New Hampshire list of 2012/13 Capital Improvements

[deadheadskier]

main·te·nance(mnt-nns)n.1. The act of maintaining or the state of being maintained.
2. The work of keeping something in proper condition; upkeep.


If the New guns at Attitash and Wildcat allow them to make better quality snow at a faster rate, that's improvement; not maintenance. I think anyone who has frequently skied the Boyne areas in the east can attest to the fact that their snowmaking is much improved over ten years ago. If putting in new guns was "maintenance" then there would be no improvement.

[AdironRider]

To each their own, I should know better than to try and argue financials on this board.

You cannot seriously think that the "percentages" of improvement you see marketed have a direct correlation to the "percentages" of improvement of on snow product.

Its like replacing a ten year old corrolla. They are both basic transportation. Sure the new one is more efficient, but is it cheaper to own? No. The other one still got the job done at a lower cost. Quality is negligible as they are both Toyota Corollas.

Replacing aging equipment does not equal automatic more awesomness of whatever they say it will give. But it sure sold you guys.

[Smellytele]

Financials aside. If they were replacing a Corolla with a Corolla then that would not be an improvement but if they were replacing a Corolla with a Lexus then it would be an improvement. Money has nothing to do with it. Also if they had no car before and did buy a Corolla would that be an improvement or maintenance? same for same is one thing and better for inferior is another.

[St. Bear]

You cannot seriously think that the "percentages" of improvement you see marketed have a direct correlation to the "percentages" of improvement of on snow product.

Nobody made this argument.

Its like replacing a ten year old corrolla. They are both basic transportation. Sure the new one is more efficient, but is it cheaper to own? No. The other one still got the job done at a lower cost. Quality is negligible as they are both Toyota Corollas.

Depends on a whole host of factors. What's the projected downtime of the older equipment? Labor costs for repair? Forcasted energy costs? Return on invested capital (or interest expense on loans)?

[deadheadskier]

yeah, I certainly know that "percentages" are marketing speak most of the time. Doesn't mean the new equipment should be considered maintenance. If it's putting a better snow product on the hill at a faster rate, then that's an improvement. With an extremely challenging weather season like last year, being able to make as much snow as you can as quickly as you can is very important. That's probably an area where percentages can actually be measured on the hill. How many gallons per hour does the new equipment convert to snow versus the old?

[kickstand]

Who cares? Attitash got 40 new guns, Wildcat got 61. End of story. Let Peaks worry about the jargon and financials. If it gets me more of a better quality man-made snow, that's all I care about. Why split hairs about "maintenance v. upgrade"? Just go enjoy the freakin snow.

[St. Bear]

Who cares? Attitash got 40 new guns, Wildcat got 61. End of story. Let Peaks worry about the jargon and financials. If it gets me more of a better quality man-made snow, that's all I care about. Why split hairs about "maintenance v. upgrade"? Just go enjoy the freakin snow.

Late summer + slow at work = inane discussions

[eastern powder baby]

To each their own, I should know better than to try and argue financials on this board.

You cannot seriously think that the "percentages" of improvement you see marketed have a direct correlation to the "percentages" of improvement of on snow product.

Its like replacing a ten year old corrolla. They are both basic transportation. Sure the new one is more efficient, but is it cheaper to own? No. The other one still got the job done at a lower cost. Quality is negligible as they are both Toyota Corollas.

Replacing aging equipment does not equal automatic more awesomness of whatever they say it will give. But it sure sold you guys.

Before you get too proud of yourself, I happen to be a financial analyst (with a degree in accounting too, though I had no interest in taking the CPA) and in my view, you're about half-correct in these claims. From what I remember, you're a Whiteface guy, so I don't know if you're at all familiar with snow-making operations at Wildcat. The place has got outdated, shoddy equipment and a limited water supply compared to other resorts in the area. Needless to say, saving water and energy could help them to open more terrain earlier in the season and potentially allow for more snow gun use on other parts of the mountain.

Your Corolla example also selectively misses the point on technological advances. A little over ten years ago, the Ipod was invented. Before then, the best option to listen to music was to buy CDs and a portable CD player. In the portable music device market, there's no such thing as merely "replacing" a CD player anymore. I listen to music through my smart phone that also browses the internet, syncs with my email accounts, etc.

I'd be willing to bet that the smow-making apparatuses to be replaced at Wildcat are more like 25+ years old and that that replacing them will make a difference to people like myself who ski there fairly regularly. It won't be as rosy as the marketing people/my ipod analogy might be, nor will it have a near-zero effect like you seem to claim.



The snow making improvements at Attitash, however, probably wont be very noticeable, and I tend to agree with your assertion that most marketing is a load of bs. But, if you've ever been to places with mediocre-to-poor snow-making technology, you should understand that new guns can allow areas to open terrain earlier, and cover it more thoroughly.

[Geoff]

Financials aside. If they were replacing a Corolla with a Corolla then that would not be an improvement but if they were replacing a Corolla with a Lexus then it would be an improvement. Money has nothing to do with it. Also if they had no car before and did buy a Corolla would that be an improvement or maintenance? same for same is one thing and better for inferior is another.

For the most part, the low-E snow guns make lousy snow and can't throw the snow as far. A better metaphor is replacing a 1977 Trans Am with a Kia Rio. Sure, it gets great MPG but who'd want to drive one?

Anybody who skied Outer Limits at Killington in 2012 can vouch for the crap quality. Those low-E tower guns barely covered half the width of the trail and they blew wet goo that quickly turned into concrete instead of the talcum powder the less efficient guns used to put out when adjusted properly. Low-E means they're not using enough air. You ski under it and get paste on your goggles. It looks great on the bean counter spreadsheet but it's awful to ski on.

[riverc0il]

I've skied on a lot of man made snow. Damned if I could identify differences in quality between low e, fan gun, or tripod. Far more likely that recent temperature, humidity, traffic, and time since the last natural snow will have a major effect in perception of quality of snow. And if it ain't natural, it already is pretty crappy so you are splitting hairs on which man made crap is worse.