buechsr

4 hours ago, Stevie Boy said:

I wonder if the big Gators there were part of the deal 😀 apparently the one I got close to, was called Henry 🙄

About 3 years ago a 6 footer swam over about 20 feet from the starting dock when I had a daughter about to jump in for her set.  I’m not afraid of gators, but I was watching with interest!

6 hours ago, BKistler said:

After several aborted attempts, Ski Paradise in Mulberry, FL has been sold. The buyer will develop it as an RV park. According to the site plan, almost the entire waterfront is RV sites, so it looks like the end of tournaments. However, the plan shows that the covered docks and boat ramp remain and ad copy talks about water skiing as an activity, so it looks like club use might continue. Haven’t heard from Stan or Donna. 

If I’m not mistaken, the longest running water ski tournament in the country, the Lakeland Open, would be having its 77th annual this year which has been held at Paradise for some time.  Sure hope it continues.  

“Isaws?” In front

“Ysmaws” (more)

do in white and ill  buy a few 

4 minutes ago, ETskier said:

I seem to remember those Infinitys had a nasty 22 off rooster tail at 34mph. Drove like it was on rails though.

They did but Kris and Rob had some “hull-attachment devices” (we’ll call them strakes) that helped as I recall from almost buying a zx1 a few years ago.  

That’s awesome!   Great skiers, and even better kids to be around!  Great job Kyle and Karen!  

2 hours ago, jpwhit said:

Learn something new everyday.....

Seems like this will create some complexity in changing out the engine to be ZO capable.

You'll need an engine configured the way they are setup in v-drive boats. The engine is flipped around so the exhaust manifolds have to be configured in the opposite direction. On a lot of engine, you can flip the exhaust system around, but it gets more complicated with the newest engine with catalytic converters. There are a lot more clearance issues and cooling plumbing that makes it much tricker to convert an engine that was intended for direct drive. 

Switching out the transmission, if desired for reliability, may also be a little more complex. 

Is the setup currently in the boat a separate transmission and v-drive gearbox? Or is it a combined unit?

Another potential hurdle for converting this boat to ZO, all the new engines available have catalytic converters. The existing engine box may not be larger enough to allow for such an engine without modifications or replacement. 

I’m not seeing why the tranny output going to a Vdrive (Walter’s?) or driveshaft would have any bearing on the feasibility of the project.  Same issues present themselves when putting the same new long block in a DD or VD wakeboard boat.  I would agree that if it is using a 1 piece tranny/vdrive like a skivee? That would create a bigger issue but I’m pretty sure that in ‘01, tranny and VD were separate components.

O, and if you ever get the chance to drive an infinity, it’s a hoot.  OP, If you don’t have the external strakes, may want to look into them.  Kris Lapoint could help I bet.

3 hours ago, UWSkier said:

LOL thermoplastic resin.  Get it hot, stand on a concrete surface on a sheet of parchment paper, pull it out, let it cool a bit, then mold it around your heel.  Then you just measure/test fit it 3-4 times on the RTP, make some guide marks, and glue it down.

Got it.  So a glorified horse dental impression.

3 hours ago, UWSkier said:

This is my Frankenstein setup.  It's ugly, but it works great.  Low enough to kick into, and keeps my heel from sliding laterally on the plate, which is the biggest mind-screw when switching to RTP.

 

what is that a horse denture?

2 hours ago, VONMAN said:

Sorry guys I've been having so much fun with skiing the C-95. After a full page of fin tuning I've settled on my numbers.

6.850  2.425  .836  7deg CG right   29.25"  

What's taking so long is that I had to adjust to the ski. With this ski you become the rider/passenger. The biggest thing I had to adjust to is don't be aggressive with this ski. It seems to do and know when to do it with very little effort on my part. It's fast, gets great angle, early and wide. In the turns let go of the handle reach and turn complete waiting for you to complete your stack for the boat to pick you up. Try to snap turn it or aggressive hip drop, well you better be ready! All the Denali's so far have been evolution of designs, but the C-95 has it all in one package. Keep in mind I'm still free skiing it. So for now here is some video at 32 and 35off at 32mph.

Looks fun…tell Don Simon to let that rope out softer you’re not barefooting!  I seem to see some buoys to skiers left in that 1st video 😜

Last week I saw a RTP that used a snowboard binding toe ratchet strap for the heel....on my to do list to try now. 

I've tried unsuccessfully multiple times to get out of double boots, never to feel confident.  Of course, that leads me to ski hips back in reliance on my back foot.  Really wish I could find a way to ski "on" my front leg better.  Going to try to frankenstein something this weekend.

