Warshaw: “Best world-title interview of all
time!”
By Derek Rielly
Guess who!
Earlier today, the financially robust surf historian
Matt Warshaw sent an archived interview with the message,
“Best post-world title interview ever? I say nothing’s even
close.”
I applied myself to the fruit of his searchings and found
that, yes, the interview, snatched of the 18-year-old world champ
Nat Young in 1966, was splendid. Frank, cruel and cheerful. It
really does ricochet.
You can read the full interview here (although you must subscribe) but,
for free, here, examine a crisp debrief.
BeachGrit: First, I want to list my favourite quote:
“Girls shouldn’t
surf, they make fools out of themselves.” Provocative! A
different time, yes?
Warshaw: There’s nothing to say in Nat’s defense
except he’s 18, invincible, and Australian. In that interview you
do get flashes of the man he would later become. Nat can be really
generous and funny and gracious. But by and large, in this piece,
he’s just a bastard. In many ways I love how raw he is. But in
other moments, like the “girls” comment—which was cruel even by
1966 standards—you just want to punch him. Or get someone bigger
than yourself to punch him. Did you see the comment about the poor
Irish surfer?
BeachGrit: “What is the
meaning of it all?”
Everyone at the 1966 world titles had to fill out a
questionnaire, and one of the questions was “What do you get out of
surfing?” And Nat, in the interview, wonders “how the Irish guy
answered something like that. That would have been ridiculous.”
Just lashing out at that poor guy, his name was Kevin Cavey. Nat
can’t imagine an Irish surfer having any kind of meaningful
relationship with the sport.
“Nat can be really generous and funny and gracious. But by and
large, in this piece, he’s just a bastard. In many ways I love how
raw he is. But in other moments, like the “girls” comment—which was
cruel even by 1966 standards—you just want to punch him.”
BeachGrit: Everybody
dumps on the Irish! But let’s do a
little background on this interview. It’s 1966, San
Diego, it’s the world title and Nat Young is an
eighteen-year-old animal. Big. Smart. Powerful. Colour it in for
me.
Go back a year,
and Nat probably should have won the 1965 world titles in Peru. Kid
was just 17, but already so good. Big, tall, powerful, the best
paddler in creation, talent and ambition to burn.
He out-surfed everybody in Lima, but Felipe Pomar played by
the rules, got the biggest waves, rode the furthest, and won fair
and square. Nat was runner-up. And I think at that point there was
no way he wasn’t going to take it all in 1966. He won everything in
Australia that year; the New South Wales titles, Nationals, Bells.
Nat and Bob McTavish and George Greenough meanwhile were all
hunkered down working on equipment. Thinner boards, long narrow
flexible fins. Nat flew to San Diego with a 9’4” that was less than
2.5” thick. Ten-foot by 3.5” thick—that’s what the other guys were
on. David Nuuhiwa was God to American surfers, just 17, but smooth
as honey and could hang ten from here to the next county. Nat was
good on the nose too, but beyond that was just far and away the
most progressive surfer in the world, on the most progressive
equipment. So he won the contest going away. In the finals he rode
a wave to the beach, stepped off onto the sand, put his hands on
his hips and just stared down the judges. The mother of all
claims.
BeachGrit: Can you imagine John John,
say, or even Kelly Slater being this lucid, this self-aware,
this…candid… in a post world title interview? The references to ego
in surfing, the talk about “commercial interests”,
self-expression an so forth. I wonder, has the commercialisation of
surfing, the snatching of children from the cradle to become pro
surfers, the removal of all stimuli and challenges except those
related to surf technique, turned our best athletes into empty
vessels? Balls of stupid?
Barton Lynch was sort of like Nat in his interviews, but
without the arrogance. Pam Burridge, the same. Smart, aware, didn’t
pull punches. But sweet. Rabbit was a great interview, but there
was always a sense of performance, that he was putting on a show.
Kelly is very good, but also very calculating. With Kelly, you
never get it raw. But all of them were all a lot older when they
won their titles. Nat was just 18. So my answer is . . . nobody was
like him, certainly not at that age. It wasn’t just that he was
smart and lucid. All the bluster aside, Nat was eager to learn,
open to new ideas, a good listener. He just absorbed knowledge,
from Midget and McTavish, from Greenough, and certainly from Bob
Evans, who was a father-figure. Nat wasn’t a man in full at 18, but
he’s on his way, you can tell.
“The actual worst interview? She’s not a world champ, but I
tighten up whenever Courtney Conlogue is interviewed. She’s a
tremendous surfer, but all I really get from her—in the way she
rides waves, and from her speech—is just all the sweat and toil and
practice and repetition.”
BeachGrit: I’m awfully fond of Nat talking about
surfboard design, about the thickness of boards, accelerators and
brakes. This, “If you want a paddleboard, and you
want to get out the back, you go out and buy one. But surfboards
are made to ride waves and have nothing to do with
paddling.”
