ROVER HOCKEY SKATES PROJECT

[Skate Mod 4]

The realty of the situation is that a skate is not a car where you can innovate constantly; a lot of intelligent things have been tried before with a proven track record. They are called “pattern cuts” one of the reasons we can’t come up with new stuff because the stress points are always in the same location, so you cannot reinvent the wheel to much. What you can do is apply new materials and new methods with the same pattern cuts, make few changes and tweak things here or there, all these changes make a significant difference.

So the mega air forefoot piece is a reinforcement pattern cut because in this location you have a lot of stress. Part of performance increase is not always to improve things, but not to let things break down too fast.

All of my replies here were not aimed at those who actually replied, it was always aimed at the silent type, the one that comes here for advice because of the same issues as every one else has today, and quickly realizes that the advise he is given is based on no merit. And quickly learns that to fix these issues and finding solutions to these problems can only be done with a different approach to design and production method which I disclosed in my crowd funding campaign.

I have yet to see anyone challenge my skate from structural point of view regardless if it is an old proven design that we can't improve on or new design that does improve things, which is the most important thing, all other nit picking issues are from people that are amateurs in every sense of the word, so they are looking to grab anything they can based on their IQ level.

 

Dark:

 

Do you actually think I would disclose my full financial break down of my operation, who is doing what, who is my IP lawyer, who is my main engineer who is my accountant, what is my full cost break down, what connections and relationships I have with big box chain stores in which country for future expansion.

You already challenged me once by asking me to name few names, and received an appropriate answer.

When you are asking all these amateur questions you are not discrediting my operation or me, you are discrediting your lack of understanding of both the engineering side of the business and the business side of the business.

I can live without being a permanent participant on this or any other forum, yet the ones that replied with no merit, it seems to me that this is all you have. So I encourage you in continuing doing what you have been doing, which is working on your reputation by grabbing the lowest hanging fruit you can grab.

 

Cheers

[proth0303 29]

Were you specifically looking for a challenge to the skate design?  Pretty much looked like you were wanting people to look at your crowdfunding page and consider donating... and because this is a discussion forum, you got feedback on several other aspects because that's what happens in discussion forums... 

 

 

[DarkStar50 679]

No worries Skate Mod, as long as you have your ducks in a row, it's fine by me. Of course, I'm not the one looking for funding after 40 years in the hockey business. 

[Playmakersedge 58]

On 12/27/2017 at 7:07 PM, Kgbeast said:

Do not forget that there were skates with actual hinge at the ankle, so they act as a brace (reducing side to side, while preserves front back movement). They are long gone, but still admired by few. The only progress in hockey skates that found an appreciation is in weight reduction, moisture management, impact protection, and blades change speed; everything else is like a puff of smoke, it comes and goes before many ever notice it. Marsblade will probably follow that route as well. No matter how cool that articulation is, question will be, can they take a hit, how long it takes to replace a blade. Hockey is much more than skating.

Yes ,my first pair of non department store skates were Lange. They were confidence building, but when I out grew them and went to a conventional skate that was the point when I started to be able to skate with a deliberate stride, cut etc .        My experience with the new style composite skates with a non organic interior is they are too stiff all the way around and there molded and they fit .  When I loosen them to the feel I like side to side front to back; then while skating the non organic interior gives me this slippery not flesh to flesh feel . I want that feel and also have  movement.    When I conform to how the skate was designed and tighten the laces; What I have to do is then change the way I skate to fit with in the design.  Not how any tool should be ; it's job is to serve your needs.      I by no means mean this in any way condicending at all or try to blow my own horn .  This is coming from a giant guy, that "was" the kind of good that takes a gift of God or the universe and work your but off on top of that.   This shit with the holders moving is to correct a problem the industry created . The adding height to the blade to prevent hitting the side of the boot and lifting the edge off the ice is to compensate for a problem the industry created.      To those of you that only have used these new style boots don't know the difference.      The skates I refer to as working correctly:  yes you could lift the edge of the ice with the boot, but that was do to messing up in form . You gotta take my word on this, I'm 6'8" when I played  I was 270-280 ; i could cut with my elbow almost on the ice and didn't lift the blade.  Start drawing lines to visualise that body position, you see it's not possible by just laying the boot over . The boot wasn't layed over all the way only enough to get a positive edge and the rest of the body position was from the ankles.      The skate boot now has to be layed over with the body  .   