19 minutes ago, DvarianDan Johnson said:

Yes remiss of me to not have mentioned the still ongoing magazine, but in all honesty are U getting anything there that isn't readily available here (BOS), Spraymakers, FPM, Rob H videos, etc, etc.  Doubtful any new pearls of wisdom from the mag.    Membership if you're re not competing is of course being reconciled to the fact that you're mainly just supporting the greater good with your funding.  

Allows me to tell my kids to put their phones down and read something with a straight face, so as to not break my own house rules which are admittedly enforced too infrequently.  

3 hours ago, Interjon said:

Here's a question.  I am 4 years new to the sport.  I love it and spend too much time on this site (and ski as much as I can).  However, I will never likely compete in a tournament.  For those like me in this situation (and there are probably many), is it good for the sport for me to join AWSA and others?  Please let me know.  

If so, I will make it happen today.  I want to be a contributing member of the community.

Absolutely.  There's strength in numbers, however small we may be.  Plus you get a magazine, lol.  That I actually like.  Last month had article on Jaeden Eade, and articles written by Corey Vaughn, Seth Stisher, and Chris Rossi.  Personally I fail to see the criticism in the magazine content.  It's far from bend your knees articles. 

10 minutes ago, UWSkier said:

The MC earnings call next week will be highly suggestive of whether this is a MBUU problem or an industry problem.

Last qtr:

On 4/30/2024 at 4:32 PM, Deep11 said:

A little advice needed -

The actuators on our ski nautique have become temperamental. Chat to other owners suggests this is a common fault. Given the significant expense to replace, the possibility of repeat issues in the future makes me ask if they are really necessary ?

also is there perhaps a “universal position” where they can be placed to suit as many skiers as possible. 
(the lengths we currently use them on are 28, 32,35 and occasional 38 off).

 

thanks for any thoughts on this,

K

I talked to a senior driver yesterday about this actually as I pull some people in the 28-32 mph, 15-28 off range and he suggested leaving at 35 off (for practice anyway).  Will try soon. 

@Deep11 is your boat a 19 or 20?  I have a 21 and believe I was told they changed the  part that year for reliability.  Have access to a 21 or beyond to check the latest if yours if 19-20?

I forget, can a skier request deviation from the helm microtuner setting in a tournament?

MBUU quarterly financials released an hour ago…I’m not Warren Buffett, but I  don’t think this looks good:

https://stockhouse.com/news/press-releases/2024/05/02/malibu-boats-inc-announces-third-quarter-fiscal-2024-results

Link to earning call at 8:30 this am on malibuboats.com

7 hours ago, unksskis said:

Typical thread that veers well beyond the point of the OP and into arguing over other sports’ applications.  Go golf, go play tennis, but nothing is comparable to the situation at hand. Jody is expressing how the membership is tired of the same old, and providing specific inquiries and concerns as to why aren’t there more specifics.  
 

what does bringing new people to the sport do?  What value does it bring? What incentive does it provide? 
 

This was KevCo’s opportunity to engage, and the choice was telling everyone to go pull some more people.  

Other sports’ governing organizations are not “comparable to the situation at hand”?  I disagree.  Everything is comparable.  In fact, comparisons to healthy organizations are wise to make. What are those sports and organizations doing?  It’s wise to study and emulate, just as in any other facet of life: skiing, parenting, career, etc.  

One example of a sport that has come out of nowhere to now be particularly prevalent, is Pickleball.  I just went to USA Pickleball’s website. It is dominated with requests for tagging it in social media and introducing others to the game.  Of course it should.  That’s the mission.  How is that so different than a simple request from Kevco in our monthly/quarterly whatever magazine?

In the original post, many grievances were aired.  Subsequently there has only been 1 concrete “fixable” complaint, which related to the thinning of divisions, essentially to (once again) tinker with the size of age groups.  People obviously have different opinions on that so that is not an actionable gripe unless the rules committee considers those tweaks.  

Other than that sole example, the OP, and other subsequent posts, generally disparaged Kevin Michael’s encouragement of members to get others skiing, and somehow twists that into rhetorically asking what does membership “do for me”?  

If any skier, competitive or not, USAWS member or not, can’t appreciate what Kevin was saying, we think differently. If current or “former” USAWS members are concerned with the expense of tournaments (sanctioning, officials, etc) surely they/we can appreciate that more revenue through membership better offsets the expenses of the organization.  What was so offending for Kevin to try to encourage USAWS members of the vital role of sharing the sport with others?  It doesn’t mean every new skier has to join USAWS, it just means the larger pool of skiers will organically create new members: a benefit to the organization, current members, and hopefully the future ski careers of new members.  

