Sugarloaf Bucksaw Chair....RIP

[dlague]

Yeah, people aren't going to websites and figuring out how old the lifts are at a given area.

I'm sure people would like a new lift to help relieve base congestion. It is stated that the Double Runners are in line for replacement. That should help a lot. Hopefully when they are built, the base of the lifts are more convenient to the Base Lodge. That's their biggest problem. I'm sure many people with young kids opt for Sunday River because the lifts all go right close to the lodge/parking.

You can spin things however you want Goldenboy, but it doesn't change that Sugarloaf is doing the best business they ever have in terms of skier visits and revenue. If that starts to change, I'm sure they will react appropriately if the resources are available. They have so far under Boyne. Slow and steady wins the race. Too fast, and you're the next ASC.

I am sure that the average skier or snowboarder pays little attention to average lift age. Only on forums like this is it brought up.

 

[SIKSKIER]

Speaking of lift age how old would one consider Cannons Tuckerbrook,Brookside and Eagle Cliff?They all came from Sunnapee's used summit lift.

 

[Puck it]

Speaking of lift age how old would one consider Cannons Tuckerbrook,Brookside and Eagle Cliff?They all came from Sunnapee's used summit lift.

I think you might be wrong. Tuckerbrook was new in 2003. Eaglecliff and Brookside were the old Sunapee Triple chair installed in 1998.

 

[machski]

I would never look a "gift" HKD SV10 Impulse snow gun in the nozzle, but to assume the devil's advocate perspective, and I understand this is hyperbolic, new snow guns do nothing for you when your ski lifts are literally trying to murder you. My perspective is this-- I grew up in Maine until I was 18 then moved out of state for job opportunities. When I am trying to convince my New England friends to drive a bunch of hours to Maine to enjoy my favorite home mountain with me, you'd rather have them say, isn't that the place that just put in a bunch of new lifts versus isn't that the place where a bunch of people got dropped from lifts. I know they're doing a good job retrofitting repairs and safety features but a major investment in new cool lifts would resolve the perception problem. If you're seeking uncrowded slopes maybe you don't mind the perception problem because you know its actually safe following the anti-rollback and lift removal initiatives. I'm just looking at it from a business perspective cause my head kind of works like that.

See, and you're also wrong on snowmaking equipment. I was not talking a few new low e guns, SL has overhauled the entire system. Rebuilt pumps, new pumps, new valve Assemblies, new piping, everything you don't really see in the system. That was a lot of $$. So sure, you can't see most of that, but you can surely see what it puts on the hill. Now, go with your "business" instinct and put in shinny new HS lifts without the snowmaking system investment. When those shinny lifts are sitting idle due to lack of snow, it won't look like the best business decision. Both lift accidents were unfortunate, but I think Boyne's plan is sound.

 

[Whitey]

See, and you're also wrong on snowmaking equipment. I was not talking a few new low e guns, SL has overhauled the entire system. Rebuilt pumps, new pumps, new valve Assemblies, new piping, everything you don't really see in the system. That was a lot of $$. So sure, you can't see most of that, but you can surely see what it puts on the hill. Now, go with your "business" instinct and put in shinny new HS lifts without the snowmaking system investment. When those shinny lifts are sitting idle due to lack of snow, it won't look like the best business decision. Both lift accidents were unfortunate, but I think Boyne's plan is sound.

Good points Machski. SL was behind the times on snowmaking because they always figured that their location/elevation/latitude made it less necessary for them. It was time to address that.

I know a lot of this thread is about the safety concerns and there is probably a lot of validity to that. But on the capacity side - I skied SL on a weekend in March, with prime conditions, the alpine nationals there, and the KP lift down. I really didn't have any issues with long lift lines and even getting over to Brackett wasn't bad off of the Skyline lift.

 

[xwhaler]

If KP is down lapping Brackett is very annoying. You have a long run out back to Whiffletree basically and then you repeat the process.
We did that a few times during the yr the Summit had all the wind holds---rode Bateau #3 up and did the single track cat walk traverse all the way over to Brackett.
It was nice because no one was over there but it was a long process for the amt of skiing we got in.

 

[SIKSKIER]

I think you might be wrong. Tuckerbrook was new in 2003. Eaglecliff and Brookside were the old Sunapee Triple chair installed in 1998.

Exactly right Puck.Easy to confirm as the first 2 are triples and the Tuck is a quad!

 

[Puck it]

Exactly right Puck.Easy to confirm as the first 2 are triples and the Tuck is a quad!

I think the old Sunapee triple is the same vintage as the Zoomer. Very similar chair design.

 

[goldenboy80]

See, and you're also wrong on snowmaking equipment.

How am I wrong on snowmaking equipment? I love snowmaking equipment, plus it saves you money. Also, I am not implying that the average skier does the math that I did proving Sugarloaf has the oldest lifts of the major resorts on the east coast. I am just saying that the math and the accidents appear to be correlated. Spillway East was 35 years old when the deropement occurred in 2010. King Pine was 27 years old in 2015 when the rollback occurred. Now everyone is attacking me because I suggested that Sugarloaf has failed to stay competitive with its lift system (which it has). Put in a new gondola and revitalize the marketing campaign and boost visitors. Replace some of the super old feeder lifts with high speed lifts and sell some condos. Its not rocket science. Borrowing costs are about as low as they will ever be. It's about planning for the future, but you do need a stable owner with some vision. Somebody should send Louis Bacon (bought Taos) a care package of Maine lobsters and blueberry pies.

 

[goldenboy80]

Both lift accidents were unfortunate, but I think Boyne's plan is sound.