When I hear that, I hear McTavish’s voice. The bit where Nat
talks about two trains being on the same track — that’s a McTavish
riff. I think the gas pedal comment is also from Bob. But so what?
That’s what I was trying to say a minute ago. Nat just sucks in
ideas and thoughts and concepts. That’s what the great ones
do
BeachGrit: Was LSD and marijuana an influence on the
ability to be so… expansive?
Not in 1966, no. But there’s a funny picture of Nat in Peru
from the year before, at the after-contest party, just shitfaced on
the dance floor.
BeachGrit: If this is the best post-world
title interview. What’s the worst you’ve heard or
read?
Damien Hardman had nothing to say to creeps like me, to any
surf writer who raised a microphone to his face. But I always loved
him for that. It’s like Nat says, Be who you are. Damien never
wanted to be a public figure, and didn’t fake it, and good for him.
So his interviews are terrible, but for a good cause, if that makes
sense. The actual worst interview? She’s not a world champ, but I
tighten up whenever Courtney Conlogue is interviewed. She’s a
tremendous surfer, but all I really get from her—in the way she
rides waves, and from her speech—is just all the sweat and toil and
practice and repetition. Endless repetition. I always drink more on
the nights after I see Courtney onscreen.
BeachGrit: So we start
off with Nat insulting the girls, and end with you doing the
same?
Well, Nat was in a position of power. I’m just some poor
geezer blogging for free on your website. Courtney could beat me up
and still make it to the gym on time.
Loading comments...
Load Comments
0
Revealed: How “Quik-Bong” will work!
By Derek Rielly
Sackings. Increased debt.
Yesterday, the two biggest surf companies in the
world quit playing cute and merged. As Chas Smith
wrote yesterday “Did you ever believe that you’d live to see the
day when the two biggest surf companies in the world, Billabong and
Quiksilver, united into one? Well congratulations! You did!”
The Wall Street Journal reported,
“The combination would create a global player with
ubiquitous brands, about $2 billion in annual sales and 630 stores
in 28 countries. But both Quiksilver and Billabong have struggled
in recent years with declining sales and corporate
restructurings.”
So how’s the deal gonna work after it gets rubber-stamped by
shareholders who are very thrilled to be getting a buck a share on
something that felt like it might’ve evaporated into nothing a
couple of years ago, and were twenty percent less before the
takeover deal was voiced?
In a very good interview yesterday on the
website shop-eat-surf, the new
CEO of Quik-Bong, Mr Dave Tanner (a former airforce pilot turned
biz whiz), explains how he sees Quik-Bong play.
A lot of the detail is buried behind feel-good talk of
preserving the independence and cultures of the brands and so forth
but you don’t merge unless you plan on roughly cutting costs.
i.e. job cuts.
The story is behind a paywall (Oh the future! But not here! Free
forevs!) but let’s examine a few of the pertinent quotes.
Tanner on duplication: “The integration would be
focused on protecting (brand culture) at all costs. So that would
mean designers, merchandisers, and brand marketers. As little will
change for those people as possible because we realize that we’re
only as good as our brand, and our brands are only as good as those
cultures and that creativity. So we’ll be mostly hands-off with
those, with the brands. And we create brand pods that are
supported by a common back end. But a common back end includes
hundreds of millions of dollars of spending on anything from
corporate offices to finance support, to IT support, to e-com
platforms, to logistics and distribution networks, etc… What you
have here are two completely redundant business systems on the back
offices of the business.”
The takeaway: if you’re a designer, you might
keep your job. If you’re a computer cat or you punch numbers or
count beans, start looking for a new gig.
Tanner on respective market strengths: “Boardriders
(Quiksilver) is stronger in Europe, Russia, and Mexico. Billabong
is stronger in Australia.”
The takeaway: Russia? Mexico? Quik’s getting
its ass kicked in Australia? Has the mountain fallen that far that
Mex and Russia are significant markets? Did you know?
Tanner on taking on new debt: “Yes. We’re
recapitalizing the balance sheet of both companies as part of the
transaction. Meaning, the combined entity will have a completely
new balance sheet.”
The takeaway: A completely new balance
sheet! But more red ink!
Tanner on using combined muscle to pressures stores into
buying Quik-Bong: “There is nothing in our financial
modeling that has any sort of plan to accrue benefits from that
kind of activity… If we’re talking about a bigger piece of
your store, and how we merchandise your store, and how we partner
with you, give you the right data – we think there’s a way to
elevate that game that is a win-win.”
The takeaway: Yes!
Loading comments...
Load Comments
0
Details: Billabong lost $53 mil last
year!
By Chas Smith
Rejected a takeover bid 4 times as much just five
years ago and other salacious insights!
