bluishgreen
New member
I am all for no lease, especially since it might have been the GM and not the state that made Cannon not a profitable area. The place has really changed in a lot of ways since the new GM. Right now, the biggest argument for a lease, the red ink argument, is no longer valid.
I go back-and-forth on the issue.
I'm not against leasing, but there are business realities about Cannon that people who take the "it worked for Sunappee, so it must work for Cannon" argument completely miss (and like you said, even more so in the current economy):
--Distance. Sunapee makes a huge amount of money simply on being close enough to the Boston and southern NH area for day-trippers. Cannon is not within a close enough range to get nearly the number of day-trippers that Sunapee gets. Yes, hard-core people will drive that far, but this is far too small a population to determine profitability.
--Weather. Sunapee has very moderate weather, so it is more reliable in terms of getting an enjoyable day. Cannon of course, isn't quite so forgiving, scaring away people, and you can't do anything about the weather, regardless of how much money you have.
--Terrain. Cannon is a far more advanced mountain, deterring some people, while Sunapee can cater to all people.
--Real estate. Even throwing-out politics of fed/state land issues, there just isn't anywhere to build logistically. On the tram side, it's all cliffs and ledges, the bottom has Echo Lake and and an interstate highway. The private land on the other side of Mittersill has been bought and built-out through the last 20 years. The only place to really build slope-side is Mittersill Village, which already exists and owned. All the real money in running a ski place is in building and selling new condos, and but there just isn't anywhere to build from a practical standpoint.
Again, I'm not against leasing--I just can't stand the current arguments, which all revolve around Sunapee's success. I'd like to see someone with a plan that focuses on how Cannon can succeed, and not simply "it worked in that place, so it must be able to work here...", which I find as naive. I actually like what the Muellers have done with Sunapee, however, Sunapee and Cannon are two completely different beasts. One big risk with leasing is: the state leases it out, the company fails, and then Cannon closes-down because the state budget is now used to not paying for it. I just want it done in a more thought-out manner, rather than on a whim because someone got excited when they saw a shiny object down south...
One thing on the GM's, though. Cannon was profitable under the previous GM in the early 2000's. The last few years that he was there were not profitable, but we also didn't have good snow years. The current GM had a record snow year his first year, and and extremely above average year his second year, so he's also been somewhat fortunate. I'm not saying the current GM couldn't do it without record snow, since I like a lot of the things he's done, but I think it's a bit of an unfair comparison.
michael