Marketing

Society for Case Research

CONTROVERSIAL BURTON SNOWBOARDS SPARK DEBATE

______________________________________________________________________________________

This case was prepared by Paul E. Olsen from Saint Michael’s College. The views presented here are

those of the case author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Society for Case Research. The author’s’ views are based on his own professional judgments. Copyright © 2011 by the Society for Case

Research and the author. No part of the work may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means

without the written permission of the Society for Case Research__________________________________

“Two things matter more than anything else: riders and riding”- Burton Snowboards

Sex sells. Or does it? Burton Snowboards, a leader in developing, manufacturing, and

promoting snowboards and snowboard accessories, faced this question in late 2008 when

controversy arose over its Love snowboard line, featuring photos of nude women.

Burton also faced criticism for making light of self-mutilation, with graphic images of

bodily injury on its Primo snowboard.

While Burton Snowboards defended its products as free artistic expression, both youth

and women’s advocates criticized the Love and Primo snowboards as inappropriate.

They saw the boards as objectifying women and trivializing self-mutilation among young

people.

Was Burton tone deaf in launching and promoting the Love and Primo snowboard lines,

or was the public outrage over the boards a case of political correctness run amok?

Generally known as a good corporate citizen, Burton Snowboards appeared blindsided by

the controversy and struggled with how best to respond to the criticism. From a public

relations standpoint, how should Burton respond to its critics? What ethical

responsibility, if any, does Burton have to the community, to its customers, and to its

critics? Have the interests of the community Burton lives and works in and its riders

collided? And if they have, what is next for Burton Snowboards?

Snowboarding

In the 1990s, snowboarding participation saw triple digit growth (Simons, 1995). From

the period of 1997 to 2008, the number of riders doubled from 2.5 million to more than 5

million (Marquardt, 2008). Today, skiing and snowboarding is a $10 billion industry in

North America (Copeland & Abkowitz, 2009).

In 2009, snowboarders spent more than $198 million on equipment (Copeland &

Abkowitz, 2009), including $87 million on boots and $77 million on bindings (Consumer

Profile, 2009). Like many industries, snowboarding felt the impact of the recent

recession. Winter sports equipment sales were down 8% in 2009 and 2010 orders were

down 25% (Bruce, 2010). Snowboarders tended to be younger and visited mountains

three times more often than skiers (Simons, 1995). While the majority of boarders were

male, 26% of riders were female, with an average age of 19 for women and 22 for men

(Consumer Profile, 2009). Additional information on snowboard consumers is contained

in Table 1.

Table 1

Snowboard Consumer Profile

32% Snowboarders with household income over $100,000

10 Number of days on the mountain for the average rider

5

million

Number of Americans aged 7 or older who rode at least

twice in 2007

$280.87 Average price for snowboards at a specialty shop

$135.02 Average price for boots at a specialty shop

20% Snowboards sold designed specifically for women

37,182 New snowboards sold on eBay during the 2007-2008

snowboard season

3 U.S. resorts still not open to snowboarders Source: Consumer Profile of Snowboarder. SGB, January 2009, Volume 42, Issue 1, p. 94.

Historically seen as a “sport of renegades” (Marquardt, 2008, p.72), boarders were

viewed by many as both nonconformist in dress--wearing grunge or loose-fitting clothes-

-and behavior as they performed wild tricks on the slopes. In fact, the culture clash

between skiers and boarders was as old as snowboarding itself. “Skiers moan that

boarders--carving up the snow on surfboard-like contrivance--are a reckless, cussing, ill-

attired menace” Hamilton & Pryor (1994) wrote when describing the early conflict

between skiers and boarders on the slopes. Snowboarding, like other action sports (e.g.,

motocross, freestyle BMX, skateboarding, surfing), “embody a rebellious counterculture,

born largely from their image as disruptive and antithetical to the status quo of organized

sports,” (Sosienski, 2008, p. 32). Swift (2004) described snowboarding’s nearest cousins

as surfing and skateboarding, not Alpine skiing.

In addition to norms around dress and behavior, boarders developed a common language

and slang for use on and off the slopes. “They constructed a language that not only was

expressive of new forms and practices of snowboarders but also was distinct from the

language of skiing (i.e. hit vs. jump) and was aligned with the skateboarding and surfing

culture” (Heino, 2000, p. 181). In fact, a number of websites and blogs (e.g.

http://www.abc-of-snowboarding.com/snowboarddictionary.asp and

http://rockitfish.blogspot.com/2007/04/to-z-on-snowboard-slang.html) have been

developed that highlight the language of boarding. For example, rockitfish.blogspot.com

defined “flex” as a “term used to describe the stiffness and pattern of how a snowboard

flexes,” “grind” as “to slide with the board parallel to the coping,” “kink” as “abnormal

and not smoothly transitional surfaces,” and “stick” as “another name for a snowboard” (A

to Z on Snowboard Slang). As will be seen later in the case, snowboard culture and slang

contributed, in part, to Burton’s Love and Primo snowboard controversy.

Burton Snowboards

With a $20,000 nest egg, Jake Burton Carpenter established Burton Snowboards in

Stratton, Vermont, in 1977 (Lane, 1995). Working from the “Snurfer” board originally

designed by Sherman Poppen in 1965 (see Figure 1), Burton Carpenter improved the

board’s design and marketing and was seen as a pioneer in the snowboarding industry

(Finkel, 1997).

Figure 1

Sherman Poppen’s Snurfer

Source: http://www.mashf.com/snurfer.jpg

Burton Snowboards produced and marketed premium snowboards, equipment (e.g., boots,

bindings), and accessories. Snowboarding accessories like footwear and goggles were sold

under Burton’s Gravis and Anon lines (Tran, 2007), while men’s and women’s apparel was

marketed under its AK, Burton, Ronin, iDiom, Mark XIII, and B by Burton lines (Speer,

2007).

The privately held company was headquartered in Burlington, Vermont, the state’s largest

city. The company had divisions in Japan and Austria and retail stores in Burlington, New

York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Innsbruck, Osaka, and Tokyo (Back in the Day).

Burton’s estimated sales in 2007 were $38.9 million. The majority of the firm’s sales were

made outside the U.S. (Horyn, 2003). Burton Snowboards had more than 500 employees

worldwide. The firm’s CEO at the time of the controversy was Laurent Potdevin.

Burton’s competitors included Ride, K2, Sim, and Morrow (Gallagher, 1997). Burton had

consistently controlled a large share of the snowboard market, followed by K2 and

Morrow. In 2003, Burton’s estimated market share was 35 to 40% (Bhonslay, 2003); in

2010, it was projected to be 40% (Bruce, 2010).

Burton had long been seen as producing state-of-the art boards. The firm had “a strong

research and development component, and consistently had been able to introduce

features and build boards of such high technological quality, both in their construction

and their lacquered decorative graphics, that they commanded top prices” (Barna, 2001,

p. 23). Current snowboard prices on the firm’s website ranged from $299.95 for the

Clash board to $999.95 for the Vapor and Vapor Wide boards (www.burton.com).

In addition to its leadership in the snowboard industry, Burton Snowboards had also

championed social responsibility. “Burton is the type of sickeningly good corporate

citizen that gives Vermont its wholesome reputation” (Daley, 2009, p. 19). The company

engaged in a number of outreach projects that targeted women and disadvantaged youth.

Donna Carpenter, Jake’s wife and co-owner of Burton Snowboards, established Burton’s

women’s program to create and promote products for women (Tran, 2007). At Burton

Snowboards, Donna Carpenter championed women’s issues throughout the firm,

including family leave and childcare (Back in the Day).

Burton’s nonprofit international Chill foundation, established in 1995, provided hundreds

of disadvantaged children with snowboarding, surfing, and skateboarding lessons and

equipment (Back in the Day). The goal of Chill’s Learn-to-Ride program was to improve

the “self-esteem, confidence, and resilience of at-risk and inner-city youth by teaching

through boardsports” (Back in the Day, p. 33).

Love and Primo Boards

Known for the use of provocative art on its snowboards, Burton offered many designs for

its customers. In 2008, Burton released two snowboard lines that prompted public

criticism from women’s and youth advocates.

The Love line featured four different classic Playboy photos reproduced on the top of the

board. The bottom of the board contained the word “Love” in a variety of colors placed

above each woman’s bare buttocks. The boards sold for $429.95. On its website, Burton

described the boards with the following text:

Hi. My name is Love™ and I’m on the market for someone who’s looking

to score serious action, no matter where they like to stick it. I enjoy laps

through the park; long, hard grinds on my meaty Park Edges followed by a

good, hot waxing. Whether you’re hitting it from the front or the back, my

mid wide shape, supple flex, and twin tips like it kinky. Keegan and

Mikkel love riding me, I hope you will too (Burton Snowboards. Love,

Keegan and Mikkel’s).

While one could view Burton’s use of provocative language and sexual innuendo when

describing the Love board as inappropriate, those familiar with the culture of

snowboarding and boarding slang clearly recognized Burton’s use of double entendre in

the description. Recall that rockitfish.blogspot.com’s A to Z on Snowboard Slang

contained definitions of “flex,” “grind,” “kink,” and “stick” (A to Z on Snowboard

Slang). As Heino (2000) said when discussing the evolution of snowboarding culture,

“as symbolic power was manifested in clothing and equipment, language itself became a

point of differentiation and resistance” (p. 180).

The $349.95 Primo board featured five cartoon panels depicting someone cutting off his

index finger with a pair of scissors and then sewing a new artificial finger on containing

the text “#1” (see Figure 2). Blood is seen in three of the five panels. The bottom of the

board had an animated image of the bloodied new index finger with the words

“NUMBER 1” underneath. Burton’s website described the Primo board as follows:

The fully-loaded Primo™ leaves looks of terror on the competition’s half-

assed attempt at a pocket-friendly park stick. An unstoppable axe of

freestyle destruction, the Primo’s soft side is matched by an armored-car

construction that tears through snow, steel, and pavement without fear for

its safety. From murdering street rails, to chopping the park to pieces—

this is one twin-tipped weapon set to slaughter every inch of this snow-

covered planet (Burton Snowboards. Primo, Mutilate the mountain).

Community Backlash

Burton’s new boards immediately resulted in a negative community response.

Advocates of both women and youth in Vermont took issue with the Love and Primo

boards respectively. Community organizers Suzie Debrosse and Lezlee Sprenger

planned a protest outside of Burton’s Burlington headquarters in October 2008. Debrosse

and Sprenger said they scheduled the event because Burton did not respond to the

community concerns over the Love and Primo boards. “We have contacted the police

and media and this will be a kid-friendly rally,” they wrote on a website promoting the

event. They even provided ideas for protest signs. “Boycott Burton,” “Burton Loves $$

Not Kids,” “Love Does Not = Porn,” “Cutting’s Not Cool,” “Dress Your Snowboards”

and “Parents for Public Decency & Public Health” were among their suggestions (Burton

Protest Rally).

Debrosse and Sprenger were joined in their protest of Burton by a number of

organizations from throughout Vermont. Spectrum Youth Family Services, a

community-based nonprofit serving at-risk youth; The White Ribbon Campaign of

Figure 2

Sample Primo Board Graphics

Source: www.burton.com

Vermont, a group of men working to end violence against women; the Women’s Rape

Crisis Center of Chittenden County; the University of Vermont’s President’s Commission

on the Status of Women; the Howard Center, a Burlington nonprofit providing

developmental, mental health, substance abuse, and family services to Vermonters; and

the Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence all joined the protest

campaign. The Essex Reporter reported that 150 demonstrators attended the October 23

event.

Criticism of Burton’s controversial Love and Primo lines did not end with the rally at

Burton’s Burlington headquarters. In an open letter to Burton Snowboards, members of

the White Ribbon Campaign of Vermont asked Burton to discontinue the Love line.

“The images you are exploiting and the language you are using in promoting this product

perpetuate the sexual denigration and objectification of women and women’s bodies, and

contribute directly to violence against women,” they wrote. “At a time when our

families, our communities, our schools and colleges are working to end sexual and

domestic violence, it is irresponsible for Burton Snowboards to promote a product so

disrespectful to women. As men, we feel disrespected, too.”

In an opinion editorial in the Burlington Free Press titled “Real Impact of Burton’s

Boards,” Karen Tronsgard-Scott (2008), director of the Vermont Network Against

Domestic and Sexual Violence, also called on Burton to pull the Love snowboards.

“Burton’s canned response (to the controversy) has been dismissive and insulting.

Further, Burton is a Vermont company that has enjoyed a reputation of supporting

women in the sport and within their company; a company that claims to be progressive,”

she wrote. Burton “can and should do a better job of upholding their social responsibility

to the people on the slopes, the families who buy their products, and to the people of

Vermont” (p. 7A).

The controversy over Burton’s boards extended beyond activists in Vermont. In addition

to Pico Mountain, Killington Resort, Stowe Mountain, Sugarbush, and Smugglers’ Notch

ski mountains in Vermont, resorts in Colorado, California, and Utah prohibited or

discouraged employees from using the Primo and Love boards while on duty (Asmar,

2008; Daley, 2009; Ober, 2008).

