Defending Goliath

[TheGoalNet]

Defending Goliath

Most of us have our favorite small manufacturer that we like that we like to support. The reasons for supporting small businesses are pretty obvious and apply to many things other than hockey too. There’s the opportunity to work directly with the proprietor or a small team, additional personalization details, the “feel good” aspect of it, or the perception of better customer service.

As a result, people seem to take a lot of shots at the big guys. They think that largest companies in hockey are soulless mega corporations that don’t care about their customers. It really doesn’t make all that much sense if you truly understand how they operate and what makes them different.  I like all most hockey companies regardless if they are big or small. If you’re one of those “big guy” haters, I’d like to explain why you should give the bigger companies a second look…

First and foremost!!! Research and Development: To my knowledge there are only 2 companies, maybe 3, in hockey with a proper R&D department. This consists of engineers and scientists that conduct experiments, use advanced software applications, and have benchmark standards. This is different than building a prototype and convincing Joey the intern to go stand in net and give it a whirl.

If we look at masks; this means every new mask model released by a big company is thoroughly tested. Material engineers analyze the right material layup for a new shell and test the potential design with a puck cannon. This means that prototype masks will be shot with pucks in a repeatable environment and the impacts will be recorded and analyzed. If the helmet does not meet their minimum benchmark for safety or durability, it won’t make it into to production. To be clear I am not advocating that anyone’s mask is better than anyone’s else mask, but there is a reason that clone masks cost 30-40% less and it’s not all related to NHL licensing fees or player endorsements. There was probably minimal, or no, R&D or testing done on the mask.

The R&D departments at these companies also have access to external resources the small guys do not. There are multiple examples of the big guys forming university partnerships. These collaborations can be used to validate or challenge their internal findings. The universities also have subject matter experts to perform DoE and study areas of interest. As an example, these partnerships will probably be a key contributing factor to the continued improved safety of goalie masks.

Another external R&D resource that the big companies have special access to are from suppliers. The material vendors that supply innovative new materials to the supporting goods industries are actively targeting the big guys. As the big guys also support player equipment, they have larger turnovers, and thus have more money to spend on R&D. As a result, when a material company develops a new composite fiber or impact absorbing foams, they will target the R&D departments of the big guys. This is the resource of early access that can deeply drive innovation and new products. By contrast, some of the smaller guys may need to do their own research on finding new cutting edge materials or rely on commonly available materials.

Resources: Large companies make more money and have a wider reach than small companies. That’s a fact of business. The more expensive the product is to produce, the higher the barrier to entry is. That’s why very few companies sell goalie skates compared to foam core sticks.

This is why the larger companies are truly the ones with largest historical portfolios of innovation. They generate more revenue than the smaller guys and are able to reinvest large portions of this revenue to R&D. This is not to say they are the only companies innovating, but it’s the reason they withstand a lot of ups and downs or are able to gain mass acceptance with a fringe idea.

In player sticks, the Easton Synergy is the easiest example of this. The composite stick had been kicking around for years and smaller companies, like Busch, pioneering them. Until a large company, like Easton, dove into this market, applied their existing stick expertise, and used their R&D resources the market didn’t take off. When Easton released the Synergy, the market exploded and wood sticks have now disappeared from the market.

Departmental Synergy: Many of the Big Guys also produce player gear. Player sticks and skates are the biggest revenue drivers for the entire industry. The biggest revenue generators get the most attention for R&D and/or the largest budgets to develop new products. The lessons learned in these areas can be cascaded to the goalie team which enables them to create even better products.

Hypothetically; the player stick team could realize a fiber they are testing is too responsive and wouldn’t work for a stick blade catching passes. However, they could realize this would be an ideal insert material to make a hotter blocker rebound.  This is a synergy a company without a player department does not have access too.

“Wisdom of the Crowd” aka a team: Many of the best small companies are driven by their founder or 1 key contributor. What happens when that person retires or pursues an alternative career? Does that company have the team in place or the resources to continue to grow and pioneer? Large companies have teams and processes in place.  They will inevitably go through highs and lows, but they will survive. There’s a reason that a couple companies have withstood the test of time, but the Christians or Ferlands have come and gone.

Lastly, large companies are commonly knocked for their practices related to off shoring. Whenever given the choice of equivalent products, I will favor something “Made in America”. The manufacturing industry pays the bills in my household and I believe that producing products in the USA or Canada is the best possible thing for our economies.

