Cannon Mountain...thoughts

[deadheadskier]

You are correct. My bad. It would be 10% of the state's population (130K different people) using the mountain. For some reason I must have thought I read 10%, not 100%.

 

[riverc0il]

He said 100% though.

Also, from a purely financial aspect, I think that the tolls argument strengthens his case: a new operator would undoubtedly advertise more and try to bring in more skier visits. From "Cannon is a treasure don't destroy this wonderful public good" it is less so. Boo crowds. hurray beer.

I disagree. Those skiers would just be siphoned off from other areas. The tolls are south of the 93/89 split. So any additional skiers taken from 93 ski areas and VT ski areas north of Killington would not represent any shift in tolls. Skiers taken away from 95/16, maybe. Is it really going to amount to that much? Does anyone really think a private Cannon is going to pack em' in? You can change the management but you can't change the topography. Even the Muellers couldn't completely Sunapee Cannon. At least not the terrain....

 

[MadPadraic]

I disagree. Those skiers would just be siphoned off from other areas. The tolls are north of the 93/89 split. So any additional skiers taken from 93 ski areas and VT ski areas north of Killington would not represent any shift in tolls. Skiers taken away from 95/16, maybe. Is it really going to amount to that much? Does anyone really think a private Cannon is going to pack em' in? You can change the management but you can't change the topography. Even the Muellers couldn't completely Sunapee Cannon. At least not the terrain....

That's a good point about our hypothetical Cannon mostly taking visits from other areas rather than increasing the overall market size (though Cannon could market itself as big time skiing close to MA). But in terms of trying to turn Cannon into Okemo, I don't see that as being a good strategy. There seems to be a belief here that over groomed and unchallenging is the only way to appeal to the masses. If that's true, why are Jay, MRG, Sugarbush, Stowe, Jackson Hole, Ajax, etc so successful? They all market themselves as being difficult and at least some of them brag about bumps and natural terrain.

 

[threecy]

The tolls are north of the 93/89 split. So any additional skiers taken from 93 ski areas and VT ski areas north of Killington would not represent any shift in tolls.

South of the 93/89 split, but same effect.

 

[threecy]

Why don't you go back and reread the context of my statement.

Black Phantom made a true statement; "The State makes money off of tolls from people visiting Hampton Beach." I simply made another true statement; "The State also makes money off of tolls for people visiting Cannon."

Even if I could provide you a dollar figure, it wouldn't matter.

The context of my statement in this thread is that every time I so much as make a claim here, it is demanded (often by you) that I back it up. Yet you are able to make claims with no support. Got it.

 

[riverc0il]

That's a good point about our hypothetical Cannon mostly taking visits from other areas rather than increasing the overall market size (though Cannon could market itself as big time skiing close to MA). But in terms of trying to turn Cannon into Okemo, I don't see that as being a good strategy. There seems to be a belief here that over groomed and unchallenging is the only way to appeal to the masses. If that's true, why are Jay, MRG, Sugarbush, Stowe, Jackson Hole, Ajax, etc so successful? They all market themselves as being difficult and at least some of them brag about bumps and natural terrain.

I can't speak for the western resorts, but MRG markets itself just as much as a family mountain as an experts mountain. As a shareholder, I would argue our success is more due to families than die hards. While MRG has been successful as a coop, I MRG isn't exactly rolling in it and has to make careful choices on how to reinvest into its infrastructure. A mountain without the historic cache of MRG would not be able to survive, it is a unique area. As for Jay, having been a pass holder there, the number of families and joeys at Jay FAR outnumbers the hardcore and powder hounds. Jay isn't successful because of the powder hounds even though that is where it gets its reputation. Take away the groomer only crowd and Jay would fail. So would Sugarbush.

 

[riverc0il]

South of the 93/89 split, but same effect.

Thanks for the correction, that is what I meant and will fix it. If the toll was north of the split, there could be toll variances if I-93 ski areas stole from VT.

 

[deadheadskier]

The context of my statement in this thread is that every time I so much as make a claim here, it is demanded (often by you) that I back it up. Yet you are able to make claims with no support. Got it.

Not quite

When I can't offer you data, I admit it, such as with the tolls.

What I don't do is play politician and deflect away from the question and point people to my website or say, "that information is available from the State of NH for a fee if you are interested"

 

[threecy]

What I don't do is play politician and deflect away from the question and point people to my website or say, "that information is available from the State of NH for a fee if you are interested"

Right, you can't even be bothered to find out where the data to back your claim exists.

 

[Cannonball]

Not quite

When I can't offer you data, I admit it, such as with the tolls.

What I don't do is play politician and deflect away from the question and point people to my website or say, "that information is available from the State of NH for a fee if you are interested"

At least you get a response. I've been asking him simple, direct, non-challenging questions (in the other Cannon thread) so I can understand the environmental issues better. He ignores them. Oh well.

 

[deadheadskier]

Right, you can't even be bothered to find out where the data to back your claim exists.

What more do you want threecy?

Black Phantom said the state makes money off of tolls from people visiting Hampton Beach. True Statement.

I said, the state makes money off of tolls from people visiting Cannon as well. True Statement.

I have admitted to not knowing what the data is. Doesn't make my statement false because I don't know.

If I were to give you an approximation of that revenue. I'd suggest that probably 80% of the skier visits to Cannon pass through the Hooksett tolls. So, 104K visits. Factoring in buses, let's say the vehicles going through those tolls, average 6 passengers. So, roughly 17K skier vehicles pass through the Hooksett tolls on the way to visit Cannon.

$1 a toll each way would equal approximately 34K in revenue to the state per season.

Happy?

 

[deadheadskier]

When I can't offer you data, I admit it, such as with the tolls.

What I don't do is play politician and deflect away from the question and point people to my website or say, "that information is available from the State of NH for a fee if you are interested"

At least you get a response. I've been asking him simple, direct, non-challenging questions (in the other Cannon thread) so I can understand the environmental issues better. He ignores them. Oh well.

pretty much

 

[threecy]

I said, the state makes money off of tolls from people visiting Cannon as well. True Statement.

I have admitted to not knowing what the data is. Doesn't make my statement false because I don't know.

If I were to give you an approximation of that revenue. I'd suggest that probably 80% of the skier visits to Cannon pass through the Hooksett tolls. So, 104K visits. Factoring in buses, let's say the vehicles going through those tolls, average 6 passengers. So, roughly 17K skier vehicles pass through the Hooksett tolls on the way to visit Cannon.

$1 a toll each way would equal approximately 34K in revenue to the state per season.

Happy?

I guess that sets the precedent for backing up claims here moving forward.

 

[MadPadraic]

I can't speak for the western resorts, but MRG markets itself just as much as a family mountain as an experts mountain. As a shareholder, I would argue our success is more due to families than die hards. While MRG has been successful as a coop, I MRG isn't exactly rolling in it and has to make careful choices on how to reinvest into its infrastructure. A mountain without the historic cache of MRG would not be able to survive, it is a unique area. As for Jay, having been a pass holder there, the number of families and joeys at Jay FAR outnumbers the hardcore and powder hounds. Jay isn't successful because of the powder hounds even though that is where it gets its reputation. Take away the groomer only crowd and Jay would fail. So would Sugarbush.

I'll try to write a more thoughtful/detailed post later, but to get the idea out there... I would expect that the Joey/groomer crowd at Jay are attracted because of the marketing campaign, even if they don't actually make heavy use of that type of terrain. Sort of like owning an Porsche but driving slow or a 4wd SUV and never venturing off road (nor driving in blizzard).

 

[Geoff]

I'll try to write a more thoughtful/detailed post later, but to get the idea out there... I would expect that the Joey/groomer crowd at Jay are attracted because of the marketing campaign, even if they don't actually make heavy use of that type of terrain. Sort of like owning an Porsche but driving slow or a 4wd SUV and never venturing off road (nor driving in blizzard).

No. ...and it's not the "Joey" crowd. It would be the Jean, Joseph, Louis, and Pierre crowd. Jay has far more Quebec plates than southern New England/metro-NYC plates. Like any other ski area, most of the customers are intermediates.

