Cannon Mountain...thoughts

[UVSHTSTRM]

Thats one of my favorite things about Cannon, the lack of crowds and great terrain. I love the mountain the way it is and with the mittersill lift open now, there is even more terrain to explore. Its the classic feel of the place that gets me every time which I cant see any company keeping if they take the mountain over. My view on cannon is that it is a gem and if its making money than why bother leasing it? If it is loosing money, it is worth paying that small sum to keep it the way it is because there is no other mountain that I have experienced that skis like cannon does. Wildcat has a similar vibe, but cannon just has that special feel to it.

While I could care less whether Cannon is leased out or not, I still don't get the whole vibe, classic feel, nothing skis like Cannon, etc. I don't mean to pick on you, others have said it prior and will say it going forward, but what makes Cannon more old school, classic, vibe, etc? I mean depending on where your from the mountain that you call home tends to have "the vibe". Classic? In what way does it differ from every other privately run resort? It's got lifts, lots of them, it's got a base lodge or two, it's got snowmaking, it's got wide trails, it's got housing at the bottom of it, and it's got really wide trails just like every other resort.....oh and it's got lots of trails. So I am not sure what makes it more or less classic then every other resort in the Northeast. As far as how it skis, it's fine, it's what Northeast skiing is, it pretty much offers every trail type, fall lines, etc that every other resort does....just doesn't have tons of intermediate terrain. I guess I just don't see the big deal if the state were to lease it out in regards to terrain, classic feel, vibe. Pricing of the passes and tickets that might change, but I am not sure they could get away with it....I mean they are already close to average for a typical day ticket for a flatlander.

 

[threecy]

so, improved snowmaking will increase skier visits by 100%?

Do you expect me to post a business plan or something? Come on.

 

[deadheadskier]

You're the one who insists that Cannon would increase skier visits 250% under private management just like Sunapee.

I pointed out that Sunapee got there with massive investment and that outside of snowmaking and perhaps grooming equipment, Cannon already has all of the things the Meullers did in place - HSQ for main lift, updated base lodge etc.

If you're so strong in your feelings about the growth private management would bring to the area, you clearly must have a vision of how it gets there no? I ask the question, you respond 'snowmaking'. Not a very convincing argument.

 

[threecy]

You're the one who insists that Cannon would increase skier visits 250% under private management just like Sunapee.

Really? Where did I insist that Cannon would increase skier visits by 250%? I merely said it's not impossible, contrary to your insisting that there was "NO WAY."

 

[deadheadskier]

your constant use of the Meuller's success at Sunapee indicates that that's what you believe would happen at Cannon under private ownership.

yet, you refuse to explain how it would other than 'improve snowmaking'.

I stand by my statement that there is NO WAY you'd see the same increases at Cannon short of massive real estate development and turning Mittersill into an low intermediate trail pod serviced by a HSQ. If you believe they should do the latter, I'm guessing you're one to fart in church.

 

[thetrailboss]

Actually, what I find interesting is that Threecy makes the argument that the state runs Cannon so well that it put other places out of business but then turns around and argues the opposite saying that the state does a bad job and having a private operator would make it better. Seems to want to argue both ways.

As to the argument that the state put places out of business, the ownership factor is outweighed by other considerations that factored in such as the size of the area (vertical AND acreage), the locations of the operations, and other factors such as insurance and energy costs.

 

[threecy]

I stand by my statement that there is NO WAY you'd see the same increases at Cannon short of massive real estate development and turning Mittersill into an low intermediate trail pod serviced by a HSQ.

Alright, you're on the record.

 

[deadheadskier]

Actually, what I find interesting is that Threecy makes the argument that the state runs Cannon so well that it put other places out of business but then turns around and argues the opposite saying that the state does a bad job and having a private operator would make it better. Seems to want to argue both ways.

