Radii and sidecuts

[Ski]

No, but I just gave her the keys to our shore house where she's going to be spending her entire last summer before college having a non-stop six week party. Actually, she'll be with eight or nine of her cross country and track chick friends and they were looking for an oil boy, 'Dude.

[ThinkSnow]

No, but I just gave her the keys to our shore house where she's going to be spending her entire last summer before college having a non-stop six week party. Actually, she'll be with eight or nine of her cross country and track chick friends and they were looking for an oil boy, 'Dude.

26493[/snapback]

 

What's the address?

[skidude]

No, but I just gave her the keys to our shore house where she's going to be spending her entire last summer before college having a non-stop six week party. Actually, she'll be with eight or nine of her cross country and track chick friends and they were looking for an oil boy, 'Dude.

26493[/snapback]

 

Mmmm sounds good...err great to me

 

But I was actully talking about your other daughter

 

 

 

 

You are such a good dad too (not being sarcastic there)

[Ski]

What's the address?

26494[/snapback]

Drive toward LBI and listen for loud music.

 

And, 'Dude not 'til she's at least six.

[sibhusky]

naaaaaa, that would be too easy...  BTW it is now thursday and there is nothng from them in my inbox..  here we go!!!!

26486[/snapback]

 

See, the fact that you are not returning them means that they are acceptable in some way, which is why he is trying to buy you off with socks. IMO, they are NOT acceptable if what you were looking for was a certain side cut, say for quicker slalom turns or whatever. As soon as you take this middle road, you've lost the fight.

[Papasteeze]

See, the fact that you are not returning them means that they are acceptable in some way, which is why he is trying to buy you off with socks.  IMO, they are NOT acceptable if what you were looking for was a certain side cut, say for quicker slalom turns or whatever.  As soon as you take this middle road, you've lost the fight.

26514[/snapback]

 

Valid point, except I don't think we are at that point.

 

 

In my original notification,I asked "how do we resolve the shipping error"? In his only reply, he only offered socks nothing more (the other 2 replies were auto generated "out of office" and a FAQ.

 

I don't think it is my place to offer to ship them back since he says it is me who is misunderstanding what I ordered. If I send them back without his offering to take them back, given the correspondence to date then I would be responsible for all shipping costs. I am not interested in spending anymore for shipping and trusting that this will be resolved. I already put my best foot forward by paying for a item, trusting that I would recieve it as ordered. Forget the cardboard, tape, packing, where do I mail, do I get insurance too, hassle with travel backand forth. (I had the skis dropped off at my ski shop a half hour away.)

 

I have lots of skis that have value for all different situations, this pair could just be added to the pile, if I get them at a cost that makes it reasonable to keep them.

[Papasteeze]

Ok guys and gals, I need a reality check. This is the response that I recieved tonight from this seller. Your opinions count.. This is what he wrote:

 

 

 

sorry again for any misunderstanding.

my last email to you stated my feelings on this.

 

the ad clearly stated "Turn Radius: 14m (@138cm). "

 

as i mentioned, this is the industry standard way of stating ski radius.

if this was not enough information for you and the specific radius of this ski in the 143cm size was important to you, then you should have not bid until you had verified that information.

 

i have sold approximately 8,000 skis with the radius stated in this fashion.

i have never had this problem before.

i would encourage you to take a look at the way other websites advertise ski specs.

 

i have already stated this and i have also offered a free pair of socks to help make up for any misunderstanding.

 

thanks for your cooperation and understanding,

todd

[Ski]

"...the ad clearly stated "Turn Radius: 14m (@138cm). "

 

 

That's just it, Rob. He doesn't say what the skis are at 143; just that they are 14m at 138cm. He certainly could have been much clearer with the exact specs and likely will be in the future. But I don't think he's bullsh*tting you by saying it's "industry standard" to list skis like that, since Ski Mag does it with their annual reviews. That's not exactly the same, of course, but it's just made buyers more aware that there's different radii at various lengths. He set himself up to eventually have a pissed off buyer. Your arguement it right, but his arguement isn't wrong. A no-win situation when there's such a high shipping cost involved and such a small profit margin for the seller.

