Cannon Mountain...thoughts

[deadheadskier]

That's not what Baldwin says though. He said the State Park system does not have to be self-sustaining. Suggesting that the State recognizes that revenue from other tax sources can be used to fund operations of the parks...........same thing with every other state.

By nature, State and National Parks were not established to be revenue centers for the government. They're intended to conserve natural resources for the enjoyment of citizens. Some how this concept is lost on you.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

apples and grapefruits. The Parks Dept is an administrative part of NH state government. Revenue and Losses experienced by the state park units can be diferent than the overall budget results of the department as a whole.

Every state budget, every year is public info. From my view unless you or someone else has reviewed the numbers from each state park, especially Cannon and Sunapee, all the posts regarding the profibilty of the state parks are just opinions. A dept deficit from what has been posted could be losses carried over from years ago and does not reflect actual Rev/Losses from each park. I suspect some parks make money, some do not. These numbers would be only a part of the state park's dept budgets resulting in the disconnect with the facts presented so far.

 

[Nick]

You guys are intense. that's all I have to say

 

[jack97]

hmmm.... this is getting some steam

http://www.nhpr.org/senate-committee-pushes-privatize-cannon


I bet there are a lot of land owners nearby hoping this would happen. In addition, I would be interested to see which companies are stepping to the plate to place a bid.


imo, the pro to this is that competition is good maybe it will lower the rate of increasing ticket passes around the area.... force Loon or Bretton Woods to reasonable pricing.

the con to this is that they have to compete, they have to tame the placed down even more. imo, the land swap for Mittersill was the first step and it now allows the option for wusification....

 

[threecy]

By nature, State and National Parks were not established to be revenue centers for the government. They're intended to conserve natural resources for the enjoyment of citizens. Some how this concept is lost on you.

How would Cannon not be conserved for the enjoyment of citizens if a private sector firm operated it? Again, hundreds of acres of land are current off limits to everyone for most of the year, and in season, only available to those paying $67 for a lift ticket (or less on a deal day or more for a season pass).

Meanwhile, nearby Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat are operated at no cost to the government. That land is open to free use year round, or for a fee if you wish to use a lift.

 

[thetrailboss]

How would Cannon not be conserved for the enjoyment of citizens if a private sector firm operated it? Again, hundreds of acres of land are current off limits to everyone for most of the year, and in season, only available to those paying $67 for a lift ticket (or less on a deal day or more for a season pass).

Not true! Single tram rides are available for a relatively reasonable cost and one can hike up the Kinsman Trail.

 

[MadPadraic]

Even if the bonds are paid off, it's still absolutely a drain on state residents - it ties up taxpayer funds. New Hampshire is staring at deficits and debt - why allocate debt to an alpine ski area that most New Hampshire residents will never use?

No it doesn't. First off there is no such thing as "tax payer funds." There is revenue generated from taxes, and there are state funds, but there is no such thing as "tax payer funds." Second, unless you know something that the bond markets don't, the state of NH is not credit constrained. If it was, then they couldn't issue bonds for Cannon at rates which you find unreasonably low. Funds are not diverted away from some other source, and the existence of Cannon bonds doesn't prevent the state from borrowing in other areas. This is cut and dry.

They absolutely have a lower cost to expand - $0. A privately owned ski area operator has to pay out of pocket to expand.

Factually incorrect; we have data available from four private ski resort operators: intrawest, Vail, ASC, and Peak. Not a single one of these pays "out of pocket" for expansions. All four use debt.

What in the world are you talking about?

You seem very upset that the state of NH can borrow cheaper than entities with poorer credit ratings. Hence, you want Cannon to pay more for its lifts. This means that you want higher costs to Cannon, which turns means higher lift ticket prices. Hence, Cannon skiers pay more money to Cannon, which goes directly into the bond markets.

 

[Northernflight]

If Cannon is privatized I don't think it would put pressure on Loon and Bretton Woods to lower prices, it most likely would be the opposite with Cannon trying to compete with Loon and Bretton Woods more, they would have to raise prices. I think the mountain is priced fairly for what it is now. I get a $250 season pass to 4 mountains so Im very happy with the current pricing structure. The only thing I see that can be done to Cannon to make it compete directly with Loon and Bretton Woods would be the complete taming of Mittersill, widening trails, adding snowmaking and expansion of slopeside houses which cant really occur anywhere withing the ski areas footprint unless they somehow add a pod on the ridge to the right of Mitt. which would cost a lot to do. I personally like the mountain how it is and I would not like to see it change in that way. If I want to ski Loon Ill go ski Loon, but most days I'm driving by to Cannon.

 

[deadheadskier]

. I get a $250 season pass to 4 mountains so Im very happy with the current pricing structure.

Student pass? State worker discount? Which Mountains? and how can I hook it up :lol:

 

[MadPadraic]

If Cannon is privatized I don't think it would put pressure on Loon and Bretton Woods to lower prices, it most likely would be the opposite with Cannon trying to compete with Loon and Bretton Woods more, they would have to raise prices. I think the mountain is priced fairly for what it is now. I get a $250 season pass to 4 mountains so Im very happy with the current pricing structure. The only thing I see that can be done to Cannon to make it compete directly with Loon and Bretton Woods would be the complete taming of Mittersill, widening trails, adding snowmaking and expansion of slopeside houses which cant really occur anywhere withing the ski areas footprint unless they somehow add a pod on the ridge to the right of Mitt. which would cost a lot to do. I personally like the mountain how it is and I would not like to see it change in that way. If I want to ski Loon Ill go ski Loon, but most days I'm driving by to Cannon.

I think this is right. Cannon is able to be so cheap because it doesn't have to maximize profits; it should be run to a break even. A private operator would see that it is 12%-50% cheaper than Loon or Sunapee and raise prices to just below Loon's. Where do you get a $250 pass to four mountains?

