Cannon Mountain...thoughts

threecy · May 2, 2011

riverc0il said:
When did Cannon finish paying off debts for the expansion such as the Peabody Quad and Tuckerbrook Quad. Were those parts of the debt from prior to JD? If so, then saying Cannon operated at a loss those years might be somewhat disingenuous if profits were going to pay for new lifts and expansion. Or was the expansion paid out of state coffers through Bonds and not connected with Cannon's finances at all?

You'll note that he said they paid off the deficit, not the debt. Last I knew, the division is not legally allowed to lose money. Thus, they carry annual losses over into the next budget. I believe his comment was that in the recent good snow years, they've covered the deficits carried over from past bad snow years.

I believe the Mittersill chair was bonded. The tram replacement was bonded. The HSQ as well if I'm not mistaken. Some of the smaller fixed grip chairs were paid with the Sunapee lease money.

deadheadskier said:
I'm against a lease mostly because I look at the deals for residents at Sunapee and they are PITIFUL in comparison to Cannon. Don't know why threecy continues to argue that the deals for NH residents aren't very good. They're the best I know of of any mountain in Northern New England.

Again, it is likely that NH resident discounts will be written into the lease agreement, likely at the current level.

AdironRider · May 2, 2011

What no credit for Mitt this season for profitability?

I didnt make it back myself, but all the folks that I met out here from NH seemed stoked. Even the gapers were talking about it. Thats saying something.

I feel no need to troll Threecy this year on this topic. After thinking it through, Id rather just see it not be leased, regardless of the snowmaking improvement that would inevitably result.

Condos would blow no matter what. And the whole no real estate thing works fine, I think alot of resorts just got used to rolling in revenue as condos flew off the shelves 10 years ago and just forgot how to run the ski business itself.

deadheadskier · May 2, 2011

threecy said:
Again, it is likely that NH resident discounts will be written into the lease agreement, likely at the current level.

Is there documentation backing that up?

Just curious how you know it is 'likely' that resident deals will be written into the lease agreement at the current level.

MadPadraic · May 2, 2011

threecy said:
Would you say that most NH taxpayers have Wednesday off? I'd argue that most NH taxpayers get Saturdays, Sundays, and NYSE holidays off - none of which have a NH resident discount.

Full, Unrestricted 2011-2012 Season Pass:
Cannon NH Resident "Discount": $546
Wildcat+Attitash+Crotched: $599

Is that "big mountain skiing at a greatly reduced price to NH residents?"

I would say that most NH residents can take a Wednesday off if they want. What's with the term "taxpayer?" Does paying a meal, gas, property, or income (err..NH) somehow entitles one to more perks at a ski area than other residents? I pay tons of taxes in NH, but I'm not a resident...

Cannon full price ticket is 12% cheaper than those of Loon or Bretton Woods. That's a nice discount. It is also 4% cheaper than leased Mt. Sunapee,

Besides the Wildcat+2 others pass is only responding to market pressure from Cannon, so pass holders there are benefiting anyway!

MadPadraic · May 2, 2011

Cannonball said:
There seems to be no consensus on whether Cannon operates in the black or the red, and by how much. I certainly don't know all the history and detail in regards to Cannon's profit/loss.

This is a quote from the November 19th, 2010 Cannon Mountain Advisory Commission meeting:

" Cannon’s management team believes that with its aggressive 10/11 marketing plan, the improvements made and marketed since September 2008, and an ever-increasing season pass holder base, the ski area will post a fourth consecutive net profit while continuing to improve upon its products, services, and infrastructure"

SIKSKIER · May 3, 2011

MadPadraic said:
" Cannon’s management team believes that with its aggressive 10/11 marketing plan, the improvements made and marketed since September 2008, and an ever-increasing season pass holder base, the ski area will post a fourth consecutive net profit while continuing to improve upon its products, services, and infrastructure"

Sounds like a GREAT reason to give up operating it huh?I don't pretend to know all the facts on how Cannon shows their profit numbers from year to year.I do know that they appear to be running the area much better and it shows on the mountain.

