this is a re-run of the non-skate shoe company sponsorship thing. Non-traditional brands making in-roads to an industry and skaters taking the $£s. Over time, this has become normalized. One day Revive might also achieve this and come to dominate. Be good if the OPs mate gets to ride this and pass on the skills he’s developed.
Yes, mainstream skateboarding is being devalued right across the board, a process accelerated by YT and social media but this can’t be stopped now. But more skaters = more SOSes, is this not good? I think paid-for skateboard lessons and throwing three year olds down stairs for red blobs is far more heinous than an off-brand brand making it good.
4 Likes
I’m not talking about any of these points but they are valid and I agree with many.
More skaters, more shops, more skateparks, more acceptance are good results to any entity being successful and popular, but there bad sides to all these too, not many and some could be seen as negative towards skateboarding too, like gatekeeping.
My point is very specific, I can’t muster the words to bring them out differently.
I don’t care for what Revive are of do, they are what they are and no one has any right to stop them being who they are. While they are skaters and people with their own idea of what skating is, I feel they have become an online machine, a wolf in sheeps clothing. The wolf is not evil, it’s just a cheeky one using clickbait lies in order to gain revenue. Some say this is just normal business, good sales etc, I say it’s not honest and it’s degrading, devaluing. This is not the point I was trying to make but my opinion.
It does seem you’re basing this opinion on the fact a different brand used a disingenuous title.
Don’t get me wrong, Revive is clickbait as fuck but other than a recent one saying “best late flipper in the world” (and the guy in the vid is unbelievably good at them, quite possibly the “best in the world”) their titles are just cheesy.
Brands have used questionable marketing gimmicks for years; Baker glamourising drug and alcohol abuse (alongside some of the best skaters in the world (and some very much not)) - are cheesy titles worse?
Fact is mate, a brand with no prior connection to the industry came out of nowhere with a different business model and, without intending to do so, completely upended it all. Skateboard retail is primarily for kids and today they (young kids certainly) think very differently to the way we did when we were that age. We’re the old guard, the G&S to their H Street*, and times change.
*Yeah, nobody on Revive is changing the game like Hensley did but guess what, 12 year old kids don’t care.
Want to start by saying I’m not trying to pipe up at you specifically, or exactly piping up at all, but I think there’s a real misconception about paid-for skate lessons. The way you describe them gives off the impression they’re synonymous with that kind of sport centric/churning out Olympic hopefuls attitude. That’s fair enough and a lot of people have that view. There does seem to be an element of that - mainly in the States with skate camps and whatnot (but that might be my skewed preconception).
Anyway, I worked at a skate shop and park where we offered lessons and it couldn’t have been further removed from that. The first lesson would be figuring out if they’re goofy or regs, basics like pushing around and a bit of coordination with tic-tacing. From there, they would come in for a half hour lesson every week or two maybe. After each lesson we’d let them skate the park for as long as they wanted for free. If they’d learnt something new, or were getting close to doing, we’d tell them to keep it up and keep skating independently before they came along next. You’d talk to them like you’d chat to any kid who’s hyped on skating: fave skaters, what’s been on Thrasher this week, old videos for them to check out, etc.
Once they were at the point where they could roll about comfortably, kickturn and drop-in (about four lessons usually) we’d tell them and their parents they’re all set and don’t need anymore. By this point they’d grasped how to learn things by themselves and were cool with. Pretty much all the kids that stuck with it that far in turned into ‘proper skaters’ - for lack of a better way to put it - and they’d be down every weekend, happily skating by themselves.
It was never this regimented “this week you’re going to learn this trick” thing. The parents never pushed them to make more progress than their kid was obviously comfortable trying to either.
So, TLDR: skate lessons aren’t an entirely bad thing and I’ve pretty much only seen positives from them, as someone who taught them for a few years.
7 Likes
Are you reading my posts? I can’t say it clearer and you are still banging on that i’m hating on them for shaking the industry up, It needed it. I think the industry is far too cliquey so I applaud an outsider making waves, that’s not what i’m talking about.
Their riders might be good at some low impact gimmick tricks and yeah these are usually what impresses kids at the entry level, it was the same when I was a kid and Alex Moul hooked me. Aside from their niche style of skating, which is great obviously, they are still not good enough for traditional sponsorship/professional career on a centre stage brand being viewed by the world. You can argue that they are if you want and that’s fine but, my opinion of course, they are not. Bar Andy Anderson and even he stinks (But I love it)
Of course I’m reading your posts, you keep suggesting that their riders aren’t good enough (doesn’t matter, many sponsored skaters aren’t) and that they’re “liars” based on the fact you watched a video from a different brand with a disingenuous title.
You say they should sponsor better skaters to justify their market share, I would suggest their market share is evidence that our old hat opinion is irrelevant.
1 Like
