The "Sugarbush Thread"

mbedle said:

I'm going to guess that the warm weather is partially to blame. It looks like Stowe is not blowing any snow until later today.

Click to expand...

I agree it could explain the past day or two and we'll have to see what happens when it gets cold again. Something was definitely wrong when it was cold and they weren't blowing (and for all we know something is still wrong). Was/is it a mechanical issue or did they really run out of water? One scenario can be fixed...the other means Sugarbush is in for a tough season without a ton of natural snow.

If Lincoln Peak is out of water becouse of the drought i would guess other mountains will seen have the same problem, though someone mentioned they made a little snow on lower Downspout so I assume the problem was mechanical running out of water should be easy to predict.

Is it really possible that they could be out of water? I find that pretty hard to believe. I see an article online from about a month ago which says sugarbush reports a full reservoir. Unless that wasn't true how could that have changed so drastically in a month where we have seen a decent amount of melting snow? Maybe I just don't want to believe it...


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

Anyone in the area who can take a run by the pond for some intel? We'll know either tonight or tomorrow as temps in teens would certainly warrant snow making. Also, why are they claiming they have 8 runs open, but only 4 really accessible to the public?

Griswold said:

Is it really possible that they could be out of water? I find that pretty hard to believe. I see an article online from about a month ago which says sugarbush reports a full reservoir. Unless that wasn't true how could that have changed so drastically in a month where we have seen a decent amount of melting snow? Maybe I just don't want to believe it...


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

Click to expand...

Smith said Sugarbush fills the 25-million-gallon reservoir it uses to make snow on Lincoln Peak with water from the Mad River, and that the resort can draw as much water as it needs as long as the river is flowing at or above median level.

http://freshiesmag.com/2016/03/01/the-guns-of-salvation/


It's possible they are out, they went through 230 million gallons last year and 25 million gallons for a place that size is not that big. To compare, Ragged's new pond holds 24 million gallons. The two big cutters this week will provide lots of rain, if they are not blowing Friday/next weekend, it is not lack of water.

sugarbushskier said:

Also, why are they claiming they have 8 runs open, but only 4 really accessible to the public?

Click to expand...

The trails at Mt Ellen are for race training.

Here's my take. I just skied their the past couple of days. I think this weekend was a soft opening for them. I find it hard to believe that they are the only mountain in New England that ran out of water. I believe that was a rumor being spread to take the heat off them not opening more terrain IE top to Bottom. With a small crowd today Deathspout(though skied good) was still pretty crowded. If you added a top to bottom runout off of the bottom of Deathspout you would have put more congestion on that trail than it could take.
They were setting up Top to Bottom this afternoon and they were also setting up Ripcord. The bottom of Spillsville up the mountain had a lot of snow. Once they blow on Ripcord, spillsville should open up front the blow off from Ripcord. Those trails do not need much more to open up.

Well the good news is that they are officially mentioning restarting snowmaking as soon as temps allow in their snow report. So if there was a problem (which I believe there had to be as there was no way they would have wasted a 24-48 hour window of excellent snowmaking temps a few days ago) it is now fixed. A mechanical issue that has been fixed would be much more reassuring to hear rather than the draining the pond rumor.

As for whether they could have drained the pond, with a 25 million gallon pond that is easily possible if they couldn't refill from the Mad River. I've seen that 25 million figure referenced in pretty much every article I could find on Sugarbush snow-making regarding the size of the pond by the Mad River. On the history page of their own website though, they mention a 63 million gallon pond during the ASC era (http://www.sugarbush.com/discover/sugarbush-history/). Is that 63 million figure on their website wrong? Or is that combining other ponds (such as the Mt Ellen one...which I always was under the impression was relatively small)?

Plowboy said:

"Is that 63 million figure on their website wrong?"
They only dug the the pond about halfway

Click to expand...

But I thought they had since dredged it to the permitted depth?

cdskier said:

Well the good news is that they are officially mentioning restarting snowmaking as soon as temps allow in their snow report. So if there was a problem (which I believe there had to be as there was no way they would have wasted a 24-48 hour window of excellent snowmaking temps a few days ago) it is now fixed. A mechanical issue that has been fixed would be much more reassuring to hear rather than the draining the pond rumor.

As for whether they could have drained the pond, with a 25 million gallon pond that is easily possible if they couldn't refill from the Mad River. I've seen that 25 million figure referenced in pretty much every article I could find on Sugarbush snow-making regarding the size of the pond by the Mad River. On the history page of their own website though, they mention a 63 million gallon pond during the ASC era (http://www.sugarbush.com/discover/sugarbush-history/). Is that 63 million figure on their website wrong? Or is that combining other ponds (such as the Mt Ellen one...which I always was under the impression was relatively small)?

Click to expand...