However, there are some realities around this that often get overlooked. It’s something I might take a deep dive into later, but I’ll try to explain at a high level here. The reality is that most people reading this article don’t know how to sew at a commercial level, lay composite materials, or to make a tool for molding. Those are some of the most prominent skills required to produce goalie equipment. Less developed nations in Asia, South America, or Mexico have spent an immense amount of time and energy building up those skill sets and allowing people to scale quickly.

Imagine if someone wanted to open a new pad factory in the USA and make 2000 sets a year. Where on earth would they find the experienced labor to produce that many sets and scale up their factory? It’s a sad reality, but it literally wouldn’t be possible. There are a lot of reasons why this has come to be true, but it’s a reality of today’s world. I am not saying that more couldn’t be done to keep manufacturing here or that maintaining profits or price points don’t play a factory in the equation, but it’s not as cut and dry as people think.

If you’re one of those people that has it in their head that any product made off shore is garbage, please let me know the country of origin of the device you’re reading this on. Even if it’s an American brand like Apple, Google, Dell, or Motorola… it wasn’t made here. I don’t know about you, but my iPhone is one of the most reliable devices I own. 

To further clarify, I am not saying that every off shore product is of the highest quality. My point is that using lower cost nations for production can be done right, but it requires proper training and a deep commitment to quality control. If you’re not considering a certain product solely because it’s off-shored, you might be missing out.

Again, I wish it were all made here and like to support people who keep it here, but there’s a reality to a global economy.

As I referenced earlier, I like companies of all shapes and sizes. If I think a product will make me a better goalie or more comfortable in the net, I will use it. I think it’s crazy how much some of the trolls rip on the big guys and someone has to stand up for them. If you were a hater, hopefully you’re a bit more open minded after considering the facts.

[coopaloop1234]

Just to cherry pick one point out of this, I don't think anyone who has seen gear has really any qualms about offshore stuff being up to quality. Not for a good 8+ years or so.

Is the N.A. stuff built better? There's arguments for both sides

Is the offshore stuff bad? Not at all.

[TitanG]

You make some good arguments, but one thing that annoys me is the marketing speak and sometimes bending of truths or outright lies. Things that come to mind are CURV composite, Opti-slide, and AIRslide technologies. What does any of that mean to the average consumer? Does it mean the product is lighter or better in some way, or is it just marketing? There are obvious benefits to marketing technology with new names, to make it seem new and maybe it really is new, but there are drawbacks. I recall at least two instances with goalie gear in which the marketing was outright untrue: 1) when the original Bauer OD1n project was talked about as just a trial program, they said that the goalie pads allowed for a faster reaction time of something like 1 inch; and 2) the aforementioned AIRSslide from Warrior claims to improve the pads sliding. First, an inch is a unit of distance, not time, so that claim doesn't even make sense; and second, presuming they mean sliding is improved by reducing the surface area of the pad (by including the channels on the landing surfaces) makes no sense because friction (the force that opposes your motion) depends on the weight of the pad and the material of the sliding surfaces (ie. ice and jenpro), not its surface area. If the same material is used with or without channels, the friction will be identical, so that is also untrue. I guess this is what happens when people forget high school physics...

Overall, though, the R&D by big companies does often push smaller ones, and vice versa. Bauer with their OD1n program, Brian's with the Smart Strap, Maltese with their padding, etc. There is a place for both in the world, and if we all go back to only small manufacturers or go the way of most things now and only have large conglomerates, the development of equipment will be hurt.

[TheGoalNet]

2 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Just to cherry pick one point out of this, I don't think anyone who has seen gear has really any qualms about offshore stuff being up to quality. Not for a good 8+ years or so.

Is the N.A. stuff built better? There's arguments for both sides

Is the offshore stuff bad? Not at all.