Other than Mad River which is an anomoly since it has a 600 person per hour single chair so it's crowded with 1000 people, the only place I can think of with a mostly expert customer base is Snowbird. Even Jackson Hole is more than 50% intermediate terrain. Whistler is certainly more than 50% intermediate.

 

[AdironRider]

No. ...and it's not the "Joey" crowd. It would be the Jean, Joseph, Louis, and Pierre crowd. Jay has far more Quebec plates than southern New England/metro-NYC plates. Like any other ski area, most of the customers are intermediates.

Other than Mad River which is an anomoly since it has a 600 person per hour single chair so it's crowded with 1000 people, the only place I can think of with a mostly expert customer base is Snowbird. Even Jackson Hole is more than 50% intermediate terrain. Whistler is certainly more than 50% intermediate.

Have you been to Jackson? Our blues blow most blacks anywhere else out of the water. This is actually a pretty large complaint for alot of folks, but marketing keeps pushing it so people other than experts actually travel here.

 

[MadPadraic]

No. ...and it's not the "Joey" crowd. It would be the Jean, Joseph, Louis, and Pierre crowd. Jay has far more Quebec plates than southern New England/metro-NYC plates. Like any other ski area, most of the customers are intermediates.

Other than Mad River which is an anomoly since it has a 600 person per hour single chair so it's crowded with 1000 people, the only place I can think of with a mostly expert customer base is Snowbird. Even Jackson Hole is more than 50% intermediate terrain. Whistler is certainly more than 50% intermediate.

Joey wasn't my term, I actually don't like it. As long as they aren't endangering me, I don't really care how people enjoy their time on the slopes or what their skill levels are.

That being said, I think the meat of your post proves my point. Most resorts make a big deal out of how authentic (whatever that means) their experience is and how difficult their terrain is. Every major resort I've ever been to has plenty of intermediate terrain, but only a handful emphasize it.

 

[Geoff]

Have you been to Jackson? Our blues blow most blacks anywhere else out of the water. This is actually a pretty large complaint for alot of folks, but marketing keeps pushing it so people other than experts actually travel here.

As you say, marketing is successful getting the tourists to show up.

At Snowbird, they can ski there one day and then go elsewhere rather than be banished to Chip's Run. You don't see much Texas Tuck there.

 

[Geoff]

Joey wasn't my term, I actually don't like it. As long as they aren't endangering me, I don't really care how people enjoy their time on the slopes or what their skill levels are.

That being said, I think the meat of your post proves my point. Most resorts make a big deal out of how authentic (whatever that means) their experience is and how difficult their terrain is. Every major resort I've ever been to has plenty of intermediate terrain, but only a handful emphasize it.

Actually, I'm arguing the contrary point.

The most successful resorts are stuffed full of intermediate terrain and market the hell out of it. Okemo is the poster child in the east. Vail is really intermediate. Steamboat is really intermediate. Snowmass is really intermediate. You make your money from the people paying retail prices at high season. If it wasn't for them, there would be very few ski areas. Ski areas would go broke if all they had was advanced skiers on season passes who ski 60 days per year.

Other than Mad River's "Ski It If You Can", nobody in the east markets themselves as the super-challenging ball crusher ski area of the east. The biggest places like Sunday River and Killington market having something for everybody but nobody is going to do anything to chase away that $1,000/day family of 4 business or the car load of intermediate couples driving up from the flatlands business. It's everybody's bread and butter.

 

[hrstrat57]

Actually, I'm arguing the contrary point.

The most successful resorts are stuffed full of intermediate terrain and market the hell out of it. Okemo is the poster child in the east. Vail is really intermediate. Steamboat is really intermediate. Snowmass is really intermediate. You make your money from the people paying retail prices at high season. If it wasn't for them, there would be very few ski areas. Ski areas would go broke if all they had was advanced skiers on season passes who ski 60 days per year.

Other than Mad River's "Ski It If You Can", nobody in the east markets themselves as the super-challenging ball crusher ski area of the east. The biggest places like Sunday River and Killington market having something for everybody but nobody is going to do anything to chase away that $1,000/day family of 4 business or the car load of intermediate couples driving up from the flatlands business. It's everybody's bread and butter.

Well said!