Scott, is there an official connection between Jim Rosa and Oakley? We know he put out custom splatter painted Blades, Razor Blades and M Frames, complete with clear boxes with his own label affixed to it. However, we have always considered it akin to an independent artist custom rather than product officially sanctioned by Oakley.

Speaking of splatter paint, do you know the inspiration that led to the creation of the Splatter M Frames?

There was an official connection with Rosa, but not in the way artist collabs are recognized today. Rosa was a dealer buying Blades & Razors, painting them, adding his decal to the box and reselling them. We weren't happy about it, but ended up using him as a vendor/supplier to paint them for us. I can't recall ever specifically promoting him or referring to anything as "Rosa Edition", but we also weren't denying that he was painting them.

The inspiration for M Frames was simply that there was still a demand for splatter. M Frame splatters evolved by using the fade in the base paint that we didn't have in Blades and Razors. I can't remember if Rosa did these or not. I'm thinking he didn't. Once FMJ and print paint (hydro dip) technology came along the splatters seem to fall out of trend.

Scott

Much appreciated, Scott.

Scott what was/is your favorite Oakley product or accomplishment?

This is an incredibly interesting thread. This is brings back so many memories of when I discovered this brand in the 90's.

The Oakley 5

I recently received an email from the-o-man asking about the gold coin that accompanied the Teachers Edition Oakley 5 books.

I'm not sure if the Oakley 5 has been discussed in detail on O-Review. I think it is important to know that at the time establishing the Oakley 5 was an important part of Oakley's history. I'd be happy to answer any questions about the why, how and what of the Oakley 5. As well, I have all the books in digital. If you don't have them I think it would be valuable to the O-Review to archive them. Let me know where I can download them and I will do so. Scott

My response to the-o-man's email:

I recall doing 150 sets of the teachers sets. We only did the gold coins for the teachers sets. Receiving the Teachers set meant that you were specifically nominated to be a teacher of the Values and it was considered an honor.

Also, for the Oakley 5 book. There was a hard bound version that was given to employees who worked at Oakley at the time the Oakley 5 was launched. I'm guessing here were approximately 5000 produced. After the hard bounds were given out we switched to a soft bound version. As well, with the exception of a small run of a Japanese translated version they were all in English

An important note, after I had left Oakley there was a solid rumor that several thousand Oakley 5 books and Teachers sets were inadvertantly destroyed. Someone in the warehouse had mistaken the part numbers as old and written off inventory. Instead of doubling checking they sent them to the recycler. I'm of the understanding that Oakley never printed the books again. Scott

Yelkao,

Sorry for the slow response to your previous post about my favorite Oakley product and/or accomplishment. I have been asked this several times and my feeling is that there are so many special moments and memories that I can't single out a specific one.

Over my 25 years we accomplished so much. Most important for me was our everlasting passion to be brave, break rules, doing things when we were told they could not be done and using the power of opinion leaders to literally establish amazing trends. We developed an iconic brand that literally became its own lifestyle with one of the deepest follower/loyalist base that so few brands have been able to accomplish.

We were also amazingly diverse in how we positioned the brand. From motocross to golf, surf to baseball, cycling to shooting, Olympics to X Games, from athletes to celebrities to even the Chilean miners. Not to mention as much as we avoided using the term "fashion" as a driver we influenced so many fashion trends. All because we were original, authentic and had the ability and bravery to create world moving moments.

It was most exciting when breaking a new style and seeing it show up on athletes, celebrities and in the media. We simply were the best in product placement. Right product, right influencers, right place. And to think back at all the places Oakley would show up is mind boggling. I can only think of one other brand that rivaled us in unique product placement and that was Nike.

Much of the reason for our success was that technology, innovation and our unique design ID gave us our legitimacy. It was the backbone of our existence. Our stuff worked for the most demanding situations and opinion leaders respected us for that.

We also loved a fight. Coming directly from Jim we also had the mindset to work harder when told something could not be done. It was in our DNA that everything can and will be made better. It was just a matter of by who and when. So when Jim was told that something could not be made better he would challenge that thought until we did it. This was not just in product design and innovation, but everything we did and many times the competition was our motivator.

As for favorite styles, I loved and was most proud of the brave stuff. Besides the Eyeshade (literally created and pioneered the multi-billion dollar sport performance eyewear category) and O Frame I would have to say that Blades, Rzr's, M Frames, Pro M's, A Frames, X Metal, Eye Jackets, E Wires, Monster Dogs, GasCans, Jawbones were the most significant for trendsetting and building the popularity of Oakley. Other breakaway styles had their place as well. Zeroes, Straight Jackets, Racing Jackets, Scars, Plates, OTT's all represented "pure" Oakley design ID and helped sell the more milder styles.

Some would say Frogskins, but truth be told us veterans were taught to hate the Frogskin. Jim hated the Frogskin. We looked at the Frogskin as the cash cow that funded our breakthrough stuff. At the time it represented cash flow that allowed us to launch the brave styles that were truly Oakley. Hence the name Frogskin. It stood for "greenbacks" or dollars. Granted we did some fun stuff with Frogskins in the way of colors, etc., but Jim always cautioned us to never let Frogskins to be the face of Oakley. Even as employees (opinion leaders) he always challenged us to wear the brave stuff. He even fired a sales rep once for only wearing Frogskins.

When we re-released Frogskins we tried to do it as discreetly as possible. For the same reason as in the beginning. Any brand could copy the Frogskin. It was basically a Wayfarer. So to rely on such a mainstream, un-original style could be very dangerous for a trend leading brand. I would place the Holbrook in the same place. Great for bringing follower consumers into the brand, but we could not sit on our butts and allow a mainstream style dictate the brand. Unfortunately, I feel Oakley has fallen into that rut today. Playing it too safe and not driving the trendsetting styles that lead the industry.

Again, so many great moments and memories. Too many to even remember.

Scott

Scott-
a couple questions,

As head of Sports Marketing I would consider you one of the "...opinion leaders...". Do you not see yourself in that role?? and who would you consider the "...opinion leaders..." to be??

Was the sale of O to Lux and Lux's influence the reason the Frogskins were brought back in 2007?? or is that merely a coincidence?

Thanks for the awesome knowledge and information.

Robert

During the formidable years at Oakley all employees were really considered "opinion leaders".

For the most part when we referred to "opinion leaders" they represented the "front row" of consumers who readily accepted and were leaders in driving new style trends. They were instrumental in influencing more of the follower consumers who waited for a tend to exist before they would buy it. The early on opinion leaders we referred to were mostly our athletes, but you could find opinion leaders across several areas including our employees. Our employees were opinion leaders to their friends, family and other who looked to Oakley as being interesting and inspirational.

Specifically for sports marketing we always hired ex athletes from the sports they would go back into and market. For Oakley to have the best athletes we needed to be respected by the athletes and also have a deep understanding of what the athletes needs were. Oakley sports marketing always prided itself on not being that company who merely gave athletes paychecks in hopes they would become ambassadors to the brand. Instead we prided ourselves for recognizing the most marketable athletes before our competition, but most importantly we were legitimate, and earned the athletes respect by living the life of the athlete. The result was having the best and most loyal athlete ambassadors in the industry.

For my latter years as SVP of Marketing I always tried to be that internal opinion leader to help inspire employees and help them best understand what makes the brand special. Especially since we grew so fast and only a few of us that had been with the brand during the challenging years. Being an internal opinion leader you understood the special nuances it took to keep the brand authentic to the core, but also capable of engaging with the mainstream. Oakley did this better than any other sports brand.

As for the Frogskin and Lux influence, the answer is no and yes. The Frogskin had come full circle in trend and we saw the re-release as a way to reconnect with the illusive young lifestyle consumer. We worked very hard to keep it exclusive and not distract from other new styles. Where Lux pushed is they didn't embrace or understand the idea of limited, or exclusive distribution and really pushed to open the floodgates of production.

Scott

My Jawbones won at the Co-Pilot Event. It was very cool to tell people for the next two months that the only non-employees that had them were Lance Armstrong and myself. I was offered $400 that night for them, didn't take it. I told Dann about a year ago that I should have had you guys authenticate them...LOL

Who's the guy in the white t-shirt?

Thanks Scott! Tons of great info!

Thanks for the thoughts on the Frogskins. The re-release seems to have spawned an offshoot of collectors. I only have a small sample of some of the ones I see as historically significant, like the Sky Blue and a few Gen 1's, the Supremes, and the second STPL edition. As jaded as I am, that was actually a cool frame color.

The meaning of the name is hilarious and a perfect in-joke for how they were viewed internally. I'm sure aside from the frog-a-holics, that view is shared amoungst some of the longer term collectors. I'm surprised they went forward with the re-release. When I was visiting in 2005, the New RazorBlade in the stretchline collection had just come out, and after talking with a few people, any further retro designs seemed to be off the table.

This is a super interesting thread, thanks very much to Scott for sharing his memories from the front lines. I picked up my first pair of M-Frames around 1993-4 and since then Oakley has been part of me, both outwardly in things I wear and internally in how I think about challenges, design and my work. You guys all did some amazing things and while the recent changes at Oakley have been, well, not the best for old timers, Oakley is still an incredible brand with history and identity that few companies can match.

Great info Scott, thanks for taking the time and for sticking around!

Its great to hear that Oakley only made the less cool stuff to fund the crazy stuff. I am the guy who loves to wear the weird and bright colour stuff because I hate to see anyone else in the same sunglasses as me.

Im lucky enough to have a decent stash of it I can keep wearing while I wait for the crazy stuff to make a comeback!

thanks again

Lex

Even as employees (opinion leaders) he always challenged us to wear the brave stuff. He even fired a sales rep once for only wearing Frogskins.
Scott - Bazooka

That is a very interesting anecdote. In Oakley's modern era, influencers and taste makers like athletes seem to gravitate to the lifestyle stuff, at least when they're not performing. Makes me wonder if the current day athletes would choose they crazy stuff if it were made available to them. The Madman didn't catch on, but perhaps something like the OTT still would.

Once the OR re-opens its doors, we may have to personally invite Scott back. What a wonderful fountain of knowledge he is.

Yes, that's item #1 after the relaunch.

Good question on the "PROTOTYPE" engraving on the .2 and .3. I truly don't recall. I have a pair myself that I was just looking at and tried to remember the significance. I don't remember it being athlete specific, but more that "PROTOTYPE" was cool back then so we might have engraved some just to spark some buzz. - Bazooka

Followed up with Peter Yee as well and he offered the supporting following reasons for the existence of the Zero with “prototype” etching:

Early on it was for two reasons:

#1 strategically used to leverage our team of high level professions athletes for input and make them feel part of the brand in the deepest way possible.

#2. It was cool AF.

The second reason is the best reason! I wonder how many design pitches that one showed up on over the years?