CCM sold by Adidas

[chakal]

Seems like they finally sold CCM.

 

http://nypost.com/2017/07/20/adidas-laces-up-100m-hockey-brand-sale/

[TheGoalNet]

37 minutes ago, chakal said:

Seems like they finally sold CCM.

 

http://nypost.com/2017/07/20/adidas-laces-up-100m-hockey-brand-sale/

Not shocking and not what I was hoping for! 

Investment firms will not have any interest in moving production back to Canada or too much R&D 

[dreadlockgoalie]

Looks like they've dumped the hockey business, aside from jerseys?  Hopefully this sale goes better than the Bauer story has ended up.

 

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/adidas-sell-ccm-toronto-based-firm-us110-million/

[jayluv54]

Adidas has been moving to exit equipment manufacturing much like Nike has and focus on apparel.  

[TheGoalNet]

People used to the soft goods business cannot stomach the hard goods margins. I doubt too much will change or anyone will notice in the short term. 

Bauer had a bankruptcy to weed through and that complicated things. 

[Fullright]

I'm just stunned at how cheap the stuff is from both manufacturers. All over the web and on here, the degree of wear in a short amount of time is pretty amazing. I'm still, for example, using my D&R LG 55s which I bought in 1981 or 1982. I used them all through junior, college and senior leagues and when I started up again in 2012, they were/are still intact. The inner channel strings/laces are still in one piece and I saw this morning on a Facebook goalie page a set of high end Bauers in which the inner channel lace was wearing out after only a few months according to the goalie. I understand that this is not a good direct comparison but jeez mine are almost 40 years old and this person's were only several months old. The glove review by Hills showed a lot of wear already on a relatively new glove. What the hell? Are the gear manufacturers doing planned obsolescence?

 

[WillyGrips13]

Which is why it's nice we have companies like Brown, Passau, Battram, Boddam, Simmons, Kenesky, and McKenney that will build products that last. 

I've seen those D&R pads online before and they always looked impressive. That type of pad was before my time, but I'd love to try them. 

[bunnyman666]

17 hours ago, WillyGrips13 said:

Which is why it's nice we have companies like Brown, Passau, Battram, Boddam, Simmons, Kenesky, and McKenney that will build products that last. 

I've seen those D&R pads online before and they always looked impressive. That type of pad was before my time, but I'd love to try them. 

Anything made by D&R back in the old days was fantastic! I had a pair of their player gloves that were stolen before they were done being used. I used them for coaching after my playing days. They matched no team I was on, but they were so comfortable and protective. I do have a pair of Eagle goat skin gloves that will never leave my posession. They are a lifetime player glove, with superior protection, materials and construction. They look like undyed horsehide, which makes them look cooler. 

D&R name was brought back for awhile not long ago, but the product was barely good enough for a Sports Authority or Canadian Tire.

The return of smaller brands to the NHL is quite unlikely due to the greed of the NHL. Factory may end up in the NHL until they decide that everything MUST have a brand mark on it, and it HAS to be a brand that paid the fees. 

It killed me watching the junior championships with everyone in Bauer or CCM gear. I loved the old days where you played the game of "what helmet, gloves or stick is he using?" or "what is the goalie wearing?" when watching games on tele. 

 

[TheGoalNet]

18 hours ago, Fullright said:

I'm just stunned at how cheap the stuff is from both manufacturers. All over the web and on here, the degree of wear in a short amount of time is pretty amazing. I'm still, for example, using my D&R LG 55s which I bought in 1981 or 1982. I used them all through junior, college and senior leagues and when I started up again in 2012, they were/are still intact. The inner channel strings/laces are still in one piece and I saw this morning on a Facebook goalie page a set of high end Bauers in which the inner channel lace was wearing out after only a few months according to the goalie. I understand that this is not a good direct comparison but jeez mine are almost 40 years old and this person's were only several months old. The glove review by Hills showed a lot of wear already on a relatively new glove. What the hell? Are the gear manufacturers doing planned obsolescence?

 

 I think we'd all be neive if we didn't recognize that gear wearing out is an "added bonus" that major corporations take into account when trying to forecast long term sales or buying cycles... I'm sure in the 90s, people recognized that Clarino and Jenpro didn't last as long as real leather and used that data for business planning 

But companies are not out there actively looking at ways to make their products wear out faster, it's quite the opposite. They're trying to make products that perform better or aesthetic designs that attract buyers. 

Like with anything, there are trade offs. Material X is better than Y because of 123, but the trade is that we'll sacrifice 456. In the hockey case, the first synthetic leathers were better because they added color, improved resistance to water, and people could make a lighter pad. The trade off? It doesn't last as long as real leather. The pros outweighed the trade offs and it went from there. 

If you look at OD1N, Bauer came out with something that slid better and weighed less. I'm sure they knew the material wouldn't last as long as Jenpro, but I doubt they knew it would break down as early as witnin months. Captilalsm worked its magic and Bauer released a mid cycle update to improve wear and how long the pad would last. I'm sure for the next 2-3 updates of Supreme an Vapor, they will constantly focus on keeping the performance and improving the durability. If they don't, people will shy away from the product. 

