What mystifies me is how skis can get reputations for having one side that is better than the other. For example, I've heard that the HO A1 has a very good offside. How is that? The ski is symmetrical, it can't know. I only guess is that the shape of the A1 works well with the way the average skier stands on the ski through an offside turn.

I believe that the only thing that makes the Goode LFF, RFF or neutral is the orientation/layup of the ski.  i.e. it's a flex thing, not a "shape" thing.

(don't quote me)  ;-)

To answer your question, with five axis machining and CAD, I don't think it would be too bad, but.... still not cheap.

From the standpoint of an engineer and a high performance sailor, I can see how an asymetric ski could have some merit, however....  I think the shape would be very dependent upon each skiers build and style.  I could almost see a series of half molds that could be assembled to produce a semi custom ski.  Biggest problem I see there is that once you optimize for one thing, you lose somewhere else.  So, if you build this super custom ski and your weight, ability, form, speed, line length changes too much, you're out of spec witht he ski and fighting it.

Can't we all just go back to flat bottom Cypres Gardens Little Monsters??  ;-)

I learnt on a Mastercraft asymmetric, Bob Lapoint design.
at the time I think they held a number of Euro and world titles..

I remember looking down the rails and on one side was a clean flush line to the tail then the other side had a very (very) slight bulge between the front and rear binding. don't remember seeing anything different in the actual shape of the rails. (but at the time i didn't know squat about skis.)

I'm not 100% sure, waiting to hear back from Dave Goode. I think the angle GOODE lays up the carbon fiber is different from one side of the ski to the other making one side stiffer/softer torsionally than the other side of the ski.