Agreed, My goal was trying not to say one is better than the other. Just trying to point out that off shore does NOT automatically equal flaming garbage 

[TheGoalNet]

1 hour ago, TitanG said:

You make some good arguments, but one thing that annoys me is the marketing speak and sometimes bending of truths or outright lies. Things that come to mind are CURV composite, Opti-slide, and AIRslide technologies. What does any of that mean to the average consumer? Does it mean the product is lighter or better in some way, or is it just marketing? There are obvious benefits to marketing technology with new names, to make it seem new and maybe it really is new, but there are drawbacks. I recall at least two instances with goalie gear in which the marketing was outright untrue: 1) when the original Bauer OD1n project was talked about as just a trial program, they said that the goalie pads allowed for a faster reaction time of something like 1 inch; and 2) the aforementioned AIRSslide from Warrior claims to improve the pads sliding. First, an inch is a unit of distance, not time, so that claim doesn't even make sense; and second, presuming they mean sliding is improved by reducing the surface area of the pad (by including the channels on the landing surfaces) makes no sense because friction (the force that opposes your motion) depends on the weight of the pad and the material of the sliding surfaces (ie. ice and jenpro), not its surface area. If the same material is used with or without channels, the friction will be identical, so that is also untrue. I guess this is what happens when people forget high school physics...

Overall, though, the R&D by big companies does often push smaller ones, and vice versa. Bauer with their OD1n program, Brian's with the Smart Strap, Maltese with their padding, etc. There is a place for both in the world, and if we all go back to only small manufacturers or go the way of most things now and only have large conglomerates, the development of equipment will be hurt.

I agree that marketing can skew things for sure... 

Do no leather straps make us better goalies? Probably not. Do they make pads more comfortable and easier to throw on? Absolutely. 

But, when it comes to sliding? I can say that OptiSlide, CORtech ( OD1N ),  and Speed Skin all slide better. I’m confident I make a slide here and there I wouldn’t make with Jenpro. 

So some stuff does make us better goalies and some stuff just makes a better or marketable pad

@TitanG - Thanks for the detailed response. It takes a lot of effort to write these and I love the detailed response 

[TitanG]

5 hours ago, TheGoalNet said:

I agree that marketing can skew things for sure... 

Do no leather straps make us better goalies? Probably not. Do they make pads more comfortable and easier to throw on? Absolutely. 

But, when it comes to sliding? I can say that OptiSlide, CORtech ( OD1N ),  and Speed Skin all slide better. I’m confident I make a slide here and there I wouldn’t make with Jenpro. 

So some stuff does make us better goalies and some stuff just makes a better or marketable pad

@TitanG - Thanks for the detailed response. It takes a lot of effort to write these and I love the detailed response 

Yeah, it makes sense that those material changes in OptiSlide, CORtech, and Speed Skin will improve sliding (it changes the coefficient of friction), but simply reducing the surface area and not the weight by using the channels on the AIRslide system will not affect sliding.

Overall, though, I like when companies push the boundaries, whether they are the biggest or smallest fish in the pond.

[ULTIMA]

This was a great read. Got tired of reading year after year from the fanboys about how Brian's and Vaughn were the best just because their stuff was made on this continent. I wonder if Mike Vaughn in his infinite amount of ignorance/arrogance would have anything to say after reading that.

it's like, if ALL goalie companies went to the orient to have their stuff made, would that make YOU stop playing hockey?


Didn't think so.

[estogoalie]

All the pads I've ever owned were made in Canada, but I've bought offshore stuff for my kids, and have to agree that the quality has improved alot over the years. For pro-level stuff , I would say there really isn't any difference in quality regardless of where it's made. And the mid-level stuff is a great bang-for-the-buck. Quality of offshore gear isn't an issue in 2018. The idea of moving the industry from Canada to Asia irkes some people, but yea in 2018 in a capitalistic global economy, that's just the way it goes, suck it up. On the flip side, I think there's a market for both Asian made and Canadian made gear. For those on a budget, or kids who grow out of pads every 2 years, affordable and good quality Asian made is perfect. For those who want a more personal interaction, or custimization, plus have the warm fuzzy of supporting local business, then smaller Canadian companies are great.

Personally, I try to buy Canadian gear when possible, but I'm old-school, so it means something to me. But for the younger kids who grew up in stuff made in China, I don't know if it will make any difference to them where it's made (?) But then on the flip side of that, Millenials love "local, bespoke, organic" stuff...so maybe supporting a local company with locally sourced materials working in an eco-friendly building powered by solar panels in Canada made by bearded, vegan Canadian will be worth it to them to spend a few extra bucks instead of buying gear produced in China in a high-polluting factory by a non-vegan Asian kid making $2/day. Let's see....it's a free market....

