To Park or Not?

dlague · Aug 11, 2014

Abubob said:
That is specifically about super pipes or half pipes. Any information about cost of snow making alone?

Half Pipes are a waste! Most people zig zag in the bowl portion and definitely not worth it IMO!

mbedle · Aug 11, 2014

dlague said:
Half Pipes are a waste! Most people zig zag in the bowl portion and definitely not worth it IMO!

I'm not sure the resorts that host major halfpipe events will agree with that statement. I don't use them, but some people do and I am guessing that some resorts make money off of having one.

ScottySkis · Aug 11, 2014

Mountsnow I know brings in people from nyc because the hill that is a park.

Domeskier · Aug 11, 2014

ScottySkis said:
Mountsnow I know brings in people from nyc because the hill that is a park.

People from NYC have to go to Mountain Snow if they want to park. Either that, or shell out for a garage!

steamboat1 · Aug 11, 2014

Ever notice it's the flat mountains that are big on parks?

Mountains with decent terrain not so much.

ss20 · Aug 11, 2014

steamboat1 said:
Ever notice it's the flat mountains that are big on parks?

Mountains with decent terrain not so much.

Didn't know Killington and Sugarloaf were flat.

deadheadskier · Aug 11, 2014

Stowe has extremely expansive park offerings as well.....

steamboat1 · Aug 12, 2014

ss20 said:
Didn't know Killington and Sugarloaf were flat.

deadheadskier said:
Stowe has extremely expansive park offerings as well.....

All of which didn't offer a 1/2 pipe last year. Not sure about the Loaf

deadheadskier · Aug 12, 2014

steamboat1 said:
Ever notice it's the flat mountains that are big on parks?

Mountains with decent terrain not so much.

steamboat1 said:
All of which didn't offer a 1/2 pipe last year. Not sure about the Loaf

You weren't talking about 1/2 pipes.

steamboat1 · Aug 12, 2014

deadheadskier said:
You weren't talking about 1/2 pipes.

Yes but we were talking about cost. Just putting up rails & such doesn't cost that much to do. Blowing enough snow for a full sized 1/2 pipe does.

deadheadskier · Aug 12, 2014

Blowing snow to create massive jumps that you'll find at many mountains with steep terrain also costs a lot of money.

To be honest, I think the lack of pipes has less to do with cost than it does usage and ROI for those snowmaking efforts. Half pipes existed prior to parks and were hugely popular in the 90s. Until the late 90s there was no such thing as big air competitions and slopestyle that incorporated the more diverse features you see today. Once all of that came into play, half pipe usage went down. I was unaware that Stowe didn't offer a pipe this year as it was the first season in awhile I hadn't skied there. They always had one on Lower North Slope, but in recent years, no one was using it. Yet, the Tyro park was packed with people having a good time. Invest in what the clientele wants, which these days clearly isn't half pipe.

Abubob · Aug 12, 2014

steamboat1 said:
Ever notice it's the flat mountains that are big on parks?

Mountains with decent terrain not so much.

Ragged has a fair park that get's pretty good use - always folks in there - mostly young. Cannon on the other hand had this ridonkulous park last season that hardly anyone used. So it's not a question of who has the parks as who uses them and on what mountains.

I think Ragged, even though it has some decent terrain needs a park. Cannon doesn't really need a park IMHO, Even though they had some sort of competition there afterward it didn't seem to get much use.

Cannonball · Aug 12, 2014

Having parks is like having racing: Most people don't/can't participate in it, it takes up valuable slope space, it takes up other resources (snowmaking, equipment, staff, etc). Both racing and park events are a huge part of the identity of skiing. World tours, Olympics, etc are the outward expression of skiing to most of the world. If resorts want to be a part of that they need to offer parks and racing.

Domeskier · Aug 12, 2014

Cannonball said:
Having parks is like having racing: Most people don't/can't participate in it, it takes up valuable slope space, it takes up other resources (snowmaking, equipment, staff, etc). Both racing and park events are a huge part of the identity of skiing. World tours, Olympics, etc are the outward expression of skiing to most of the world. If resorts want to be a part of that they need to offer parks and racing.

