Do skiier's hate Snowboarders?

[polski]

So why are they banned at MRG?

With apologies to the dead horse ...

You don't have to "hate" snowboarders (I certainly don't; I hate assholes, whatever's on their feet) to support the ban at MRG (I do, on balance), and only at MRG, on the EC anyway.

As for "un-American," is there nothing more American than doing what you want with your own (first Betsy Pratt's, then the coop's) private property? Again, we're not talking about a civil-rights-protected class here.

 

[witch hobble]

So why are they banned at MRG?

My guess is because the transition to cooperative ownership coincided with the mid-late 90s explosive growth in snowboarding. It was a reactionary thing. It was stubborn-ness before and since, but a dozen years ago there was a very real possibility that snowboarders were going to take over the world. And that would mean the terrorists win.

 

[dmc]

My guess is because the transition to cooperative ownership coincided with the mid-late 90s explosive growth in snowboarding. It was a reactionary thing. It was stubborn-ness before and since, but a dozen years ago there was a very real possibility that snowboarders were going to take over the world. And that would mean the terrorists win.

Ski-haad!

 

[Cannonball]

Oh, the poor horse.

MRG (and the other non-snowboarder mtns) have a very good and simple reason for their ban. It's called niche marketing. MRG has great terrain but to compete on the open market with all the other nearby VT resorts they would need to invest in major upgrades. An alternative to head-to-head competition is to offer a service that consumers can't find elsewhere. In MRG's case that means no snowboarders, cheap tickets, un-sanitized terrain (and facilities), and a general low-key throw-back groovy vibe. They probably have relatively low operating costs, and can attract just enough skiers to make it work. It's a decent business model.

 

[polski]

I love that this has evolved into yet another MRG-snowboarder-ban thread when it evolved from one of those. Well, actually, I don't love it but I can't help throwing in another $0.02 anyway.

Oh, the poor horse.

MRG (and the other non-snowboarder mtns) have a very good and simple reason for their ban. It's called niche marketing. MRG has great terrain but to compete on the open market with all the other nearby VT resorts they would need to invest in major upgrades. An alternative to head-to-head competition is to offer a service that consumers can't find elsewhere. In MRG's case that means no snowboarders, cheap tickets, un-sanitized terrain (and facilities), and a general low-key throw-back groovy vibe. They probably have relatively low operating costs, and can attract just enough skiers to make it work. It's a decent business model.

I think that's pretty accurate, though from what I know of the history of MRG, I think this niche marketing opportunity flowed organically from an authentic desire to keep the place pretty much as it always has been -- fairly Spartan facilities, very low density of skiers on the trails, reliance on natural snow. Also, to increase uphill capacity or add snowmaking above 2300' now would require bylaw changes, so it wouldn't just be a matter of money but persuading a majority of voting coop members to allow those things, and I think that would be a very tough row to hoe.

I pay pretty close attention to the business model and agree, it's decent. We'll get killed in a bad snow year but do OK in a good winter. The place will never be rolling in dough but I think it's pretty sustainable over the long haul.

p.s. re niche marketing, per Board of Trustees meeting minutes, MRG is applying to have the entire ski area listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Among the arguments in favor was marketing - it would be the first ski area to win the designation.

now i really have to tear myself away from the computer and get shit done so I can ski there Sunday

 

[millerm277]

I suspect newbies who has been on the slopes less than 10 years would agree with you too.

Suprisingly....no. I'd say that teenagers themselves, are actually as divided as the older generation. The result I've found splits more along the lines of choice of emphasis....the "park rats", skiers and boarders alike tend to get along well. Those of us that aren't into the park, are usually the ones with less liking of snowboarders.

 

[JD]

Oh, the poor horse.

MRG (and the other non-snowboarder mtns) have a very good and simple reason for their ban. It's called niche marketing. MRG has great terrain but to compete on the open market with all the other nearby VT resorts they would need to invest in major upgrades. An alternative to head-to-head competition is to offer a service that consumers can't find elsewhere. In MRG's case that means no snowboarders, cheap tickets, un-sanitized terrain (and facilities), and a general low-key throw-back groovy vibe. They probably have relatively low operating costs, and can attract just enough skiers to make it work. It's a decent business model.

AS IF that were the reason. All these excuses made up after the fact that a bitter old lady lost her temper with some children...all of the sudden if become a marketing move...Pa-leese. LOL.
Someone find a pic of the energizer bunny because this thing just keeps going and going and going....