 

[bunnyman666]

19 minutes ago, TheGoalNet said:

 I think we'd all be neive if we didn't recognize that gear wearing out is an "added bonus" that major corporations take into account when trying to forecast long term sales or buying cycles... I'm sure in the 90s, people recognized that Clarino and Jenpro didn't last as long as real leather and used that data for business planning 

But companies are not out there actively looking at ways to make their products wear out faster, it's quite the opposite. They're trying to make products that perform better or aesthetic designs that attract buyers. 

Like with anything, there are trade offs. Material X is better than Y because of 123, but the trade is that we'll sacrifice 456. In the hockey case, the first synthetic leathers were better because they added color, improved resistance to water, and people could make a lighter pad. The trade off? It doesn't last as long as real leather. The pros outweighed the trade offs and it went from there. 

If you look at OD1N, Bauer came out with something that slid better and weighed less. I'm sure they knew the material wouldn't last as long as Jenpro, but I doubt they knew it would break down as early as witnin months. Captilalsm worked its magic and Bauer released a mid cycle update to improve wear and how long the pad would last. I'm sure for the next 2-3 updates of Supreme an Vapor, they will constantly focus on keeping the performance and improving the durability. If they don't, people will shy away from the product. 

 

And that's why I won't touch any of that stuff with a ten foot pole, at least for retail purchase. I don't want to pay for R&D.

[SaveByRichter35]

Its a built in reason to have people coming back to buy more.  Its like the shitty road construction in my area.  Every winter the place is littered with potholes.  They fill them with garbage materials that don't last and there is now guaranteed work to do the following year as well.

[Fullright]

1 hour ago, TheGoalNet said:

 I think we'd all be neive if we didn't recognize that gear wearing out is an "added bonus" that major corporations take into account when trying to forecast long term sales or buying cycles... I'm sure in the 90s, people recognized that Clarino and Jenpro didn't last as long as real leather and used that data for business planning 

But companies are not out there actively looking at ways to make their products wear out faster, it's quite the opposite. They're trying to make products that perform better or aesthetic designs that attract buyers. 

Like with anything, there are trade offs. Material X is better than Y because of 123, but the trade is that we'll sacrifice 456. In the hockey case, the first synthetic leathers were better because they added color, improved resistance to water, and people could make a lighter pad. The trade off? It doesn't last as long as real leather. The pros outweighed the trade offs and it went from there. 

If you look at OD1N, Bauer came out with something that slid better and weighed less. I'm sure they knew the material wouldn't last as long as Jenpro, but I doubt they knew it would break down as early as witnin months. Captilalsm worked its magic and Bauer released a mid cycle update to improve wear and how long the pad would last. I'm sure for the next 2-3 updates of Supreme an Vapor, they will constantly focus on keeping the performance and improving the durability. If they don't, people will shy away from the product. 

 

If my comments suggested some sort of corporate conspiracy, such was not my intent. It just seems that based on reviews I've read, stuff falls apart pretty fast. To the pros, how fast a piece falls apart is irrelevant because money to get replacements isn't an issue. To amateurs, I don't know many who can go ahead and replace pads or gloves every few months, esp a working man whose kid plays. That's not to say, however, that the stuff from long ago is any better because perhaps it was more durable. Lots of junk was made "back in the day". Moreover, my gloves are modern and certainly better than anything I ever had before. The competing policies are, as TGN points out, durability versus lightness. Lightness seems to be carrying the day right now. I agree with you though TGN. Capitalism is self correcting usually. If the sales slide enough, the makers will figure a way to get the numbers back up.

[bunnyman666]

16 minutes ago, Fullright said:

If my comments suggested some sort of corporate conspiracy, such was not my intent. It just seems that based on reviews I've read, stuff falls apart pretty fast. To the pros, how fast a piece falls apart is irrelevant because money to get replacements isn't an issue. To amateurs, I don't know many who can go ahead and replace pads or gloves every few months, esp a working man whose kid plays. That's not to say, however, that the stuff from long ago is any better because perhaps it was more durable. Lots of junk was made "back in the day". Moreover, my gloves are modern and certainly better than anything I ever had before. The competing policies are, as TGN points out, durability versus lightness. Lightness seems to be carrying the day right now. I agree with you though TGN. Capitalism is self correcting usually. If the sales slide enough, the makers will figure a way to get the numbers back up.

Can anyone say nylon Cooper player gloves? Not even the nylon in a pair of breezers, more like a windbreaker material! Those were HORRID!!! Yes- mine fell apart in two seasons, but the palm wore like iron!!!! One team I was on spec'd those gloves, and we ALL had to buy them.  They were cheap, but there was a reason they were cheap! A few years later, it was Cordura or leather, as the nylon was light, but did not last at all! Needless to say, that's when we bought those D&R gloves that I had mentioned. 

I would not want to catch a puck from a skilled shooter using composite from a glove made back in the day! Whilst being durable as hell from the leather, the lack of foam and plastic certainly would bruise your hand!