[AtomicSkier]

My current ski, GS:9's, are 15m @ 170. However, when i bought them, the ad said 16m @ 180, and i was actually expecting a 16m ski, but when i bought the 170s, they came and they were 15m. I didn't really care at the time, but now, if I thought I was buying a 16m ski, and a 15m came, I'd be a little upset, but he's right, it's the way you do it (and the way atomic, for instance, states the radius on their website)...

 

The question is, was this new pair of skis really needed? Doesn't he already have two pairs of fischers @ different lengths and different sidecuts? It's the skier, not the skis.

[Papasteeze]

"...the ad clearly stated "Turn Radius: 14m (@138cm). "

That's just it, Rob. He doesn't say what the skis are at 143; just that they are 14m at 138cm. He certainly could have been much clearer with the exact specs and likely will be in the future. But I don't think he's bullsh*tting you by saying it's "industry standard" to list skis like that, since Ski Mag does it with their annual reviews. That's not exactly the same, of course, but it's just made buyers more aware that there's different radii at various lengths. He set himself up to eventually have a pissed off buyer. Your arguement it right, but his arguement isn't wrong. A no-win situation when there's such a high shipping cost involved and such a small profit margin for the seller.

26649[/snapback]

 

He is taking a higher tha all-mighty stance that he has done no wrong. That is what is continuing to irk me, the part about selling 8,000 pairs really gets my goat, so he screwed up once.. After all he says that he inspects each item personally - quote, unquote. BullSH** BTW- the dimensions are as he stated, (now I wonder, are they the dimension for the 138 or the 143 or all of them in that series?) I know the answer.... I just replied asking just what radius ski did you send me? as if I was asking the question before the sale. He might as well mistate the length or the width....

 

 

My current ski, GS:9's, are 15m @ 170.  However, when i bought them, the ad said 16m @ 180, and i was actually expecting a 16m ski, but when i bought the 170s, they came and they were 15m.  I didn't really care at the time, but now, if I thought I was buying a 16m ski, and a 15m came, I'd be a little upset, but he's right, it's the way you do it (and the way atomic, for instance, states the radius on their website)...

 

The question is, was this new pair of skis really needed?  Doesn't he already have two pairs of fischers @ different lengths and different sidecuts?  It's the skier, not the skis. 

26650[/snapback]

 

Jeff - you are correct and so is the industry standard for stating turning radii, when the width dimensions are the same on different length skis the radius changes. The 143 should have a greater than 14 m sidecut.

 

Need? no, Want? yes! Ridge has 2 pair of fischer World Cups - 138 r10 and 143 r11 - both of which are the same width tip, waist and tail. BTW - I would imagine that the 148 is up around r12. This particular pair was/is another experiment with turning radii. Which is why I am pissed. We already have that exact set. I agree it is mostly the skier along with a lot of little other things..

[sibhusky]

It reminds me of when we got our dog yard fence put in. I told them I needed nine gauge fence for structural reasons, i.e strong dogs. Then I said I wanted the green vinyl kind. When it arrived, it was obviously not what I wanted by "nine gauge". It was 11 gauge, dipped in vinyl, suddenly becoming nine gauge. I told them that I don't care what the "industry standard" was, that I had specifically told them I needed it for STRUCTURAL reasons, and that this stuff wouldn't hold my dogs. They agreed there was no way for me to know that once you dip fencing in vinyl it becomes a "different" gauge. They swapped it.

 

Of course, I always say this is a "male thing", advertising one thing and it's actually another thing..... Case in point, two by four wood doesn't measure two inches by four inches..... It goes on to other measurements as well, but we won't go into that here.... ;-)

 

But anyway, the main point is, if you'd have told him at the outset that you needed a turning radius of 11 and he didn't deliver that, it'd be a whole 'nother story. Right now, you're stuck. He's right about the lazy "industry standard". When I bought Siblet's race skis one year I contacted the manufacturer SPECIFICALLY asking the turn radius on the ski I was buying BEFORE I bought it because I knew the FIS regulations were coming.