As to the argument that the state put places out of business, the ownership factor is outweighed by other considerations that factored in such as the size of the area (vertical AND acreage), the locations of the operations, and other factors such as insurance and energy costs.

agree 100%

http://forums.alpinezone.com/showpost.php?p=625995&postcount=168

wanting the cake and eating it to

 

[Northernflight]

While I could care less whether Cannon is leased out or not, I still don't get the whole vibe, classic feel, nothing skis like Cannon, etc. I don't mean to pick on you, others have said it prior and will say it going forward, but what makes Cannon more old school, classic, vibe, etc? I mean depending on where your from the mountain that you call home tends to have "the vibe". Classic? In what way does it differ from every other privately run resort? It's got lifts, lots of them, it's got a base lodge or two, it's got snowmaking, it's got wide trails, it's got housing at the bottom of it, and it's got really wide trails just like every other resort.....oh and it's got lots of trails. So I am not sure what makes it more or less classic then every other resort in the Northeast. As far as how it skis, it's fine, it's what Northeast skiing is, it pretty much offers every trail type, fall lines, etc that every other resort does....just doesn't have tons of intermediate terrain. I guess I just don't see the big deal if the state were to lease it out in regards to terrain, classic feel, vibe. Pricing of the passes and tickets that might change, but I am not sure they could get away with it....I mean they are already close to average for a typical day ticket for a flatlander.

Its the combination of all the parts. Its Franconia notch, the tram, the rustic feel of the lodge, the way the trails flow and the way they are set up, the history of the place, the employees. I am the first to admit I have a limited scope of skiing. Ive grown up in New Hampshire so most of my skiing has been in the White Mountains. I have been to Vermont and Main of course but have only spent two days out West. I'm sure there are places out there that are better than Cannon, but for me its the feel I get whenever I go there. Every resort is different but Cannon is special for me. Its just all the bits and pieces put together that make it great. Sure it lacks intermediate terrain, there are some nice blue trails but for the average skier they can pose challenging although Ive never found Cannon to be as tough as I hear everyone say it is. Whenever I think of a corporate ski area I think of Loon, I know that's not always the case, take Wildcat as a example, but my fear would be a private operating trying to compete toe to toe with Loon which would require a build up of amenities and turning mittersill into something smiler to the Kang Quad at Loon. I like Cannon the way it is and I don't want it to change. We all fear change, just look at the discussions when they where putting the Mitt lift in. Hopefully if it does change it is for the better, I just don't see any benefits from leasing the mountain for anyone.

 

[threecy]

Actually, what I find interesting is that Threecy makes the argument that the state runs Cannon so well that it put other places out of business but then turns around and argues the opposite saying that the state does a bad job and having a private operator would make it better. Seems to want to argue both ways.

No, that is not what I was saying. You're missing the part about government pouring millions of dollars in investments into Cannon (as well as Sunapee years ago and Gunstock).

Cannon doesn't have any loan or property tax payments, amongst many other costs. Debt and taxes absolutely cripple private sector ski areas in bad times.

 

[bobbutts]

No, that is not what I was saying. You're missing the part about government pouring millions of dollars in investments into Cannon (as well as Sunapee years ago and Gunstock).

Cannon doesn't have any loan or property tax payments, amongst many other costs. Debt and taxes absolutely cripple private sector ski areas in bad times.

And during bad times at Cannon the State has to cover it, so they're essentially NELSAP-proof. I have no trouble giving you this point.

But wouldn't a State subsidized, but privately leased area be even more of an unfair competitor? For instance the Mueller's seem to be able do things more aggressively and cheaply than Cannon with their special state arrangement and private combo. Like install a second hand chairlift at lower cost. Also if they go belly up the State would likely be there to take it back over. I'm wondering if a leased area like Sunapee is an even more unfair vs. Cannon?

Threecy are you saying the State should get out of the ski area business altogether because it hurts private business here? Or just that they should lease Cannon? Or??

 

[SIKSKIER]

Holy cow!I leave for a few days and then more of this?Leave Cannon alone.Do you know what happened when leasing Cannon was first discussed?The Old Man fell from his perch in horror!:grin:Cannon and the wonderland that is Franconia Notch exist in its current beauty today because the state had the foresite to purchase the lands from private hands.Can you even imagine what Franconia Notch would look like if it had been in private ownership until now?The state has done one incredible job keeping a balance access for tourists and leaving it mostly undeveloped.I'm sure they would remain in control in that sense with a lease but for gods sake,they have been a great caretaker and also have prospered.Leave it alone already.

 

[threecy]

But wouldn't a State subsidized, but privately leased area be even more of an unfair competitor?

I don't see how a leased Cannon would be state subsidized?

In regard to assets, investments at Sunapee starting with the lease agreement were made with private dollars (and I believe are thus taxed by local towns). Assets owned by the government would in theory be priced into the lease and thus be similar to how Bretton Woods, Loon, etc. rent theirs from CNL.

In regard to land, Attitash, Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat all lease much of their ski terrain from the Federal government.

Like install a second hand chairlift at lower cost.

