Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Hammock
    Claytor JH
    Tarp
    stock JH tarp
    Insulation
    CCF and body fat
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by warbonnetguy View Post
    i guess if they can afford a racing sailboat, they're probably too rich to care
    That was my point.

    Also, insurance and liability being what it is, I bet that to put out these things with a breaking strength of 2000 lbs. costs more than an equivalent product for the climbing industry. It's just my guess, but I figure that a manufacturer of climbing gear can fall back on the assumption of risk inherent in the activity if they're sued. Right or wrong, it's not hard to see juries (and consequently insurance companies) not being too moved by the injury or death of someone involved in what they see as incredibly risky. Then on the other hand, you have sailing which conjures up a more genteel and civilized image-- a place where a product liability tragedy is going to be worth a lot of money. Combine that with the fact that a performance sailboat owner is probably going to have a lot more money to devote to pursuing claims, and the costs of manufacturing start going up. Again, this is just my guess, and I could be way off.

    In any event, what's the final verdict on these things?

  2. #12
    you may be right about the whole liability thing with regards to jurys and insurance companies. inherent risks of climbing vs. sailing, but i don't think it has anything to do with being able to fall back on the inherent risk of climbing itself. afterall, these same compaines make similar gear for industry. steel workers and rescue people etc. if hardware breaks, they can't say, well, being on a rescue squad is inherently dangerous. it doesn't really matter what the circumstances are. if you are using a device correctly and it breaks and you are injured, it shouldn't matter if you were participating in recreation or your job.

    well, i know that climbing standards are pretty strict and climbing compaines have to spend lots on testing and certifications. i think every biner sold gets tested to a certain weight, and a cretain number out of every batch gets tested to failure.

    both companies pay for liability insurance, but i can't see the sailboat hardware company having to pay more, but even if they do, it can't be so much more that they have to charge more than 10 times the cost of an almost identical item.

    i think they are just charging as much as they feel they can get away with, and that has to do with the high social class of their clientel.





    Quote Originally Posted by Nails View Post
    That was my point.

    Also, insurance and liability being what it is, I bet that to put out these things with a breaking strength of 2000 lbs. costs more than an equivalent product for the climbing industry. It's just my guess, but I figure that a manufacturer of climbing gear can fall back on the assumption of risk inherent in the activity if they're sued. Right or wrong, it's not hard to see juries (and consequently insurance companies) not being too moved by the injury or death of someone involved in what they see as incredibly risky. Then on the other hand, you have sailing which conjures up a more genteel and civilized image-- a place where a product liability tragedy is going to be worth a lot of money. Combine that with the fact that a performance sailboat owner is probably going to have a lot more money to devote to pursuing claims, and the costs of manufacturing start going up. Again, this is just my guess, and I could be way off.

    In any event, what's the final verdict on these things?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •