Burton to Purchase Mad River?

[David Metsky]

Here's what you're really saying...you don't like the idea of a snowboard company buying MRG and you won't even discuss the idea because you can't give it any mental space; it just doesn't work for you.

No, we were first responding to a rumor that was posted as real. Then we started discussing the rumored financial situation at MRG. Then we discussed how any potential takeover off MRG would work. Along the way we touched on the shareholder makeup of the MRG co-op, physical location of the ski area property, the incentive for a snowboard maker to purchase a ski area, the legal setup of the co-op, and, inevitably, we touched on the snowboard ban.

I'm more than open to discuss a hypothetical purchase of MRG, but when people are making factual claims about behind the scenes activity, it makes perfect sense to clarify what is and isn't possible. If you wanted to talk about Magic Hat buying out Stowe it could be an interesting fantasy thread. I could definately contribute proposed new trail names and amenities at the lodge. :beer: But if you started it by claiming (as this thread did) that it was actually happening and these were the reasons why, you'd expect people would examine the logic behind it.

Bottom line, this wasn't started as a hypothetica/fantasy thread. It was started as if it were fact and that's how people responded.

-dave-

 

[JimG.]

No, we were first responding to a rumor that was posted as real. Then we started discussing the rumored financial situation at MRG. Then we discussed how any potential takeover off MRG would work. Along the way we touched on the shareholder makeup of the MRG co-op, physical location of the ski area property, the incentive for a snowboard maker to purchase a ski area, the legal setup of the co-op, and, inevitably, we touched on the snowboard ban.

I'm more than open to discuss a hypothetical purchase of MRG, but when people are making factual claims about behind the scenes activity, it makes perfect sense to clarify what is and isn't possible. If you wanted to talk about Magic Hat buying out Stowe it could be an interesting fantasy thread. I could definately contribute proposed new trail names and amenities at the lodge. :beer: But if you started it by claiming (as this thread did) that it was actually happening and these were the reasons why, you'd expect people would examine the logic behind it.

Bottom line, this wasn't started as a hypothetica/fantasy thread. It was started as if it were fact and that's how people responded.

-dave-

Point taken...again, I didn't start the thread and I firmly beleive Greg posted it to start conversation. In that regard, it was very successful.

I think we all know that Burton isn't buying MRG; we can all relax.

OK...for the sake of conversation only...forget about renaming trails. Leave the mountain as it is, make any planned upgrades to the single. Leave MRG as it is except for the snowboard (props to noski) ban. What do you think MRG would be like if snowboards were allowed?

The bigger question is can we discuss this without flaming each other to death?

 

[SkiDog]

What do you think MRG would be like if snowboards were allowed?

No different...the trails wouldnt change....skiers and snowboarders slide together at almost all other resorts...what would change because it was MRG..

M

 

[JimG.]

No different...the trails wouldnt change....skiers and snowboarders slide together at almost all other resorts...what would change because it was MRG..

M

So, other than the "skiers only" MRG mystique, you feel things would be pretty much the same. I kind of agree.

 

[SkiDog]

So, other than the "skiers only" MRG mystique, you feel things would be pretty much the same. I kind of agree.

Plain and simple...IMHO...THIS IS A STUPID BAN...and it gets worse and worse every year...why do we need animosity between SNOW SLIDERS?????? MRG should just give it up already....having snowbaorders on their lifts wont ruin any "experience" MRG claims it would....silly...

M

 

[Greg]

Bottom line, this wasn't started as a hypothetica/fantasy thread. It was started as if it were fact and that's how people responded.

For the record, I didn't start this thread as if it was "fact". I simply posted a link to the blog and asked for "thoughts", i.e. scrutiny.

 

[SkiDog]

For the record, I didn't start this thread as if it was "fact". I simply posted a link to the blog and asked for "thoughts", i.e. scrutiny.

Hey as far as im concerned..you can post whatever the heck you wish...doesnt say administrator under your name for nothing

M

 

[JimG.]

For the record, I didn't start this thread as if it was "fact". I simply posted a link to the blog and asked for "thoughts", i.e. scrutiny.