The Sun Bowl Quad at Sunapee was already owned by the Muellers (they had purchased it new for Okemo).

Threecy are you saying the State should get out of the ski area business altogether because it hurts private business here? Or just that they should lease Cannon? Or??

The Phone Book Rule: "If it's being done by something already listed in the phone book, the government shouldn't be doing it."

 

[Cannonball]

The Phone Book Rule: "If it's being done by something already listed in the phone book, the government shouldn't be doing it."

No more public: defenders, health services, road repair, security, armed forces, teachers, broadcasting, research, elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, colleges, oil reserves, parks, campgrounds, ski areas, golf courses, utilities, ........

I think I finally see where you are coming from.

 

[Puck it]

No more public: defenders, health services, road repair, security, armed forces, teachers, broadcasting, research, elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, colleges, oil reserves, parks, campgrounds, ski areas, golf courses, utilities, ........

I think I finally see where you are coming from.

He has been held up in a large compound outside of Concord with no internet. He uses couriers to post these rants.

 

[MadPadraic]

Really? You are comparing pricing to Okemo run Sunapee? The fact that Cannon is cheaper than Sunapee says a LOT more about Sunapee than Cannon. Cannon is on the second tier right under the top big resorts and except for resident and twofer days, discounts are really crumby compared to VT resorts that offer a lot of deals.

1) You put out a challenge on how it might change, and now your rejecting the most direct comparisons in terms of geography and size (Loon) and changing business structure (Sunapee)?
2) Name me two better deals within a 2.5 hour drive from Boston.

Cannon doesn't groom any more or less than they used to. They groom better though. Leave the powder alone for two days? Really? C'mon. I've been skiing Cannon pretty regularly for ten years now. Anything not designated as bumps gets the groom day after the powder day. Day after powder day is all about the trees. Hell, day of powder day is all about the trees. It ain't like they are leaving a ton ungroomed even on a powder day (compared to Jay, for example).

1) Jay is far away. 2) As clear from earlier in the thread, we seem to have different experiences on the same mountain.

A potential leaser is going to treat Cannon differently than Smuggs or Jay because of how far they are from civilization?

Um, yes.

Keep in mind Smuggs is the closest big mountain to Burlington and Jay is just as close as Stowe to folks coming up I-91.

Stowe, Jay, and Smuggs are far away. Stratton and Mt Snow aren't. You view Jay as a nice drive, would you like Jay to become Stratton?

 

[MadPadraic]

It certainly tells you something when it takes half a decade of good snow years to pay off rolled over deficits.

Yes it does. What does it tell us? Well it tells us that if just "half a decade" of good snow years can pay off decades of losses, then the entire argument of "Cannon only makes small amounts of money in the years it turns a profit, but looses lots in the bad years," has to be false.

 

[threecy]

What does it tell us? Well it tells us that if just "half a decade" of good snow years can pay off decades of losses, then the entire argument of "Cannon only makes small amounts of money in the years it turns a profit, but looses lots in the bad years," has to be false.

Time value of money. I bet a single day of lift ticket sales can offset deficits incurred during the late 1930s at Cannon - does that actually mean anything?

The bottom line is the entire parks division is required by law to balance its budget every year. Another year in the red from Cannon may force the division to start *selling* property (as it almost did a few years ago).

 

[deadheadskier]

Time value of money. I bet a single day of lift ticket sales can offset deficits incurred during the late 1930s at Cannon - does that actually mean anything?

The bottom line is the entire parks division is required by law to balance its budget every year. Another year in the red from Cannon may force the division to start *selling* property (as it almost did a few years ago).

The NH State Park system is the only State Park system in the country that is self funded. I suppose that can be interpreted as being required by law to balance it's budget each year.

It sounds to me that a balanced budget is not what you'd like to see from the State Parks. You'd rather see the State Parks as a profit center with surpluses going towards reducing the overall State Budget deficit.

Who specifically discussed selling property? Which lawmakers? Why didn't it happen?

 

[threecy]

It sounds to me that a balanced budget is not what you'd like to see from the State Parks. You'd rather see the State Parks as a profit center with surpluses going towards reducing the overall State Budget deficit.

Where did I say that?

Who specifically discussed selling property? Which lawmakers? Why didn't it happen?

The NH legislature commissioned a study and grouped each of the parks, with group "C" being recommended for decommissioning, transferring, leasing, selling, or being given away. DRED walked that one back at the end of 2009, however it still gets whispered when the budget woes draw attention.