Good news. Fingers and toes crossed for Saddleback folks. They've had to endure a lot of pain.
-
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!
Saddleback Meeting
- Thread starter skicub
- Start date
Good news. Fingers and toes crossed for Saddleback folks. They've had to endure a lot of pain.
MEtoVTSkier
Active member
Now, if someone could just win the Powerball, and hand them the Barnstormer 6. :grin:
Last edited:
MEtoVTSkier
Active member
Good luck to them. I'll try to support them by getting up the first season they open (and hopefully many more).
Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
Yeah, I just don't see a need for that lift there. Maybe you know something I don't.
Looks like Boyne is positioning itself to get it. Where it goes is anyone's guess. Assuming Boyne gets it, I'd guess Sunday River.
MEtoVTSkier
Active member
If they replace the Rangely with a fixed quad, nobody is gonna want to go there in the numbers they'll need to succeed. The manufacturers already saying they want to get away from building quads and smaller chairs. Might as well do something to create the desire to visit, that will put bodies on the chairs and slopes.
This is THE infrastructure question from a skiing perspective in my book. Is a fixed quad enough, will a detachable lift be too expensive, or will either/neither work?
Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
You do realize that a HS lift not only costs more to install, but requires much more $$$ in electricity, maintenance, and operating costs, right? If they have the demand and enough revenue, sure I can see it working. But if they are not sure about revenue and want to be conservative, then a reliable fixed grip can be a good option.
And the demand for HS lifts by bigger resorts has created a business opportunity for fixed-grip lifts. You are right that the two big manufacturers would LOVE to sell HS lifts because of more maintenance contract opportunities, but they still very much sell fixed grip lifts, often at a competitive price in order to get more business. And there is one or two other companies trying to get that fixed-grip market. So, there are a lot of good opportunities to get a fixed-grip replacement for less cost.
I know that portions of the market will always want HS lifts at EVERY resort, but there are portions of the market that assess an area not only on lifts but on the terrain and experience. Look at Magic. They are slowly building it back into a sustainable business by using fixed-grip lifts instead of going into debt to get new HS lifts. Obviously that example has some major differences, but there is something to be said about not blowing the bank on a single lift when you have a lot of other things that need to be addressed. Also, for all the hype about HS lifts, the impact to the quality of the snow and terrain is indeed noticeable. In my many years skiing at Burke, I can say that the snow quality in the era pre-MidBurke Express and after is very noticeable, even with that place being sub-100k skiers a year. The reason is that folks get MANY more runs in on a single day and the terrain sees more traffic as a result. I was pretty surprised to see that firsthand.
If I am understanding "what" Saddleback "was", and "what" they want it to "be", then they may not need a HS lift in that position. Would it be nice? Sure. Is it necessary? I personally don't know, but I believe that their skier days were not "that" high to justify one.
Last edited:
I think the Rangeley is way too long of a chair to stick with a Fixed Grip.
Magic is a good point, but their location I think allows them to go the FG route a little easier. They're located in day trip range of millions of people. They have four of the busiest resorts in the East all within 45 minutes to try and syphon some folks off to ski try it.
SB is a much greater commitment to get to due to their remote location. You kind of have to have the shiney thing to get people to commit to an overnight ski trip up there vs Sunday River or Sugarloaf.
There's a risk no matter what they do with the lift. They did get up to around 100k skier visits prior to closing.
Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
Magic is a good point, but their location I think allows them to go the FG route a little easier. They're located in day trip range of millions of people. They have four of the busiest resorts in the East all within 45 minutes to try and syphon some folks off to ski try it.
SB is a much greater commitment to get to due to their remote location. You kind of have to have the shiney thing to get people to commit to an overnight ski trip up there vs Sunday River or Sugarloaf.
There's a risk no matter what they do with the lift. They did get up to around 100k skier visits prior to closing.
Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
machski
Well-known member
The Rangley chair is about 5000' long, so in my book is right at the boarder line of when a Detach vs FG chair becomes highly relevant. If it was twice the cost of acquisition of a FG only (IE operational costs were the same) then yes, you would go detach. But since operational costs are at least double that of a FG, not sure you can justify that difference right now at Saddleback. I personally think a FG (toss the carpet on for that slight speed bump perhaps) is logical for them right now. They might skip the carpet, especially if they are installing it with the potential possibility of moving it for a Detach in say 7-10 years down the road. In any event, it is returning from dormancy and I don't think a HSQ would attract enough new and sustained business to be cost effective. Would something like Barnstormer? Maybe, but for me being an expect level skier and just wanting access to Kennebago Chair, I just need a reliable out of base chair. I wouldn't be lapping whatever goes in for Rangley much.
