arcteryx getting a bit pricey? - Page 3 - ClubTread Community

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #31 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 06:34 PM
Off the Beaten Path
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC, Canada.
Interest: Skiing,Mountain Biking, Surfing, Hiking, Climbing
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Ryan.in.yaletown

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Mike Valhalla

If you wanna see something crazy check out Veilance from Arcteryx Again not for the outdoor or even ski market.
They have massive discounts on that line at the factory outlet store... massive as in $2,000 for $200. And even then it's way overpriced. (Don't get me wrong, I love their outdoor gear; their yuppie wear on the other hand...)

-Ryan
I've only seen a few Veilance pieces not for me but someones buying it.
Mike Valhalla is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 07:00 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: , , .
Posts: 320
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Mike Valhalla

You are correct you can do anything in an Arcteryx jacket you can do in a less expensive jacket.

All the brands you mentioned are all great and have the same warranty and all stand behind their product. They also make a $500 Shell as well as a $150 shell.

If you compared all of the $500 shells to a $500 Arcteryx shell you will find with the Arcteryx shell you are getting a better face fabric (no not all proshell is the same) better stitching which ends in a better fit and longer lasting jacket.

If all you need is a TNF Venture for $130 and it suits your need then that's exactly what you should get.

I have an Epic Jacket ($150) from Mountain Hardwear that's 3 years old I wore it backpacking in the summer and spent most of the time in my pack it's toast not waterproof and delaming at the neck. I have a 6 year old Arcteryx shell used for skiing, hiking, fishing and it looks like new.

Everybodies needs are different and like you said if you enjoy your gear it does't matter who made it
and i had a dead bird cierzo pack which i blew through the side in about 2 months ... great fitting pack, light fabric, but they do list climbing as its "recommended" usage on their site ... returned to MEC

just because dead bird makes it doesnt mean its more "durable" or last longer versus other brands

i have a mec 1000D bullet pack that ill put against any other bullet back including the dead bird cierzo or BD bullet any day of the week ... it also cost $16 ...

its the piece of gear my seconds have the most fun with ... just look at that big smile ....



bearbreeder is offline  
post #33 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 07:10 PM
Off the Beaten Path
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC, Canada.
Interest: Skiing,Mountain Biking, Surfing, Hiking, Climbing
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by bearbreeder

and i had a dead bird cierzo pack which i blew through the side in about 2 months ... great fitting pack, light fabric, but they do list climbing as its "recommended" usage on their site ... returned to MEC

just because dead bird makes it doesnt mean its more "durable" or last longer versus other brands

i have a mec 1000D bullet pack that ill put against any other bullet back including the dead bird cierzo or BD bullet any day of the week ... it also cost $16 ...

For sure a 1000D pack will outlast a UL 100d to 421d pack any day.
Mike Valhalla is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 07:14 PM
Off the Beaten Path
 
NS Explorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North Vancouver, , Canada.
Interest: Hiking, Scrambling, Trail Running, Mountain Biking, SAR
Posts: 843
Default

Arcteryx supplies the North Shore Rescue with our Team clothing. We tried out the clothing of a great number of other suppliers and Arcteryx was simply the best. I think the main debate is: is paying extra worth it to you to have the best? For our Team it was, but it is a personal choice, and not everyone will agree.
NS Explorer is offline  
post #35 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 07:37 PM Thread Starter
Off the Beaten Path
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , , .
Posts: 705
Default

I'd pay extra for a DWR that is actually durable, ive' always found a jacket is waterproof as long as its still beading. You should check out 'Neverwet' , i'm hoping that stuff works/lasts, it would be a revolution.
mrultralite is offline  
post #36 of (permalink) Old 12-17-2011, 10:07 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Here, , Canada.
Posts: 4,676
Default

I think that there is a concensus that Arcteryx gear probably wont improve performance any more than any other brand. I think that purchasing based on fit or even a personal preference for aesethetic style are very valid reasons. I think people spend too much time obsessing over what other people are wearing, using etc. There are a bunch of haters who seem to have nothing better to do than pass judgement on someone by what they are wearing or where they are wearing it. If you're like me and want to get the most money out of your clothing, you probably wear most of your outdoor clothing around town more than in the backcountry because realistically we spend most of our lives in town. If someone wants to spend more money on a piece of clothing than I would, good on them...that's their business. I don't own or have any practical reason to wear expensive jewelry either but I don't begrudge others who like to.
Hiker Boy is offline  
post #37 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 11:40 AM
Hittin' the Trails
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Coquitlam, bc, Canada.
Posts: 7
Default

Overpriced clothing yes, but they make some of the best packs!
outdoorfreak is offline  
post #38 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 11:59 AM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: , , .
Posts: 1,081
Default

It is bought predominantly for image not performance, and that is a personal choice based on ones' values.

