What Expansions are left

[Orca]

The universe, or maybe it's contracting

 

[raisingarizona]

I swear you just make up 50% of your posts. The ski industry creating ancillary revenue sources throughout the year has nothing to do with impending Global Warming doom, and everything to do with sound & responsible business practices to maximize revenue. This isnt hard.

And Tesla isnt even close to being the #1 selling luxury vehicle brand. Tesla literally almost went bankrupt less than 6 months ago.

EDIT: Maybe you meant to say 1 particular Tesla vehicle model rather than the Tesla brand?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesl...s9Kp3X5sLEVJI8aJrmlDUqjCdxXxdsnIKKDqshqUkAOpR

I can 100% guarantee you that ski industry experts are planning for a changing climate and the recent trend in expanding summer and shoulder season offerings is related. You’d be an idiot to not be.

 

[raisingarizona]

This is pretty much the definition of not believing in climate science.

Haha! Yup. BG really doesn’t like to hear that eastern skiing is going to be mostly gone in the near future. I get that but if the science is right then trying to run a ski area in the north east isnt going to be sustainable and why I question any eastern ski area expansions.

 

[Orca]

Ha! There isn't a single person on this forum qualified to estimate the effect of climate change on eastern skiing. Even if there was, the error limits on their prediction would be huge. I'm not saying all the added CO2 in the atmosphere isn't harmful, it just that we don't know how much or little.

 

[EPB]

I can 100% guarantee you that ski industry experts are planning for a changing climate and the recent trend in expanding summer and shoulder season offerings is related. You’d be an idiot to not be.

You stopped one step short of the logical conclusion. You'd be an idiot to be invested in the Eastern ski industry at all if you think it's going way soon.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[raisingarizona]

You stopped one step short of the logical conclusion. You'd be an idiot to be invested in the Eastern ski industry at all if you think it's going way soon.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

Well we are only human. I think it makes sense for Vail or Ikon to invest in it. Even if there were only 30 years left of eastern skiing those investments are minuscule compared to the profits in that time.

 

[boston_e]

Didn’t Pat’s Peak add a few new trails in somewhat recent history? (Probably within the past 10 years)?

 

[thetrailboss]

A few I recall off the top of my head

-Sunapee
-Jay (west bowl? I forget the name)
-Whiteface and gore have a couple more in master plan



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Highly doubt that Jay is going to be expanding anytime soon. They have a few issues to resolve first before updating their aging lift infrastructure.

 

[thetrailboss]

Didn’t Pat’s Peak add a few new trails in somewhat recent history? (Probably within the past 10 years)?

Yes. New lift and completely new area (Cascade Basin).

 

[EPB]

Well we are only human. I think it makes sense for Vail or Ikon to invest in it. Even if there were only 30 years left of eastern skiing those investments are minuscule compared to the profits in that time.

If you think there's 30 or so years of runway, that's a far cry from the eastern ski industry being "mostly gone in the near future". If that's your base case, then buying and expansion, if necessary, at very crowded resorts makes some sense.

Summer activities are not evidence in themselves that Vail et al. is woried about losing winter operations. Here's why: if 97% of climatologists agreed that there is no global warming, it would still make sense to make those investments for the reasons I outlined.

Also - I checked and you weren't the guy who accused me off being anti vaccine because I don't toe the line on climate change. That was skitheeast45, I believe. My mistake.

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[deadheadskier]

I can 100% guarantee you that ski industry experts are planning for a changing climate and the recent trend in expanding summer and shoulder season offerings is related. You’d be an idiot to not be.

That all started 40 years ago at any ski resort with business sense, way prior to Al Gore going Alpha on global warming

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[BenedictGomez]

This is pretty much the definition of not believing in climate science.

No, actually it isnt.

It's the definition of being scientifically open-minded to data, pragmatic, cautious, and rational, as opposed to emotional, replacing science with religion, and falling prey to the fallacy of "expert" herd mentality, which routinely fails. I used to make the bank I worked for a killing by betting against events that "everyone" knew would happen.

Ha! There isn't a single person on this forum qualified to estimate the effect of climate change on eastern skiing. Even if there was, the error limits on their prediction would be huge. I'm not saying all the added CO2 in the atmosphere isn't harmful, it just that we don't know how much or little.

This. As I mentioned in a prior post, just look at the 2020 draconian predictions made in 1990, 2000, etc...., and the world is still here. It will still be here 11.5 years from now, despite "intellectual" AOC's dire warnings.

 

[BenedictGomez]

You'd be an idiot to be invested in the Eastern ski industry at all if you think it's going way soon.

Or to buy a $12 MILLION dollar home on the water's edge in Martha's Vineyard, which is the epicenter of the Atlantic Coast flooding plain as predicted by Climate Scientists if you truly believed this was a "near-term existential threat".