Why thank you boss...I was going to mention that it was never posted as fact, just as an interesting thought.

Then folks got a bit carried away with the Sherlock Holmes syndrome and had to prove or disprove it.

I think we can all agree it isn't fact, and I'll bet few of us ever thought it was.

And I'm stubbornly trying to discuss it from the hypothetical "just for argument's sake" point of view as if it were true.

And I'm blowing some gaskets in the process...something must be wrong with me.

 

[Sparky]

Why thank you boss...I was going to mention that it was never posted as fact, just as an interesting thought.

Then folks got a bit carried away with the Sherlock Holmes syndrome and had to prove or disprove it.

I think we can all agree it isn't fact, and I'll bet few of us ever thought it was.

And I'm stubbornly trying to discuss it from the hypothetical "just for argument's sake" point of view as if it were true.

And I'm blowing some gaskets in the process...something must be wrong with me.

You haven't been skiing recently. It effects the mind.

 

[David Metsky]

Hey, I read the link and the blog posted appeared to think this was true. In reading more and the bogus "retraction under pressure from Burton" I agree that this person is just hoaxing. But, honestly, I read the link and responded to it, not to your original post. Others came along after that and were addressing the rumor as if it were fact, and off we went. Perhaps it got too technical, but I think people were addressing real questions.

As to the hypothetical situaltion, I think it would be bad for MRG to remove the snowboarding ban. MRG is unique in a few ways, and that is the only think keeping it alive. It's not big enough, nor does it have the real estate or infrastructure to compete head-to-head with the other big boys. It chose a different track and is supported in this effort by a core group of diehards that are willing to buy shares to back up their words. For better or worse, I think you'd lose a big part of this core group if they attempted to lift the snowboard ban.

This is, unfortunately, bad for the snowboarders who want to ride MRG. But I think MRG would go downhill (sorry) quickly if that core group abandoned the ski area. It really only works today as a throwback to an earlier era. Slow lifts, little snowmaking, limited grooming, small and intimate lodge, and no snowboards are all part of that throwback. I don't think it is an absolute requirement for a throwback ski area, but in this case it seems to be.

-dave-

 

[JimG.]

As to the hypothetical situaltion, I think it would be bad for MRG to remove the snowboarding ban. MRG is unique in a few ways, and that is the only think keeping it alive. It's not big enough, nor does it have the real estate or infrastructure to compete head-to-head with the other big boys. It chose a different track and is supported in this effort by a core group of diehards that are willing to buy shares to back up their words. For better or worse, I think you'd lose a big part of this core group if they attempted to lift the snowboard ban.

This is, unfortunately, bad for the snowboarders who want to ride MRG. But I think MRG would go downhill (sorry) quickly if that core group abandoned the ski area. It really only works today as a throwback to an earlier era. Slow lifts, little snowmaking, limited grooming, small and intimate lodge, and no snowboards are all part of that throwback. I don't think it is an absolute requirement for a throwback ski area, but in this case it seems to be.

-dave-

No doubt MRG serves a niche market.
Even more important is that this niche market is fanatical and wants MRG to stay the way it is.
And MRG simply can't ignore that fact.

I'm sure they would lose a large portion of their current customers if they did allow snowboards. Just look at the fevered response to this thread. I agree that the area would lose out if that happened.

Would they be able to recoup revenue with increased snowboard visits? Would snowboarders flock to MRG? Would so many snowboarders go there to make them forget skiers? Snowboarders, what say you?

 

[SkiDog]

I would assume that any "ridership" lost due to lifting the snowboard ban would be made up for 10 fold by snowboarders...now would they return year after year like the current "ridership" that would remain to be seen...and would be a risk it seems MRG is VERY unwilling to take.

M

 

[thetrailboss]

I'm just going to say this....not being offensive or anything...but honestly, MRG is only one of three places in North America that don't permit snowboarders. Only one of three. There are hundreds of other places and thousands of acres that are open. Is MRG really that great? Go to Jay. Go to Bolton. Go to Sugarbush. Go to Magic. Go to Burke. Similar terrain and snow. Why is there such an attraction to MRG? Is it the psychological desire because you can't ride there?