Edit: Rangley is only 4550, doesn't need to be detach. Basically a 9 minute ride FG.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app
Edit: Rangley is only 4550, doesn't need to be detach. Basically a 9 minute ride FG.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app
x10003q
Active member
The Rangeley Double is 4717 feet length/1177 feet vertical. A FGQ would be a fine replacement for the current lift and handle most crowds. However, are you going to convince the masses to show up in the middle of nowhere for a FGQ? If they want to try and survive they need the marketing effect of a HSQ. Magic's location allows them to skip the HSQ and draw visitors.
https://skimap.org/data/446/7/1257035266.pdf
https://skimap.org/data/446/7/1257035266.pdf
Per NE ski history, here are the lifts since 2010 that are roughly the length of the Rangeley chair:
Fixed grip:
Magic quad (used) - ~5000 feet
Spruce triple (one-for-one replacement) - 4400 feet
Green peak (relocated) - 4400 feet
Mittersill double (required to be a double?) - 4000 feet
Shawnee peak triple (used) - ~4100 feet
Detachable:
Stratton Snow Bowl - 4600 feet
Snowdon six - 4400 feet
Barnstormer six - 5450 feet
Sun bowl (relocated) - 4300 feet
All the fixed grips over 4000 feet were built under extenuating circumstances.
Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
bdfreetuna
New member
My vote would be a fixed grip chair as low to the ground as possible (windproof). Pretty important unless you want big lines on the T-bar.
What T Bar?
The remaining one is dead from what I've heard. And that T Bar only served like 600 vertical of uninspiring terrain.
Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app
There were plans to replace the existing t bar at one point.
Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app
My thoughts exactly as to cost concerns.
Yeah, this touches on what I was saying about "what" people will come to SB for--is it the terrain, the experience, the location? Would the HS lift be "the" thing that changes the equation in terms of attracting more business? I don't know.
bdfreetuna
New member
Cupsuptic T-Bar is the only T-Bar at Saddleback, I have no idea if it still works. It was however the last lift I rode (for most of the day actually) in April 2015 just before they closed. You can access quite a bit of good terrain off it too-- Wooly Bugger woods, Golden Smelt, Blue Devil, Thrombosis glades for example.
The Rangely double was on wind hold and people were taking the Cupsuptic over to the Kennebago Quad which wasn't as affected by the wind.
An awkward situation they'd be wise to avoid. I guess ideally the T-Bar could be replaced with a cheap double chair for better access to that zone and better redundancy.
Re: thetrailboss
When Saddleback re-opens it will be our family's #1 choice for winter vacation. The condos are cheap to rent and extremely luxurious for the price. The terrain and affordability are the primary draws. As long as the chairlifts function I don't care much what they are. Saddleback is a Top 5 in the East for me on terrain and avoids the crowds and expense of other top rank resorts.
Last edited:
...and ALL the HS lifts you cite were installed by bigger corporate resorts. The only exception that you didn't cite was Burke and its HSQ that it installed in 2011. There are some parallels between Burke and Saddleback--a locals place that always wanted to be bigger and more of a destination, a family with relatively deep pockets that improved things to a point and then had to get out, similar size of skier days. But the Burke HSQ was "complicated" to say the least--it was initially a reinstall of an older CTEC HSQ from Ascutney that fell apart, some of the financing from the State was tied to a renewable energy incentive program (hence, the wind turbine), some of the financing came from mentioned "angel" backer to help the mountain and BMA, and some of the impetus we now know was to make the mountain more marketable for a buyer...who came in 2012 in the form of the dreaded Q.
Here, from my 30,000 foot view, these folks have a pretty clean slate. They're going in a new direction and some patient money to work with. The priorities depend on what else needs to be done to upgrade or repair facilities, that have sat UNUSED for what, now five years? That can be a lot, as we saw with Tenney (albeit there was some pretty bad vandalism and theft there). But, assuming that repairs are relatively minor in other areas, I can see that investing in a new HSQ gives them market cache ("hey, we're serious about making this place go") and certainly puts them in a spot to handle growth as opposed to responding to it.
