Snowboarding and the Economics Intertwined

Just recently, SNOWBOARDER MAGAZINE published their annual Buyers' Guide. I looked through the pages, realizing that boards over the years have increased in price about $80 dollars, which is almost crippling to the average consumer, like myself. This INELASTIC SUPPLY displayed neither a SHORTAGE, nor a SURPLUS in SUPPLY, but simply an increase in price. The quantity supplied remained the same while the quantity demanded increased. In my opinion, which is shared by most snowboard consumers, a supply curve would show an inverse relationship, showing that the higher the price, the less likely someone is going to purchase the product, therefore making snowboards a neutral good. Because most snowboarder's wages aren't all that high, it makes sense for a company to lessen its prices, to help spur sales, but for whatever reason, this fantastic concept does not seem to want to happen.

Another point to be made, is that due to the increase in people snowboarding, the companies may have chosen to increase supply in order to make more money as price increases (law of supply).

A complement product, snowboard bindings, show an inelastic demand. Partially due to the higher durability of bindings compared to boards, people don't buy new bindings as often as boards, thus reducing the percentage change of demand.

While this all may seem confusing jumbled together, it basically states this: Snowboards have increased in price, while the population of snowboarders have also. People want to pay the same amount for snowboards, which will therefore benefit the companies who keep prices low.