That guy is dangerous

[Matteo V]

Safety gear can increase safety but also create a false sense of security (like the guy in the picture).

Never have I thought of my airbags and seat belt in my vehicle as a reason to take more risks while driving. Never have I thought of my kiteboarding helmet as a reason to launch toward rocks or other hard objects. If I did, it would NOT fit the definition of stupid, so much as it WOULD fit the definition of complete lack of self preservation.

For your statement to make any sense, you would have to say "that helmets kill more people than they save". Could you actually make that statement in confidence?

[dice]

Why would anyone not wear a helmet while climbing? Rocks fall all the time.

Do you climb? Not everybody every time wears helmets. In sport climbing helmet off is more common than helmet on.

Not in Europe.

[Matteo V]

kgb, I'll give you one more chance to refute by quoting me, my clear accusation that 'YOU JUST LIED AGAIN'.

If you cannot find the statement to which you have accused me of saying, then you should apologize, or at least clarify that I did not state it - but you thought I did. Please provide the quote, or do the right thing.

Haha,

So now you get to decide what an acceptable level of expenditure is... and they say you can’t put a price on safety.. well you just have.

Spend more you are worthy of matteos derision and mocking, your Core kite comments back that up, spend the Matteo approved amount and your in the kool gang.

But to follow you off topic and explain what I am pretty sure you already know, but are just reaching: Paying $300 for a product that is not significantly better than a $1 product is something that I have stated you should be free to do.

But it is stupid. And it is demonstrably stupid if you assign any value (work for your money) to your resources. The only justification for it is that you value "fashion" above money in the bank.




Now lets go back to the beginning of that thread with some of the things that I said about the positives of this kind of stupid:

Those that price their products "too high" will not survive. The companies that are around and growing are the survivors.

Slowy,

Two things wrong with the above....

First, we still have high priced companies in almost every product offering that consumers purchase - especially the luxury ones. Thus the second sentence is not accurate. If you want to pay lots for a brand name, you can. And not only can you pay tons of money for something you could have purchased cheaper, there is often a huge selection of brands to pay waaaayyyyy tooooooo much for.

Second, in a free market, companies that succeed will cater to "want's" instead of "needs". No kiter "needs" a $200 pair of sunglasses for out on the water when $1 sunglasses work almost as well. But many kiters do "want" a $200 pair of sunglasses for a large number of reasons.

1. Perception of quality and function being related to price allows companies to actually sell more by increasing price. Remember Oakley sunglasses back in the day? Their sales model was built on building an expensive product, and then charging 4 times more than that additional construction price justified. This drove the consumer perception that Oakley sunglasses were "better".

2. When you have disposable income, most want to flaunt that. This is a completely natural human trait. A good example is when someone purchases a high end sports car, but does not have the skills to drive it. In the US, the trend is even moving toward pickup trucks falling into this category now. With these trucks base prices more than double that of passenger car, people who never haul anything (and would never let you put something in the bed of the truck because it may get scratched) are just buying them because of how expensive they are. The human desire to flaunt a status symbol is much like a peacock whose beautiful long feathers are for show, but can be detrimental to it's survival.

And there are many more reasons why people will spend more for a comparable product. But the underlying key to the success of high end brands is their ability to slightly differentiate the product so that they are recognized as "genuine". And in this case, the word "genuine" means "I paid lots of money for them because I can".


Overall, I do not believe that this is a bad thing. On a rare occasion, some innovation comes out of the desperation of "high end brands" to differentiate from economical alternatives. So I am happy that a free society works this way. Plus, those that will drop $200 on a pair of sunglasses are wearing a sign above their head that pretty much lays out what their values and/or personality is like.

[iriejohn]

Matteo, you are the common factor in the majority of serious arguments and disagreements in threads in this forum, so either ...

1. You are right most of the time.

or

2. You are not right most of the time, but either have a problem with backing down when you are wrong or are unable to see others points of view.

Which of these two do you think applies to you?

Thanks.

... stuff ...

[kgb]

So if anyone pays more than your example of $1 (subject to scale) then they are stupid? I mean a scale sliding from 300 to 1 is pretty steep but that’s your scale eh?

Someone riding in a $300 helmet is stop and values fashion over above all else when they could be “equally” safe in your $1 lid?

Can you actually provide any evidence that supports such a wide range of price covering the safety gear being discussed?

A $150 impact vest vs your 50cent vest
The same with helmet
Boots
Gloves
Leash?


Actual evidence that a 300 dollar lid has no more safety rating than a 1 dollar lid?


I mean we should all be kitted out for well under $5 right?

AND be safe! Anything else is fashion and waste right?


What’s the most expensive piece of kit that you own?
Just play the game and list it for us ok?

[PullStrings]

I will play
My must have are :
Sunglasses wrap polarized copper tinted prIsm compensated lenses safety 2.2mm thickess polycarbonate ballistic 8 base scratch resistant hydrophobic with flash frontside mirror and anti reflective backside to wear over my UV400 prescription soft contact lenses
$250.00 !!

Next item :
When the surf is huge and dangerous a floatation vest
$100

No helmet needed :
No rocks or obstacles where i launch / land/ ride
$0.00

[kgb]

Haha!

Good stuff I was hoping Matteo would play but he has gone shy I think? Or composing another 999 word sermon

So all we need is concrete proof that all those features can be found in glasses costing 75c and Matteo has proved his reasoning...

[tautologies]

Haha!

Good stuff I was hoping Matteo would play but he has gone shy I think? Or composing another 999 word sermon

So all we need is concrete proof that all those features can be found in glasses costing 75c and Matteo has proved his reasoning...

haha
I think perhaps he is composing his masterpiece sermon.

I have no idea why anyone would worry about how other people spend their money unless it impacts themselves?
Regardless of if he could find an equal set for 75c or not saying someone is stupid based on how they spend their money simply shows a lack of perspective. There are too many unknown variables so the best thing is to let people decide for themselves and not care until it impacts other people.
People have different value sets and that is fine.

[Matteo V]

Haha!

Good stuff I was hoping Matteo would play but he has gone shy I think? Or composing another 999 word sermon

So all we need is concrete proof that all those features can be found in glasses costing 75c and Matteo has proved his reasoning...

haha
I think perhaps he is composing his masterpiece sermon.

I have no idea why anyone would worry about how other people spend their money unless it impacts themselves?
Regardless of if he could find an equal set for 75c or not saying someone is stupid based on how they spend their money simply shows a lack of perspective. There are too many unknown variables so the best thing is to let people decide for themselves and not care until it impacts other people.
People have different value sets and that is fine.

Sorry, no - just got done kiting.

pulley tried to argue that the features in $200+ sunglasses were a necessity for kiting. Poly carbonate, which most all safety glasses are made of, provides all of the uv protection you need in a $1 item. Pretty simple, but he came back with industry buzz words. So yes, paying a ton of money is your choice. But you do not need to.

[Matteo V]

Haha!

Good stuff I was hoping Matteo would play but he has gone shy I think? Or composing another 999 word sermon

So all we need is concrete proof that all those features can be found in glasses costing 75c and Matteo has proved his reasoning...

How about we play, "tell the truth". Just go back to where YOU LIED, and find something to back it up, or apologize for that lie.

The rest of your argument about $1 helmets is a bs fake to get you out of having to explain yourself on that lie. Seriously, where is this imaginary $1 watersports helmet coming from?