Does size Matter?

[Sparky]

I ‘m sitting here at my desk wondering (as I often do when I’m suppose to be working) if there has ever been a survey done breaking down the number of skier visits to the smaller mountains vs. the larger. In the east a large mountain would be Killington, Sunday River etc. and a smalls would be the Windhams, Magic’s, Sundown. I guess it could be a matter of there being more small areas then large, or maybe it’s just a factor of whether you go to the cheaper closer mountain or travel and spend.

I’m sure there is a survey showing visits/mountain and there is no real definition of large vs. small, but I would find it interesting to see just where the business centers.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I think there are alot of in betweens too. You're a Jiminy Peak guy Sparky, smaller then Kmart, but bigger then Sundown.

 

[thetrailboss]

Bigger as in by number of trails? Vert? Number of people skiing there?

Some would dispute the characterization of Magic as a small mountain. It has a fair amount of vert and terrain...but really does not have many skiers or riders.

 

[Riverskier]

Bigger as in by number of trails? Vert? Number of people skiing there?

Some would dispute the characterization of Magic as a small mountain. It has a fair amount of vert and terrain...but really does not have many skiers or riders.

Another example of this would be Saddleback. That is a HUGE mountain, but has less skier visits than many mountains less than half it's size.

I think you would have to further quantify the definition of big.

 

[riverc0il]

Places like WaWa, Nashoba, Bradford, Pats, etc gotta have higher skier numbers than many bigger sized hills. There are small areas with higher skiers visits and low skier visits. And there are big mountains such as Burke (and some may say Magic) that don't get hardly any skier visits for their size.

 

[Geoff]

When I'm traveling west, I've been seeking out the smaller places. Double chairs, 1000 feet of vertical, very few skier visits. An example of a place I really like is Monarch. The surface is usually fantastic since they have so little traffic. The traffic they get tends to be Texans who ignore the terrain I like to ski. The tickets are cheap. The food in the bar is really good and a great value. The whole vibe is very relaxed. It doesn't have a glitzy base village. I've found some good lodging options down in the flats 15 minutes away.

Ski Santa Fe and Wolf Creek are other examples. I've actually thought about retiring to Santa Fe and having that be my home ski area. A great town. A very nice little ski area 20 minutes up the hill.

In the east, small doesn't necessarily translate well. You need a pretty big mountain to get the orographic lift that gets you 250" of snow. You usually want snowmaking unless you're cherry picking the good days. Most of the time, Mad River is the only "small" mountain that is on my radar screen.

 

[millerm277]

Agreed with Geoff's thoughts on this...

Around here, it's only the larger places that I can really ski at for a length of time, and (usually) that have reliable enough conditions/will always have enough trails open for me to plan to go far in advance. I like Blue, and Sno, but if I can, I'm headed to Hunter or larger any day. The smaller mountains around here, really aren't nicer than their larger counterparts like they often are out west. Their only advantage most of the time, is convenience. They usually are more crowded and with worse snow conditions in the east.

Out west, I much, much prefer anywhere out of the way/off the radar to the Heavenly's and Aspen's.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

some of the smalls you mention like Windham and Magic would actually be considered midsize..some skiers don't bother with the small local mountains and only go on ski trips to larger New England and Rocky mountain resorts..but some small mountains due really well due to their prioximity to large population centers. Seven Springs in western PA does almost 500,000 skier visits per year because of it's proximity to Pittsburgh and Washington DC. Blue mountain does over 300,000 skier visits a year because it's only 75 miles from Philly. I'm guessing the smaller areas do an equal amount of business there are just so many more small areas than larger ones..so while the average small area might do 1/5 or even 1/10th the skier days of Killington or Vail, the # of them make up the difference,

I'm guessing that the % of total visits at large resorts has increased a significant amount in the past generation as more and more small mom and pop ski areas have closed. As for Large vs Small..it's all relative. Out west..Bridger Bowl and Grand Targhee are considered small at only about 2k of vert and over 1,000 acres while in Vermont Bolton Valley is considered small even though it would be a major resort if it was in the mid-Atlantic...

 

[Beetlenut]

I'll go to a small area if it has something interesting to ski (i.e. Sundown). Most of us are victims of our geography, and ski stuff because it's convenient. Hey it's a product, and sometimes convenience is part of the appeal. I don't think size would be that big of an issue if a mountain had some dedicated bump trails, some gladded areas, and of course a half pipe. But it's also fun to go to the Wallmart's for the longer runs and hopefully better snow conditions.