I think the reason for these crazy stiff boots came to be for these reasons:  weight yes . I think mostly it was done to make hockey a sport that most people can do . They have taken the learning how to skate time and shortened it almost taken it off the table.   Great for sales . Bad for the players ,there muscles and ligaments and tendons haven't gone threw the progression that'that's necessary for an athlete.  Lots of these aspects that have been marketed as important are just marketing and justification for putting casts on people's ankles.    I have observed "elite"  youth hockey players 14,15,16 with these pipe cleaner legs . This is indicative of them not being an elite conditioned athlete under the equipment.  These kids are going to need hips replaced, knees torn up.   It worries me .  Off to the rink for a few laps  

 

 

[Playmakersedge 58]

6 hours ago, proth0303 said:

Regardless of whether I agree or not, I have to give props to the guy for trying to find an alternative solution... 

Just thinking out loud, I think you'll find limited success in crowdfunding because the solution doesn't appear to be all that radical from the existing options in the market (it may seem radical to you but not to the person who is currently getting by with the skates he/she already has).  Why buck up $500+ on a product that won't be delivered for well over a year when I have options to meet my need today (may not be the perfect option but they work pretty well)?  IMO, ditch the crowdfunding and focus on investors.  Rather than spend time trying to justify to a large number of individual potential buyers (and repeatedly have the same back and forth debate over what is a drop in the bucket of the overall goal), go to the sources that have the amount of money you need and do what you need to do to get the necessary financing.

Solid points . 

[Playmakersedge 58]

6 hours ago, Skate Mod said:

The realty of the situation is that a skate is not a car where you can innovate constantly; a lot of intelligent things have been tried before with a proven track record. They are called “pattern cuts” one of the reasons we can’t come up with new stuff because the stress points are always in the same location, so you cannot reinvent the wheel to much. What you can do is apply new materials and new methods with the same pattern cuts, make few changes and tweak things here or there, all these changes make a significant difference.

 

 

 

So the mega air forefoot piece is a reinforcement pattern cut because in this location you have a lot of stress. Part of performance increase is not always to improve things, but not to let things break down too fast.

 

 

 

All of my replies here were not aimed at those who actually replied, it was always aimed at the silent type, the one that comes here for advice because of the same issues as every one else has today, and quickly realizes that the advise he is given is based on no merit. And quickly learns that to fix these issues and finding solutions to these problems can only be done with a different approach to design and production method which I disclosed in my crowd funding campaign.

 

 

 

I have yet to see anyone challenge my skate from structural point of view regardless if it is an old proven design that we can't improve on or new design that does improve things, which is the most important thing, all other nit picking issues are from people that are amateurs in every sense of the word, so they are looking to grab anything they can based on their IQ level.

 

 

 

Dark:

 

 

 

Do you actually think I would disclose my full financial break down of my operation, who is doing what, who is my IP lawyer, who is my main engineer who is my accountant, what is my full cost break down, what connections and relationships I have with big box chain stores in which country for future expansion.

 

 

 

You already challenged me once by asking me to name few names, and received an appropriate answer.

 

 

 

When you are asking all these amateur questions you are not discrediting my operation or me, you are discrediting your lack of understanding of both the engineering side of the business and the business side of the business.

 

 

 

I can live without being a permanent participant on this or any other forum, yet the ones that replied with no merit, it seems to me that this is all you have. So I encourage you in continuing doing what you have been doing, which is working on your reputation by grabbing the lowest hanging fruit you can grab.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Sir , respectfully. You are essentially asking for an investment by and or from the hockey community.   This being said . You should and need to treat this with the same approach you would seal funding from venture capitalists etc . They certainly would ask to see the information you talked about above that you are not disclosing.   