Why dump the operation for leasing?I can actually see threecy's point of known profit from the lease.However,I as a NH taxpayer for 50+ years don't have the problem with the State running it as does he.I really don't see the why it is such a lightning rod for him.

Again,for mostly selfish reasons I don't want a lease and while the mt is profitable I see much less reason for that.I know that whoever would run Cannon would have to increase two things to cover the higher overhead than what is in place now,ticket prices and skier visits.The money has to come from somewhere.Do I want that?Of course not

By the way riv,the main building at Mittersill is mainly and may be wholly owned by time share/condo arrangement.Here's what I got off of their website:
Mittersill Resort offers a right to use, lifetime ownership of vacation property sold in weekly intervals. Our prices are the lowest and the most cost effective because we are a non-profit cooperative. Mittersill Resort is a homeowners association, controlled by the unit owners so the interest of all guests and their comfort is always a priority.

witch hobble · May 4, 2011

Bump:dunce:

New Hampshire resident, taxpayer, and this year Cannon passholder. (can't spell passholder without asshole!) Can we call out of state passholders "Massholders"?

As with my time in NY, I take a smidgeon of pride in the fact that I am a fractional owner of a really awesome ski area. I understand that a balance needs to be struck between providing services at reasonable prices, not totally undercutting private industry, and showing the bean counters that we can keep the place close to profitability.

But consider me among the (likely) few who is willing to pay a few more of my tax dollars toward the state promoting skiing, winter sports, and the natural history of Franconia Notch to residents, children, and outta staters alike. I do not feel that a leaseholder would have my family's best interest in mind.

Other thoughts:

Tucker Brook family area- Really Cool and useful!
Upper Cannon- great cruiser
All the off map cuts- thank you for all the hard work. there is some sweet stuff.
Mittersill annex- jury still out. Holy mogul fields!

I had a great season there, and I even missed out on several of the mid season powder events. Looking forward to next year.

Peace!

St. Bear · May 4, 2011

witch hobble said:
But consider me among the (likely) few who is willing to pay a few more of my tax dollars toward the state promoting skiing, winter sports, and the natural history of Franconia Notch to residents, children, and outta staters alike.

I'm sure the State of NH would accept a donation.

witch hobble · May 5, 2011

St. Bear said:
I'm sure the State of NH would accept a donation.

They will be getting two additional season's passes out of us. So that is a start.

If it came down to relying on charitable giving to run the operation......well I guess thats what skins are for. :daffy:

threecy · May 5, 2011

witch hobble said:
If it came down to relying on charitable giving to run the operation......well I guess thats what skins are for.

If there are really that many people who care about Cannon and are willing to put their money where their mouths are, they could form a co-op and take the lease.

thetrailboss · May 5, 2011

threecy said:
If there are really that many people who care about Cannon and are willing to put their money where their mouths are, they could form a co-op and take the lease.

Assuming that there is a "lease." I don't think it will get that far, at least for now. It is a revenue generating asset so they won't give that up.

witch hobble · May 5, 2011

threecy said:
the lease.

You post as though a lease is a forgone conclusion.

witch hobble · May 5, 2011

thetrailboss said:
Assuming that there is a "lease." I don't think it will get that far, at least for now. It is a revenue generating asset so they won't give that up.

You beat me to it. Didn't see this post.

witch hobble · May 5, 2011

Additional thought I forgot to mention:

what I feel Cannon lacks is lower intermediate terrain. They have a very nice beginner area. Obviously have great terrain for high intermediates to experts. But lack a big mountain transition from green to blue.

MadPadraic · May 5, 2011

riverc0il said:
On the other point, no one has taken up my challenge regarding addressing what changes might be made to Cannon that might alter the character. Compare Cannon to other mountains and suggest what changes you've seen at other mountains might be made at Cannon to destroy its character.

... (lot's of good insight deleted for space) ..