In another public response to the controversial boards, Spectrum Youth Family Services,

a community-based nonprofit serving at-risk youth, ceased participation in Burton’s Chill

snowboarding program. “It is a very sad and tragic condition when young people feel the

compulsion to cut or harm themselves, and it is extremely difficult to treat. It is beyond

comprehension that any company would use self-harm as a marketing ploy," Spectrum’s

Executive Director Mark Redmond said when describing the Primo line. "We will

explain to these kids that sometimes you have to stand for higher principles, in this case

principles against the objectification of women and self-mutilation as a marketing ploy.

We're taking a stand against it."

Following the community response, Burlington’s City Council began debate on a

resolution condemning the Love and Primo boards. As introduced, the resolution called

for “Burton Snowboards to withdraw their Love and Primo Boards from sale.” An

amended resolution was adopted calling for Burton to meet with domestic abuse, mental

health, and youth advocates (see Figure 3). Burlington Mayor Bob Kiss signed the

resolution on December 3, 2008.

Burton Responds

“Burton stands by board art: CEO defends use of centerfolds as artistic expression” read

the front page headline in the October 23 issues of the Burlington Free Press (Ober,

2008, p. A1). In the accompanying press release issued to the newspaper, Burton CEO,

Laurent Potdevin, described critics of the oards as “an isolated group of individuals,”

and characterized the board images as “graphic artwork” (Potdevin, 2008, p. 4A). “Here

is our position,” Potdevin explained in his written statement, “Burton supports freedom of

Figure 3

City of Burlington Resolution 12.0

Source: Burlington City Council Resolution 12.0, introduced 11/17/08. Cosponsored by

Councilors Wright, Shannon, Davis, and Knodell.

artistic expression. Board graphics are artwork, and art can be offensive to some and

inspiring to others…We will keep these boards in the market and have no intention of

recalling them” (p. 4A).

One month later, Donna Carpenter and Jake Burton Carpenter went public with their

response to the controversy over the Love and Primo boards. In a written statement

issued to the Stowe Reporter, Donna Carpenter (2008) said “What started as genuine

concern over a couple of board graphics somehow morphed into a full-blown attack on

Burton, on the work I have done personally to advance the cause of women’s issues, and

even the nonprofit Chill Foundation, which we founded” (p. 11). “I have been around

snowboarding’s youth culture enough to know that there is a real generational difference

as to what constitutes pornography,” Donna Carpenter (2008, p. 12) said. “As for the

Primo board, all I have to say is that this design is a cartoon. It is a piece of artwork and

In the year Two Thousand Eight Resolved by the City Council of the City of

Burlington, as follows:

That, WHEREAS, Burton Snowboards, a well respected and successful

Burlington based enterprise recently released its “Love” and “Primo” line of

boards that have generated controversy and raised concerns from community members and groups with expertise in domestic and sexual violence, as well as,

groups with expertise in dealing with issues of substance abuse and mental health;

and

WHEREAS, City of Burlington and its taxpayers fund services and

programs that investigate the crimes of sexual assault, child abuse and other

domestic violence and the treatment of mental illness in our City;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council

respectfully requests the leadership of Burton Snowboards to meet with the leadership of Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, Vermont

Business and Professional Women, the Girl Scout Council of Vermont and the

White Ribbon campaign and Burlington agencies addressing sexual assault, child

abuse, and other domestic violence and mental health to discuss how to reduce all forms of sexual violence and child abuse and how to treat mental illness in youth,

including self-mutilation, in Burlington and throughout Vermont.

Adopted by the City Council November 17, 2008

Approved by Mayor Bob Kiss December 3, 2008

art is, by definition, open to interpretation. The images may be unsettling, but a lot of art

is meant to make us uncomfortable” (p.12).

In his op-ed in the same newspaper, Jake Burton Carpenter (2008) noted that the Love

and Primo boards were designed primarily for young men. “A very important factor to

this crew is that what they are riding and wearing is something their parents would never

be caught dead in. It was like that when I was 18, and it’s like that now” (p. 14). Burton

Carpenter (2008) also raised concerns over the reaction to the boards in Vermont: “…the

local reaction to these graphics has been hurtful and out of line….It’s interesting to note

that in Europe, the only press coverage these graphics have received focuses on the

extreme reaction in Vermont to this issue. The coverage is not flattering to our state” (p.

14).

Conclusion

As a socially responsible business, was Burton’s creation and promotion of the Love and

Primo Snowboards the right thing to do? What role, if any, did snowboarding culture and

slang play in the controversy? Was the controversy a misunderstanding, political

correctness run amok, or an intentional plan to provoke a response?