       Also  you never know who any of the members of this forum are.  There are investment savvy folks . There are business savvy folks. Technically savvy folks  . You don't know who has share the ice with hall of fame players or who's significant other is a financal planner in one of our nation's wealthiest area codes .   You can't afford to have  your above tone .  

at this stage you have to approach this as a market study.  Every piece of information you have been given here has value .  Potential investors, potential customers.   Any investor worth there salt will want to see everything you mention above and then some. That is the basis used to measure the risk.. They will rattle your cage just to see how you react.          Your take away from this should be ,the information ,knowing when to say thanks for the input there is much to take into consideration after the thread became redundant, this is business emotions more often then not become a liability.    

[Kgbeast 195]

1 hour ago, Playmakersedge said:

Yes ,my first pair of non department store skates were Lange. They were confidence building, but when I out grew them and went to a conventional skate that was the point when I started to be able to skate with a deliberate stride, cut etc .        My experience with the new style composite skates with a non organic interior is they are too stiff all the way around and there molded and they fit .  When I loosen them to the feel I like side to side front to back; then while skating the non organic interior gives me this slippery not flesh to flesh feel . I want that feel and also have  movement.    When I conform to how the skate was designed and tighten the laces; What I have to do is then change the way I skate to fit with in the design.  Not how any tool should be ; it's job is to serve your needs.      I by no means mean this in any way condicending at all or try to blow my own horn .  This is coming from a giant guy, that "was" the kind of good that takes a gift of God or the universe and work your but off on top of that.   This shit with the holders moving is to correct a problem the industry created . The adding height to the blade to prevent hitting the side of the boot and lifting the edge off the ice is to compensate for a problem the industry created.      To those of you that only have used these new style boots don't know the difference.      The skates I refer to as working correctly:  yes you could lift the edge of the ice with the boot, but that was do to messing up in form . You gotta take my word on this, I'm 6'8" when I played  I was 270-280 ; i could cut with my elbow almost on the ice and didn't lift the blade.  Start drawing lines to visualise that body position, you see it's not possible by just laying the boot over . The boot wasn't layed over all the way only enough to get a positive edge and the rest of the body position was from the ankles.      The skate boot now has to be layed over with the body  .   

I think the reason for these crazy stiff boots came to be for these reasons:  weight yes . I think mostly it was done to make hockey a sport that most people can do . They have taken the learning how to skate time and shortened it almost taken it off the table.   Great for sales . Bad for the players ,there muscles and ligaments and tendons haven't gone threw the progression that'that's necessary for an athlete.  Lots of these aspects that have been marketed as important are just marketing and justification for putting casts on people's ankles.    I have observed "elite"  youth hockey players 14,15,16 with these pipe cleaner legs . This is indicative of them not being an elite conditioned athlete under the equipment.  These kids are going to need hips replaced, knees torn up.   It worries me .  Off to the rink for a few laps  

 

 

Agree with that. I always had a problem with stiffer-and-higher-of-the-ice-is-better thing. Easier yes, better - I doubt that. I am not the only one here agrees with that, but unfortunately, when people get ski boots for skates, they see immediate "improvement" in skating and hence this is more popular. Graf has tried to fight this "too stiff, too tall" thing for years, and that just helped them out. Most people want easy, they do not care if it is wrong.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

10 hours ago, Skate Mod said:

The realty of the situation is that a skate is not a car where you can innovate constantly; a lot of intelligent things have been tried before with a proven track record. They are called “pattern cuts” one of the reasons we can’t come up with new stuff because the stress points are always in the same location, so you cannot reinvent the wheel to much. What you can do is apply new materials and new methods with the same pattern cuts, make few changes and tweak things here or there, all these changes make a significant difference.

 

 

 

So the mega air forefoot piece is a reinforcement pattern cut because in this location you have a lot of stress. Part of performance increase is not always to improve things, but not to let things break down too fast.

 

 

 

All of my replies here were not aimed at those who actually replied, it was always aimed at the silent type, the one that comes here for advice because of the same issues as every one else has today, and quickly realizes that the advise he is given is based on no merit. And quickly learns that to fix these issues and finding solutions to these problems can only be done with a different approach to design and production method which I disclosed in my crowd funding campaign.

 

 

 

I have yet to see anyone challenge my skate from structural point of view regardless if it is an old proven design that we can't improve on or new design that does improve things, which is the most important thing, all other nit picking issues are from people that are amateurs in every sense of the word, so they are looking to grab anything they can based on their IQ level.

 

 

 

Dark:

 

 

 

Do you actually think I would disclose my full financial break down of my operation, who is doing what, who is my IP lawyer, who is my main engineer who is my accountant, what is my full cost break down, what connections and relationships I have with big box chain stores in which country for future expansion.

 

 

 

You already challenged me once by asking me to name few names, and received an appropriate answer.

 

 

 

When you are asking all these amateur questions you are not discrediting my operation or me, you are discrediting your lack of understanding of both the engineering side of the business and the business side of the business.

 

 

 

I can live without being a permanent participant on this or any other forum, yet the ones that replied with no merit, it seems to me that this is all you have. So I encourage you in continuing doing what you have been doing, which is working on your reputation by grabbing the lowest hanging fruit you can grab.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Please quit it with the personal comments. Thank you.

[Davideo 99]

3 hours ago, Kgbeast said:

Agree with that. I always had a problem with stiffer-and-higher-of-the-ice-is-better thing. Easier yes, better - I doubt that. I am not the only one here agrees with that, but unfortunately, when people get ski boots for skates, they see immediate "improvement" in skating and hence this is more popular. Graf has tried to fight this "too stiff, too tall" thing for years, and that just helped them out. Most people want easy, they do not care if it is wrong.

Do folks really see an improvement with stiffer skates? I thought the shift was more a push of 1) Stiffer equals better energy transfer (technically true) and 2) 220 lb NHL players wear stiff skates (so clearly 115 lb Johnny Bantam needs the same level of stiffness).

[Leif 161]

I’ve reread the introduction on your funding page, and it says that the aim is to create skates with more complex construction and production. Surely the first question that any investor is going to ask is what benefit does the skater get from these skates, especially in comparison to existing skates, and I could not find the answer to that question. Surely the complexity of the skate and the production are not goals, they are side effects of the solutions chosen to achieve the goals. Now it’s possible the answer to my question is buried in the large amount of text, and if so then it is my view that you need to make it clear in the introduction. 

And the other posters are right, we’re not being mean, there’s gonna be loads of cash rich people reading this forum. Hell, I wish I had been able to invest in the Sparx crowd funding offer. 

[Davideo 99]

When people question the ability to successfully mass produce high quality skates "with more complex designs and more complex production methods vs. current industry standard" as quoted from his fundraising page, he responds with some handwaving: "So a lot of the concerns you raise on my skates going through testing , impact, flex, stress testing, 12 moth delivery……have no merit because only a person knowledgeable in the art of developing skates would understand the process and realize that there is no need to reinvent the wheel, all we need is to fix issues that are ideology based not engineering based."

So either the designs and production methods are not more complex, or the changes are engineering based.

Making a guess here, he most likely he doesn't have much experience with mass manufacturing and a factory told him they can do it with no problem, so he is just assuming that it will be pretty easy. As someone with some experience bringing consumer electronics to market, it seems crowd funding products typically way, way underestimate the time, cost, and headache involved in going from a prototype to a commercially viable, mass produced product. And that's starting with a prototype that is shown to be functioning. It's one of those, you don't know what you don't know sort of things.

I commend the OP on his determination and goals, and any successful entrepreneur needs to be able to push past doubters. However, doubters usually have a point that at least needs to be considered, and often adjustments taken as well. And based on the fact that the funding is total is currently $0, it appears just about everyone is a doubter at this point.