The "fit" argument is a poor one, as one person's fit is another person's disaster. To argue Arcteryx's fit is "better" is to simultaneously argue it will be "worse" for others. Further, since the fit is known to vary withing the Arcteryx lines, there must certainly be products within the line that do not fit any particular individual as well...or "best"...given the prolific alternatives.

The anecdotal "wear and tear" stories are also interesting, and valuable to hear, but again, must be put in context. Here, individual bias is of course about as high as it could possibly be: for numerous psychological reasons, including buyer justification, as Mick Range pointed out. That is not to say the stories are untrue, simply to point out that it's unlikely those same individuals have truly subjected similar garments to the same conditions in a controlled manner (not to mention multiple samples, as would be required to reach a meaningful conclusion); it would seem, the majority tend to believe that functionality and durability won't differ significantly anyways.

The car analogy is probably a good one, because indeed, the car industry is predominantly driven by image and status....as marketers in that industry attest to.

JohngenX...wow, am I glad somebody said they were also confused. Arcteryx is so convoluted, I can only conclude that they are purposely trying to obfuscate their product lines...perhaps to justify the premium price...and make it less clear what people are actually getting. The number of jackets alone, is astounding...by the time you wade through the greek letters and acronyms, little energy is left to start tackling all the other specifically named ones!

Besides, I still havent' forgiven "them" for the clown who came on here last time, defending Arcteryx to the death....before I realized he used to be one of the top guys at Arcteryx before going off to sell it to the Whistlerians...

DCIPHER is offline  
post #39 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 12:10 PM
Summit Master
 
mick range's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Forest Gnome Cabin, , Canada.
Interest: Outdoor stuff...especially scrambling,trailrunning,mountain biking,kayaking,and hiking, and of course photography
Posts: 13,876
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by outdoorfreak

Overpriced clothing yes, but they make some of the best packs!
Yep, have to say my Bora 35 is the best pack I've ever owned
mick range is offline  
post #40 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 12:28 PM
Hittin' the Trails
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 44 Posts, , .
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCIPHER

It is bought predominantly for image not performance, and that is a personal choice based on ones' values.

The car analogy is probably a good one, because indeed, the car industry is predominantly driven by image and status....as marketers in that industry attest to.

Besides, I still havent' forgiven "them" for the clown who came on here last time, defending Arcteryx to the death....before I realized he used to be one of the top guys at Arcteryx before going off to sell it to the Whistlerians...
Alternative products from TNF offered in this thread as alternatives, and you pick on Arc'teryx for being bought predominantly for image? Hilarious. Outside of Vancouver, the average person doesn't even know what the hell Arc'teryx is. Even if most people wearing it were doing so for image, I see no reason at all to look down on those who are wearing it for the performance that is undeniably there (which should comprise the vast majority of Arc'teryx users on this forum). So if we at the very least agree that the gear is at least comparable to it's alternatives (which in almost all product lines I personally feel it would be) and the deciding factor is price, that brings me back to my initial comment that Arc'teryx haters are simply jealous that others have the disposable income to afford it.

The problem with your analysis of the car analogy is that even if the marketing is driven by prestige, only a retard would say that their Camry was better than a 535i. It doesn't matter if for argument's sake, half of the BMW owners owned them to show off to their peers, or rub their wealth into their's ex's faces because objective reviews clearly show it to be the better automobile.
Brianrieta is offline  
post #41 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 12:47 PM
Summit Master
 
mick range's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Forest Gnome Cabin, , Canada.
Interest: Outdoor stuff...especially scrambling,trailrunning,mountain biking,kayaking,and hiking, and of course photography
Posts: 13,876
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta

The problem with your analysis of the car analogy is that even if the marketing is driven by prestige, only a retard would say that their Camry was better than a 535i. It doesn't matter if for argument's sake, half of the BMW owners owned them to show off to their peers, or rub their wealth into their's ex's faces because objective reviews clearly show it to be the better automobile.
Good point, and I'd add the simple market explanation:
Like the BMW, the Arcteryx jacket, while it may well be a better product, is overpriced by a similar margin to its competition. Why? Part of the reason for that is simply that the market determines the willingness of its customer base to part with disposable income and part of that is determined by customer review. In other words the price is whatever the market will bear. In Anaheim, you can bring your family of four and get fed at the Ducks game for about the price of a single ticket to a Canucks game. In Detroit, you can land a ten dollar ticket to a Red Wings game, and on and on. Bottom line, is it money well spent? That's an individual decision
mick range is offline  
post #42 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 12:48 PM
Summit Master
 
pmicheals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Richmond, BC, Canada.
Posts: 2,674
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by jeffweichel

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by pmicheals

At a $1000.00 per garment, I'm definitely not comfortable supporting those ethics with respect to people earning a living wage.
That stuff is still made in Canada I believe. Mostly Softshells and fleece that have been pushed offshore.
Jeff I guess it varies on their production requirements. When a company is satisfied that an offshore Mfg can produce the line with satisfactory quality control then they farm it out. Having attended their past sales, I've noticed the same soft and hardshell jackets made both in Canada and in China. The Canadian garments were sized correct but had some minor deffects. The offshore garments on sale were generally off in sizing and cut but no deffects.

Brianetta I own a couple of Arcteryx products (which I sourced at good prices oddly out of the states or got at the sale) Not sure I find their quality control much different than other brands. Everybody is pretty well using similar laminates and weaves now. I think someone once made a point about how generally most gortex products have to reach a saturation point before they begin to ventilate which is why some products look like they are not effective. Mountain Hardwear is trying to set a new benchmark in breathability with a new line so lets see what their results are over time.

Bottom line is Arcteryx is savvy enough to test the limits of what the market will bear and they are playing on it. Only the insiders are privy to the OEM costs of the garment + overhead + margin. If they can slash as much as they can at the sales then for sure there is still alot of room there to move on price. The one product of theirs that I do like is their softshell pants. They seem to be pretty good for fit comfort and climate control.

I say again I think its a case of "the Emperor's New Clothes" JMHO
pmicheals is offline  
post #43 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 01:08 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Finally stopping that crazy suffering that is ice, climbing to concentrate on great ski tours!, .
Interest: Anything that can drag me to the mountains. Backpacking is #1, followed by climbing, dayhiking and camping with family.
Posts: 3,783
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCIPHER


JohngenX...wow, am I glad somebody said they were also confused. Arcteryx is so convoluted, I can only conclude that they are purposely trying to obfuscate their product lines...perhaps to justify the premium price...and make it less clear what people are actually getting. The number of jackets alone, is astounding...by the time you wade through the greek letters and acronyms, little energy is left to start tackling all the other specifically named ones!
!!!

Five "Alpha" jackets?

It's a dizzying array of "waterproof shells," insulated waterproof shells," insulated shells," "softshells," "hardfleece," "light/athletic," "Gore-Tex active shell," and "Coreloft." Some of the jackets overlap, some of them are obvious, many are not.

Honestly, I'd need to spend hours in a store trying to figure which jacket does what.

I'd thought Outdoor Research's line was a little too broad until I scanned ArcTeryx's.

Seriously, it makes me wonder if the prices are high just because they have so many different garments, increasing design and production costs?
johngenx is offline  
post #44 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 01:49 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: , , .
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCIPHER

It is bought predominantly for image not performance, and that is a personal choice based on ones' values.

The car analogy is probably a good one, because indeed, the car industry is predominantly driven by image and status....as marketers in that industry attest to.

Besides, I still havent' forgiven "them" for the clown who came on here last time, defending Arcteryx to the death....before I realized he used to be one of the top guys at Arcteryx before going off to sell it to the Whistlerians...
Alternative products from TNF offered in this thread as alternatives, and you pick on Arc'teryx for being bought predominantly for image? Hilarious.
Please, drop the rhetoric eg. "pick on". You will find it won't get you far with me. TNF is irrelevant, I did not bring it up.

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
Outside of Vancouver, the average person doesn't even know what the hell Arc'teryx is.
Again, irrelevant. You would find that "most" people dont' know a specific absolute premium brand in a hobbyist domain. Though in fact, Arcteryx has been trying hard to drive their brand into the mainstream.

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
Even if most people wearing it were doing so for image, I see no reason at all to look down on those who are wearing it for the performance
If you truly feel I said that, please quote specifically to what are referring, and I will address it. Otherwise, kindly retract what I feel is a complete misrepresentation of what I posted.

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
that is undeniably there (which should comprise the vast majority of Arc'teryx users on this forum).

On a trivial note, I found it curious that you specifically gave an example of not wanting to wear MEC clothing to the convenience store, what demands do you feel the MEC clothing was not able to meet during this activity??

