New Rods Introduced by Sage

[Tony300wby]

These posts happen every year. It makes me laugh when people complain about new models. Compare a fly fishing catalog from the late 80's/early 90's to a 2015 catalog and you will find very few things that havnt been updated and/or improved apon. And the few things that are still available 25yrs later are double to triple in price now. Some of the older models that people have spoken about were the latest and greatest newly released models of the time. And if you figure inflation over 20+ years their price tags would be comparable to todays $800.00 rods.

While I do agree that the latest and greatest 2016 model probably wont help me cast and/or fish any better then the 2015, 2010, 2000, ect model I cant blame Sage or any other company for updating, upgrading, refining, ect their model lines. Chances are if they didnt they would not still be in buisness. If Sage wanted to they could reproduce any model line they ever had. As a matter of fact there have been special runs of LL's and XP's. But; dont expect that LL rod that retailed for under $300.00 in the late 1980's to still carry the same price tag in 2016.

I compared a few things from a 1987 Kaufmanns catalog I had to a 2015 catalog;
Top end Sage rod; 1997 $280, 2015 $800
Top end Orvis rod; 1997 $240, 2015 $800
Orvis CFO; 1987 $120, 2015 $335
Top end fly line; 1987 25.00, 2015 $75.00+
Hardy Lightweight; 1987 $125, 2015 $249
Regal vise; 1987 $109, 2015 $275
Mustad 94840 (25pk); 1987 $1.50, 2015 $5.00
TMC 100 (25pk); 1987 $2.50, 2015 $7.05

Good luck, Tony

 

[outsider]

Tony,

I think the big difference between then and now is the quality and availability of lower costing rods. The number of lower-cost rod manufacturers has increased greatly since then.

 

[nymphingmaniac]

+1 SLT. I have one and wish I picked up another.
There were some significant changes in their rods after the SLT- what difference they make is up to the user.
I'm a SAGE man and will be for some time. For me the turnover is a good thing. Every rod was purchased at 40-50% discount when they were discontinued.
All that said, the turnover is starting to get ridiculous and driven more by marketing. I'm starting to see other manufacturers do the same-increase the turnover of their lines (pun intended)
This does not take away from the fact they have outstanding domestic products.

 

[Sylvaneous]

nymphingmaniac wrote:
. For me the turnover is a good thing. Every rod was purchased at 40-50% discount when they were discontinued.
All that said, the turnover is starting to get ridiculous and driven more by marketing. I'm starting to see other manufacturers do the same-increase the turnover of their lines (pun intended)

I think they have to. I was thinking about who must buy these $8-900 rods? Well, its the people who can and will. It isn't most of us. SO: they must put out rods frequently that are the latest and greatest and get people to buy them. I think it's a very small segment of flyfishermen. To get that $850, they have to make a new series so the eager beavers will buy them. Any manufacturer could leave that $800 rod model out for years and 1) I would never buy it and 2) the eager adapters won't buy it because it isn't new. They have done their research and know that they have to introduce their high dollar rods when other companies are not. (the newest of the new) They also know what the market will bear. They can't introduce a new line every other year. The radian is accepted as about the finest trout rod out there. Will they just sit on it for X years, waiting for whom exactly to break-down and finally shell over most of one pay check for a stick barely different than what they have? Scott doesn't churn as much. It's smaller with fewer offerings. I don't think it can. It's too small.
At this point, the different models from all the manufacturers is dizzying. Orvis' tip- and mid- flex are, truly, separate rod models. And Winston's B-X2 and 3 and 3-i or god knows what....Heavens.... you'd have to spend weeks running around to compare all these different rod lines from a fair number of makers.

Again, it seems ridiculous. At this point, they must intentionally make lesser rods for lower price points. Make it too stiff or heavier or too floppy. Otherwise, it won't be different from our flag ship or other lines enough. It seems less like marketing and begins to feel like manipulation.

 

[greenghost]

Tony300wby wrote:
These posts happen every year. It makes me laugh when people complain about new models. Compare a fly fishing catalog from the late 80's/early 90's to a 2015 catalog and you will find very few things that havnt been updated and/or improved apon. And the few things that are still available 25yrs later are double to triple in price now. Some of the older models that people have spoken about were the latest and greatest newly released models of the time. And if you figure inflation over 20+ years their price tags would be comparable to todays $800.00 rods.

I compared a few things from a 1987 Kaufmanns catalog I had to a 2015 catalog;
Top end Sage rod; 1997 $280, 2015 $800
Top end Orvis rod; 1997 $240, 2015 $800
Orvis CFO; 1987 $120, 2015 $335
Top end fly line; 1987 25.00, 2015 $75.00+
Hardy Lightweight; 1987 $125, 2015 $249
Regal vise; 1987 $109, 2015 $275
Mustad 94840 (25pk); 1987 $1.50, 2015 $5.00
TMC 100 (25pk); 1987 $2.50, 2015 $7.05

Good luck, Tony

Thanks for the counterpoint, Tony. While I do agree with many of your comments, I also agree with other posters that new Sage rods are simply way overpriced for the angler with average financial means (i.e. me).

According to an economic calculator I found online, a $280 rod in 1987 would be a little over $550 today with inflation adjustments -- $800 is 70% higher than where it should be.

Of course, as an "average income" angler I am undoubtedly NOT Sage's target market. I do wish I could afford their newest rods, I can't. So I'm stuck with having to graze online and continue to buy the older ones.

In today's market there are many rod options available that perform nearly or equally as well as Sage for a lot less money-- Redington for example. However that being said, I like to adjust my rod collection every now and then and Sage has the very best resale value in the market judging from the times I have bought and sold rods online. So aside from excellent performance, that's another important reason to fish Sage.

 

[dano]

I got to play around with the new 3wt 8'2" little one.
It was fantastic as I could accurately lay out a 9ft-6x leader with a foot of fly line off the tip. I then could peel off 40 ft of line and effortlessly shoot and lay out some easy casts without a haul.
I've cast a lot of rods and this was the best 3 wt. I've handled.
But it's not nearly worth the dough compared to the price point of used LL389.
If you have cash to burn, the little one is "it".
I can't see Sage selling many of these little niche rods at that price.
The txl at the current 30-40% closeout price are nice and (I believe, a better tool) and near the cost of a used LL389.