And again I reference other mountains like Jay and Smuggs that are privately run but still foster a particular culture and character. Cannon's trails really can't be widened much further, most are already pretty wide. And its not like the place doesn't get groomed flat a ton).

I don't think a leaser would make the culture or character any better for sure. But I also wonder what could be done to lessen the character or culture?

One is price. I know that you say it's not the great value it was, but it is still 12% cheaper than Sunapee, despite running a Tram and having better terrain.Sunapee undoubtedly spends more on grooming, but let's be honest: Sunapee and Loon can charge $76 because the market will bear it. They are run in an attempt to maximize profit. Cannon should be run with an attempt to break even over the medium/long run and as a result shouldn't need to extract huge profits from their ticket pricing.

Back to grooming: yes Cannon grooms more than they did, but they still leave the powder alone and they usually leave it alone a day or two after a dump (which is awesome considering the overnight wind they sometimes get). This may or may not change depending on the operator's outlook.

Speaking of tuckerbrook, as I recall a beginners ticket is cheap and one lift is even free.

I'm not a fan of the new bar, but beers still cost less than they do at my neighborhood local. I would expect this to change with a lease.

Finally, the places you mentioned, Jay and Smuggs, are very far from civilization. I'm not aware of any decently sized areas that close to Boston which go for the traditional feel/vibe. (Maybe Magic for NYC, but I've never skied there) There's a chance that a given operator would try to change the vibe. Then again, they might see it as a competitive advantage and make Cannon into a crowded mess. I'd rather not run the risk of losing such a treasure.

deadheadskier · May 6, 2011

MadPadraic said:
One is price. I know that you say it's not the great value it was, but it is still 12% cheaper than Sunapee, despite running a Tram and having better terrain.Sunapee undoubtedly spends more on grooming, but let's be honest: Sunapee and Loon can charge $76 because the market will bear it. They are run in an attempt to maximize profit. Cannon should be run with an attempt to break even over the medium/long run and as a result shouldn't need to extract huge profits from their ticket pricing.

Back to grooming: yes Cannon grooms more than they did, but they still leave the powder alone and they usually leave it alone a day or two after a dump (which is awesome considering the overnight wind they sometimes get). This may or may not change depending on the operator's outlook.

Speaking of tuckerbrook, as I recall a beginners ticket is cheap and one lift is even free.

I'm not a fan of the new bar, but beers still cost less than they do at my neighborhood local. I would expect this to change with a lease.

Finally, the places you mentioned, Jay and Smuggs, are very far from civilization. I'm not aware of any decently sized areas that close to Boston which go for the traditional feel/vibe. (Maybe Magic for NYC, but I've never skied there) There's a chance that a given operator would try to change the vibe. Then again, they might see it as a competitive advantage and make Cannon into a crowded mess. I'd rather not run the risk of losing such a treasure.

post of the thread. I translate what you're saying Padraic as:

Cannon is awesome as is

Cannon's a NH treasure.

Let's keep it that way instead of letting it become a Corporations profit center.

threecy · May 6, 2011

deadheadskier said:
Let's keep it that way instead of letting it become a Corporations profit center.

Good point. Can't have evil private sector people profit. Much better to let government employees profit.

thetrailboss · May 6, 2011

threecy said:
Good point. Can't have evil private sector people profit. Much better to let government employees profit.

Huh? :blink: The public benefits.

deadheadskier · May 6, 2011

threecy said:
Good point. Can't have evil private sector people profit. Much better to let government employees profit.

Do you feel that NH should lease out all of it's State Parks?

Should the federal government lease out all National Parks?

Cannonball · May 6, 2011

threecy said:
Good point. Can't have evil private sector people profit. Much better to let government employees profit.

Huh? Which government employees? The lifties?

Cannon Mountain...thoughts

New member

Well-known member

Moderator

Active member

Active member

New member

Member

New member

Member

New member

Moderator

Member

Member

Member

Active member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

Moderator

New member

Similar threads