I know what you mean. I don't consider a resort "world-class" unless it has a 120m ski jump.

Abubob · Aug 12, 2014

Cannonball said:
Having parks is like having racing: Most people don't/can't participate in it, it takes up valuable slope space, it takes up other resources (snowmaking, equipment, staff, etc). Both racing and park events are a huge part of the identity of skiing. World tours, Olympics, etc are the outward expression of skiing to most of the world. If resorts want to be a part of that they need to offer parks and racing.

Nailed it.

Highway Star · Aug 12, 2014

thetrailboss said:
We've discussed this in the past, but BenedictGomez asked this question in the Jay Challenge thread:

So in 2014 are parks no longer needed? As he put it, have they "jumped the shark?" Or do they serve a purpose for smaller hills near the cities and metro areas that need something to keep skateboarders and urban jibbers happy?

Here is my cross-post about what I've seen out here:

I've noticed out here that parks are not that big of a deal.....folks say because the "whole mountain is a park." I think that a big reason is that resorts out here (generally) do not rely quite as much on snowmaking. Using eastern standards, Snowbird's "park" is pathetic. But as I ski by on Big Emma or ride on Gadzoom I rarely see anyone use it. Most of the 'bird's regular clientele come for the "natural" terrain offerings. Alta doesn't have a park (same reason). I heard from folks at Snowbird that it was cost and liability issues. If anything, I think they make a small one to throw a bone to the few out of towners who want some kind of park.

Brighton, on the other hand, has some decent parks and night skiing and riding. Their main crowd is into the park scene.

PCMR has killer parks but they do it because they get lots of out-of-towners who want it, they host big events, and they have a lot of athletes who need the parks for training.

As to cost, it is amazing. I recall when Burke dedicated a trail and some snowmaking money to a half-pipe. When Northern Star went out of business, I talked to someone in the know who was part of the new ownership about that half pipe and asked "why not do it?" He told me that it cost the resort $50-75k annually in snowmaking, etc. and netted few users and no revenue. That said, Burke has dedicated a lot of resources to a serious park and I think it has worked well at keeping a niche crowd that would have otherwise gone elsewhere. But is it making a lot of money? Probably not. That demographic does not really have a lot of disposable income. Mommy and Daddy sometimes do though...at least enough to get their kid a season pass.

My last season in Vermont, 2010-2011, Burke and Sugarbush had pretty serious parks. Sugarbush had a whole area dedicated to it and my observation was that it was pretty well used. Burke's parks are pretty good and cater to a pretty significant crowd.

I also have seen some big parks at Sunday River, Loon, and Killington. But I can't say if the latter two still do them.

As usual, you are massively out of touch with anything outside of your narrow point of view.

skiNEwhere · Aug 12, 2014

Highway Star said:
As usual, you are massively out of touch with anything outside of your narrow point of view.

As usual, you're an assclown

Is your handle highway star due to your "my way or the highway" approach to debating?

Savemeasammy · Aug 12, 2014

Cannonball said:
Having parks is like having racing: Most people don't/can't participate in it, it takes up valuable slope space, it takes up other resources (snowmaking, equipment, staff, etc). Both racing and park events are a huge part of the identity of skiing. World tours, Olympics, etc are the outward expression of skiing to most of the world. If resorts want to be a part of that they need to offer parks and racing.

I will say this about parks: they are situated in terrain I could care less about... Race courses on the other hand eat up valuable real estate!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

thetrailboss · Aug 12, 2014

Highway Star said:
As usual, you are massively out of touch with anything outside of your narrow point of view.

Yes, so narrow. I don't even consider any other POV's regarding this issue. :roll:

skiNEwhere · Aug 12, 2014

FYI highway star....a counterpoint might help your case (whatever the hell that is)......just sayin'

To Park or Not?

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

New member

Moderator

Active member

Similar threads