 

[billski]

"Better" is defined by what the goal of the skier/boarder is.
Comparative measurement of ticket sales would be difficult. It would be like comparing apples to oranges if not properly compared.

Many of the small areas within easy drive of major metro areas have huge lessons programs. A large number of skiers there are learning to ski, either in lessons or free-skiing. Others may come for other activities such as racing or just to socialize "after work". I would suspect that destination resorts have a smaller number of "learners" as a percentage of total ticket sales than day trip areas like Pat's Peak NH, Nashoba, MA, or lesser so, Wachusett.

Even if you just go to ski/board, I've stopped saying that area X is "better" than area Y. It depends what you're there for. Bumps? Groomers? Park? Speed? Relax? Race? Woods? There are so many ways to measure it that I don't think it would be easy to draw conclusions.

 

[Sparky]

You guys bring up a lot of issues: terrain, snow conditions, proximity, snowmaking… all of which can influence a skier’s choice, and are worthy of discussion. However before getting to that point I just wanted to see where most of the skiing was done. That endeavor is hampered by my failing to define “large vs. small” Below is just a suggested list to help define the two. Again the idea here to see where skiers are going. Is it to the highly advertise sprawling maga resort where skiing is a “lost leader” and the idea is to “maximize the spend” (read; condos, bars, restaurants, shops). Or to the not so sprawling mountain that may/may not have some of the above, but relys more on the actual skiing.

Small:
Berkshire East Ski Area
Bousquet Ski Area
Catamount Ski Area
Jiminy Peak Mountain Resort
Nashoba Valley Ski Area
Wachusett Mountain Ski Area
Ski Butternut
Ski Sundown
Mohawk Mountain Ski Area
Hidden Valley
Mountain Creek Resort
Holiday Valley
West Mountain

Large;
Killington
Sunday River
Stratton
Mount Snow
Jay Peak
Sugarbush
Tremblant
Okemo
Stowe


Now I know there can be a lot of debate about this list, but it’s just meant to ball park things.

 

[ComeBackMudPuddles]

here i was thinking the spammers had figured out how to post threads to AZ.

 

[billski]

We're talking bout market segmentation now. Well, the two groups you described are day tripping and destination resorts respectively.

Interestingly, the numerical majority of skiers in the US in the the east. Yes, I was suprised to learn that. I would suspect that there are more day trippin' areas in the east than in the west.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

here i was thinking the spammers had figured out how to post threads to AZ.

ahahahaha..

 

[KingM]

Small:
Berkshire East Ski Area
Bousquet Ski Area
Catamount Ski Area
Jiminy Peak Mountain Resort
Nashoba Valley Ski Area
Wachusett Mountain Ski Area
Ski Butternut
Ski Sundown
Mohawk Mountain Ski Area
Hidden Valley
Mountain Creek Resort
Holiday Valley
West Mountain

Large;
Killington
Sunday River
Stratton
Mount Snow
Jay Peak
Sugarbush
Tremblant
Okemo
Stowe

How about Bolton, Mad River, and Smuggler's Notch? First two small, last one large?

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

For me size matters..it's all about the vert and fast chairs are a plus..ski season is short so I don't want to spend to much time on endless fixed grip lifts unless they are direct like the Thunder quad at Jackson Hole or Heavens Gate at Sugarbush. I want the runs to last as long as possible..the runs at Blue are good for about a minute which is alot better than 30 seconds or so at some other PA hills..I don't want to go out west to ski a 1,000 vert mountain..I want to ski endless runs and get my ass handed to me..

 

[tcharron]

I ‘m sitting here at my desk wondering (as I often do when I’m suppose to be working) if there has ever been a survey done breaking down the number of skier visits to the smaller mountains vs. the larger. In the east a large mountain would be Killington, Sunday River etc. and a smalls would be the Windhams, Magic’s, Sundown. I guess it could be a matter of there being more small areas then large, or maybe it’s just a factor of whether you go to the cheaper closer mountain or travel and spend.

I’m sure there is a survey showing visits/mountain and there is no real definition of large vs. small, but I would find it interesting to see just where the business centers.

I'm sure the industry has them, but they simply aren't available for the common man. I'm guessing that the larger mountains have more unique visits, but the sum total of smaller mountains have more reoccurring visits. But that's just a total stab based on no factual data.