It’s not 1995.  IF people want to wax poetic about the good ol days, that’s fine, but all I’m reading herein is complaints.  No concrete suggestions are being made.  It’s just like the safe sport conversations.  All complaints, no solutions (because there were no alternatives), other than dropping your membership.  If you’re inclined to drop USAWS over a video that you could watch while changing your boat oil, fine.  But there is no utility in complaining without offering any concrete solutions to that which is being complained.  I’m not suggesting anyone keep their thoughts to themselves, far from it, express away, but coupling them with solutions makes it far more productive.

As far as I’m concerned, there was nothing wrong with Kevin’s appeal.

34 minutes ago, jjackkrash said:

It's been a while since I carried a handicap, but I was under the impression that the USGA/AGA were integrated.  But, sorry for potentially erroneous side comment, carry on.  

You’re a plus 2, right?  👍🏻

1 hour ago, jjackkrash said:

I suspect the USGA has a lot of members because you usually need a USGA GHIN handicap to reliably gamble with other recreational golfers.  

https://support.usga.org/membership/#:~:text=A Handicap Index® is,visit usga.org%2Fgetahandicap.
 

Apparently, not.  See link.  
 

in my experience that’s done through your state association, and per the above link at the bottom.  
 

In reviewing what USGA membership “does” for you, seems remarkably lacking yet money pours in for the benevolence of golf programs and education.  

not a response to your post jjack, but USAWS is not a charity.  That said, if we collectively look at USAWS through the lens of “what  do I get out of it?”,  that’s short sighted for the sport.  

3 hours ago, The_MS said:

700,000 USGA members.  I wonder how many have to complete safe sport training prior to playing in the local club championships 

Although I posted that membership stat, that’s an inaccurate comparison to the issues raised in the opening post.  Opening post dealt with why would one benefit by USAWS membership.  The overwhelming majority of the 700,000 USGA members see no direct benefit whatsoever.  It’s just a benevolent gesture of wanting to belong to an organization that supports what they like.  No USAWS member has to take safe sport, Only if they will be competing.  Notably, cursory web searching suggests all affiliated with “First Tee” must take safe sport…as well as US soccer, usta etc.  

…but is this another thread about safe sport?  Or the direction of USAWS?

3 minutes ago, DvarianDan Johnson said:

Organization membership isn’t required for most other amateur events . Can join community leagues, intramural events, etc.  We need to stop trying to justify

Just as no one is required to join the pickleball association to join the YMCA and play, no one is required to join USAWS to ski a non sanctioned event.  

The USGA has 700,000 members.  Exceedingly few of those play USGA events. USGA members feel a benelovent calling to support the organization that supports their sport.  I’m sure “Some” people justify abstaining from joining based on what the USGA (doesn’t) do for them, but not a single one of them would criticize the President of the USGA for encouraging members to expose new players to golf or encouraging competitive progression.  Many in waterskiing have and do the same, with or without supporting USAWS. That’s their prerogative.  Personally, I respect the tall tasks USAWS must deal with and will gladly pay my dues long after tournament admission is needed.  

1 hour ago, MitchellM said:

I'm an avid tennis player.  The parallels between the tennis world and waterskiing are interesting.  Millions of people play tennis at all levels as a recreational sport.  These folks don't need to join a society to play a friendly game.  However, if you want to compete, you must be a USTA member.  They have a hold on that aspect of the sport and are responsible for rankings, etc...

How many folks out there like to ski with a recreational intention only?  Take the family out on the boat and free ski while enjoying the water.  This is probably the vast majority of skiers.  We don't all want to compete.  No need for those folks to join and support USAWS.

At the end of the day, these governing bodies and our "elite" athletes are the ambasadors for our sports.  The do need to step up and encourage participation at a grass roots level.

You’re right, there is no “need”, but they should feel a modicum of a calling.  

I've not done this conversion before but as to running wires to helm, find the steering cable, follow its routing, use a hanger or other wire fishing solution, tie a string, and route it up.  Tie wires, pull through.

42 minutes ago, Golfguy said:

All of the above statistics are great information and made a case of some sort. Great research was done by all, and of course by individuals that are already skiers. I just wonder if the purpose of all of this wasn't to investigate whether the price of boat was discouraging new participation? I postulate that it is. So what can be done? Saying that a new person to the sport can buy a used boat is true, but in the long run if new boas aren't sold, then soon there will be far fewer used boat. Problem not solved. It would be interesting to see just how many of the people in this forum bought a new boat this or last year. 