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
So if we at the very least agree that the gear is at least comparable to it's alternatives (which in almost all product lines I personally feel it would be) and the deciding factor is price, that brings me back to my initial comment that Arc'teryx haters are simply jealous that others have the disposable income to afford it.
I disagree with your reasoning. If we agree, as you suggest that the gear is comparable and the deciding factor is price, then the reasoning you present is:

1.decided on the cheaper item
2.criticizes those who chose the more expensive item
3.#2 and #1 imply that the individual was could not afford the more expensive item


I simply do not feel that this extremely implausible. #2 and #1 do not imply #3. You seem to make a lot of broad generalizations about people (eg. who questions the choice of arcteryx, why people here are wearing arcteryx, etc), but I believe there are NUMEROUS other reasons for #2 and #1, including: values: specifically, prestige vs fiscal restraint (as I already stated), and even basic logic: why should I give up more of a valued resource(money) for an equivalent product?
Were this purely a business transaction, I believe most businessmen would in fact be baffled by such a choice, were the "image" factor eliminated.

I feel that my premise is more plausible:
1.decides on the more expensive item
2.has values which in this particular instance dictate that the greater expenditure of money is desirable given the prestige received


I have not actually commented on whether I feel this is the correct choice or not (again, I will await the quote or retraction I requested from you above)

Now again, this is also a reference (as I stated ie"predominantly") to the majority. There are in act other reasons why one might choose the higher priced equivalent item eg. I wanted something manufactured in Canada, etc.


Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
The problem with your analysis of the car analogy is that even if the marketing is driven by prestige, only a retard would say that their Camry was better than a 535i.
Crassness aside, actually I feel this is huge problem with both of your car analogies. You're making a comparison between two products which do not try to be equivalent...one would have to compare something like a Lexus 350 for that, and indeed the term "better" is hopelessly vague, for indeed, in terms of functionality (in most ways), the BMW will indeed, not be any better. However, the premise you presented above was for equivalent products, not one which is in fact inferior as you say the Camry is. So if you want to make a comparison, you should take two comparable products. I think numerous examples about eg. Hyundai vs..... However, the car industry, certainly would have difficulty going for anywhere near the same margin Arcteryx has been able to achieve.


Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Brianrieta
It doesn't matter if for argument's sake, half of the BMW owners owned them to show off to their peers, or rub their wealth into their's ex's faces because objective reviews clearly show it to be the better automobile.
See above. If the product can objectively be shown to be better, then in fact, it becomes much more likely that some are buying it for the advantage vs image, however, you already conceded that point, in regard to Arcteryx (and I believe you were right to do so).
DCIPHER is offline  
post #45 of (permalink) Old 12-18-2011, 02:01 PM
High on the Mountain Top
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: , , .
Posts: 1,081
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by johngenx

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by DCIPHER


JohngenX...wow, am I glad somebody said they were also confused. Arcteryx is so convoluted, I can only conclude that they are purposely trying to obfuscate their product lines...perhaps to justify the premium price...and make it less clear what people are actually getting. The number of jackets alone, is astounding...by the time you wade through the greek letters and acronyms, little energy is left to start tackling all the other specifically named ones!
!!!

Five "Alpha" jackets?

It's a dizzying array of "waterproof shells," insulated waterproof shells," insulated shells," "softshells," "hardfleece," "light/athletic," "Gore-Tex active shell," and "Coreloft." Some of the jackets overlap, some of them are obvious, many are not.

Honestly, I'd need to spend hours in a store trying to figure which jacket does what.

I'd thought Outdoor Research's line was a little too broad until I scanned ArcTeryx's.

Seriously, it makes me wonder if the prices are high just because they have so many different garments, increasing design and production costs?
Yep!

I really do not know what exactly they are thinking, but I know on more than one occasion, I've sat down to try to figure out which of their products would be the one for a certain need, and after a couple hours, just plain given up....doesn't help that most of the links will be to their site, or vendors, for which all jackets are: incredibly light, warm, breathable, weather resistant.....

Same thing for me, when I've gone straight to the Arcteryx site, What's this? Hercules?? Venta? Wait....accelero....maybe I just need a hardfleece?? Oh wait...the Gamma LT is an "athletic" jacket...wait I'm sure I saw that listed as a softshell....I did! So....I guess the rest of the Gamma's are definitely softshells...will the Gamma MX be more breathable than the Epsilon sv or ar??

Start mixing in older or discontinued models that sometimes are still available, and...my simpleton brain just gives up eventually! LOL

PS. I will say this! Sometimes I've come across a dead-bird jacket at a cheap price...maybe discontinued or a special sale and been tempted to buy it, without being able to determine exactly where it is in the product and performance line-up. STILL it's ARCTERYX...that seems like a good price for ARCTERYX! (heh, maybe it is working on me!)

DCIPHER is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1