In my mind the two major unanswered questions are 1) does the skate actually work in the intended way? and 2) can it actually be successfully brought to market? I think it will be very hard to get funding without much better answers to these questions.

[Playmakersedge 58]

1 hour ago, Davideo said:

When people question the ability to successfully mass produce high quality skates "with more complex designs and more complex production methods vs. current industry standard" as quoted from his fundraising page, he responds with some handwaving: "So a lot of the concerns you raise on my skates going through testing , impact, flex, stress testing, 12 moth delivery……have no merit because only a person knowledgeable in the art of developing skates would understand the process and realize that there is no need to reinvent the wheel, all we need is to fix issues that are ideology based not engineering based."

So either the designs and production methods are not more complex, or the changes are engineering based.

Making a guess here, he most likely he doesn't have much experience with mass manufacturing and a factory told him they can do it with no problem, so he is just assuming that it will be pretty easy. As someone with some experience bringing consumer electronics to market, it seems crowd funding products typically way, way underestimate the time, cost, and headache involved in going from a prototype to a commercially viable, mass produced product. And that's starting with a prototype that is shown to be functioning. It's one of those, you don't know what you don't know sort of things.

I commend the OP on his determination and goals, and any successful entrepreneur needs to be able to push past doubters. However, doubters usually have a point that at least needs to be considered, and often adjustments taken as well. And based on the fact that the funding is total is currently $0, it appears just about everyone is a doubter at this point.

In my mind the two major unanswered questions are 1) does the skate actually work in the intended way? and 2) can it actually be successfully brought to market? I think it will be very hard to get funding without much better answers to these questions.

Agreed,  another point in line with your thinking.   There dosent seam there is enough business experience behind this product . 

Advice to skate mod :: the idea guy,the creator  ,is not the person to take a product to market, to hear dirrect input from focus groups.  The reason is you are passionate about this. Emotional about this.  

It's human nature to deflect the negative. There is a reason for that ... For explaining it in the visual  ; our brains have a heavy door being held open by a very fragile stick,  this stick is called pride . Once that is broken, slam goes that heavy door and useful, important, lessons, facts  just bounce back or off  .

You are right that skate boots are going in the wrong direction.  Where you are missing the mark is your design is a compensater for the root of the the issue.   Why compensate?  Fix the problem where the body wants to naturally wants to bend in the mechanics of skating.    

Your venture is a develope,patent ,prototype,  then make your money selling the I.P in a lump sum, or licensing.  . My self I would seek the lump sum 

[Playmakersedge 58]

12 hours ago, Davideo said:

Do folks really see an improvement with stiffer skates? I thought the shift was more a push of 1) Stiffer equals better energy transfer (technically true) and 2) 220 lb NHL players wear stiff skates (so clearly 115 lb Johnny Bantam needs the same level of stiffness).

I think the material being used in the skates now is ideal for the points of energy transfer  . Places it is about the lessening the lost energy from the skater .         The theory of using stored energy in the composite materials is in my opinion garbage.  I say this because  for this material has to be compressed for that now stored energy to transfer to the ice .   Our force ,via strength and weight is doing the work compressing the material and this is the spot the flaw in the design of the skates on the shelf today.   We lose necessary boot flexion where we want it .   

[skates 3]

Hi Skate Mod, I have reviewed your "skate concept" comments to solve the problems that in your opinion the skate industries face today.  I will only leave you with the following comments. I wish you the best of luck, it is welcoming to hear other opinions on skate design functions to improve the athlete but one must also realize the logistics of validating the proof of concept with this type of idea.before confirming you have solved these product issues in your overall plan,  proof of concept is the 1st step one must complete  before looking too far ahead at the bigger picture.  One step at a time.

[Skate Mod 4]

The information you are asking on full details of final design, development, financial break down, risk assessment, what materials I will use, what specific production methods I will use, how much research I did corresponding with companies that are skilled in specific production methods, based on my specific designs and more importantly these companies already work and have worked with big brands on R&D and skate development including factories in China that work with big brands.

