Over the decades, there have been "coatings" which were promoted as being slick and tough. I've seen these (and had to remove them) from a set of floats and a couple sets of skis. The problem with coatings is that they can invite and hide corrosion underneath the coatings. As I noted, I bought a set of floats on which the bottoms had been coated with some nasty, very hard black coating, the former owner apparently thinking that the stuff would make the floats slide better in water. Back then, this black stuff seemed to be all the rage in Alaska, because I subsequently ran into the stuff on the bottoms of two sets of skis.
I worked really hard with lots of very toxic liquids to try to remove the coating from the bottom of the floats, only to find ultimately, that corrosion had nearly destroyed the metal under that coating. So, I then replaced the bottom skins.
With skis, the risk of corrosion is certainly lower, but there are other functions that the plastic affords in that realm that a coating doesn't. High on that list is protection of the ski structure itself from rock damage, which is very common in skis. The UHMW bottoms absorb all that punishment, and are relatively easy to replace. Replacing plastic bottoms is a lot easier and less expensive than replacing ski bottoms.
As noted earlier in this thread, the plastic bottom coverings on skis is a sacrificial material, intended not just for better performance, but to protect those ski bottoms.
MTV