Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

softmachines.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#51

Post by justinator »

nlfwhulsdhouv wrote: post #25
Mikeb85 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sometimes people will do extraordinary things without the motivation of money Spending money and doing things will always be more fun than earning money. People earn money to spend it on pursuits like rock climbing, even if climbing the rock itself is free, buying the equipment and taking time off to climb it costs money, so those extraordinary things were done thanks to an earlier motivation to make money.

Rock climbing has a very long and storied history of climbers living on absolute scraps to get by, just so they can climb more. This persists in the culture to this day. Yvonne Chouinard, depicted in the article, was one of those climbers. He tells stories of eating catfood and stealing leftovers from the hotels in Yosemite Valley to survive. While you're right that making money helps people live an easier life more…

I think the myth of the dirtbagger is a little played out. It makes for great marketing though.

Post War America was a time of relative easy living, especially if you were born in America, white, and a man (and were dodging the draft, too!)

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#52

Post by laxatives »

ezoe wrote: post #40
necubi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My primary shoe for bouldering is the Scarpa Drago, which has 2.5mm rubber. The toe rubber wears out after ~3 months. That's pretty fast for a $200 shoe, but it can be resoled several times (~$40 for a pair) for a total cost of ~$320/year. To me, that's worth it for the comfort and performance. But I'm not sure this is really a trend overall; there are still plenty of high-end shoes from Scarpa, La Sportiva, etc. wit…

If you want the absolute best to win the climbing competition, that's a viable strategy and totally worth the money for. But for a casual climber like me whose best grade is 3級(Japanese grade standard, equivalent of 6a+/6b or V3) and climb once per week in a indoor gym, it's a diminishing return. I want my shoes to be durable enough for at least 9 months. The resole is cheaper but necessary effort for the resole(brin…

Think you're putting too much focus on the shoe. I've had a $40 pair of shoes for nearly 8 years without a resole for when I want comfort. Climbing V6 without issues (at least not because of my feet).

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#53

Post by Fricken »

ezoe wrote: post #22

The very interesting trend right now is there are so many new climbing shoes vendors start appearing within a couple of years. I suspect it's because the Olympic accepted free climbing. I was skeptical at first on these freshly new shoes vendors, but when I tried out their products, it's on-par quality with the existing vendors. Even more, often time, these newcomers has far durable product than the traditional vendo…

I think it's interesting the way climbing apparel makers have gone on to assume such a dominant presence in retail. I recall going into mountaineering shops in the mid 90s when North Face and Arc'teryx were boutique manufacturers that only catered to hardcore alpinists and climbers.

Now, if you go to the mall on a cold day every second yuppie is wearing a jacket from one of the big climbing apparel retailers. Initially they were motivated purely by utility, fashion played no role in their design choices.

If you buy a puffy or a goretex jacket from a non-climbing company it may appear technical, but they're just not as well made.

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#54

Post by justinator »

jasonkester wrote: post #24

It still amazes me how climbing gear continues to find ways to improve every year. The pads I land on and the shoes I climb in today are undeniably better than the ones I was using just five years ago. Take shoes. Here's what the brand new Scarpa Instinct looked like nine years ago: https://www.climbing.com/gear/new-and-notable-scarpa-instinc... Notice the tiny scrap of rubber they stuck on to the top of the thing. T…

What's funny is that I feel somewhat the opposite. Most revolutionary things were developed right when I started (1996?) and now it's just incremental changes. To wit: my favorite climbing shoe, the Sportiva Miura VS came out in 1996! They're still used for cutting edge climbing. The rubber was what was really important to the shoe.