Edited May 10, 2005 by sibhusky

[Glenn]

Reading through this thread again I think I better understand the technical specifics that are going on. If there is indeed an industry standard of giving tech specs of skis at a specific length and all the ski's in that line are recognized by those specs (even if the specific specs are different), then he's not to blame. I don't think he was playing high and mighty at all by telling you how many skis he sells, I think he was just showing that you may not be privy to all the information that you are. In this case the fact that there is certain talk that is commonly accepted when referring to ski specs. The fact that you are just now concerning yourself with specific specs, and simultaneously having issues with specs is your first clue, that its you not him. Just like on tv you will see a fully equipped car in the commercial, but when they give you the price, its for the base model. Everyone knows thats what is going on, but imagine, the shock if you didn't, you get to the dealership, and the car that costs what was advertised doesn't have the cd player, sun roof, a bizzilion horse power, and some horses in the trailer its supposed to be able to pull. I don't mean to bust your balls but it really seems like he did nothing wrong. He doesn't want them back, but at the same time, he's really not wanting to spend a whole lot of money on your misunderstanding.

[Glenn]

Of course, I always say this is a "male thing", advertising one thing and it's actually another thing.....  Case in point, two by four wood doesn't measure two inches by four inches.....  It goes on to other measurements as well, but we won't go into that here....  ;-)

26657[/snapback]

 

[skimom]

My current ski, GS:9's, are 15m @ 170.  However, when i bought them, the ad said 16m @ 180, and i was actually expecting a 16m ski, but when i bought the 170s, they came and they were 15m.  I didn't really care at the time, but now, if I thought I was buying a 16m ski, and a 15m came, I'd be a little upset.

 

But, your 170 wasn't advertised as a 16m ski - the model is advertised to be 16m @180. It's baseline knowledge that a 170 will have a different radius than a 180 - that's why they say the radius is 16m@180 rather than 16m.

 

The fishy thing here is that the radius was smaller at a longer length, so Papasteeze wasn't sent a proportionate ski at a longer length. That is what makes me think Papasteeze has a legit. point and the ski should be replaced or refunded. Although he could have asked the radius of the longer ski, no one would reasonably expect a longer ski to have a shorter radius.

[sibhusky]

Although he could have asked the radius of the longer ski, no one would reasonably expect a longer ski to have a shorter radius.

26662[/snapback]

 

I agree with this item. I am wondering if in fact the ski is not actually a Junior ski or different model year ski or something. It sounds like it is a SOFTER ski than the advertised ski. Maybe a woman's version?

[Papasteeze]

To those of you who are following and not bored with my tirade this is the reply to my simple question. My subsequent reply is astericked.

 

"What is the turning radius of the skis you sent me?"

He replied:

 

 

i am not sure.

******Check with Fischer and see what they state the radius is, then you will see where I am coming from.

 

this number was not stated in the auction ad. if this information was important to you, then you would have needed to acquire this information before bidding.

*******I am not sure I understand this statement - you are asking me to verify what was printed on the ski? Todd, then why list those dimensions at all? Why not list the dimensions printed on this individual ski?. I have not had a problem like this with you before, keep in mind I have bought 2 other pairs of Fischer Skis and bindings from you. (not to name other skis) I understand radius dimensioning very well. (The previous Fischer skis were not the specific ski radius as advertised either, but they were consistent with the "industry standard" these are not.)

 

i must admit that i am a little concerned about your stance on this.

********Happy to help, anyone who sells as many skis as you do should know these type of technical specifications.

 

after reviewing the auction ad and our email correspondence, it would seem that you think i misstated the sidecut radius of the skis in the auction ad. this is simply not true.

*********It is true, radius side cuts increase as the ski lengthens provided the widths are held consistent The 143 and the 138 are the same width. the 143cm should be about r15m based on your ad. Radius sidecuts go UP as the ski lenthens.