This is all private and privileged information that should only be asked by a potential investor who’s looking for equity in return.

And I did look for a private investors, knocked on as many doors as I can. Today’s landscape of investors is all software based with minimal risk, high reward.

I’m still very open to that idea, and that’s why I made my campaign public in case there is an investor still out there, and that is also why I did not disclose everything 100% publicly so if I do attract a potential investor I still have enough of a leverage in being competitive on intellectual property.

I’m fully aware of the market place and that finding 2000 people at $500 at a concept stage is a long shot at best. The most I can hope from crowd funding is to find 300 – 500 dealers that are willing to put up $2k - $3k each if they want to carry a product where customers don’t come back with issues and loose any respect for that dealer for selling them a crappy skate for $1000.  We have a lot of these dealers because manufacturers forgot how important they are to our industry.

Our dealers (physical store pro shops) are the most priced possession we have, without them we will collapse as an industry, we are not soccer where consumers can shop on their own, we need expertise on fit, feel and everything else in between.

Manufacturers do not respect dealers, they are shoving easily made product down their throat and forcing them to take gambles on badly designed skates, with too many models with the same design approach and same fit and overpriced product. It’s a short-term solution.

9 out of 10 people that come to these forums, do not come here in praising how good their skates feel, they come here with issues because they can’t solve them anywhere including the dealer that sold that the skates.

The only way to solve it is not to cut corners on design and fit and narrow your focus on fewer models, and grow your business at the rate of the dealer’s demand and not at the rate of your shareholder demand.

I know I can bring this project from a concept stage to reality regardless what type of holes you are willing to poke in my presentation, because of the amount of preparation I did over the years on all sides.  This has nothing to do with being passionate or not, it has everything to do with being calculated.

My private “Pitch Deck” was reviewed by “Industry Insiders” and also very wealthy individuals, some of them know the full process of development and the financial aspect of bringing a high-end skate to the market. There was never a single-issue raised about my presentation from an engineering side or financial side, quite the opposite.

Hockey is simply too risky of a business compared to all other options Investors have today.

That’s why it might only happen if the risk is spread out among a large group of people.

We will never see a person that has both enough capital and enough knowledge on the engineering side to bring a high-end hockey skate to the market. There are too many disciplines a person must have to do that, we are too small of an industry to find that person.

That is why a lot of hockey companies got into our business by buying out other existing brands, because it’s usually a business man without an engineering back round so they can only go by proven track record, which sometimes works well in long term, and sometimes it doesn’t.

 

Cheers.

[Skate Mod 4]

FOR ENGINEERS:

 

Ok, we have tackled the business side of my project as far as my ideology and my approach to crowd funding, lets tackle the engineering side of my project on a much broader scale.

There seems to me a lot of engineers coming out of the wood work with magnifying glasses trying to find any mistakes in my designs or test my level of expertise one the engendering side. Since I can’t respond to each and every one of you individually I will make a general response.

I did a quick test by deliberately making an incorrect statement in one of my replies, hoping that since there are so many magnifying glasses out there, there would be more then enough suitors to point out the mistake.

Unfortunately it did not happen, but I’m not surprised since if I was participating on an engineering forum, there is a good chance I might be in the same shoes where someone takes me to school as well, although the most likely scenario I would have styed away from commenting unless I was able to back it up.

I do not like giving people advice in general unless they seek it or unless it’s a forum where it’s all about advise.

One piece of advice I will give to all of our engineers on this forum is not to look at skates not just mine, but any other skate as individual pieces and individual mistakes or flaws in design, but look at it collectively as a one functioning unit.

Because of such complexly of fit and function we can never perfect it, we can only sacrifice one thing for another hoping to take one step back and two steps forward.

So when most of you raise issues on complex design, complex manufacturing methods that are present in my public presentations, it’s based on the same principle of taking one step back in order to take two steps forward on the overall feel, fit and function of the skate.