Boyne is a very good operator, no doubt. They are doing the best they can with what they have been given. My issue is with the owner, CNL Lifestyle Properties, which is a failed REIT. They didn't give Boyne the resources to keep plant, property and equipment at a reasonable level. CNL hired Jefferies LLC, where I used to work, to sell them. Hopefully their team can get resolution to buyer problem so that more meaningful future improvements are not in limbo.

 

[deadheadskier]

Borrowing costs maybe low, but good luck finding a bank to finance ski area growth in a flat industry.

If you haven't noticed, resorts are having to go with EB-5 or proceeds from their own real estate developments or operating profits to fund all this very expensive equipment you're wishing for.

The days of easy financing for ski areas ended decades ago. My father helped finance numerous projects for ski areas in the 80s and 90s while working for Bank of Boston. The easy money dried up LONG ago.

 

[goldenboy80]

The easy money dried up LONG ago.

Sounds like we're going to need a lot of blueberry pies...

 

[Jully]

Let me rephrase what I said then. I don't think Sugarloaf should be spending their money on a high speed quad for any feeder lift, as in West Mountain, Snubber, or Double Runners. It won't help with anything.

Double Runners will hopefully be replaced soon, but dropping an extra few million dollars on an HSQ for a lift with what, 700 feet of vertical flanked by two HSQs already, seems pointless to me. I'd love to see a skyline equivalent there. It offers a fixed grip option up the mountain at half the cost of an HSQ.

I think mountains that maintain older fixed grip lifts in non essential areas of the mountain are making great business decisions by doing that. Replacing everything with HSQs isn't the answer.

 

[Newpylong]

Let me rephrase what I said then. I don't think Sugarloaf should be spending their money on a high speed quad for any feeder lift, as in West Mountain, Snubber, or Double Runners. It won't help with anything.

Double Runners will hopefully be replaced soon, but dropping an extra few million dollars on an HSQ for a lift with what, 700 feet of vertical flanked by two HSQs already, seems pointless to me. I'd love to see a skyline equivalent there. It offers a fixed grip option up the mountain at half the cost of an HSQ.

I think mountains that maintain older fixed grip lifts in non essential areas of the mountain are making great business decisions by doing that. Replacing everything with HSQs isn't the answer.

They will never put a HSQ in to replace Double Runners nor should they for the reasons you mentioned. Did someone say they should?

West Mountain is 1 trail, so also not an option. Snubber is well, Snubber, also not an option.

HSQ replacing Bucksaw I think is a reasonable option, there is a good amount of terrain in that pod. It has the length and downhill capacity, and soon, no lift.

 

[goldenboy80]

I'll go on record saying I support the fixed grip quad to replace the Double Runner. Too much skier traffic on the bunny slopes isn't good for anyone. Nice to be able to take fixed-grip (DR to SL) most of the way to the top on a windy day. For the Snubber, I don't know... It probably needs to be replaced sooner rather than later as it's 30 years old. Can't risk dropping any more skiers (plus its really high where it rises above Sawduster). I'd probably replace the Snubber with a HSQ. It services a lot of houses, condos, and hotel rooms -- putting in a HSQ would raise the property values of every single piece of property alongside it. Lifts aren't going to get any cheaper in the future. In the year 2040, I doubt Sugarloaf would look back and regret a $3-4 million investment in 2016 that would support some of its most valuable real estate for the next 25 years. I think Bucksaw will get redone next summer. If I had purchased a townhouse in the Timbers development I'd be upset if it didn't get done soon.

 

[goldenboy80]

Keep in mind that running a ski resort is primarily a real estate business. Lift tickets, etc. typically only covers the cost of utilities. Need to do whatever you can to increase property values and desirability of purchasing lots, spec houses, and hotel rooms. Otherwise the Maine doctors and lawyers that acquire these sorts of things will look elsewhere and often out-of-state.

 

[deadheadskier]

You will never in your lifetime see a HSQ for Snubber. I don't care if Mark Cuban buys the place. The capacity is not needed. The ROI would never be realized. I've stayed in those condos many times and the lift is more than adequate.

 

[xwhaler]

My $.02 as someone who has skied SL nearly as much as any other mtn in his life (100+days)

A HSQ for KP makes more sense than any of the low angle condo lifts.
The Bucksaw area should be better utilized so perhaps a HSQ over there would serve to open up that terrain and also alleviate some pressure on the SQ.

Sell Timberline quad to raise capital to fund other improvements. That chair may not bring much back in sale though.
I'd rather see them put a surface lift up to the top or even a surface lift to top of Burnt Mtn.
The Timberline chair is very under utilized because the terrain up there is not worth skiing for the amt of time you are on the lift (unless the ice fields are good or access to back side)

 

[goldenboy80]

I plan to live at least 50 more years so as long as global warming hasn't eradicated all snow by then, I will definitely take that bet. I may have to knock on your door, perhaps in the year 2065, to collect my $10 but I will be there and will be wearing a Mavericks hat.

 

[Jully]

They will never put a HSQ in to replace Double Runners nor should they for the reasons you mentioned. Did someone say they should?

West Mountain is 1 trail, so also not an option. Snubber is well, Snubber, also not an option.

HSQ replacing Bucksaw I think is a reasonable option, there is a good amount of terrain in that pod. It has the length and downhill capacity, and soon, no lift.

I agree there. A Bucksaw HSQ would be excellent, KP too. If I were a mostly lower intermediate family with one or two advanced members, SL becomes vastly superior to SR with a high speed bucksaw. With no bucksaw I think I'd go with SR right now.