Yesterday, alongside sister publication
TheWall Street Journal, we broke*
exclusive** news of Quiksilver’s acquisition of former rival
Billabong and today we have more information on the blockbuster
deal through our partners at the BBC. Quiksilver’s official
business name was changed to Boardriders last year and took over
the company which was valued at $155 million. And when I write
“Quiksilver” or “Boardriders” I mean Oaktree Capital.
According to the report, Billabong lost $58 million dollars in
2017, only made a profit during one of the past five years. Also,
Billabong rejected a takeover bid in 2012 that was worth four times
the amount agreed to yesterday.
Chief Executive Neil Fiske said,”Billabong’s brands’ great
strength is their authenticity and heritage. I’m confident those
qualities will not simply be protected but enhanced by a new
organisation that will have the scale and financial security to
continue to support and build them as we enter into a new and
dynamic retail environment.”
I have many questions. Like, where did Billabong’s 53 million
dollars go? And how much both Andy Warhol and Iggy Pop were
responsible for? And if Italo Ferreira gets cut due “cost saving
measures” will Quiksilver scoop him up?
And, in these corporate takeover scenarios, does the word
“synergies” mean the same thing as “lay-offs”? And the stock market
has been soaring for the last few years. Is the surf industry
immune to good times?
And how long before Quiksilver and Billabong appear exclusively
at Target?
Many questions.
Do you have answers?
* Stab recently claimed they “broke every single WSL
story” of 2017 apparently changing the definition of the word
“broke.”
** BeachGrit will attempt to do the same thing for the
word “exclusive” this year.
Loading comments...
Load Comments
0
Official: Billabong + Quik one
company!
By Chas Smith
"Hanging ten" together!
Did you ever believe that you’d live to see the
day when the two biggest surf companies in the world, Billabong and
Quiksilver, united into one? Well congratulations! You did!
The parent of the Quiksilver surfwear brand has agreed to
acquire rival Billabong International Ltd., combining two of the
largest active sports brands as the industry is undergoing a major
shakeout.
The combination would create a global player with ubiquitous
brands, about $2 billion in annual sales and 630 stores in 28
countries. But both Quiksilver and Billabong have struggled in
recent years with declining sales and corporate
restructurings.
Restructurings?
Hang ten?
This is maybe the least interesting news of the week (John
Florence Sr. losing more
integrity wins) seeing as the same finance corporation
owns both’s debt but you made it to the day when Kelly Slater and
Andy Irons rode for the same company.
How does it feel?
Are you thrilled?
Does this restore your faith in humanity?
Loading comments...
Load Comments
0
Daddy John: “You’re blinded by tits!”
By Chas Smith
John John Florence's father comes swinging in!
The internet is a singularly fantastic thing
and mostly because it doesn’t forget. Every little thought, idea,
photo, story deposited into its fertile loam stays there forever.
Like the ex-girlfriend you thought you could delete from Facebook.
Like Derek Rielly’s John John’s dad just wrote a
tell-all book from three years ago. Would you like
your all-to-human memory jogged?
Ain’t nothing worse than a middle-aged man who throws away
the last vestiges of his dignity. Some men’ll fly the coop from
their families to chase long-evaporated dreams; others’ll fool
’emselves into thinking that 20-year-old high-ass-and-pussy combo
ain’t just chasing ’em for their money.
And John Florence, the 45-year-old estranged father of John
John, Nathan and Ivan, has sunk to a remarkable nadir with a
69-page self-published Kindle-only book currently for sale on
Amazon.
The book is the work of a man who’ll happily tell you he got
too many blows to the head as a kid and who was so rad he was
always doing something to “give me that warm fuzzy feeling of fear
and/or ‘Now you fucked up.’”
It’s a book that attempts to be part adventure (swinging
through Europe on expired credit cards), part street-lit (dealing
coke and weed) and part redemption (I just gotta stay away from the
booze!).
F.E.A.R (Yeah, that’s the name) fails because the writer
can’t shuck off the ego that inflates the story.
Derek then goes on and posts excerpts from the book before
suggesting you purchase Mom John’s memoir instead.
Three years ago is so so so ancient and you likely were unaware
of BeachGrit. One person, Radical_Dude_33 commented
“Cringe.” And that was it. That was all.
Until last week.
During that magical time between Christmas and New Year’s John
John Florence’s father, John Florence, apparently found the story
and decided to comment too.
Soak in that illusion bro… you aren’t very bright are you….
that or oblivious to the truth… perhaps your blinded by the
tits?….lol
It’s really him, seeing as his only other post is to advertise
the book elsewhere and do you think he is right? Is Derek’s
critical review born out of being blinded by Mom John’s tits? Or is
John’s comment the last last vestiges of his dignity?
Elder John? You are clearly there. Can you tell me about your
dignity?
Loading comments...
Load Comments
0
Jon Pyzel and Matt Biolos by
@theneedforshutterspeed/Step Bros