Take a look at page 52 2011 starboard catalog.

[Praxis]

I have nothing against Starboards product, that being said I think someone that actually surfs needs to edit there catalog too many mistakes and it makes me feel like they are marketing towards people that are new to the sport and can be sucked in with slick photos.

[Chase Maxwell]

Can you imagine what it would cost to even print their catalog?  It's got to be several dollars for each one.  With that much invested, you would think they would invest in some legitimate pictures.  If this was a lesser known company, they would get crucified for this.  Starboard gets a pass because they are a huge company and have many dedicated customers.  No mater what, it's lame.

[Praxis]

Just got a email from Jimmy, he had a few choice words to say about this, but for some reason I think he is laughing at starboard.

[pdxmike]

Just got a email from Jimmy, he had a few choice words to say about this, but for some reason I think he is laughing at starboard.

Starboard certainly gave Jimmy Lewis an opportunity for some interesting adverstising of his own--"Don't take our word for how good our boards are--just ask Starboard".

Then again, people may be too quick to blame Starboard.  Maybe Jimmy Lewis hacked in and inserted the photo of the JL board into Starboard's catalog.   

[Smokey Carter]

Couldn't there b confusion? He said he's done shapes for their production line in the last paragraph? And maybe they just license boards through Jimmy when the athletes want something really specific?..... Don't think there was anything sinister at work here....

http://www.jimmylewis.com/shopcontent.asp?type=Jimmy%20Lewis

[uglysupper]

The likelihood that this is a mistake rather than an intentional deception is pretty high.

Killer wave and great shot.

[Strand Leper]

Mistake or not... it's not like a mere grammatical error.  It is a pattern of Starboard incorrectly portraying their products to inflate them in the mind of the consumer... this is just bad on every single level. 

One of SB's paid athletes chose a different board on which to charge double O surf... Of course Starboard isn't going to make something mass produced specifically for condictions that only .000001% of SUP riders will ever ride... and of couse the athlete is going to want to ride equipment that gives them the best opportunity for success in the given conditions...

So, dial it down a freaking notch cowboys... show your boards... in their elements... with your riders on them... and some hot chicks... IS THAT SO HARD?

Or, buy your team riders some good disability insurance policies and send them out at mid sized Jaws on 10'8" Whoppers... and get some good shots... (please rail... hold... hold... hold... oooooh noooo.....)


Tim

[Praxis]

If Jimmy says it's cool I'll post the email he sent. I have to respect the man and ask before I put my foot in my mouth.

[southwesterly]

Here we go again.

[anotherncbeachbum]

Here we go again.

 

Whenever I search for a starboard review....I always end up back to this page.

Come on folks, use your own pictures. :\

[PonoBill]

Holy buckets. Did they see a sales spike from controversy last time? If not, are they complete idiots? I can only assume that for some reason they just don't care. Probably most of their sales comes from new customers that don't have a clue. But if I were a competitor and they did something like that I'd get an injunction to have their catalog seized. It happened to a client of ours (not because of something our agency did, but our contact at the company was fired, along with the VP of Marketing).

I'm looking at their tagline: Innovation, quality. Yikes.

[surfcowboy]

I still maintain it's a "save some bread, do it yourself" thing. Ignorance, but as Bill says, it only takes one good lawsuit to learn your lesson.

Speaking of... Leper has the point. Their own guy on another board and they ran it? Before, when we were answered, they maintained that the board could perform the same, it was just a cosmetic change. This is a clear performance difference to the point of being reckless.

Selling the dream is one thing... this is another.

[Praxis]

Mistake or not... it's not like a mere grammatical error.  It is a pattern of Starboard incorrectly portraying their products to inflate them in the mind of the consumer... this is just bad on every single level. 

One of SB's paid athletes chose a different board on which to charge double O surf... Of course Starboard isn't going to make something mass produced specifically for condictions that only .000001% of SUP riders will ever ride... and of couse the athlete is going to want to ride equipment that gives them the best opportunity for success in the given conditions...

So, dial it down a freaking notch cowboys... show your boards... in their elements... with your riders on them... and some hot chicks... IS THAT SO HARD?

Or, buy your team riders some good disability insurance policies and send them out at mid sized Jaws on 10'8" Whoppers... and get some good shots... (please rail... hold... hold... hold... oooooh noooo.....)


Tim

I wonder what SB is going to say about this.
 There are builders that mass produce boards for those conditions the board Conner is on is a baby bomb the only difference is the construction on the production models.
 I like the whopper comment :-) I would like to see some nutter give it a go

[Praxis]

The likelihood that this is a mistake rather than an intentional deception is pretty high.

Killer wave and great shot.

I would like to think it's a mistake but if you look closely at the pic in the catalog it looks like the put a black outline on the bottom

[DavidJohn]

It's just a sup surfing picture.. 

DJ