 

i stated that the sidecut radius of this model ski in the 138cm size is 14.

**********Agreed, and the radius of the 143 will be greater than 14 provided the 143 and 138 are the same widths which is how Fischer advertises on their website.

 

this is true and this is the industry standard way of stating sidecuts.

*********You are half correct. The industry standard specifies a line of skis this way, not individual skis.

 

the sidecut for the 143cm ski was never stated and would be open for the buyers interpretation or for them to acquire that specific information if they see fit.

*********I did interperet and found that the ski would have a radius greater than 14, which is what I was looking for.

 

i feel strongly that my auction ad was accurate and complete and with specs stated in the same manner as other sellers.

*********Todd, then please remove your BS about personally inspecting the item and identifying it to the best of your ability. Is that how Ebay does things, reconsider that comment, pleeeeease. You are a trusted 20k plus seller.

 

i also feel strongly that my handling of your email inquiries has been fair.

*********Very very slow and initially impersonal, but fair. Thank you.

 

if you need to return this item i will still allow you to do so (returns instructions text below). if you would like to keep it, i would offer some socks (please respond to my socks text from previous emails).

 

*********todd

 

I believe I had said that I wanted a particular item other than a pair of socks to come to a positive resolution. Why no exchanges, Todd? I am not interested in picking up more costs like shipping charges, unless you are picking up the tab. Please keep in mind that I bought a pair of matching bindings for these skis from you. It wasn't just the cost of the skis.

 

I await to hear an answer.

 

 

Thanks for your email.

To begin the return/refund process (sorry, no exchanges), please

REPLY to this email stating:

 

1) the reason you are returning your item.

2) your preference of paypal or check for the refund of the winning bid amount(plus shipping costs if I have made an error in this transaction). please include your address accordingly for this refund.

3) the item number and name of the item being returned.

4) your name and zip code as it will appear on the returned package.

 

Please then return the item in the SAME CONDITION as recieved (there is no need to include a note with the package)

and send to:

 

Todd Denlinger

po box 681500

park city ut 84068

 

I look forward to issuing your refund upon reciept of the returned item(please note--due to warehouse logistics, this may take up to 14 days after receipt).

 

BTW if there are any math majors here the radius can be figured out given the the width dimensions of 97-65-85 (that is what is on the ad) I am heading over to my ski shop this afternoon with the other Fischer is hand to compare side by side.

Edited May 10, 2005 by Papasteeze

[skimom]

I agree with this item.  I am wondering if in fact the ski is not actually a Junior ski or different model year ski or something.  It sounds like it is a SOFTER ski than the advertised ski.  Maybe a woman's version?

26665[/snapback]

I thought a SL variant.

[Glenn]

Well since he's offering a refund, or socks I don't know how you can complain. If the item isn't right, return it, you pay shipping. Thats the way ebay transactions work man. If you want 100% certainty of the state of your item, don't buy it on ebay, bottom line. If the item is acceptable at some level, take the socks and be on your way.

[Papasteeze]

Well since he's offering a refund, or socks I don't know how you can complain. If the item isn't right, return it, you pay shipping. Thats the way ebay transactions work man. If you want 100% certainty of the state of your item, don't buy it on ebay, bottom line. If the item is acceptable at some level, take the socks and be on your way.

26671[/snapback]

 

Sorry, you are so wrong. As a consumer we have all rights of protection against false advertising, furthermore when a seller admits no wrong, and then goes on to repeatedly represent that the buyer is wrong, well..... It gets deeper... Ebay prides itself with ratings accuracy and positive experiences. I think Ebay would be very disappointed to hear that you say that's the way it is. I haven't even touched on the issue of using the Fischer website in his advertisements.

 

This guy simply uses the system to his advantage (remember, he is the expert seller, we are not expert buyers). Had he checked what he shipped upon my original POLITE notification we would not be at this point.