It could be the other way around. 5x seems like a huge difrence in capacity.

Tin said:

The trails at Mt Ellen are for race training.

Click to expand...

Well yeah but there's no indication it'll be available to the public anytime soon.

Win must be freaking out that they are the only VT resort open not skiing to the base, so why not throw those trails closed to the public on the report to boost trail count?

Pass prices are too high for them not to be T2B right now. I love the place but every season I don't get why everyone else (at least the resorts that want to play in the big leagues) can ski T2B but we'll be downloading for two weeks.

I agree that there's absolutely no point in having the ME trails listed on the report when they are for race training only. ME doesn't open for several more weeks.

Interesting info that the pond was never dredged to the permitted depth. That sounds like something that would be worthwhile to do at some point unless there's some good reason not to (other than cost).

I do however think the T2B complaints are a bit exaggerated. Last year SB was T2B on 12/1, Killington was T2B 11/25, Okemo 11/28, Stowe 11/25. That's less than a week difference when comparing to resorts that all have substantially more powerful snowmaking systems. Both the two years prior to that SB was T2B on opening day. Let's see what happens at SB over the next couple days.

All that said, I'd still love to hear what was the real reason for them being unable to make snow for a couple days this week at LP. If it was mechanical, so be it. That could be hard to prevent and predict. If it was instead lack of water in the pond, then that sounds like a perfect reason to make dredging the pond to the permitted depth a priority when they talk about capital improvements in the next budget.

cdskier said:

I agree that there's absolutely no point in having the ME trails listed on the report when they are for race training only. ME doesn't open for several more weeks.

Interesting info that the pond was never dredged to the permitted depth. That sounds like something that would be worthwhile to do at some point unless there's some good reason not to (other than cost).

I do however think the T2B complaints are a bit exaggerated. Last year SB was T2B on 12/1, Killington was T2B 11/25, Okemo 11/28, Stowe 11/25. That's less than a week difference when comparing to resorts that all have substantially more powerful snowmaking systems. Both the two years prior to that SB was T2B on opening day. Let's see what happens at SB over the next couple days.

All that said, I'd still love to hear what was the real reason for them being unable to make snow for a couple days this week at LP. If it was mechanical, so be it. That could be hard to prevent and predict. If it was instead lack of water in the pond, then that sounds like a perfect reason to make dredging the pond to the permitted depth a priority when they talk about capital improvements in the next budget.

Click to expand...

Win, hasn't come out and said it was a water issue. I think that is a loose rumor that they want to say it was. Basically the first week that they are open, they are only open top half of the mountian unless they have enough natural snow to open TTB. They probably have a schedule at the beginning of the season where/when they make snow. As a said in an earlier post it looks like Ripcord, and TTB is what they are working on next. They bet that there goal to open is the four trails that they opened, they hit that goal and stopped making snow.

cdskier said:

I do however think the T2B complaints are a bit exaggerated. Last year SB was T2B on 12/1, Killington was T2B 11/25, Okemo 11/28, Stowe 11/25. That's less than a week difference when comparing to resorts that all have substantially more powerful snowmaking systems. Both the two years prior to that SB was T2B on opening day. Let's see what happens at SB over the next couple days.

Click to expand...

Yes maybe they are exaggerated but let's look at it another way. Early season pass rates at Killington and Okemo are $1,269 and $1,339 respectively. Sugarbush's is $1,399 and Stowe's is $1,609 per a Ski Vermont article (these are adult passes prior to the first deadline).

Sugarbush wants to charge what the big boys charge (they are actually second to Stowe I believe in adult season pass prices in VT) but the other three have significantly better snowmaking infrastructure. Stowe's prices are ridiculous but then you see they have 2.5 ways down 2,000 vertical feet and apparently a bunch of beginner terrain.

I guess it's not as much the T2B but just how far behind they always seem to be with snowmaking but its not as cheap as it used to be to get a pass there.

*Full disclosure I lucked out from the pass war (posted this in the MRV forum that crashed) and got a Stowe pass for $599 and a Sugarbush pass for $499 because I'm 33 years old and was planning on getting a Bush adult pass until Stowe's pricing came out and caused the Bush to drop their rates. I got both for less than the price of one adult pass.. I haven't used either yet but will be next week. Not going to lie, if the Bush isn't T2B by Wednesday I'll be using my Stowe pass first.

nhskier1969 said:

Win, hasn't come out and said it was a water issue. I think that is a loose rumor that they want to say it was. Basically the first week that they are open, they are only open top half of the mountian unless they have enough natural snow to open TTB. They probably have a schedule at the beginning of the season where/when they make snow. As a said in an earlier post it looks like Ripcord, and TTB is what they are working on next. They bet that there goal to open is the four trails that they opened, they hit that goal and stopped making snow.