 

[millerm277]

AS IF that were the reason. All these excuses made up after the fact that a bitter old lady lost her temper with some children...all of the sudden if become a marketing move...Pa-leese. LOL.

I don't think too many people dispute that was the initial cause of the outright ban. However, it seems to be working quite well for MRG, why exactly would they want to change it? Their business model is working. They get a ton of free publicity, and their owners are happy. The fact that you don't like it, means nothing, ski somewhere else, or buy into the mountain and work to change it. Their "job" is to please shareholders, and to break even/profit. From all evidence, they are doing both, and that the shareholders overwhelmingly prefer the ban or else it wouldn't exist/would be voted on.

In short: Why should MRG care what you think, if the people that actually make the decisions are happy with the results of their decisions?

 

[mondeo]

If one actually looked at a chart with the numbers of skiers and riders in the last 15 years you will quickly see that without the fast growth of snowboarders from 1995 to 2005 we would have alot less resorts than we do now. Regarding the OP, the idea that all skiers might hate snowboarders is total stupidtown.

So you're saying that those snowboarders wouldn't have started skiing if snowboarding wasn't available?
Mid-90s to early 00's snowboarding was the rebel thing to do, leading to a bunch of punks on boards. Now it's mainstream. 95% of the population doesn't care anymore.

 

[abc]

All these excuses made up after the fact that a bitter old lady lost her temper with some children...all of the sudden if become a marketing move...Pa-leese.
Someone find a pic of the energizer bunny because this thing just keeps going and going and going....

Come on! Marketing doesn't have to be original. It only need to be effective!

MRG shareholders hitch onto the controversy and are milking it the best they can.

The fact this topic keeps coming up is the best evidence that marketing works better than you care to admit!

 

[snoseek]

It's probably just the weed talking but both this thread and the cruise control thread are downright hysterical.

 

[ski_resort_observer]

Do you know where I can find such a chart? Thanks in advance.

The chart was in an issue of SAM Magazine I have it somewhere. I did find this from a CNN story from 2004

"Participation in alpine, or downhill, skiing in the United States has dropped about 47 percent, to just over 7 million, from a high of more than 12 million in 1988, according to SnowSports Industries America, the industry's largest trade group.

Participation in snowboarding increased more than 300 percent, to 5.5 million, over the same period, according to SIA."

The whole article
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/01/21/sprj.ski04.snowboarding/index.html

 

[redalienx11]

It's probably just the weed talking but both this thread and the cruise control thread are downright hysterical.

yesssssss

 

[mondeo]

The chart was in an issue of SAM Magazine I have it somewhere. I did find this from a CNN story from 2004

"Participation in alpine, or downhill, skiing in the United States has dropped about 47 percent, to just over 7 million, from a high of more than 12 million in 1988, according to SnowSports Industries America, the industry's largest trade group.

Participation in snowboarding increased more than 300 percent, to 5.5 million, over the same period, according to SIA."

The whole article
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/01/21/sprj.ski04.snowboarding/index.html

So overall, skier + boarder numbers... stayed (about) equal!

It's called substitution.

 

[JD]

Come on! Marketing doesn't have to be original. It only need to be effective!

MRG shareholders hitch onto the controversy and are milking it the best they can.

The fact this topic keeps coming up is the best evidence that marketing works better than you care to admit!

The topic of how stupid GWBush is caem up alot too.....certainly notbecause he was beloved.

 

[billski]

The chart was in an issue of SAM Magazine I have it somewhere. I did find this from a CNN story from 2004

"Participation in alpine, or downhill, skiing in the United States has dropped about 47 percent, to just over 7 million, from a high of more than 12 million in 1988, according to SnowSports Industries America, the industry's largest trade group.

Participation in snowboarding increased more than 300 percent, to 5.5 million, over the same period, according to SIA."

The whole article
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/01/21/sprj.ski04.snowboarding/index.html

Interestingly, over the past five years, the trend in snowboard adoption has leveled out and skiing has increased once again.
While not exactly on-topic, I copied a demographic froma 2006 SIA report and recreated a graph with the age spread, just for yucks:
http://www.iabsi.com/ski/misc/skier demographics 2006.pdf

I'll have to search for the reference which gave me that info, but I know it was from SIA.