Did the sexual and controversial images help or hurt sales of Burton’s Love and Primo

snowboards? As a privately held company only Burton Snowboards knows for sure. In

the end, how effectively did Burton handle this public relations problem?

Burton’s critics asked for a meeting to discuss the controversial boards. How should the

management at Burton Snowboards respond to this request? How should the company

respond to Burlington City Council’s resolution? More importantly, should Burton

Snowboards continue production, modify, or discontinue the Love and Primo snowboard

lines?

References

A to Z on Snowboard Slang (n.d.). Retrieved November 6, 2009 from

http://rockitfish.blogspot.com/2007/04/to-z-on-snowboard-slang.html

Asmar, M. (2008, November 25). Bawdy boards get the boot. Rocky Mountain News, p.

b1.

Back in the day. (n.d). An in-depth look at the history of snowboarding and burton

snowboards. Retrieved March 9, 2009 from

http://akamai.burton.com/2008/PDF/08_BackintheDay.pdf

Barna, E. (2001, July 1). Burton snowboards catches gnarly production process. Vermont

Business Magazine, p. 23.

Bhonslay, M. (2003, January). Everything’s jake. Sporting Goods Business, p. 36-38.

Bruce, H. (2010, February 1). All work and snow play make Jake a success. USA Today,

p. 3b.

Burlington City Council Resolution 12.0, introduced 11/17/08. Cosponsored by

Councilors Wright, Shannon, Davis, and Knodell.

Burton Protest Rally. (n.d.). Retrieved February 25, 2009 from

http://www.neurell.com/protest.html

Burton Snowboards. (n.d.). Love, Keegan and Mikkel’s latest “playmates.” Retrieved

February 25, 2009, from http://www.burton.com/Gear/

Burton Snowboards. (n.d.). Primo, Mutilate the mountain, then terrorize the streets.

Retrieved February 25, 2009 from http://www.burton.com/Gear/

Burton Carpenter, J. (2008, November 26). Burton contributes plenty to state {Letter to

the Editor}. Stowe Reporter, p. 12-14.

Carpenter, D. (2008, November 26). Wow, that’s it, that’s what this is all about? {Letter

to the Editor}. Stowe Reporter, p. 11-12.

Consumer Profile of Snowboarder. SGB, January 2009, Volume 42, Issue 1, p. 94.

Copeland, M.V. & Abkowitz, A. (2009, February 16). Ski bum. Fortune, p. 12.

Daley, J. (2009). Ridin’ dirty. Skiing, 61(6), p. 19.

Finkel, M. (1997, January 13). Chairman of the board. Sports Illustrated, p. 9.

Gallagher, L. (1997, February 24). Balance of powder. Sporting Good Business, p. 26.

Hamilton, K. & Pryor, T. (1994, January 10). Culture clash on the slopes. Newsweek,

Vol. 123, Issue 2.

Heino, R. (2000). New sports: what is so punk about snowboarding? Journal of Sport and

Social Issues, 24, p. 176-191.

Horyn, C. (2003, August 24). To balance a business, he rides a snowboard. The New York

Times, p. BU5.

Lane, R. (1995, March 27). The culture that Jake built. Forbes, p. 45.

Marquardt, K. (2008, September 29). King of the hill in snowboards; hip young Burton

riders to ‘shred’ competitors. U.S. News & World Report, p. 72.

Ober, L. (2008, October 23). Burton stand by board art. Burlington Free Press, p. A1,

A4.

Ober, L. (2008, October 28). Burton fallout reaches smuggs, 5 western resorts.

Burlington Free Press, p. A1, A4.

Potdevin, L. (2008, October 23). Burton statement. Burlington Free Press, p. 4A.

Simons, J. (1995, October 30). The adventure capitalists. U.S. News & World Report.

Sosienski, S. (2008). Dude, action sports are, like, totally homophobic. Advocate, (1014),

p. 32-35.

Speer, J.K. (2007, November 29). Burton snowboard performs on the slopes. Apparel

Magazine.

Swift, E. (2004). Vermont made. Sports Illustrated, 100 (13), p. 32-34.

Tran, K.T.L. (2007, November 29). Burton courts women with west coast flagship.

WWD, p. 10.

Tronsgard-Scott, K. (2008, November 8). Real impact of burton’s boards {Letter to the

Editor}. Burlington Free Press, p. 7A.

Copyright of Business Case Journal is the property of Society for Case Research and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.