Burton to Purchase Mad River?

[SkiDog]

This thread isn't fun anymore.

Even though the internet posting that spurred this discussion is probably untrue, could it hurt to discuss the potential outcome as if it were true? Why does everything have to be proven or disproven to the exclusion of theretical conversation?

Why is it that every time a snowboarder mentions MRG a flame war breaks out? The way folks react one would think they were terrorists bent on flying an explosive laden airplane into the single chairlift. Such defensiveness!

And I'm a skier who loves MRG just the way it is!

Jeez, some folks need to lighten up!

I think its likely becasue Snowbaorders feel like they are being "banned" from a place...you hear the same complaints with Alta since they have the same policy...IMHO its not really that big a deal...are those 2 RESORTS really all that important?? there are MANY places i've never skied and probably never will...why get bent about not being able to ski 2 mountains??? I sure wouldn't...lifes too short..and you're hardly missing all that much..I mena MRG is great..but not the "must have" destination..

I dont understand it either..but I bet we'd (skiers) would be angry if some resort was snowboarder only..I used to get SUPER angry when they used to have trails that were "snowboarder only"back when it was newer..I felt skiers were first...now we coexist...but since MRG gets to make thier own choices we can't do anything about it..

dont know if that makes any sense..

M

 

[Greg]

...lifes too short...

Those are the three most important words in your post. I find it amusing when folks go on various "crusades" and it completely consumes them. Time to move on.

 

[JimG.]

I think its likely becasue Snowbaorders feel like they are being "banned" from a place...you hear the same complaints with Alta since they have the same policy...IMHO its not really that big a deal...are those 2 RESORTS really all that important?? there are MANY places i've never skied and probably never will...why get bent about not being able to ski 2 mountains??? I sure wouldn't...lifes too short..and you're hardly missing all that much..I mena MRG is great..but not the "must have" destination..

I dont understand it either..but I bet we'd (skiers) would be angry if some resort was snowboarder only..I used to get SUPER angry when they used to have trails that were "snowboarder only"back when it was newer..I felt skiers were first...now we coexist...but since MRG gets to make thier own choices we can't do anything about it..

dont know if that makes any sense..

M

Dog, snowboarders "feel" like they are banned from MRG because they are! It's not important to you that MRG and Alta ban snowboards because you ski. And you said it, if they banned skiers you would be pissed.

Better watch out, because it sounds like you're sympathizing with snowboarders.

See what I mean? Instead of trying to get along and understand, the discussion always turns to flames which underscores alot of hidden fears or prejudices. I think all that is just plain silly.

 

[SkiDog]

Dog, snowboarders "feel" like they are banned from MRG because they are! It's not important to you that MRG and Alta ban snowboards because you ski. And you said it, if they banned skiers you would be pissed.

Better watch out, because it sounds like you're sympathizing with snowboarders.

See what I mean? Instead of trying to get along and understand, the discussion always turns to flames which underscores alot of hidden fears or prejudices. I think all that is just plain silly.

Im not really siding with anyone..I dont see really why MRG "bans" them...we could easily coexist....IMHO anyway....so I can see why they might take offense to it...BUT...I still dont think anyonee should get bent out of shape about that...theyres still PLENTY of other places to ski and ride...and still more that are MUCH better than MRG....I guess we always want what we can't have though....

And hey what would really be wrong with siding with snowboarders on this one??? Even if I dont snowboard doesnt mean I dont see thier point...but again...LIFE IS WAY TOO SHORT to worry about other peoples "hangups" which is basically what I consider the MRG no snowboards poilcy....

just my .02..not meant to rile anyone up at all....WE ALL SLIDE ON SNOW AND LOVE IT...some just choose different methods....like I said there was a day when snowboard only trails were the "norm", and that they angered my greatly, but I figured out its not worth complaining about...


M

 

[SkiDog]

Dog, snowboarders "feel" like they are banned from MRG because they are! It's not important to you that MRG and Alta ban snowboards because you ski. And you said it, if they banned skiers you would be pissed.

Better watch out, because it sounds like you're sympathizing with snowboarders.

See what I mean? Instead of trying to get along and understand, the discussion always turns to flames which underscores alot of hidden fears or prejudices. I think all that is just plain silly.

And I wouldnt personally call it a "ban" id call it a "Choice" that MRG makes in order to cater to what they feel is their "core market"...Ban is a strong word...its like they were allowed there once, but now are banned...and to my knowledge..snowboarding was never allowed at MRG..but I am OFTEN wrong..Ha

M

 

[JimG.]

