F Vail

[snoloco]

I believe the typical season length is largely determined by the placement of holiday weeks, not passholders demanding that resorts push the season. Resorts have to start making snow in November in order to build out terrain and open all their lifts by Christmas, which you claim is like 35% of the season's revenue. If you already have the snow, then you might as well open, so that's why so many resorts open Thanksgiving weekend. Then you have to make it through President's Weekend and perhaps an early spring break in certain years with 100% terrain, and the snow that you already made is going to last to April most years, so you might as well stay open till it melts. Unless the weather early season is terrible, which means you're screwed for Christmas, or there's a nasty melt out at the beginning of March, you're going to end up with the same season length every year.

 

[raisingarizona]

“All lifts by Christmas”

Yes!

 

[x10003q]

I can see how it's related. Not saying all is Vail's fault, but maybe they are part of it.

Some ski towns (out west especially?) are so expensive that the staff can't afford to live there. Snoloco is right about one thing, if all the ops quit, the market will compensate. Wages will rise, or conditions will improve, because no one at the top is going to let those assets (lifts, etc) sit idle.

For whatever reason, people seem a lot less afraid to quit these days. It's having a profound effect. I know the theory well, but never thought I would see the effect this dramatically.

Vail is certainly part of it. Driving up the cost and target market for skiing.

I actually think snowmaking, and the expectation of a 3-4 month season, in the low-elevation east, is part of it. Snowmaking is really expensive and reliance on it seems to be increasing. If you have high fixed cost, you gotta maximize your money per skier, or pack em in, or both. Your properties have to cater to the rich, and do big volume.

IF my idea is legit, it would mean we too are complicit.

Come on now - no snowmaking is no skiing in the East and has been since the 1970s. Almost every ski area in the East has been over 70% snowmaking coverage since the 1990s and the big boys are all approaching 100% coverage. Snowmaking is required - no different than lifts or trails. Snowmaking has probably become cheaper due to modern design, computer controls, less manpower needed, and better and cheaper power generation including solar and wind.

If you want to eliminate the housing crunch at eastern resorts the first step would be to eliminate snowmaking.

 

[Harvey]

Sno - Your cause and effect may be backwards. Not sure.

One thing I am sure of in 1940, if it didn't snow the mountain didn't open.

Now we expect it to open whether it snows or not.

X - give me a different theory. It's a fact that skiing used to be a middle class sport. What changed? Sincere question.

 

[Campgottagopee]

expect

This is where Sno can learn a few things.
Expectations are predetermined disappointments.

 

[Low Angle Life]

It's a fact that skiing used to be a middle class sport. What changed? Sincere question.

Slow erosion of the American middle class due to the off shoring of US manufacturing jobs could be part of that. Rising costs of doing business for Ski areas due to rising energy and labor costs could be another. Corporate consolidation leading to less price competition may also factor in. When the middle class is shrinking and has less and less disposable income each year luxuries get put on the chopping block and skiing is far from necessity. Backcountry also continues to be the fastest growing segment of the sport, is this because of the rising costs associated with resort skiing, declining guest experience or just not enjoying spending time around a bunch of entitled rich people?

You can dine on white table cloth with real silverware for lunch at Stowe, I know this is a bit on the extreme side of things but can't you also get a "boot boy" for lack of a better term at Deer Valley? The ski industry marketing and tailoring their guest experience towards the wealthy certainly creates and vibe that skiing isn't for the common folk.

 

[tirolski]

“All lifts by Christmas”

Yes!

That’s what I’m asking Santa for. And a nice snow season.

 

[Brownski]

give me a different theory. It's a fact that skiing used to be a middle class sport. What changed? Sincere question.

Detachable lifts. Death of the family hills. Gear price inflation…. A general perception that it’s a rich white person sport driven by dopes constantly posting on the internet that it’s a rich white person sport. A middle class family in Orange County can be a skiing family for relatively cheap at Mt Peter by buying used gear at their annual swap and buying midweek night passes but most of them are probably unaware of this.

 

[tirolski]

Ya can ski places like Pete’s mountain in The Kingdom via rope tow instead of Vail’s shitshow, just sayin.

 

[Ripitz]

give me a different theory. It's a fact that skiing used to be a middle class sport. What changed? Sincere question.

Detachable lifts. Death of the family hills. Gear price inflation…. A general perception that it’s a rich white person sport driven by dopes constantly posting on the internet that it’s a rich white person sport. A middle class family in Orange County can be a skiing family for relatively cheap at Mt Peter by buying used gear at their annual swap and buying midweek night passes but most of them are probably unaware of this.

Skiing still can be a sport for the middle class. $150 a year for a family membership at Mount Greylock Ski Club. If there is a family out there that wants to join and can’t afford that I will sponsor them.