Gore Mountain Conditions

Every system has a limit. Pick one that you'd like to limit the rest:

Parking
Uphill capacity
Trail acreage
Snowmaking
Water supply
Lodge/sewer capacity
You are assuming the changes are linear. In practice, a 20% increase in lift speed (capacity) does not equate to a 20% increase in the number of people on the slopes. It just means you get to the top 20% faster and can therefore ski more. A 20% increase in parking means there are fewer people parked (dangerously) on the access road and between rows. It does not mean 20% more people come to the mountain.
 
A big one: human capital/labor pool.
& places for the worker bees to live comfortably after work.
There’s skilled 10th Mtn division folks in the North Country but not many close to the Hudson River watershed in The UpState.
 
Last edited:
You are assuming the changes are linear. In practice, a 20% increase in lift speed (capacity) does not equate to a 20% increase in the number of people on the slopes. It just means you get to the top 20% faster and can therefore ski more. A 20% increase in parking means there are fewer people parked (dangerously) on the access road and between rows. It does not mean 20% more people come to the mountain.

I wasn't assuming anything about how changes in those variables affect total capacity.

Right now I'd call the access road part of the parking. It's not a "lot" but it's part of the capacity. If they add another lot, there will be no more parking on the access road?

I'm actually agreeing with you, it's much more complicated then "we need faster lifts."

1 - We need faster lifts. √
2 - We need more terrain √
3 - We need more snowmaking, air, water, pumping capacity √
4 - We need more lodge space, bathrooms and sewer √
5 - We need more parking √
6 - We need faster lifts...

As long as the ski business grows continuously you can run that on an infinite loop.
 
Good point. That may actually be the limit now.

Another way to say that might be prevailing wages. If they rise enough so that people can afford to work for SKI3 that could shift the limit elsewhere. So raise wages and ticket prices to pay for it?

More paid parking, higher ticket prices, more snowmaking, more water capacity, more lodge room, more sewer capacity, more terrain. It could work out if the industry is really growing, and the last two years are not a temporary response to covid.
We are post covid. We’re now in the long gradual response to climate change. So let’s expand to a LOWER elevation. What could go wrong?
 
Coming soon to a Saddle Lodge near you. Or maybe kicking out the Waffle Cabin? Or the food vendor in the $30 million Ski Bowl Lodge?
IMG_0106.jpeg
 
We can hope folk riders, it is an earn s say it’s cut due to budget to set aside funds for other higher priorities.
Just safely maintaining that monstrosity ain’t gonna be cheap.
Anybody know what the insurance is for an anchor attraction zip coaster thingy 🍺?
Ayour turns nd pay scale for the techs keeping it running safely?
Twas touted as kinda unique...
Makes more sense to use the ski bowls chairlift to get bikes up the mountain and let folks have some fun 🚲 coming down.
I’d pay cash for that but nothing for the spinning in the trees BS.
Folks could learn the trail system at the bowl too when biking down.
Our trail system is not designed for lift serve downhill riders, it is earn your turns.
 
Our trail system is not designed for lift serve downhill riders, it is earn your turns.
Yup. Why not both in the bowl?

Ya get faster turns with the zip coaster though.
Hope folks don’t lose their lunch 🤮 on the animals below.
 
Last edited:
I'm actually agreeing with you, it's much more complicated then "we need faster lifts."
Sorry for misinterpreting. I thought you were countering my Hudson Chair needs to be faster point. I don't know enough about the behind the scenes water supply and sewer points, but my biggest gripe about Gore is the speed of the lifts (specifically the Hudson Chair, Topridge and the North quad). It's still close to my favorite mountain and the one I go to most often.

I will give this further thought as I spend the upcoming weekend on the Madonna I chair.
 
Sorry for misinterpreting. I thought you were countering my Hudson Chair needs to be faster point.

On this point we probably do disagree.

My point is that if you speed up every lift, the pinch point shifts. If you speed up one it's incremental. If you speed up the four slowest lifts, I'm pretty sure there will be something else that people will want 'fixed.'

If you upgrade everything, you have a bigger mountain. If every mountain upgrades everything then you need a bigger industry. Which is TBD at this point IMO.

If you ski Smuggs you must believe, at least to some extent, that slower lifts lead to better snow. Otherwise why would you drive all that way?

I guess I need to break this out too.
 
On this point we probably do disagree.

My point is that if you speed up every lift, the pinch point shifts. If you speed up one it's incremental. If you speed up the four slowest lifts, I'm pretty sure there will be something else that people will want 'fixed.'

If you upgrade everything, you have a bigger mountain. If every mountain upgrades everything then you need a bigger industry. Which is TBD at this point IMO.

If you ski Smuggs you must believe, at least to some extent, that slower lifts lead to better snow. Otherwise why would you drive all that way?

I guess I need to break this out too.
The thing i like about that being slow is it keeps people off. It is nice to have a good run with slow lifts (so long as not all lifts are slow on a big mountain).

I am not one of those, ''only I should ski here people', but those slow lifts are often the best hide out spaces on crowded days.
 
Back
Top