Click to expand...

Number 1 rule in late November in the East when you have temperatures is to keep making snow. There's no way they they just said "we hit our goal, let's stop while we have good temperatures."

If they could get T2B they would do anything to get there...there must've been a problem. No way they voluntarily stopped making snow because they only wanted to have the upper 4 trails open.

sugarbushskier9 said:

Yes maybe they are exaggerated but let's look at it another way. Early season pass rates at Killington and Okemo are $1,269 and $1,339 respectively. Sugarbush's is $1,399 and Stowe's is $1,609 per a Ski Vermont article (these are adult passes prior to the first deadline).

Click to expand...

I don't know where that article got that $1399 number for SB from, but I can flat out say it is wrong. The early pass price was $1149 for a full All Mountain 7 Adult pass. That's the price I paid (plus taxes) before SB refunded me money after announcing the early 30s pass.

Sugarbush wants to charge what the big boys charge (they are actually second to Stowe I believe in adult season pass prices in VT) but the other three have significantly better snowmaking infrastructure. Stowe's prices are ridiculous but then you see they have 2.5 ways down 2,000 vertical feet and apparently a bunch of beginner terrain.

I guess it's not as much the T2B but just how far behind they always seem to be with snowmaking but its not as cheap as it used to be to get a pass there.

Click to expand...

There's no doubt others have better snowmaking infrastructure, but that's not something that you can simply change easily. SB has continued to make incremental improvements every year and barring any unforeseen issues (like whatever happened this year) usually does a pretty good job keeping up considering they are competing against others with far better systems.

sugarbushskier9 said:

Number 1 rule in late November in the East when you have temperatures is to keep making snow. There's no way they they just said "we hit our goal, let's stop while we have good temperatures."

If they could get T2B they would do anything to get there...there must've been a problem. No way they voluntarily stopped making snow because they only wanted to have the upper 4 trails open.

Click to expand...

I completely agree with this. Something happened that forced them to shut down. There's no other way around it. You don't have overnight temps in the teens and not blow snow in the early season somewhere on the mountain. It is a shame the MRV forum is down/ These discussions might be a lot less speculation and rumor spreading if it was up as we might know exactly what happened.

I skied there Thursday thru Saturday. The guns were on the runs from HG to Coffee but weren't hooked up. Today they were hooked up. If they had intentions of Blowing down to the base why didn't they when they were resurfacing the four trails and why weren't the guns hooked up.

cdskier said:

There's no doubt others have better snowmaking infrastructure, but that's not something that you can simply change easily. SB has continued to make incremental improvements every year and barring any unforeseen issues (like whatever happened this year) usually does a pretty good job keeping up considering they are competing against others with far better systems.



I completely agree with this. Something happened that forced them to shut down. There's no other way around it. You don't have overnight temps in the teens and not blow snow in the early season somewhere on the mountain. It is a shame the MRV forum is down/ These discussions might be a lot less speculation and rumor spreading if it was up as we might know exactly what happened.

Click to expand...

So Sugarbush's snowmaking has been a perennial issue for a long time now. Obviously now five years out from being a passholder there my POV is from the 30,000 foot level, but back in 2009 and 2010 or so we had the same conversations--why aren't they moving faster? Why aren't they blowing when others are? Why do they have so many issues? And yeah, sure a few new HKDs here and there are nice, but what happened to being bullish and opening ASAP? Granted weather is an issue, but they would always find a way.

It's clear that since shifting back to Lincoln Peak that weather impacts them more because it is lower elevation. It's also clear that since 2008 or so the focus has shifted to the four-season resort and making the whole thing better instead of focusing on skiing so much. I also know for a fact that they don't have the same caliber of mountain ops that they used to in the past.

And let's be real here: their competition and "perceived competition" (Stowe) is now WAY ahead of them in terms of snowmaking. At one time they would compete with Killington on early and late season. Now they want to compete with Stowe in price and "quality", but you can't compare their limping snowmaking system with Stowe's and it pains me to say that because I love Sugarbush. It seems that they are content with relying on natural snow, not having the biggest snowmaking system in the east, and hoping that they nail Christmas, MLK, and President's Week instead of extending the season.

I think that they just don't have the cash to replace their lifts and their snowmaking. They also are more risk averse when it comes to snowmaking--they don't want to lose the money when it all melts. That's fine and I think that a lot of passholders appreciate that steady hand at the wheel instead of the risk of bankruptcies and ownership turnovers. But when they want to talk about competing with Stowe and increasing their prices to more than everyone but Stowe it seems that the value is not wheat it used to be in terms of skiing.

And I love Sugarbush a lot. Look who started this thread. It was my home for many years. But I will confess that had we stayed in Vermont we might have considered other options because it just had changed.