Not that I can think of anyone who's recently said that or done that of course!

I think it makes sense for Vail or Ikon to invest in it. Even if there were only 30 years left of eastern skiing those investments are minuscule compared to the profits in that time.

Just to peg you down on this, according to the above sentence, you believe Vail's total eastern investments will be "minuscule" versus their "profits", even if their assets turns to near $0.00 in just 30 years?

 

[mister moose]

NOTE: These are rough estimates, backed by science. I am a scientist who has worked in the field of water resources and climate change for the past 20 years. I will NOT discuss politics here (I have before and it is a waste of time). If like BG you don't believe in climate science, disregard this post and move on.

rough (wide range, coarse, subject to large variation) + estimates (derived from imprecise data). I think that's a fairly accurate descriptor of the current level of understanding of climate change. And science is not a belief. Belief is a personal opinion, a statement of allegiance of thought. That is very different than a scientific principle, which accurately, repeatedly predicts the outcome of a given event. Newtonian gravity is not a rough estimate. Maxwell's equations are not a rough estimate.

If you are of the opinion that you 'believe in' climate science, and that such a belief is what contributes to the theory's legitimacy, then I am of the opinion that you are an imprecise scientist.

 

[bdfreetuna]

Last year the Mount Mansfield Snow Stake was at or near the 70-year record since measurements began.

A few years before that in 2015 it was one of the lowest snowpacks on record.

So what? The only thing we can say definitively about climate scientists is, if they make a prediction, you can bet money it's not going to happen.


Also removing CO2 from the atmosphere won't do anything to temperatures except it would perhaps turn back the recent trend of "Earth greening", as in more trees and grass lands and less deserts, which I think is an objectively position environmental development. CO2 is such a weak greenhouse gas, it's a total wash when synergistic systems are taken into account.

If you read the news you'd know Solar Radiation Management aka spraying the sky full of aluminum and reflective nano particles is in fact the #1 proposal to tackle global warming.

I much rather live with 0.4 degree warmer temperatures and keep our blue skies instead. If the oceans rise another inch in another 100 years I think we can make do with that as well.

Unfortunately the field seems to have bred more than it's share of mad scientists. Probably mad for being wrong all the time.

 

[raisingarizona]

Or to buy a $12 MILLION dollar home on the water's edge in Martha's Vineyard, which is the epicenter of the Atlantic Coast flooding plain as predicted by Climate Scientists if you truly believed this was a "near-term existential threat".

Not that I can think of anyone who's recently said that or done that of course!



Just to peg you down on this, according to the above sentence, you believe Vail's total eastern investments will be "minuscule" versus their "profits", even if their assets turns to near $0.00 in just 30 years?

I’m really not a businessman at all. Not my thing. You seem to want a concrete answer on a time line from me and other but I’m not a scientist either. I have no idea.

My point about Vail is that buying eastern areas now will result in enough profit and probably create brand loyalty that even if eastern ski area business completely dries up in 20, 30......50 years from now that it won’t be a loss to them. The eastern and Midwest ski area purchases are more about getting people to lock in to vacationing at their premium western resort properties.

 

[ericfromMA/NH/VT]

I spend my weekends at my nice fairly non crowded mid-sized home, mountain, ragged. I go to the bigger places mid week only. I never wait more than a couple minutes to get back on the lift.

this is the way to go it you can. If I'm going to drop cash to go to sugarbush, stowe, BW or another random bigger place, I have zero interest in dealing with weekend crowds at those places.

Im lucky thought, my wife and I have awesome employers, we can actually use days off and bail on work mid week and bring the kids on a ski fever sick day off from school.

 

[EPB]

I spend my weekends at my nice fairly non crowded mid-sized home, mountain, ragged. I go to the bigger places mid week only. I never wait more than a couple minutes to get back on the lift.

this is the way to go it you can. If I'm going to drop cash to go to sugarbush, stowe, BW or another random bigger place, I have zero interest in dealing with weekend crowds at those places.

Im lucky thought, my wife and I have awesome employers, we can actually use days off and bail on work mid week and bring the kids on a ski fever sick day off from school.

Not to burst your bubble, but I've often thought Ragged would be a perfect addition to Epic or Ikon to help alleviate crowding.

 

[kbroderick]

They own up and over the backside down to Monkeybrook Road for development.

I don't know what plans lay in store, but the land holdings are massive. Last I checked, CNL was still owner of record for several parcels on the east side of the Sunday River, including the one above Nordic Knoll up towards Sunday River Whitecap and some into Riley Township. The geography makes me doubt that stuff will ever be linked in as ski terrain (I don't think you could get enough visitors up Sunday River Road to warrant that much terrain and operating cost), but the amount of linked land is significant.

 

[ss20]

Rumor has it the new 2,500' vertical tram up the backside of Thunder Ridge is headed into permitting soon