I will bring up one example, the rest you will have to tackle on your own.

 

Some people complain that the toebox on Bauer skates is too high, too much room up top. This is a prime example of taking one step back and two steps forward.

The reason behind it, its not to accommodate many different feet, no one has toes that extend that high, but by making it taller we are changing the angle of the quarter panel that wraps around the toecap edge to a more shallow angle, where as by making the toecap shorter that angle is much steeper.

Steeper angle means more concentrated stress around the curve usually around the 3^rd and 4^th eyelet  (from the top), the more concentrated stress in one spot, the more chance it will break down faster in that particular spot, that means we need to add more reinforcement material in that spot, that means more weight, and more importantly also could mean forward flex might be hindered since now we’re flexing through more material this is where a specific “pattern cut” and material uses in that cut can dictate how much forward flex is hindered.

So instead of sacrificing on so many factors, an easier solution is to make the toecap taller and avoid adding so many unnecessary steps.

In Bauer’s case with Vapor skates, they are also making the instep extremely shallow in order to spread out the stress even more, making things shallow is already going way too far where you take not one but two steps back and then 1.5 step forward. They do not want to add another “pattern cut” on top and add 10 1-20 grams of weight, so they are sacrificing instep volume instead at the expense of extreme lace bite.

This is a decision in favor of ideology on marketing the lightest skate possible, decision based on simple design that has fewer steps during production, but all these decisions are not in favor of making the right sacrifices at the correct ratio.

In order for us to get closer to a “perfect skate”, we need a design and manufacturing method where we always have enough choice on making one sacrifice in order to gain something better.

Bauer and CCM have cornered themselves where they no loner have that flexibility, unless they change their ideology and strategy which has huge financial ramifications.

So my approach to design is based on that, and it’s not my personal idea, it’s the most common, most logical and most accepted ideology around the world in any industry, but under very strict rule, Finances.

As long as financial aspect of this ideology does not interfere with it then it can be done.

In my personal case, I’m not under a large corporate umbrella, do not have large payroll, can live with much smaller profit margins, my final production cost per skate on material cost is not far from Bauer, so that gives me more freedom and flexibility in taking one step back and making two steps forward in the design and development process, while still taking into consideration mass production.

So having any further discussion on the engineering side of my skate design or specific skate features and ideology behind it is a useless exercise at this point.

@RoverHockey

[DarkStar50 679]

As we are all potential investors, I have another question. What is your personal skating background? Hockey ? Figure skating? Coaching ? Your engineering and financial background has been established. Your passion for skates comes from what prior experience? 

 

Before you think I'm picking on you, I'm not. I'm trying to understand you, Ok? 

[Playmakersedge 58]

17 hours ago, Davideo said:

Do folks really see an improvement with stiffer skates? I thought the shift was more a push of 1) Stiffer equals better energy transfer (technically true) and 2) 220 lb NHL players wear stiff skates (so clearly 115 lb Johnny Bantam needs the same level of stiffness).

I think the material being used in the skates now is ideal for the points of energy transfer  . Places it is about the lessening the lost energy from the skater .         The theory of using stored energy in the composite materials is in my opinion garbage.  I say this because  for this material has to be compressed for that now stored energy to transfer to the ice .   Our force ,via strength and weight is doing the work compressing the material and this is the spot the flaw in the design of the skates on the shelf today.   We lose necessary boot flexion where we want it .   

[Wolfpack_1986 154]

1 hour ago, Skate Mod said:

 

I did a quick test by deliberately making an incorrect statement in one of my replies, hoping that since there are so many magnifying glasses out there, there would be more then enough suitors to point out the mistake.

 

 

So having any further discussion on the engineering side of my skate design or specific skate features and ideology behind it is a useless exercise at this point

Alternate theory:

Your posts aren't concise and clear enough to follow.

And you didn't get funding because you're over inflating your importance.