 

[David Metsky]

From the original blog: http://powderjihad.wordpress.com/

Burton to Purchase Mad River? — Update 3
May 16th, 2006 by powderjihad
At the request of Burton Management, this post has been removed. .

The whole blog has now been removed. I don't think his posting style was much appreciated by Burton, MRG, or WordPress.

-dave-

 

[David Metsky]

MRG is only one of two places in North America that don't permit snowboarders. Only one of two.

Three actually; MRG, Alta, and Taos.

-dave-

 

[riverc0il]

Here's what you're really saying...you don't like the idea of a snowboard company buying MRG and you won't even discuss the idea because you can't give it any mental space; it just doesn't work for you.

um... how about no. while that is my sentiment, it is not the reason why any one is suggesting this whole thing is a hoax. what is this? you call a spade a spade and get accused of being biased? c'mon jim, call me anal, fine. i am. i frequently get caught up in logical and semantical discourse. that much is true. but because of that very reason, my bias is not strong. the lack of reason is why society is such a mess right now.

in non-analyzing opininated terms, i think new england would loose something very special if such a deal ever went through. if it was ever sold, we would see huge snow making, trail widening, grooming, slopeside, high speed lifts, the death of the single, and complete destruction of the great atmosphere that mrg has. yes, i don't like the idea and it doesn't work for me. that is not why i posted previously about the hoax being not accurate. but if you want to take this thread down this direction, long live MRG in its current form.

 

[JimG.]

I'm just going to say this....not being offensive or anything...but honestly, MRG is only one of two places in North America that don't permit snowboarders. Only one of two. There are hundreds of other places and thousands of acres that are open. Is MRG really that great? Go to Jay. Go to Bolton. Go to Sugarbush. Go to Magic. Go to Burke. Similar terrain and snow. Why is there such an attraction to MRG? Is it the psychological desire because you can't ride there?

Actually 3...MRG, Alta, and Taos, NM.

This is the common argument...and you will never understand how snowboarders feel because your sliding tool of choice, skis, is allowed and their tool of choice, snowboards, isn't.

It's easy to tell an excluded party to go elsewhere when you have no restrictions. And while it's impossible to actually tell, how would you feel if there was a mountain that one group of folks raves about but you can't experience because your sliding tool isn't allowed to play?

 

[riverc0il]

So, other than the "skiers only" MRG mystique, you feel things would be pretty much the same. I kind of agree.

i agree with that. the skiers only mystique is a powerful pull and i like it the way it is. but i will admit not much would change if boarders were allowed. most boarders don't care about mrg. no park, lots of bumps, elitist attitude, not welcoming of them, etc. i suspect mrg would draw folks like dmc that keep it real, not the park kids. i don't see many boarders showing up and the actual mountain itself wouldn't change much. good boarders don't destroy bumps any more than bad skiers do, so that doesn't hold up if the mountain only attracts good boarders. i still enjoy the mountain as is. their slogan wouldn't work any other way

 

[riverc0il]

dave touches on an interesting point of economics: if the ban were removed, could MRG survive? no way would enough snowboarders go to MRG to off set the mass exodous of people that would rather not ski MRG than see boarders there.

 

[riverc0il]

I would assume that any "ridership" lost due to lifting the snowboard ban would be made up for 10 fold by snowboarders...now would they return year after year like the current "ridership" that would remain to be seen...and would be a risk it seems MRG is VERY unwilling to take.

M

i don't see this. what would draw boarders to MRG? certainly, really good boarders would have a field day at MRG. but most boarders don't like bumps, a good porition of them like terrain parks. boarders are generally younger than skiers and the younger population tends to enjoy resorty things like snowmaking, grooming, parks, pipes, hits, etc. that MRG doesn't have. also, there is the issue of the safety concern of derailing the single. that would have to be addressed or boarders would be stuck riding the double. i think MRG would attract good boarders if such a thing ever occurred, i don't see how a few good boarders could replace the die hard dollars of departing skiers though. what boarder is going to get a pass at MRG? some might, but not enough to make up for a mass exodous of skier pass holders.