 

[billski]

I stand corrected, at least for 2008:

[FONT=&quot]SAM Magazine—Mount Prospect, Ill., July 13, 2009—According to data in the NSGA Sports Participation survey, there were 6.5 million Americans age 7 or older who skied more than once in 2008, along with 5.9 million snowboarders. Those figures represented increases of 1.9 percent and 15.6 percent, respectively, from 2007. Snowboarding was one of six sports, out of 41, with a growth rate of more than 10 percent.

[/FONT]

 

[billski]

While I was looking, here's some more boarder demographic info.

SAM Magazine—New York, June 11, 2008—According to a new study on injuries and recreational sports, more snowboarders are sent to the emergency room than participants in any other sport. The study, headed by researchers associated with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was reported in the journal Wilderness and Environmental Medicine. The study is the first to look at injuries from all activities, instead of individual sports or geographic areas.

Researchers examined data from nonfatal injuries from outdoor activities treated at 63 hospitals in 2004 and 2005. They calculated that almost 213,000 people annually were treated for such injuries nationwide. About half of those injured are young, between ages 10 and 24, and half of the injuries are caused by falls. The most common problems were broken bones and sprains, accounting for half of all cases. About 7 percent of ER visits were for concussions or other brain injuries.

Of those injured, about 109,000 (51.5 percent) were young people between the ages of 10 and 24. Males incur injuries at twice the rate as females. Researchers found that snowboarding (25.5 percent), sledding (10.8 percent), and hiking (6.3 percent) were associated with the highest percentage of injuries requiring emergency department visits. Oddly, skiing accounted for less than two percent of emergency visits at the hospitals in the study.

For both men and women of all ages, the most common injuries were fractures (27.4 percent) and sprains (23.9 percent). Of these, most injuries were to the arms or legs (52 percent) or to the head or neck (23.3 percent). Overall, 6.5 percent of outdoor injuries treated were diagnosed as traumatic brain injury (TBI).

 

[billski]

I stand corrected, at least for 2008:

[FONT=&quot]SAM Magazine—Mount Prospect, Ill., July 13, 2009—According to data in the NSGA Sports Participation survey, there were 6.5 million Americans age 7 or older who skied more than once in 2008, along with 5.9 million snowboarders. Those figures represented increases of 1.9 percent and 15.6 percent, respectively, from 2007. Snowboarding was one of six sports, out of 41, with a growth rate of more than 10 percent.

[/FONT]

a-ha, here is the chart. It's the trend that matters. The devil is in the details:

[FONT=&quot]"At the end of the 07/08 season, based on rider submissions & Ride Chronicle registrations, Ride's demographics are approximately 85% Male and 15% Female, with the largest age grouping being 18-24 years old. [/FONT]

We received the following insight from SIA's research guru Kelly Davis explaining the growth in snowboarder visits:
Participation was up across the board for 2008. It correlates with the 60.5 million (a new record) skier/rider visits to resorts reported for the 2007/08 season when La Niña conditions brought record snowfall to alpine resorts across the U.S (there were 57.4 million skier rider visits reported in the 2008/09 Kottke End of Season report). According to the NSGA Sports Participation Study, alpine skiing participation was up almost 19% and snowboarding was up 16% for 2008. The sample for the NSGA study is a bit small so we triangulate the results with the Kottke Skier/Rider visits report issued by NSAA and another participation study SIA sponsors along with OIA, SGMA, tennis, golf, NCPPA and others that includes 41,500 responses. We have two seasons of data from that study and cannot use it yet to trend participation, however, for now it serves as a good check on the trends reported by NSGA and a better view of the actual number of snowboard participants. Additionally, that study looks at participation by season rather than by year. The NSGA and the larger SIA Participation Panel study correlate well:

NSGA Participation Study (participated at least 2 times in the given year) – 5,063,000 riders in 2007 and 5,854,000 riders in 2008
SIA Participation Panel Study (participated at least 2 times in the given season) – 5,874,000 for 2006/07 and 6,099,000 riders in 2007/08

also see http://www.nsaa.org/nsaa/press/nsga-snbd-07.pdf

 

[campgottagopee]

With apologies to the dead horse ...

You don't have to "hate" snowboarders (I certainly don't; I hate assholes, whatever's on their feet) to support the ban at MRG (I do, on balance), and only at MRG, on the EC anyway.

As for "un-American," is there nothing more American than doing what you want with your own (first Betsy Pratt's, then the coop's) private property? Again, we're not talking about a civil-rights-protected class here.

Beg to differ----there's nothing more un-American than NOT being able to go skiing/riding with ALL your buddys.