And I wouldnt personally call it a "ban" id call it a "Choice" that MRG makes in order to cater to what they feel is their "core market"...Ban is a strong word...its like they were allowed there once, but now are banned...and to my knowledge..snowboarding was never allowed at MRG..but I am OFTEN wrong..Ha

M

I hate to tell you, you are wrong.

It is a ban; where's the "choice" for snowboarders? They're not allowed. Period.

And snowboarders were once allowed on the mountain; there are various stories about why they are now banned.

And around and around we go on the same stale topic. Does anyone want to discuss what it might be like if Burton did buy MRG?

And please, don't anyone have a stroke over the idea...it's just a scenario for the sake of discussion.

 

[noski]

And I wouldnt personally call it a "ban" id call it a "Choice" that MRG makes in order to cater to what they feel is their "core market"...Ban is a strong word...its like they were allowed there once, but now are banned...and to my knowledge..snowboarding was never allowed at MRG..but I am OFTEN wrong..Ha

M

Snowboarding was indeed once allowed at MRG. Semantics here, but snowboarders are not banned from MRG- only snowboards are banned.... like I said- semantics.

 

[SkiDog]

Snowboarding was indeed once allowed at MRG. Semantics here, but snowboarders are not banned from MRG- only snowboards are banned.... like I said- semantics.

thanks for the correction...but again I stand by my points...what would really be affected at MRG should they again allow snowboards.....??? I'd venture to say nothing except some crap from "elitist" skiers who think they have some "right" to a certian spot...

IMHO its a silly ban...but again...MRG's choice...they have to deal with the contreversy and it doesnt seem to affect them at all so I guess it won't ever change...

Anyone know if MRG is private or state land???

M

 

[SkiDog]

I guess to stray back closer to topic of original post...

Why would Burton want to get involved in owning a ski resort? Just to stop a "ban"..? that would seem very shortsighted reasoning for a company to buy what could possibly be just a drain on the financials.....

I just don't see Burton making an unsound business decision just to buy a ski resort so that boarders would now be welcome...

Man there really is some serious angst over this whole issue...I can't believe it..

M

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

I wasnt refering at all to making profit, did I ever say I was?

Under more careful review, you did not. My apologies.

Running a ski resort is not a cheap endeavor, regardless of making profit or not.

True enough, along with that, MRG has a significant cost advantage as]a non-profit and more so in that it's shareholders and customers expect and desire the lower cost aproach of minimal snowmaking and grooming. The clear exception to this is the additional cost of rehabbing the Single chair rather than replacing it.

I stand by my points. They are all economic speculation as to why MRG might be having a tougher time meeting its financial needs. I never said they were fact, only speculation to stimulate discussion. Frankly noone else here has any knowledge based on fact to argue that they arent in financial difficulty either...

Well, no one has posted financial statements, so you are correct, no one can make a statement as to whether or not they are in financial straits . Let me off this point to ponder:

The coop is a not-for-profit dedicated to preserving the mountain environment and skiing and recreational activities there: In the longer term, does this past season's cash flow (which I think we can all assume wasn't great) and current financial situation matter if the shareholders are dedicated to keep it a going concern?

 

[JimG.]

I guess to stray back closer to topic of original post...

Why would Burton want to get involved in owning a ski resort? Just to stop a "ban"..? that would seem very shortsighted reasoning for a company to buy what could possibly be just a drain on the financials.....

I just don't see Burton making an unsound business decision just to buy a ski resort so that boarders would now be welcome...

Man there really is some serious angst over this whole issue...I can't believe it..

M

Dave M brings up the same excellent point...it makes no sense from Burton's business point of view. But as you mention, this topic is more contentious than we often give it credit for.

For the sake of argument, the only reason Burton would take it over would be from a marketing standpoint, to say that Burton was the snowboard power that brought the evil snowboard ban at MRG to an end.

But it would be counterproductive to then ban skiers...would snowboarders flock to MRG in numbers great enough to counter the loss of all skiing business?

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

And around and around we go on the same stale topic. Does anyone want to discuss what it might be like if Burton did buy MRG?

And please, don't anyone have a stroke over the idea...it's just a scenario for the sake of discussion.

Would the tele-boarders thumb their noses at the fixed heal snowboarders?

This seems to stir up as much muck as Magic discussions on SJ. I wonder if Taos and Alta have similar debates in the Western forums?

 

[JimG.]

This seems to stir up as much muck as Magic discussions on SJ. I wonder if Taos and Alta have similar debates in the Western forums?

Oh I think so sled...I've read some pretty nasty exchanges between skiers and boarders in the Taos area. Boarders in NM often express the hope that Taos goes under one winter. Ugly stuff.