The manufacturers have to come up with a balance between performance and reasonable durability. It will come when they hear the chorus of complaints about durability.  

[Ghostender]

I would say in this case, generally we are the masters of our own destiny. The drive for lighter equipment had meant the durability has to go down. As long as people set one of the major bars for purchasing as weight, the companies will follow and you end up with things like the wear on a 1st gen. OD1N.

Unfortunately there’s the law of diminishing returns: at some point, no matter how light your pad or glove is, that shot is just going to be too fast, close and accurate to prevent a goal. In each of my last two games I was beat by a shot that went over my shoulder and just under the bar (in both cases I heard a slight “plink” as it glanced in off the bar). My first thought on those goal is about my depth, not the weight of my glove…

26 minutes ago, Fullright said:

...To the pros, how fast a piece falls apart is irrelevant because money to get replacements isn't an issue. To amateurs, I don't know many who can go ahead and replace pads or gloves every few months, esp a working man whose kid plays. ...

Exactly, and the prime reason why I don’t really care what Price, Quick, Lundqvist et al are wearing – as per Bunny’s comment – I’m not paying for R&D either

[SaveByRichter35]

If you ask me the whole weight thing is a farce anyway.  Equipment these days are perfectly fine as far as their weight goes.  They were fine last year, and the year before that, and the year before that too.  I think people make a way bigger deal about it than it really is.

[Awgoalie164]

It was probably Gary Bettmans genius idea yet again ?? 

[TheGoalNet]

2 hours ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

If you ask me the whole weight thing is a farce anyway.  Equipment these days are perfectly fine as far as their weight goes.  They were fine last year, and the year before that, and the year before that too.  I think people make a way bigger deal about it than it really is.

Haha, that's like anti progress 

I completely get that sometimes companies release new gear for the sake of new gear because they help captive to the 2 yr release cycle... 

but if companies can save 5% ever year in weight and improve the sliding capability by 5%... then ever 5 years, gear is 25% lighter and will have 25% better sliding capability 

it may not impress everyone or matter to you personally, but I love it! I feel more comfortable in net these days compared to when hockey actually "mattered"

[SaveByRichter35]

21 hours ago, Awgoalie164 said:

It was probably Gary Bettmans genius idea yet again ?? 

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean

20 hours ago, TheGoalNet said:

Haha, that's like anti progress 

I completely get that sometimes companies release new gear for the sake of new gear because they help captive to the 2 yr release cycle... 

but if companies can save 5% ever year in weight and improve the sliding capability by 5%... then ever 5 years, gear is 25% lighter and will have 25% better sliding capability 

it may not impress everyone or matter to you personally, but I love it! I feel more comfortable in net these days compared to when hockey actually "mattered"

I'm all for making gear lighter and better at sliding but not at the sacrifice of longevity of the gear.  What I meant by my previous post was the gear of the past 3-4 years are all adequately light and they don't fall to pieces in such a short amount of time.  If moving forward, in order to achieve lighter gear means its not going to last as long then to me I'll stick with what will last me a few years.

[Ghostender]

22 hours ago, TheGoalNet said:

...but if companies can save 5% ever year in weight and improve the sliding capability by 5%... then ever 5 years, gear is 25% lighter and will have 25% better sliding capability...

Bu there's that law of diminishing returns again: they can't hold that 5% every year. It will fall off asyptotically while the cost increase each year is linear. Profit is up longevity is down.

Slightly off topic, but this is also why I see smaller producers as a better option. If my pad starts wearing the way the OD1N did, I can go back and talk to someone. The big guys are a lot harder to  connect with 1:1 (if you aren't in the NHL)

[TheGoalNet]

1 hour ago, Ghostender said:

Bu there's that law of diminishing returns again: they can't hold that 5% every year. It will fall off asyptotically while the cost increase each year is linear. Profit is up longevity is down.

Slightly off topic, but this is also why I see smaller producers as a better option. If my pad starts wearing the way the OD1N did, I can go back and talk to someone. The big guys are a lot harder to  connect with 1:1 (if you aren't in the NHL)

Sure, I am just making the point that subtle evolution makes a significantly different product over a longer period of time. Look at the Velo 1 compared the Ritual. There's no space age tech in the Ritual like OD1N, but it's a way different pad.

Agreed on the customer service aspect, but it's not a lock either. I heard Bauer was great with OD1N warranty claims and Monster hockey left me high and dry... Sometimes it's easier for bigger companies to throw money at a problem then for struggling small businesses to step up and do the right thing. Not trying to be argumentative, I just don't think we can take anything for granted!!! 

 +

[Awgoalie164]

On 8/7/2017 at 11:18 AM, SaveByRichter35 said:

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean

I'm all for making gear lighter and better at sliding but not at the sacrifice of longevity of the gear.  What I meant by my previous post was the gear of the past 3-4 years are all adequately light and they don't fall to pieces in such a short amount of time.  If moving forward, in order to achieve lighter gear means its not going to last as long then to me I'll stick with what will last me a few years.

I agree with you 110% for the second part