UVSHTSTRM
New member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2009
- Messages
- 879
- Points
- 0
Reading comprehension is fundamental. The bolded items were the improvements at Sunapee that grew their business. Of course it has nothing to do with Cannon/Mittersill.
My argument is very simple. Sunapee did this and increased their visits by 100K. Cannon did that and should be able to increase their visits by 18K.
You seriously don't think that a 50% increase in lift serviced skiable terrain is 18% as significant as the improvements Sunapee has done?
18K skier visits. That's roughly a thousand skiers per week for the season. It's really not that much.
Of course I'm sure if a Private Company leased and did the same expansion you'd say, "What heroes. This is fantastic. 100K more skiers a year will head to Cannon. And my gosh, the side benefit is the glorious fact that the lease saves each NH resident fifty cents"![]()
My only beef is that it will more often than not be closed because of zero snowmaking combined with an initial surge of skier traffic (the newness factor), which inturn will drive people away when they realize they are skiing on grass and ice. I have a feeling that outside the people who initially were treking over there, that most will try it once and not really enjoy it. This is good for the "locals" "regulars", but bad to sustain an 18000 person increase year after year. Also in regards to Sunapee and Cannon their is one huge difference, Sunapees Boston population and local population has housing, 4 season housing within minutes. Many of Sunapees clientel live there during the summer and can now return during the winter with a quality product.