[TheGoalNet]

8 hours ago, ULTIMA said:

This was a great read. Got tired of reading year after year from the fanboys about how Brian's and Vaughn were the best just because their stuff was made on this continent. I wonder if Mike Vaughn in his infinite amount of ignorance/arrogance would have anything to say after reading that.

it's like, if ALL goalie companies went to the orient to have their stuff made, would that make YOU stop playing hockey?


Didn't think so.

Thanks 

In fairnes, I’ll probably do an article looking at it from the other side. I also didn’t mention names on purpose. 

A company like Vaughn is curious... They’re the second largest goalie company by sales, so they should be large. But... they’re definitely small in how they operate and I believe a formal R&D department is non existent. 

From my standpoint... I think Vaughn is a manufacturing company who’s product is hockey equipment. By contrast, Bauer is a product design company that needs manufacturing to produce their designs. 

To me, it seems like Vaughn is concered with filling the factory. They need decent enough product for good sales to fill the factory. 

Bauer is concerned with cutting edge designs that produce the best sales. Manufacturing is required to fill the orders. 

Im not saying either is wrong, but it’s different philosophies. This is also my opinion... 

[Harkonnen26]

First off let me just say that I really enjoyed the post. A lot of this resonated with me especially since I read the initial post during a study break for my supply chain midterm. 

For me it is interesting to see the various different business models employed by the big hockey companies. Some, obviously have large R&D departments others clearly do not and focus manufacturing. While there will always be a segment within the in the market that will prefer the traditional gear, or equipment that is made either in America or Canada, there is also a lot to be said for equipment that is innovative and/or produced off shore. As you correctly stated, it's a global economy, and as much as we'd like to, it's not feasible to have everything produced internally. If they did gear would be even more expensive than it already is. Additionally, those companies that do produce goods off shore, have been turning out decent to good quality gear for awhile.  A company simply can't be profitable if a lot of what they produce is defective. 

Personally I feel the R&D capabilities drive a lot of the innovative changes in the industry. I honestly wish there was more of it within the hockey industry and especially within the goalie equipment segment of the market. Yes it will cost a little bit or a premium, as the companies look to recoup the cost of the research investment, but whether it comes from big companies with dedicated R&D departments or innovators and entrepreneurs anything that helps to further the development of protective equipment can only be beneficial.  

I suppose it also comes down to the directions each companies want to go in, and how they perceive the market/their business. Your differentiations of Vaughn and Bauer were pretty spot on, and illustrates the point quite well.  

Not much more that I can add, just that I agree with the point that R&D and innovation is a good thing. For myself personally I was never a fan or Bauer gear until about 2 years ago when I needed new player skates and stepped in to some supreme s190s, and loved them. Since then I've been more open to their products and other more innovative brands. When it comes time to get new pads I'm certainly open to testing all brands. Again enjoyed the article, and like the idea of another from the opposite point of view

[RichMan]

On 11/22/2018 at 1:33 PM, TheGoalNet said:

Defending Goliath

Most of us have our favorite small manufacturer that we like that we like to support. The reasons for supporting small businesses are pretty obvious and apply to many things other than hockey too. There’s the opportunity to work directly with the proprietor or a small team, additional personalization details, the “feel good” aspect of it, or the perception of better customer service.(1)

As a result, people seem to take a lot of shots at the big guys. They think that largest companies in hockey are soulless mega corporations that don’t care about their customers. It really doesn’t make all that much sense if you truly understand how they operate and what makes them different.  I like all most hockey companies regardless if they are big or small. If you’re one of those “big guy” haters, I’d like to explain why you should give the bigger companies a second look…

First and foremost!!! Research and Development: To my knowledge there are only 2 companies, maybe 3, in hockey with a proper R&D department. This consists of engineers and scientists that conduct experiments, use advanced software applications, and have benchmark standards. This is different than building a prototype and convincing Joey the intern to go stand in net and give it a whirl.(1)

If we look at masks; this means every new mask model released by a big company is thoroughly tested. Material engineers analyze the right material layup for a new shell and test the potential design with a puck cannon. This means that prototype masks will be shot with pucks in a repeatable environment and the impacts will be recorded and analyzed. If the helmet does not meet their minimum benchmark for safety or durability, it won’t make it into to production. To be clear I am not advocating that anyone’s mask is better than anyone’s else mask, but there is a reason that clone masks cost 30-40% less and it’s not all related to NHL licensing fees or player endorsements. There was probably minimal, or no, R&D or testing done on the mask.(2)

Imagine if someone wanted to open a new pad factory in the USA and make 2000 sets a year. Where on earth would they find the experienced labor to produce that many sets and scale up their factory?(3) It’s a sad reality, but it literally wouldn’t be possible. There are a lot of reasons why this has come to be true, but it’s a reality of today’s world. I am not saying that more couldn’t be done to keep manufacturing here or that maintaining profits or price points don’t play a factory in the equation, but it’s not as cut and dry as people think.