MEtoVTSkier
Active member
Let's be honest. No one wants 10+ minute chair rides anymore. And you can't realistically install a fixed grip, just to possibly move it later, because realistically there isn't another location at Saddleback that it would be needed.
It was the biggest complaint about the Snowdon Quad. Too long, too cold... the masses cried and bitched, until finally we now have the Snowdon 6, and it's 5.5 minute ride. Killed 2 birds with one stone, as Nyberg was too stupid to either fix/update the Southridge Triple, or install a replacement immediately. The result being that it drastically changes how large numbers of skiers/riders now flow around the mountain, and the resort handles busy days much better.
Look at this example. Assuming they just install a HSQ in place of the Rangley double. What are you more apt to go ski: The SuperQuad/Timberline combo at Sugarloaf, or the Rangley Express/Kennebago combo? Terrain wise, it should be a no-brainer.
Trailboss, remember riding the old double at Burke? Long and cold as I remember. Did turning it into the Willoughby Quad improve that experience? Not much, but it did help with lift lines... now today we are fortunate that they (by means of a truly generous soul) were able to install the MidBurke Express. Making the experience there pretty darn awesome in my eyes and experience. It's now back to being a place I truly love to go out of my way to be at. As a bonus, Burke can essentially operate, just running that one lift, and not to many ski areas can operate that way, or almost completely with just the two chairlifts. But once again, they have 2 chairlifts installed, that people will come out of their way to utilize even if some of the other amenities of the resort may not be top of the line. IF the Mid-BurkeX had never been installed... I have doubts that Burke would even be open today. At least not to the Public, maybe just in some capacity for BMA.
Saddleback almost completely falls in the same category, as you can ski the majority of the hill off the one lift. Obviously Kenebago quads territory are going to encourage your expert and tree skiers to show up as well, but on a year like this, where there are days of only skiing the trails with snowmaking, one lift will get you by on mid-week days until the other terrain is ready for access.
Yep, gonna cost more, gonna be more maintenance, more electric ect. ect. It's a given. But like Burke, give me a REASON why to go back. It won't take much to make people happier than the offerings at Sugarloaf, and Sunday River is going to be fighting the same battle as other sideways resorts, with TOO many lifts to worry about.
We are talking ONE lift here, that is going to either make or break Saddleback forever. I hope they put in something that ensures success.
It was the biggest complaint about the Snowdon Quad. Too long, too cold... the masses cried and bitched, until finally we now have the Snowdon 6, and it's 5.5 minute ride. Killed 2 birds with one stone, as Nyberg was too stupid to either fix/update the Southridge Triple, or install a replacement immediately. The result being that it drastically changes how large numbers of skiers/riders now flow around the mountain, and the resort handles busy days much better.
Look at this example. Assuming they just install a HSQ in place of the Rangley double. What are you more apt to go ski: The SuperQuad/Timberline combo at Sugarloaf, or the Rangley Express/Kennebago combo? Terrain wise, it should be a no-brainer.
Trailboss, remember riding the old double at Burke? Long and cold as I remember. Did turning it into the Willoughby Quad improve that experience? Not much, but it did help with lift lines... now today we are fortunate that they (by means of a truly generous soul) were able to install the MidBurke Express. Making the experience there pretty darn awesome in my eyes and experience. It's now back to being a place I truly love to go out of my way to be at. As a bonus, Burke can essentially operate, just running that one lift, and not to many ski areas can operate that way, or almost completely with just the two chairlifts. But once again, they have 2 chairlifts installed, that people will come out of their way to utilize even if some of the other amenities of the resort may not be top of the line. IF the Mid-BurkeX had never been installed... I have doubts that Burke would even be open today. At least not to the Public, maybe just in some capacity for BMA.
Saddleback almost completely falls in the same category, as you can ski the majority of the hill off the one lift. Obviously Kenebago quads territory are going to encourage your expert and tree skiers to show up as well, but on a year like this, where there are days of only skiing the trails with snowmaking, one lift will get you by on mid-week days until the other terrain is ready for access.
Yep, gonna cost more, gonna be more maintenance, more electric ect. ect. It's a given. But like Burke, give me a REASON why to go back. It won't take much to make people happier than the offerings at Sugarloaf, and Sunday River is going to be fighting the same battle as other sideways resorts, with TOO many lifts to worry about.
We are talking ONE lift here, that is going to either make or break Saddleback forever. I hope they put in something that ensures success.
Similar threads
