Interesting.

The objective of the design of Floskis is to have less vibration making it to the skier.  I and my ski buddy happened to meet Adrian at Mammoth during a late season trip.  We demo'd while skiing with him for about an hour.  Made skiing backwards really easy because they are so easy to turn.  I bought a pair of demo skis just for fun.  Have had a good time with them at Massanutten a few times.  The binding is raised up.  The version for bigger people has "beads" on the tip.  Adrian was a NASA scientist who specialized in vibration dampening.

The downside to Floskis design is the they weigh a lot.  Tough carrying them from the parking lot.

Agree -  and the designer/owner is stupid and ripped me off for $50. We all know that NASA enginering is on par with Boeing. And the demo vid with admin US Ski Team workers was a travesty. They were trying to lay down railroad tracks in slop to no avail. No holding power and can't track. Garbage. I had the un-pleasure of demo'ing a pair here in Heavenly ... total scheiße. 

Denis wrote:

The release function of DIN bindings is dependent upon the binding being mounted on a stable solid surface.  As it is now, that’s the ski.  What happens when a shock absorber is placed between the ski and the binding.  It seems to me that this could be a major problem.

This would be like skiing on risers and I think it will lose sense of touch and vibration with the snow. I wish him all the best but this would not be for me. Risers are for racers, not the moguls IMHO.