 

[Northernflight]

Student pass? State worker discount? Which Mountains? and how can I hook it up

Its the 4-NH College pass which thank god was continued even though the Threedom is dead now. Its good at Waterville, Bretton Woods, Cranmore, and Cannon. I never make the trek over to Cranmore so its more like a 3 mountain pass but its nice to have that option if I'm ever in that neck of the woods. Its going to run me up a little more than $250 this year since the pricing cutoff is this week and being a poor college student I need to find a job first......I wish they had something like pay $50 dollars up front to lock in the lower rate and then pay the rest before you pick up the pass. Makes the customer happy and if the pass doesn't get picked up they make a little $ but I'm getting off topic now. I honestly would not be happy with any other multiple mountain pass out there right now and the main thing that's the icing on the cake for me is having Cannon on the pass.

 

[threecy]

How would Cannon not be conserved for the enjoyment of citizens if a private sector firm operated it? Again, hundreds of acres of land are current off limits to everyone for most of the year, and in season, only available to those paying $67 for a lift ticket (or less on a deal day or more for a season pass).

Meanwhile, nearby Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat are operated at no cost to the government. That land is open to free use year round, or for a fee if you wish to use a lift.

Not true! Single tram rides are available for a relatively reasonable cost and one can hike up the Kinsman Trail.

I have it from a good source that there was a ~$300 fine in place (including a sign) if one attempted to walk down the ski slopes. So, not true that it's not true. The hundreds of acres of and around the ski trails are indeed technically off limits year round at Cannon unless you have a ski pass. Not the case at Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat.

 

[threecy]

No it doesn't. First off there is no such thing as "tax payer funds." There is revenue generated from taxes, and there are state funds, but there is no such thing as "tax payer funds."

We must have completely different views of government. I view government as something to be of the people, by the people, for the people. We fund government with our taxes. Whether they spend the money today, or borrow against it, it is our tax dollars that funds it.

Factually incorrect; we have data available from four private ski resort operators: intrawest, Vail, ASC, and Peak. Not a single one of these pays "out of pocket" for expansions. All four use debt.

That comment is factually incorrect. Sure, large purchases can be funded with debt (and are to an extent with Cannon, such as the Tramway). However, other off-season work is indeed funded with ski area funds. Different ski areas recognize it in different fashions. Cannon keeps it off it's profit and loss statement.

 

[Puck it]

I have it from a good source that there was a ~$300 fine in place (including a sign) if one attempted to walk down the ski slopes. So, not true that it's not true. The hundreds of acres of and around the ski trails are indeed technically off limits year round at Cannon unless you have a ski pass. Not the case at Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat.

I call bullcrap on this statement. I have seen snowshoers and skiers skinning up the trails in the winter. They offer a one way ticket on the Tram also.

Ticket Rates:

Ages 13+ round-trip ride: $13
Children ages 6-12 round-trip ride: $10.00
Children ages 5 & under: Free w/ adult
Ages 13+ one-way ride: $11.00

 

[SIKSKIER]

I still have no response to my post 321.Threecy didn't answer any part of it in his response.

 

[threecy]

I still have no response to my post 321.Threecy didn't answer any part of it in his response.

I'm not sure how to answer a question about feeling tingly.

The state would become essentially a landlord.

Ski areas with government landlords in New Hampshire:
- Wildcat
- Sunapee
- Waterville
- Loon

 

[deadheadskier]

Senator Threecy

The question is this. You are adamant that private investors would put Cannon on track for prosperity like Sunapee. That it will have greater skier visits etc. Then you turn face and say the poorly run state areas are partly responsible for the demise of three ski areas. Don't you see the hypocrisy in your positions on the two subjects. You can't have it both ways.

Now please, provide Sikskier, myself, trailboss and the several others who've called you out on this hypocrisy with some bulleted talking points dancing around the question like you're so fond of doing.

 

[threecy]

The question is this. You are adamant that private investors would put Cannon on track for prosperity like Sunapee. That it will have greater skier visits etc. Then you turn face and say the poorly run state areas are partly responsible for the demise of three ski areas. Don't you see the hypocrisy in your positions on the two subjects. You can't have it both ways.

Again, my Southern New Hampshire theory is that - a theory. But, yes if true, one can absolutely 'have it both ways.' A poorly run business with bottomless pockets can indeed harm others. Again, I'm not trying to single out Cannon employees, but rather the whole aspect of trying to run a business within government.

 

[Cannonball]

I have it from a good source that there was a ~$300 fine in place (including a sign) if one attempted to walk down the ski slopes. So, not true that it's not true. The hundreds of acres of and around the ski trails are indeed technically off limits year round at Cannon unless you have a ski pass. Not the case at Loon, Waterville, and Wildcat.

In the past 8 months I've been at Cannon well over 100 days. In the past 20 years I've been there hundreds and hundreds of times. I have never seen a sign that says that. I have hiked all aspects of Cannon (including the ski trails) during winter, spring, summer, and fall. I have skied Cannon before and after the lifts were spinning. I have walked past Cannon ski area employees and park maintenance crews while doing all of this.

I can't say that your "good authority" is definitely wrong.....but it sure seems it.

 

[Puck it]

In the past 8 months I've been at Cannon well over 100 days. In the past 20 years I've been there hundreds and hundreds of times. I have never seen a sign that says that. I have hiked all aspects of Cannon (including the ski trails) during winter, spring, summer, and fall. I have skied Cannon before and after the lifts were spinning. I have walked past Cannon ski area employees and park maintenance crews while doing all of this.

I can't say that your "good authority" is definitely wrong.....but it sure seems it.

Including Fischer Cat Glade!!!!!;-)