Big Burke announcement

VTKilarney · Mar 13, 2015

The college pass price game gets even weirder. After 55 passes are sold, the price for a Q-Burke only pass goes up to $299. For the same $299, a college student can buy a pass that is good at Cannon, Waterville Valley, Cranmore, and Bretton Woods. Hmm... which is the better deal? It's not as if Cannon is that far from LSC.

deadheadskier · Mar 13, 2015

thetrailboss said:
Just shows that, yet again, Q does not understand who his customer really is.

That would be Stenger to though no? As the College Judge Pass has tiers as well.

The reality is that really only Lyndon State students are their market. There and local kids who go to college out of the area, but might travel home to ski. During my time at UVM, I recall only one person I knew ever getting a Jay pass. Most went with Stowe or Sugarbush.

VTKilarney · Mar 13, 2015

Agreed that UVM students don't get Jay passes. It could be that the price never really gets to Tier 4 when you factor in the single mountain passes and Judge passes.

They price summer passes to the Pump House waterpark the same way, and I don't believe that I have ever seen it hit the top tier.

I assumed that they had tiered pricing for the Pump House to try to generate incentive to purchase for a product that is in low demand. College passes are probably in low demand for Jay and Burke as well just because LSC is the only truly local college of any size.

Having said that... there are two universities in Sherbrooke, but I bet that they don't tend to drive to Burke - but they might drive to Jay.

thetrailboss · Mar 13, 2015

deadheadskier said:
That would be Stenger to though no? As the College Judge Pass has tiers as well.

The reality is that really only Lyndon State students are their market. There and local kids who go to college out of the area, but might travel home to ski. During my time at UVM, I recall only one person I knew ever getting a Jay pass. Most went with Stowe or Sugarbush.

I didn't see that. Jay is doing the "tier" thing as well?

Steve@jpr · Mar 14, 2015

This is the second year both QB and Jay have done the 'tier thing.' and it's worked well. The theory here being that when the incentive is metric based (there's only so many) versus deadline based, cashflow improves as a result of urgency. The impact, this past season, was meaningful. And whether or not any other mountain sells in this capacity has never really been a benchmark against the decisions we make tbh. Sometimes the net bears out we were right and sometimes it doesn't. This pricing model worked well last year and works very well as it relates to summer pass pricing.

thetrailboss said:
I didn't see that. Jay is doing the "tier" thing as well?

thetrailboss · Mar 14, 2015

Steve@jpr said:
This is the second year both QB and Jay have done the 'tier thing.' and it's worked well. The theory here being that when the incentive is metric based (there's only so many) versus deadline based, cashflow improves as a result of urgency. The impact, this past season, was meaningful. And whether or not any other mountain sells in this capacity has never really been a benchmark against the decisions we make tbh. Sometimes the net bears out we were right and sometimes it doesn't. This pricing model worked well last year and works very well as it relates to summer pass pricing.

If it's working for you that's cool. I just know that my first reaction was confusion. It made my head spin. I just think that simpler is better...especially in sales.

Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

VTKilarney · Mar 14, 2015

At the pass holder meeting this evening, Q Burke disclosed that they have put the Willoughby quad up for sale. At the February pass holder meeting they had said that it was going to be used for an East Bowl expansion.

Also at the February pass holder meeting, they promised to have a specific snowmaking upgrade plan released prior to the deadline for the early bird passes. While that deadline has not yet approached, they have yet to release a specific plan.

Ary was not in attendance at the meeting. A letter from Ary was handed out.

deadheadskier · Mar 14, 2015

Hopefully they use the proceeds from the sale to improve snowmaking.

Though I think they are making a mistake in not going with fromtheNEK's plan for shortening it and making and intermediate terrain area.

Wonder what that means regarding a lift in the East Bowl. Hopefully they're shelving that idea.

thetrailboss · Mar 14, 2015

deadheadskier said:
Hopefully they use the proceeds from the sale to improve snowmaking.

Though I think they are making a mistake in not going with fromtheNEK's plan for shortening it and making and intermediate terrain area.

Wonder what that means regarding a lift in the East Bowl. Hopefully they're shelving that idea.

+1 as to leaving it.

I don't know who would buy it. It's pretty old.

Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

VTKilarney · Mar 14, 2015

It makes no sense to have it parallel the MBX if they have no intention of using it as a backup. I think that NEK's lower-intermediate pod was a great idea - and something that the mountain sorely needs.

Could they be trying to get rid of it in order to make the ski area as a whole more marketable?

.

rueler · Mar 14, 2015

VTKilarney said:
At the pass holder meeting this evening, Q Burke disclosed that they have put the Willoughby quad up for sale. At the February pass holder meeting they had said that it was going to be used for an East Bowl expansion.

Also at the February pass holder meeting, they promised to have a specific snowmaking upgrade plan released prior to the deadline for the early bird passes. While that deadline has not yet approached, they have yet to release a specific plan.
Ary was not in attendance at the meeting. A letter from Ary was handed out.

Was this in the letter that was handed out at the meeting?? I found a link to this on the Burke web site where it is announcing the season pass sale.

Snowmaking. This topic was at the top of the list during our Town Hall meeting and rightfully so. It’sno secret you purchase your pass to ski, as much as possible, from opening day till close. We haveconducted extensive research in what will be the most efficient and effective system to build here at QBurke and have decided to move forward with Snowmakers, Inc. (SMI), the supplier of choice for theVancouver, Sochi, and Korean winter Olympics. We have partnered with their team to developengineering plans which will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of our snow making system andproduct. Their objective is to help us open more terrain faster with a higher quality of snow. We are inthe process of acquiring the appropriate permits to allow us to begin construction in June. This effort, ifall goes as planned, will result in the ability for us to fire up 60 plus guns at one time beginningNovember 1st to open (at minimum) two routes from the summit to base area for our guests. In orderfor us to open Thanksgiving weekend, we will need at least 100 hours of good temps. If conditionsallow, and with these upgrades, we feel confident we can make this happen.
We expect these upgrades to significantly contribute to the early opening and late closing of the resortand will do our best to begin the 2015 Winter Ski Season Thanksgiving Weekend and extend throughEaster Weekend 2016, conditions and weather permitting of course.

Although this is not yet a detailed plan, it is better than what they communicated going into this season after a very poor early season effort in 2013-2014.

I am glad that they are selling the Willoughby quad. At the end of its run as the main lift, I wasn't too sure it had much left in it then. It's a retro-fitted lift already. To invest a bunch of time and money to move it into the East Bowl area sounded like a risky idea from the get go. If they're going to do something over there, do it with a newer lift with less baggage. Personally, I like the East Bowl area and all of the glade options just the way they are.

If it were me, I would scrap the East Bowl idea in favor of doing something on the west side with a newer lift that services the lower mountain intermediate stuff like lower Willoughby, Gap, Fox's, Bear Den and potentially a run or two on the skier's left of Willoughby.

rueler · Mar 14, 2015

VTKilarney said:
It makes no sense to have it parallel the MBX if they have no intention of using it as a backup. I think that NEK's lower-intermediate pod was a great idea - and something that the mountain sorely needs.

Could they be trying to get rid of it in order to make the ski area as a whole more marketable?

.

Totally agree with the lower intermediate pod of trails…there's no smooth transition for developing skiers to move from the lower mountain to the upper mountain. Deer Run is decent in spots, but has become dangerous for lower level skiers having to constantly be on the lookout for unguided missiles coming down the new lift line trails into some "iffy" intersections…let's not forget the times where it crosses over Dipper in some spots where slow skiers are "sitting ducks".

VTKilarney · Mar 14, 2015

Deer Run is an incredibly dangerous trail and should be closed.

.

rueler · Mar 14, 2015

More accidents will happen on that trail if/when the hotel gets filled and skier traffic increases at the mountain.

The other spot that is a huge concern of mine is the entry point onto the Shoot from Fox's Folly. It's far enough down where advanced skiers are moving pretty good. As many of you know, there's not much room on the Shoot. If someone slides in from Fox's as you're getting to that cut-in, there's no room to avoid crushing them. That should be roped off permanently in my opinion too!!

thetrailboss · Mar 14, 2015

VTKilarney said:
Deer Run is an incredibly dangerous trail and should be closed.

.