In order of bolded text:

1- It is true that my calling up Jason at Boddam or Trevor at Mckenney or John at Brown Hockey or Scott at Battram etc, try doing that with Bauer or CCM or Vaughn. You either have to talk to the sales guy at the shop who then relays to the rep who then relays to the company. More than often some info gets lost of misunderstood, and I'm talking custom gear, not off the shelf stuff.

2- Explain to me then the "widow maker" (Bauer 1200)

3- That's saying that people here are incapable of learning these skills. I'm not knocking down the fact that people overseas have work, and I'm not saying that they stole our jobs crap...if companies keep bringing work overseas instead of putting together trade educational programs to help improve the local economy and lower unemployment...the only way a society loses their basic trades or skills is if you take the work away, sure, then they will lose their abilities and hopefully find another means of survival. There's a lot of old trade jobs that are being forgotten and lost because of this fact.

in hindsight, I do agree that overseas gear has seen some major improvements over the decade.

On 11/23/2018 at 2:33 AM, estogoalie said:

Personally, I try to buy Canadian gear when possible, but I'm old-school, so it means something to me. But for the younger kids who grew up in stuff made in China, I don't know if it will make any difference to them where it's made (?) But then on the flip side of that, Millenials love "local, bespoke, organic" stuff...so maybe supporting a local company with locally sourced materials working in an eco-friendly building powered by solar panels in Canada made by bearded, vegan Canadian will be worth it to them to spend a few extra bucks instead of buying gear produced in China in a high-polluting factory by a non-vegan Asian kid making $2/day. Let's see....it's a free market....

Talking to me bro?

[TheGoalNet]

15 hours ago, RichMan said:

In order of bolded text:

1- It is true that my calling up Jason at Boddam or Trevor at Mckenney or John at Brown Hockey or Scott at Battram etc, try doing that with Bauer or CCM or Vaughn. You either have to talk to the sales guy at the shop who then relays to the rep who then relays to the company. More than often some info gets lost of misunderstood, and I'm talking custom gear, not off the shelf stuff.

2- Explain to me then the "widow maker" (Bauer 1200)

3- That's saying that people here are incapable of learning these skills. I'm not knocking down the fact that people overseas have work, and I'm not saying that they stole our jobs crap...if companies keep bringing work overseas instead of putting together trade educational programs to help improve the local economy and lower unemployment...the only way a society loses their basic trades or skills is if you take the work away, sure, then they will lose their abilities and hopefully find another means of survival. There's a lot of old trade jobs that are being forgotten and lost because of this fact.

in hindsight, I do agree that overseas gear has seen some major improvements over the decade.

Talking to me bro?

2 - Lower end masks are a valid point and please realize I’m not saying big companies are perfect. It just blows my mind when people blindly rip on big companies, they do a lot of good and drive a lot of innovation. That’s the point of the article. 

I also can't speak to what what the internal testing methods were at Itech 15 years ago. Itech may not have performed the same level testing that the current big boys do.

I have no issue with Boddam, so don’t misinterpret this, but what innovation has that company ever added to the equipment world?

The bigger issue with masks is HECC. It’s amazing those pass HECC / CSA. Hopefully the Virginia Tech studies help change the independent testing standards. 

3. As I mentioned in the article, it’s too deep a topic to fully cover in this article. However, the reality is the every company that uses labor similar to hockey equipment product... like baseball equipment, sewn shoes, etc etc decided to take the easy route and out sourced over the last 20 years. 

As a result, the talent pool isn’t here anymore it’s aboard. So if you want to scale up or expand quickly, it’s literally impossible to do here. This was the case long before Montréal factories got limited to “Pro Only” gear. I’m not saying it’s right or how it should be, but it’s a bigger issue today than just maximizing profits. 

My point is that people who won’t buy off shore gear solely because they think the quality sucks might be missing out. They can produce quality products anywhere with the proper procedures and QC. 

[estogoalie]

10 hours ago, RichMan said:

Talking to me bro?

...hey, if the beard fits.... 

[beansbats]

Great topic, well written, and valid points.  I am a buy North American kind of guy whenever possible, but I do recognize that overseas quality has improved greatly over the years.  My only additional comment is that while we sometimes feel like the big guys are soulless corporations, the truth is that the entire hockey gear industry combined would be considered a small to medium business from the perspective of truly large corporations.  For example, take Bauer, it is amazing that we are continuing to see gear with their label after the recent bankruptcy and the fact that there is still no clear ownership.  Warrior and Pete Smith benefitted from being acquired by New Balance, but are now paying the price as New Balance has been negotiating struggles of it's own.  CCM's future is interesting because it was bought by a private equity firm in 2017 from Adidas (At least it is a Canadian private equity firm).  Outside of Vaughn, where Mike keeps the reigns, the other larger manufacturers seem to be held to the whims of venture capital, and as market segment bargaining chips, rather than dedicated hockey / goalie companies.

Just my .02   Any comments or corrections are welcome.

-steve

[TheGoalNet]

On 11/26/2018 at 12:57 PM, beansbats said:

Great topic, well written, and valid points.  I am a buy North American kind of guy whenever possible, but I do recognize that overseas quality has improved greatly over the years.  My only additional comment is that while we sometimes feel like the big guys are soulless corporations, the truth is that the entire hockey gear industry combined would be considered a small to medium business from the perspective of truly large corporations.  For example, take Bauer, it is amazing that we are continuing to see gear with their label after the recent bankruptcy and the fact that there is still no clear ownership.  Warrior and Pete Smith benefitted from being acquired by New Balance, but are now paying the price as New Balance has been negotiating struggles of it's own.  CCM's future is interesting because it was bought by a private equity firm in 2017 from Adidas (At least it is a Canadian private equity firm).  Outside of Vaughn, where Mike keeps the reigns, the other larger manufacturers seem to be held to the whims of venture capital, and as market segment bargaining chips, rather than dedicated hockey / goalie companies.

Just my .02   Any comments or corrections are welcome.

-steve

As I understand the issues, it’s not that some of these companies are not profitable, it’s that margins are razor thin. 

Nike and Adidas were both in Hockey and Golf hard goods and bailed on both. Why? ROI wasn’t there for Wall Street. 

I think Bauer’s current financial state is a different issue. Something along the lines of some questionable practices at a C level, lots of acquisitions, and a lawsuit from a major retailer. I believe PE owns Bauer now and they are stable? 

[SaveByRichter35]

Nice job on that write up.  I look forward to the follow up from the other perspective.

[TheGoalNet]

Great photo from ingoal showing CCM using 3D cameras to measure rebounds off pads. This data can then be used to characterize rebounds and improve the core designs of pads 

[Chenner29]

On 11/28/2018 at 3:02 PM, TheGoalNet said:

As I understand the issues, it’s not that some of these companies are not profitable, it’s that margins are razor thin. 

Nike and Adidas were both in Hockey and Golf hard goods and bailed on both. Why? ROI wasn’t there for Wall Street. 

I think Bauer’s current financial state is a different issue. Something along the lines of some questionable practices at a C level, lots of acquisitions, and a lawsuit from a major retailer. I believe PE owns Bauer now and they are stable?  

Bauer is an interesting case - in retrospect, their acquisition of Easton was ill-timed.

Shortly after the Easton purchase, some may recall the bankruptcy of several large sporting goods stores (Chick's, Sport Chalet, etc).
While Easton was very much a titan in the hockey industry when it came to sticks (and likely a key motivator for Bauer to acquire them) most of their portfolio and revenue was on the back of baseball equipment sales to these large sporting goods chains.

[bunnyman666]

1 hour ago, Chenner29 said:

Bauer is an interesting case - in retrospect, their acquisition of Easton was ill-timed.

Shortly after the Easton purchase, some may recall the bankruptcy of several large sporting goods stores (Chick's, Sport Chalet, etc).
While Easton was very much a titan in the hockey industry when it came to sticks (and likely a key motivator for Bauer to acquire them) most of their portfolio and revenue was on the back of baseball equipment sales to these large sporting goods chains.

All of that good tech that Easton had was suppressed by that purchase. It is bitterly disappointing that great stick, player helmet and skate tech is now lost and gone forever.