 

I complain, because he admits no wrong doing.

*If I thought the socks had value, I would have accepted them.

*If he had not strung me out for a month.

*If he had not proclaimed his innocence because no one complains.

*If he had not said this is an acceptable industry practice.

*If he didn't advertise that he inspects the items personally.

*If there wasn't a binding involved (that only fits these skis).

*If he didn't have such a high rating. (no one can please everyone)

*If he admitted that the item shipped was accidently misrepresented.

 

 

I would have more of a heart. I am now in the 7th message.

 

Here is the most recent reply the message above:

 

i understand what you are saying.

it makes sense.

i am sure you can understand my position of using specs from the fischer website, and that should be adequate.

in this case, perhaps not.

from what you are saying, it seems like my auction ad didnt state the correct ski width specs.

is this true?

 

 

OK - How should I reply?

 

1. Why do you represent "This item has been fully inspected and I have done my best to describe it here; this auction represents all I can say about this item. It is already packed and ready to ship."?

 

2. BINGO, Finally Todd, you win the prize!!

 

3. Todd, should I report this transaction to ebay?

 

4. Should I say I have had a positive experience with you?

 

5. Todd, how should my time be compensated?

 

As the last note the skis he shipped me do not exist in any of the Fischer Website information.

Edited May 10, 2005 by Papasteeze

[Papasteeze]

Well since he's offering a refund, or socks I don't know how you can complain. If the item isn't right, return it, you pay shipping. Thats the way ebay transactions work man. If you want 100% certainty of the state of your item, don't buy it on ebay, bottom line. If the item is acceptable at some level, take the socks and be on your way.

26671[/snapback]

 

BTW - I do not trust this guy to refund anything!!!!!! He can refund me Paypal first and then and only then I will ship the skis back to him as he required me to do with him.

[skidude]

Rob,

 

He might not be the best seller, might lack in the communitcation, but in his auction what did it say as far as a return policy? I am assuming since he has so many sales, he has a return policy.

 

Does it on the ski say its a radius of whatever, insted of whatever?...Err scratch that...Whats the guys return policy?

[Ski]

Well since he's offering a refund, or socks I don't know how you can complain. If the item isn't right, return it, you pay shipping. Thats the way ebay transactions work man. If you want 100% certainty of the state of your item, don't buy it on ebay, bottom line. If the item is acceptable at some level, take the socks and be on your way.

26671[/snapback]

I agree 100% with this.

Rob, you gave the guy a headache. Call it even. You really wanna pick this hill to die on?

BTW, did you already give the guy positive feedback? Negative feedback was your only recourse with this transaction. If you complain to Ebay, the resolution would only be for a refund (minus shipping) and he's already offered that.

 

I bought skis that had bindings literally ripped out, yet described as in "great condition". The seller even shill bid, meaning he'd bid up the price using another ID, which is illegal. The PayPal/Ebay official resolution for this fraud? Return the skis, minus shipping.

[skidude]

From the fisher website...

This NEW multi-event ski (GS race, SL race, All-Mtn.) brings huge versatility in one complete package. 2004/05 Ski Magazine junior testers call it, ?An all-mountain race ski on Red Bull.? ?It can handle GS, slalom and the entire hill.? Quick turn initiation, stability, and great edge-grip give the junior racer the ability and confidence to take on the toughest courses.

 

SIDECUT  RADIUS            LENGTHS

97 - 65 - 85  14m/138 cm 133, 138, 143, 148

 

From his aucton

2005 Fischer COMPETITION JR. This is a new release in Fischer's 2005 line-up and it's been a huge hit. This highly sought after multi-event ski (GS race, SL race, All-Mtn.) brings huge versatility in one complete package. 2004/05 Ski Magazine junior testers call it, ?An all-mountain race ski on Red Bull.? ?It can handle GS, slalom and high speed precision carving over the entire hill.? Quick turn initiation, stability, and great edge-grip give advanced JR skiers the ability and confidence to take on the entire ski hill including the toughest race courses.

 

Length: 143cm.

Sidecut specs: 97-65-85mm.

Turn Radius: 14m (@138cm). Retail price $350.

 

 

Both are for the "Competition JR. 2005" Ski.

 

I am again confused at what you want...Too much ADD to go back and read all your posts

[Glenn]

 

 

Sorry, you are so wrong. As a consumer we have all rights of protection against false advertising, furthermore when a seller admits no wrong, and then goes on to repeatedly represent that the buyer is wrong, well..... It gets deeper... Ebay prides itself with ratings accuracy and positive experiences. I think Ebay would be very disappointed to hear that you say that's the way it is. I haven't even touched on the issue of using the Fischer website in his advertisements.

26667[/snapback]

 

You have the protection against false advertisement. He claims he didn't misrepresent the item, and some people on this site agree with him. Ebay's point system is based on user response, so plenty of other people agree with him as well. He's saying your wrong, which he's allowed to do, and he's offering up a return, if you feel you have been slighted.

 

I really don't think you are going to get anywhere contacting ebay, since you are refusing to accept his offer to return the skis. Transactions are two way streets, ebay will not be as won't help you, or be concerned at all, if you are not willing to resolve things in reasonable manners, when they are presented.

 

 

 

This guy simply uses the system to his advantage (remember, he is the expert zseller, we are not expert buyers). Had he checked what he shipped upon my original POLITE notification we would not be at this point.

 

 

I don't know how this is using the system to his advantage. It seems to me there is not a universal advantage of one turning radius over another, therefore its not like he is scaming someone into a less desireable turn radius. He is simply using a "lazy" way of describing the ski.

 

When he refers to checking the items, I would assume he is referring to checking for damages, as opposed to a detailed spec check.

 

I complain, because he admits no wrong doing.

 

Other people on this site agree

 

*If I thought the socks had value, I would have accepted them.

 

Do you really think hes going to spend lots of money when he feels he didn't do anything wrong?

 

*If he had not strung me out for a month.

 

Again, its ebay, not a 24 hour store. It's frustrating, but I can't really see how this makes it worth while for him to send something of significant value (another ski, boot, binding etc).

 

*If he had not proclaimed his innocence because no one complains.

 

Maybe its not him, maybe its you.

 

*If he had not said this is an acceptable industry practice.

 

It appears it is. Sib knew to ask ahead for the SPECIFIC radius of the ski, not the radius @ length of the ski. Just because you didn't know doesn't mean he is at fault.

 

*If he didn't advertise that he inspects the items personally.

 

See above, I don't think hes is referring to specs.

 

*If there wasn't a binding involved (that only fits these skis).

 

Either the product is acceptable or it isn't. Don't try and drag other factors into play just to make out like a bandit. You're mad at this guy for supposedly scaming you into a purchasing a ski, but your not far off trying to get stuff out of him.

 

*If he didn't have such a high rating. (no one can please everyone)

 

Are you really insinuating that he hacked the server, or tricked people into giving good ratings? Or are you saying that you are going to be "that guy" that he doesn't please.

 

*If he admitted that the item shipped was accidently misrepresented.

 

Again, people on, which I might note have more experience (obviously not me) with ski specs, this site agree with him.

 

BTW - I do not trust this guy to refund anything!!!!!! He can refund me Paypal first and then and only then I will ship the skis back to him as he required me to do with him.

 

 

 

I really don't understand this. You're just being belligerent. You refuse to solve the problem. You're angry at him, but you have an agenda, it seems your not interested in solving the problem, but in picking up freebies along the way. If he was trying to scam you out of money, he wouldn't have kept the correspondence going. You will have a shipping receipt for the skis if you send them back. Also he has to verify that there are no damages to the skis before he refunds you etc. I really don't know what you want, but he seems to be pretty willing to fix the problems, and you are fighting the whole way.

[sibhusky]

Hate to be a post whore, but I have to agree with the above. Either return them, accept his socks, or move on. Anything else is just a shake down of the guy.