 

...I'm saying this as someone who thinks you have a point, specifically around VH. But it doesn't matter what you know, if you want people's money, you can't be a dick and you have to be able to communicate.

[Playmakersedge 58]

Skates mod ,  I did not read your proposal because I am not capable.  I have little tricks to extract content from short things.  I say dyslexia because that's what people get. However I'm 50 So it really was not diagnosed .And back in my day in the schools it got put in the category doesn't apply ones self, lazy ,stupid.   I get this isn't relevant to your skate.       The relevant part is many of these people are gifted in other ways  .  My frame of mind when I first saw the possibility of a new skate was cool great, because as you see I'm not a current fan of the current skates.  It was not to knock your concept.      I did what I do . I looked at the rendering, visualized the image  .And made a comment of how the holder moved .Then I extrapolated from others comments that you also have flex in the toe of the boot .    This is where the problem lies . It will not work to improve anything.  The skater/player digs off the front of the skate ,we want the energy to be as seamless as possible.  Not feel a flex then another flex in the blade.  The work is getting energy from the legs is getting reduced .     I can see the blade and holder were the seed of your concept. But when fastened to a boot there was not enough movement in the linear spring in the holder ,so then came the boot flex in the toe.   Will your skate be possible to skate on yes . But it will not be a crap these things are amazing.   I wish it were ,because change is needed.  This isn't the thing that's going to do it .  The solution to what's wrong in today's skates has been answered in nature. And the concept has already been used in other pieces of hockey gear .

 

[stick9 891]

Not to mention lengthy. Lengthy posts can be hard to absorb.

In my experience, experiencing the product for yourself is far more important than any sort of detailed breakdown. That’s when you get to wow people. You need to stop telling people your design is better, you need to show them.

[Davideo 99]

12 minutes ago, Wolfpack_1986 said:

Alternate theory:

Your posts aren't concise and clear enough to follow.

This. Your posts are rambling and unclear. Additionally, it is unlikely someone wants to go point by point disagreeing or pointing out flaws in your statements. This isn't really the proper place, would take a good bit of time, and would likely be a waste based on your reaction to previous criticism.

I think you are missing out on perhaps the biggest point many of the engineers coming out of the woodwork are making is that something making sense or working on the drawing board is a long ways from it actually working in reality. The underlying principles and dynamics can be perfectly solid, but it doesn't work for unforeseen reasons. This goes for manufacturing as well as product development.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Suggesting that people can’t have opinions, comments, or suggestions around the design because they aren’t engineers is just flat out ignorant. You aren’t that special. 

Starting your post with “For engineers” with all the added emphasis is very aggressive and a bit over the top. 

[stick9 891]

3 minutes ago, Davideo said:

This. Your posts are rambling and unclear. Additionally, it is unlikely someone wants to go point by point disagreeing or pointing out flaws in your statements. This isn't really the proper place, would take a good bit of time, and would likely be a waste based on your reaction to previous criticism.

I think you are missing out on perhaps the biggest point many of the engineers coming out of the woodwork are making is that something making sense or working on the drawing board is a long ways from it actually working in reality. The underlying principles and dynamics can be perfectly solid, but it doesn't work for unforeseen reasons. This goes for manufacturing as well as product development.

Exactly! I’ve seen it first hand. Everything looks great on paper, then you get a prototype and everyone asks what went wrong. Or, you spend months working on solving a problem only to have a MFG engineer tell you your fix won’t work in production.

[Playmakersedge 58]

7 minutes ago, IPv6Freely said:

Suggesting that people can’t have opinions, comments, or suggestions around the design because they aren’t engineers is just flat out ignorant. You aren’t that special. 

Starting your post with “For engineers” with all the added emphasis is very aggressive and a bit over the top. 

The deflecting and defensive . This group is a cross section of the hockey community.  All love the game.  And some have proven they will invest in a product they would like to see happen.  Then the principal in that company that is now relivent and growing being a member of the group.   I simply don't understand the posture  of skate mods.   It's branding suicide. 

I don't really think any of our input is sticking  .