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#55

Post by bdamm »

cc81 wrote: post #39
nlfwhulsdhouv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rock climbing has a very long and storied history of climbers living on absolute scraps to get by, just so they can climb more. This persists in the culture to this day. Yvonne Chouinard, depicted in the article, was one of those climbers. He tells stories of eating catfood and stealing leftovers from the hotels in Yosemite Valley to survive. While you're right that making money helps people live an easier life more…

I like Alex Honnold's answer to "Do all rock climbers live in vans?" https://youtu.be/kDUeh8nyLT0?t=159

Close on the timing mark, this one did it for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDUeh8nyLT0&t=129

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#56

Post by jasonkester »

necubi wrote: post #31
ezoe wrote: post #22

The very interesting trend right now is there are so many new climbing shoes vendors start appearing within a couple of years. I suspect it's because the Olympic accepted free climbing. I was skeptical at first on these freshly new shoes vendors, but when I tried out their products, it's on-par quality with the existing vendors. Even more, often time, these newcomers has far durable product than the traditional vendo…

My primary shoe for bouldering is the Scarpa Drago, which has 2.5mm rubber. The toe rubber wears out after ~3 months. That's pretty fast for a $200 shoe, but it can be resoled several times (~$40 for a pair) for a total cost of ~$320/year. To me, that's worth it for the comfort and performance. But I'm not sure this is really a trend overall; there are still plenty of high-end shoes from Scarpa, La Sportiva, etc. wit…

That's still pretty cheap for a sport. Compare it to what your skier friends blow through for the handful of days they make it out to the mountain each year.

I go through 2 pairs of shoes per year, being heavy and climbing a lot. I don't sweat the cost at all, and tend to just buy 3-4 pairs whenever I notice them go on sale at barrabes or wherever.

All in, climbing is just about the cheapest sport you could ask for. Especially as a boulderer. Add in $8/month for a giant sack of chalk and $300 every 10 years for a new giant pad and you're set.

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#57

Post by LMYahooTFY »

shantly wrote: post #21
hogFeast wrote: post #13

Has anyone else found that people who are really into rock climbing always feel the need to bring climbing up?

It the new skiing. Or maybe sailing and golfing, to a smaller extent. A thing well-off professionals go do (and yes, not just them, same as the other things) then come back and talk about.

Agree with the other reply, my perspective from a decade of rock climbing in the US is that this is almost if not totally inverted from the truth.

Rock climbing started with quite modest pioneers and was quickly joined by a lot of impoverished people. Their stories are easily found.

Even now with an industry spawned and high dollar protective and performance equipment available, the barrier to entry is very accessible, even more so if you live near outdoor areas that don't require an admittedly increasing gym membership.

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#58

Post by omegaham »

hogFeast wrote: post #13

Has anyone else found that people who are really into rock climbing always feel the need to bring climbing up?

Are climbers any different from any of the other hobbyist subcultures out there?

We don't have as much climbing where I live, but we have a lot of cyclists, and yes, they're vocal.

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#59

Post by msds »

ezoe wrote: post #22

The very interesting trend right now is there are so many new climbing shoes vendors start appearing within a couple of years. I suspect it's because the Olympic accepted free climbing. I was skeptical at first on these freshly new shoes vendors, but when I tried out their products, it's on-par quality with the existing vendors. Even more, often time, these newcomers has far durable product than the traditional vendo…

> traditional vendors aimed for the too high end product

Even when traditional vendors like 5.10 were really pushing the limits of sole thickness with stuff like their "Project" (2mm sole and unlined upper - my favorite performance shoe ever) they didn't seem to abandon the lower performance/more durable side of the market. Also, durability vs performance is a pretty reasonable tradeoff to make, as long as people who can't take advantage of the high-end shoe aren't getting mislead into buying them. Same thing with ropes - offering an 8.9mm isn't a sign a company doesn't care about durability, it just means they're selling gear to climbers who want to be on one side of the performance/durability tradeoff.

(edit: Also, not to sound preachy, but if you're having rubber-wear issues at a casual level of climbing/training, work on your foot technique! You'll climber harder, use less energy, and save money on resoles! My favorite exercise for that is long gym traverses during which I focus on making as little noise with my feet as possible.)

Re: Rock climbing and the economics of innovation

#60

Post by rcurry »

thefurman wrote: post #50
rcurry wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nothing, wait until you meet people that train jiu jitsu.

I once lost a job opportunity by passionately speaking about nothing but jiu-jitsu during the interview. They kept asking and I kept talking. After about 20 minutes they said thank you and goodbye.

Bummer, they should have at least let you gotten a roll in.
Post reply on HN