darent
Active member
a mid burke lodge should be part of the plan, it gives you the chance to skip the crowds down below, especially on race weekends, and on cold days for a quick warm up.
-
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!
Burke/Ginn Publicly Unveil Plans
- Thread starter thetrailboss
- Start date
Everyone has a plan............Pie in the sky. Burke is more likely to be on Nelsap than complete this plan. I love the place. Great tree skiing. But too far, too hard, too many ski areas to drive by to get here to ever be popular.
riverc0il
New member
At just a hair under three hours from Boston, Burke is closer than any ski area along the spine of the Green Mountains to Boston and closer to Boston than any of the big name resorts in Maine. Yet this belief still persists. People drive further than many closer areas and pass a lot of ski areas en route to places like Stowe, Sugarbush, and Jay. I just don't buy this as a reason that Burke will not succeed. You can say that perception of distance may be the issue, but the perception is definitely not fact.
I would rate Burke as good or better mountain than many areas that Bostonites pass en route to Burke. Bretton, Cannon, Loon, Waterville, Ragged, Tenney, Gunstock, Pat's, etc. Cannon and Loon are the only mountains that could come close to Burke out of that bunch--Cannon is not a resort and Loon is a crowded nut house on the weekends. The other mountains do not match Burke in caliber of terrain and natural snow fall.
If Burke can over come the perception of distance and being small time despite 2000 vertical feet, ample snowfall, classic groomers better than almost any mountain in the east, and some of the best glades west of the Green Mountain Spine... Burke's success can only be limited by failure of management to not show the truth of the mountain to its potential future clients.
from_the_NEK
Active member
Yep, stay away. Too hard to get to. :wink:
No offense Vince, but it seems that you have never been to Burke or if you have you must have taken an odd route. From any metro area, it is an easy highway drive. As someone who used to live in the Boston area, it was 2:45 or so up 93 to 91. Doesn't get much easier than that.....
riverc0il
New member
Another thing about all those ski areas you pass en route to Burke.... out of all the ski areas in the I-93 belt, none have 2000 vertical feet AND a golf course. If this plan works out... Burke will become the closest ski area/golf course/four season resort with at least 2000 vertical to Boston. Only Ragged and Bretton in the I-93 corridor have both ski areas and golf courses. Ragged is not a destination and Bretton is no where near the same caliber as Burke in terms of terrain.
The only thing that will put Burke in danger of being on NELSAP, IMO, is if Ginn doesn't follow through on their plans. If they build it, people will come (pending an economic rebound, of course, LOL).
The only thing that will put Burke in danger of being on NELSAP, IMO, is if Ginn doesn't follow through on their plans. If they build it, people will come (pending an economic rebound, of course, LOL).
I've skied Burke many times. Yes 2:45 all highway from Boston, and I agree it tops all NH places for expert skiing..............My point is that as good as it is. Burke just does not draw. Have you ever been here when its been crowded????Don't you drive away at the end of the day and ask yourself how they stay open?
riverc0il
New member
You have to have noticed that Burke is more "crowded" than it used to be just a few years ago. The word is getting out. Personally, I think it is going to take getting a high speed lift to the summit before Burke is really "on the map", but it is in the plans. This thread is not about where Burke was or is but rather where it is going. Besides, even if Burke doesn't draw a lot more people with the plan, Ginn would probably love that. It would make the place easier to market to condo buyers as a hidden gem no one visits.
This is typical for Burke early season. Why run the J-Bar and Poma mid-week? I don't see the problem here, that lift count has nothing to do with Ginn....
And I guess spending a lot of money and time on planning and development is not a sign of commitment. :-?
Ginn has made it clear that it is not running a ski area, but a resort. The original trailboss and others can comment about that. Skiing is only one aspect of the business, not the only one. And besides, early season skiing is not what Burke is about.
With your logic, Mad River Glen, which did not open this weekend, is not serious about skiing either.
I was responding to your comment that Burke is "too hard and too far" to get to. A lot of people drive past it to go to Jay. It is still an unknown for many...and I agree with Riv...once an HSQ goes in folks will come. That is, unfortunately, how many skiers assess an area.
MRG is a ski area with a cult following. Burke is trying to be a resort. 5 trails 2 weeks before Xmas. Thats what you would expect from a mom and pop ski area. That hill in CT that is all over this web site appears to have a bigger snowmaking budget than Ginn. Pie in the sky
Hopefully Ginn will put in the HSQ before they bail.
Hopefully Ginn will put in the HSQ before they bail.
riverc0il
New member
C'mon, Vince. Stop talking smack. MRG is not even open and Burke is. That makes MRG a mom and pop type ski area in your estimation. Same type of terrain offerings as other big name areas like Cannon, Wildcat, Ascutney, Magic, Ragged, Gunstock, Bolton, etc. Burke's snow making has been much improved since Ginn took over the mountain and I am sure it will only get better. Burke doesn't get the big natural snowfall that the spine of the Green's get. I think you are being a little unfair in your criticism.
This is not a busy time for resorts, so no sense in blowing snow to see it melt. Do you know how much it costs to blow snow?
And you missed the point I made: Ginn is building a resort, not a ski area. Skiing is only one aspect of their plan, hence why it is not Killington or Sunday River. To Ginn, skiing is only part of the deal. Skiing alone is not sustainable.
billski
Active member
Sad thought....
It is, but regrettably I can't think off the top of my head (except for MRG) a resort where skiing is the main focus. Killington used to have that model. No more.
Masskier
New member
riverc0il
New member
Gotta wonder if part of that is not being authentic but rather understanding demand. No one wants to buy into a condo development that has more units for sale than sold years after the development has been completed. Prices can also be higher if demand is significantly higher than supply.
from_the_NEK
Active member
The official meeting between Ginn and the townsfolk was last night. I didn't go, but hopefully it went well.
The Caledonian had an advance article about the meeting yesterday.
http://caledonianrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=145&ArticleID=43123
From the article... Is this us?
The Caledonian had an advance article about the meeting yesterday.
http://caledonianrecord.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=145&ArticleID=43123
From the article... Is this us?
You beat me to it, FTN. I must say that the latest plans for the ski area certainly address some of our gripes from in here...re: the lift configuration. I know that employees have been told to keep quiet, but that doesn't mean that lurking and market research is not allowed. :wink:
Similar threads
- Locked