 

Maybe the 2009 SN 196 was the epitome of the slalom tug?

Maybe.  I sold my ZO ‘08 this year.  Replaced with a USED 6 figure SN.  Yes, it stung.  2 kids set PBs first set though, so I’ll take it?  

15 hours ago, Hallpass said:

Read through quickly, and as I said, not a financial guy.

Actual Net Profit rose 34% exceeding the 17 percent revenue growth

As a percentage, net operating profit rose 3%  from 24.1 percent to 27.1 percent.  

I could well be missing your point.

 

I was merely saying Ferrari has very inelastic demand as its units increased marginally, revenue substantially, which means per unit pricing went up substantially.  But I’m also saying it would seem their net operating profit seems to demonstrate they saw significant increase in cost of goods sold or their net operating profit would have gone up much more.  “Actual net profit” in your last may be explained by other accounting factors.  Perhaps even value of their F1 team now that signed LH.  

Embarrassingly, I actually have a degree in finance, but have forgotten most everything related to accounting, and don;t work in finance at all.  So I could be way off too!  

Malibu’s quarterly earning call is next week. It’ll be interesting for sure.

3 hours ago, chrislandy said:

@Horton @buechsr

My point was, that we are in a silo'd market whether its skis / foils / surf boards / boats etc... 

When compared to other boats, they are overpriced for what you get. Even taking the base model of what I linked to, you get a 7ft longer boat than a GS25, a boat you can put a tender on the back off to pickup, surf and foil all day behind (seen it done) and with 14000lb dry weight kicks a massive wake. Then you can cook diner, eat, entertain, shower, sh*t, then sleep aboard.

Another example is wake foil kit, LF / HL etc you won't find "decent" kit below $2k, come out of the silo and look at surf/wing foils and they are literally half the price - pretty much the same foil shapes, board sizes, leg lengths etc... aimed at a different market. 

Because it's a silo'd market, we only see what is presented to us and for competitions, what is allowed to tow us so the prices can be set by market demand. If dealers and lenders are going to offer 30yr loans on surf boats, and regulations don't curtail their use, they will keep going up as that is the expected trajectory.

 

I also think, the another of the biggest drivers in boat costs is the 2-3yr old boat market. If the manufacturers slashed the prices, they screw the last few years buyers who will most likely be this or next years customers and sink the market completely for years to come with thousands of boats in massive negative equity, unable to refinance, unable to sell on. As I see it, the only way they could realistically reduce the boat prices is to maintain the boat price and let inflation catch up, that way the boat depreciate correctly and customers aren't left holding tens of thousands of  debt on an asset worth nothing.#

An example of this is going on right now with Tesla slashing their retail prices, which may get them a few sales now, but has sunk the used market completely.

As Jody correctly said, it costs way more to build these boats than one would think so I don;t know they’re “overpriced for what you get”.  It might be fair to say that they feel like their pricing is not justified in light of other types of boats and their pricing, But I’ll standby what I said before that nothing sells for as bloated prices as the large center console market in America. It is out of control. In any event. 

They can’t slash prices.  I just looked and in Malibu’s last quarterly report, net income margin was less than 5%.  About 11% EBIDTA margin.  While it is of course not exact, if Malibu dropped prices 5%, it literally generates no profit.  That is not going to be happening.  As it relates to the expense of building boats in this market, inboard pricing is actually quite reasonable IMO.  Tesla can cut prices and still make a profit. They’ve demonstrated that. The big three can’t do that, IMO.  All they can do is scale back production to let market demand catch up to what they can provide for a price people are willing to pay

1 hour ago, Hallpass said:

 

Ferrari shipped about 13K units last year world wide, and about 5K units in the U.S.  There units were up 3%, revenues up 17% and net operating margins were up 3%.  Inflation, high interest rates, global economy issues seemingly had no impact.

 

Just for discussion sake, I can agree that inflation and global economy issues didn’t affect their buyers which is obviously represented by significantly higher revenues, despite far less (increase) in units. The obvious conclusion is that they were able to charge more per unit than the previous year.

However, that’s the (lack of) top line effect of inflation.

Given that their operating margins were up just 3%, if they were inflation proof on the supply/production side, then in theory their operating margins should’ve been up 17%, in line with their revenues.  Said another way, it could be argued that those numbers reflect a 14% increase in its expenses associated with each unit produced…inflation….it just so happens that their buyers can afford that absorption, but I don’t we can conclude inflation didnt affect their financials substantially.