 

[awf170]

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=snowboarding&word2=skiing

I'm pretty sure this concludes that skiing is in fact a lot better and cooler than snowboarding.

 

[AdironRider]

Moving on from AWF's pointless post thanks Jim G for clarifying the thread, I was beginning to get a tad frustrated myself.

Moving on to the benefits of Burton having possible ownership...

Burton has the financial capital to make the neccesary renovation that will improve MRG. 2 mil is nothing to a company as large as Burton (well not nothing, but certainly less than a Coop of 1700, each with varying financial background). That the single renovations right there.
Other renovations to the various other parts of the mtn would also be easier to complete. Plus theyd open the mountain up for all to enjoy. It sounds as if they could use a little snowmaking at the base (correct me if Im wrong but didnt they close wicked early solely because they didnt have the snowpack at the base - the ret of the mtn was skiable?). Burton could make these changes happen. I guess what Im trying to say is that MRG can only exist if the finances are available to do so, and with Burton as the principal owner, that would never be a problem.

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

Oh I think so sled...I've read some pretty nasty exchanges between skiers and boarders in the Taos area. Boarders in NM often express the hope that Taos goes under one winter. Ugly stuff.

I suppose I should expect that. Toas is the proverbial "Big Fish in the little pond". There are not a lot of other options. Angel Fire has a lot of Acreage, but not much very interesting. Santa Fe, which I love dearly, BTW, is much smaller. Pajarito looks awesome, but the summit is "only" at 10,000', which really limits their season. It must be a bit of a drag to be a boarder in NM with Taos not interested in your money.

Alta seems like it might be a closer comparion. There are lots of other options for places to ride.

I don't really see what the fuss is all about. If an area chose to ban skiing, I'd happily say: "Keep your ball and bat, I'll play somewhere else."

This alledged buy-out rumour completly ignores the facts. There are only 300 unsold shares and 1700 shares held (safe to assume) by skiers. Who are they going to buy the shares from, even if they weren't limited to 4 shares per person?

Check here for the bylaws: http://www.madriverglen.com/coop/?Page=./5bylaws.html&dir=.

 

[David Metsky]

Burton has the financial capital to make the neccesary renovation that will improve MRG. 2 mil is nothing to a company as large as Burton (well not nothing, but certainly less than a Coop of 1700, each with varying financial background). That the single renovations right there.

But the co-op has a perfectly viable plan for replacing the single. It's going forward as we speak, so there's no need for an outside company to do this; it's being taken care of.

Plus theyd open the mountain up for all to enjoy.

The mountain is open for everyone to enjoy, you just can't ride the lifts on a snowboard. If you want to hike it and ride, go ahead. People do.

It sounds as if they could use a little snowmaking at the base (correct me if Im wrong but didnt they close wicked early solely because they didnt have the snowpack at the base - the ret of the mtn was skiable?). Burton could make these changes happen.

There is snowmaking at the base. It gets used when needed. They can also run the single with downloading at the mid-station, so skiers can hit the upper part of the mountain late in the season.

I guess what Im trying to say is that MRG can only exist if the finances are available to do so, and with Burton as the principal owner, that would never be a problem.

It's not a problem now. There certainly are challenges, but MRG is on perhaps the most secure financial footing of any New England ski area. And having an owner with deep pockets isn't a guarentee of anything long term. Look at the ASC resorts. Spreading the risk out over a motivated and varied co-op is probably more stable in the long run.

-dave-

 

[Greg]

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=snowboarding&word2=skiing

I'm pretty sure this concludes that skiing is in fact a lot better and cooler than snowboarding.

I actually think this is more applicable:

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=snowboard+ban+debate&word2=waste+of+time

 

[marcski]

Moving on from AWF's pointless post thanks Jim G for clarifying the thread, I was beginning to get a tad frustrated myself.

IMHO, Austin's post had about as much to do with reality as this entire thread does! (And was more humorous)!

 

[JimG.]

The mountain is open for everyone to enjoy, you just can't ride the lifts on a snowboard. If you want to hike it and ride, go ahead. People do.

having an owner with deep pockets isn't a guarentee of anything long term. Look at the ASC resorts. Spreading the risk out over a motivated and varied co-op is probably more stable in the long run.

-dave-

These are good points and are very hard to argue with.

If I were a boarder, I'd still be upset that I can't ride the lifts though.

The point about owners with deep pockets cannot be argued though. ASC is the prime example.

AdironRider, you realize that most of the "improvements" you would like to see would change all of the things that folks who love MRG really like about the place. And that's why there would be alot of opposition. The analogy to ASC only deepens that opposition.