Believe it or not it was for a couple seasons around 1999 and 2000. It came back due to popular demand.

There are several intersections that are of concern--Carriage Road to Toll Road, Powderhorn to Toll Road, perhaps the aforementioned Shoot onto Fox's Folly. For the most part I never really saw any accidents in those areas. That said, the last two fatalities have, apparently, been at the same spot on Carriage Road (my friends pointed out the spot that now has a memorial sign).

Most locals know the areas and keep an eye out. Other visitors generally ski unfamiliar trails slowly at first to get oriented. But yes, they are all indeed narrow and have many more intersections than one might expect.

thetrailboss · Mar 14, 2015

VTKilarney said:
It makes no sense to have it parallel the MBX if they have no intention of using it as a backup. I think that NEK's lower-intermediate pod was a great idea - and something that the mountain sorely needs.

Could they be trying to get rid of it in order to make the ski area as a whole more marketable?

.

How would removing it make the area "more marketable?"

As said, shorten it and leave it. Nobody is going to pay much for a lift that consists of 50 year old components with a mix of almost 30-year old technology that, for some regimes, was no well cared for. I think it is a mistake to not keep it maintained and at least at the ready should wind or some other issue strike. That just seems shortsighted to me. But perhaps it needs major work like a new haul rope or other upgrades.

rueler · Mar 14, 2015

I don't have any issue with where Shoot dumps you into Fox's Folly. When I am skiing Fox's Folly, I know that people could come shooting out from the Shoot and I plan accordingly.

My issue is when I am on the Shoot and skiers can come into the Shoot from Fox's Folly at about the midway point on the pitch of the Shoot when you start moving at a good clip. I've had two skiers shoot out in front of me from Fox's Folly in the past couple of seasons and I have started to avoid skiing the Shoot for that reason. The biggest issue is that when those skiers from Fox's merged into Shoot, they did not look uphill before entering. There weren't any collisions, but both were close enough calls to raise some concern.

deadheadskier · Mar 14, 2015

I thought I recalled shoot being fenced off at one point? Or maybe it was another trail. I remember FNEK pointing it out the one time I made turns with him.

I've never seen a memorial on a trail side except for Aspen Highlands for the ski patrolers that died in an avalanche. I'm assuming that it is like what you see on the side of a road where a traffic accident happened? I'm not sure how I feel about that. I feel awful for the young lady that passed, but I don't know if I'd want to see it skiing with a young child and having to explain what happened.

rueler · Mar 14, 2015

The memorial on Carriage Road is for the pastor that died a few years back. I believe it says John's Run and has a nice message on it. I am not sure if the young lady that passed died in that spot or not.

There is another spot on Powderhorn where there is a memorial. There's a sign that says Tony's Run just before you can cut off Powderhorn onto Deer Run. It also has a memorial bench there and drumsticks screwed into the tree. Not sure of the story on that one, but it's there.

VTKilarney · Mar 14, 2015

thetrailboss said:
How would removing it make the area "more marketable?"

The lift is pretty ancient and isn't needed in its current form. Therefore, a potential purchaser may see it as more of a white elephant than an actual asset. Having said that, I'm REALLY disappointed that they aren't pursuing transitional terrain from the lower hill accessed by the Willoughby lift.

As for Deer Run, there are a couple of spots that are the most likely for accidents:
1) The intersection with Carriage Road. (Carriage Road itself is a dangerous trail in its current form).
2) The intersections with the Dippers.

The Dippers are made for fast cruising. Yet you have Deer Run crossing right in front of its path in multiple spots. That's a recipe for trouble.

I'd actually be in favor of keeping some parts of Deer Run open, such as the parts to the east of Dippers that allow lower intermediates to avoid the steepest pitches on the Dippers. But Deer Run as a whole is responsible for the vast majority of unsafe intersections on the hill - and really chops up Lift Line and the Dippers, making those two trails much worse off because of it.

As for Fox's Folly emptying onto The Shoot, I'd have no problem roping that intersection off since there isn't any need for it. I always take the lower exit from Fox's to get to Willoughby.

Big Burke announcement

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Moderator

Industry Rep

Moderator

Well-known member

Moderator

Moderator

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Moderator

Moderator

New member

Moderator

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads