• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Mittersill Photos (September 2010)

threecy

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Messages
1,930
Points
0
Website
www.franklinsites.com
Whoa, hold on just a second there. You are arguing from the perspective that used lifts are typically installed more frequently than new lifts. You have the stats on the new lifts. But you don't have the stats on the used lifts? How can you make the argument without the data to back it up? I know you worked in the biz for a while but your new lift stats don't prove anything unless they are compared to used lift stats...

Take a look back at this and related threads...compare how much research and data collection I've conducted and presented to what the most vocal in this thread have contributed. Does it really make sense for me to take the time to do a survey of used lift installs to present to the crowd posting in this thread?
 

Puck it

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
9,714
Points
48
Location
Franconia, NH
Take a look back at this and related threads...compare how much research and data collection I've conducted and presented to what the most vocal in this thread have contributed. Does it really make sense for me to take the time to do a survey of used lift installs to present to the crowd posting in this thread?


Yes, becasue your data set is not full without. Specualtion is not valid.
 

thetrailboss

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
33,729
Points
113
Location
NEK by Birth
Can we just talk about Cannon and Mittersill rather than fighting over data?

cannon-mittersill_brochure.jpg


cannon_mittersill_800.jpg


http://cannonmt.com/mittersill.html
 

threecy

New member
Joined
Nov 17, 2003
Messages
1,930
Points
0
Website
www.franklinsites.com
Yes, becasue your data set is not full without. Specualtion is not valid.

Correct.

There are more new lift installs now than ever - it's a booming business. No one's installing refurbished lifts.

Reclearing and reopening the Mittersill area is a tremendous idea, will make Cannon lots of money after easily paying for itself in only a few years. There has been no regrading or minor blasting - the rocks broke apart and moved in a natural process in a few months time. Also, there is no way anyone could install a 1,200 vertical foot chairlift without using a helicopter for tower removal, concrete work, and tower installation.

A brand new double chairlift in 2010 is an excellent decision. Putting the Mittersill double chairlift out to bid in mid-May 2010 was a brilliant idea, and paying a premium for a last minute decision is well worth the money. The $2.6M of recreational spending is an excellent use of tax dollars in a year in which the state is in excellent financial shape. Cannon can easily support another new base area, since they are able to fund and operate all of their facilities 7 days a week as is.

Cannon should only be compared to other ski areas on a basis of advertised vertical drop. Skier visits, acreage, trail, and lift counts are irrelevant.

Sunapee has become a disaster since being leased by the state. Skier visits are down, the facilities are terrible, and the overall skier experience is terrible. Sunapee better served the state of New Hampshire financially and its users recreationally when it was completely under state control. If Cannon were to be leased, the results would be even worse.

That should be a pretty good summary of how wrong I am, right?
 

Smellytele

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
10,367
Points
113
Location
Right where I want to be
Here is a few, sorry about the large size...

015.jpg


020.jpg


039.jpg


Not ski related, but had to "Brake for Moose" while commuting thru the notch, pic is a little blurry, but he was pretty big!! He was on my side of the highway and almost slipped and fell as he jumped over the gaurd rail.

033.jpg

That's what I am talking about
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,710
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
Sunapee has become a disaster since being leased by the state. Skier visits are down, the facilities are terrible, and the overall skier experience is terrible. Sunapee better served the state of New Hampshire financially and its users recreationally when it was completely under state control. If Cannon were to be leased, the results would be even worse.

That should be a pretty good summary of how wrong I am, right?

Who argued that about Sunapee? No one I've seen. The argument was that Sunapee is undeniable far more expensive now than it was when it was State run.

You've spoken hypothetically that Cannon could still offer the same perks to NH residents as it does now under private ownership. I'm siding with history of what happened at another ski area over your hypothetical theory of how it could be leased.

I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of Cannon skiers would not be happy to see the bargain mid-week deals and bargain NH resident season pass go away.

We get that Cannon could've done the Mittersill project for less money. No one, but you cares.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
28,710
Points
113
Location
Southeast NH
When the Tram eventually needs to be replaced, I hope they put in a Funitel that costs the tax payers 25mil.

Just to see the epic threecy meltdown.
 

Tin Woodsman

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2004
Messages
1,154
Points
63
I thought the reason Cannon needed to install a brand new double chair was that it was amongst destination resorts, not those tiny little molehill ski areas like Sunapee, Shawnee, etc.

But wait - I thought only skier visits mattered. Otherwise, why would you be comparing Wachusett and other Southern NE molehills to Cannon? Cannon is a day trip destination? Do tell.

The funny thing is that the obvious correct answer is that you need to look at all facets, including skier visits, size (vertical, trails, acreage, etc..), and location. This is what I, and others, have been arguing the entire time. As with most complex issues, there are various shades of gray here and the pushback from me is that you are seeing it only in black and white. Alas, you initially came into this discussion proclaiming with the 100% certainty of an "industry insider" that it had to be skier visits only - otherwise why compare only to metro area molehills that do big skier visit numbers? The obvious fallacy with that argument is that if we are going to group/rank ski areas on that basis, Mountain High in SoCal is a "bigger" resort than Jackson Hole, "bigger" than Alta or Snowbird and, closer to home, "bigger" than Sugarbush.

Feel free to keep patronizing us great unwashed industry outsiders, but you haven't exactly showered yourself in glory with your half-truths, cherry-picked statistics, and clear lack of objectivity over an issue that takes about $1 out of your pocket this year.
 

EPB

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,001
Points
48
The 3,200+ views in this thread must all be Google spiderbots?

What about the 8800+ views for the Burnt Expansion thread? Context is important when introducing data and constructing arguments. It's probably a substantial reason for why people have a hard time believing the more specific details of what your points.
 

bigbob

Active member
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
815
Points
43
Location
SE NH
Any more pics from Mittersill? Let's keep it on topic and not let this hijack continue.

I will be back in Franconia for a few days starting tomorrow. If the weather gods cooperate I may even take a short hike and get a picture of a tower foundation!
 
Top