Expansions

[DoublePlanker]

Exactly. Skier visits are down 5% year over year and snow sports is practically a zero growth business. The East is an entirely different animal than out west due to altitude, climate, expansive land, regulations, etc.. There's basically no meaningful expansions happening in the NE. Small scale Cap Ex limited to snow-making upgrades, cut a new trail, replace an ancient lift, refurb a 1970's ski lodge etc. etc.. nothing exciting, that's about it.

The recent M&A activity with big resort operators and associated capital- the shear numbers/stats of the West's resorts & visits enable expansion, although probably temporary.

Back East ...forgettaboutit.

Balsams pretty significant.

 

[drjeff]

I'm not so pessimistic. We have the potential for a renaissance of eastern skiing due to low energy snowguns, $40/barrel oil, wide rocker skis, EB-5 investment, online deals and hopefully lower electricity costs.

Let's hope that long term the multiple nuclear plant closures in the East coupled with the continual red tape associated with natural gas, or new oil fired power generation plants and the NIMBY crowd who is opposed to nuclear/gas/oil and also don't want any large scale wind or solar plants constructed near them won't effect the cheaper energy we're seeing now. And that doesn't even include any issues that could arise in the Middle East to cause a spike in oil prices again!!!

 

[Jully]

What would it take for skiing to become a growing industry again, or would you say this is as big as it gets?

Beyond money, maybe a few big names, athletes or others, who get into it and publicize it?

If a big reality TV show has a big skiing segment? Maybe I'm making out the general public to be too sheep-like.

 

[Mapnut]

The only thing that suggests to me any potential for growth in skiing is the increase I observe in the numbers of people hiking. It's healthy, back to nature, and aesthetically pleasing if you have a nice area to hike. I go to the Hudson Highlands, just an hour from New York City and quite scenic. Parking at the trailheads, and wear-and-tear on the trails are getting to be problems. I'm not sure how muck hiking is increasing elsewhere, but I hear the Appalachian Trail is more popular than ever.

Big difference with skiing is that you need lessons and equipment and tickets and usually have to drive further.

 

[VTKilarney]

What would it take for skiing to become a growing industry again, or would you say this is as big as it gets?

I've been thinking about this a bit. My gut reaction was to say that the middle class needs to have the levels of disposable income that they used to enjoy. However, I see LOTS of people doing very well in the Boston and New York City area. There is still money out there.

On the other hand, the economy of the rural areas where the ski areas are located has been clobbered. They have gone from having a solid manufacturing economy to a tourism economy or a near total welfare state. In my opinion, this may be the biggest game-changer. While city people always came to northern New England to ski, the hills were also full of locals. Here in northeastern Vermont, just about everyone I speak to over the age of 50 grew up skiing, and if physically able, continues to ski. But younger families just don't have the money. We went from skiing and/or snowmobiling being the leisure activity of most families to being the leisure activity of a small minority of families. The money simply isn't there.

In addition to the poor economy in rural areas, the cost of skiing has outpaced inflation - and for good reason. We now demand high speed lifts and massive snowmaking infrastructure. You just can't run a ski area for as cheap as you used to be able to run one. In a lot of ways, catering to a more well-to-do clientele has negatively impacted the less well-to-do since lift tickets are not priced based on one's ability to pay. Everyone is forced to pay for these upgrades whether or not they can afford it. I'm not saying that this is wrong. It just is what it is. But you can trace the closure of a LOT of ski areas to the arms race for snowmaking and lifts.

Bottom line, for the locals, less money is chasing a much more expensive product. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

 

[mbedle]

I think the problem with Sunday River is the lack of vertical, they are still limited to the 1,200 - $1,400 foot range going west. The biggest vertical, unfortunately, is facing south.

 

[deadheadskier]

I just think they have plenty of terrain for the amount of people that go there already.

 

[prsboogie]

Hey, do you live near a wind plant?

I don't but I'll take your bait!

 

[Gforce]

I'm not so pessimistic. We have the potential for a renaissance of eastern skiing due to low energy snowguns, $40/barrel oil, wide rocker skis, EB-5 investment, online deals and hopefully lower electricity costs.

"Renaissance". I love that! I certainly hope so, it would be great. However my money is not on that happening. I just don't see the next generation and young families barreling into the sport, and there is so much competition for that precious disposable personal income. The time and financial commitment is way high.

 

[dlague]

What would it take for skiing to become a growing industry again, or would you say this is as big as it gets?

We can start by inviting friends. Taking your children (and for some of us, our grandchildren).

Unfortunately, this is an expensive sport, just gearing up is often a non starter. Then the ticket prices, the weekend crowds, the cost of just getting there. Not to mention the "On Mountain Pricing".

I've been thinking about this a bit. My gut reaction was to say that the middle class needs to have the levels of disposable income that they used to enjoy. However, I see LOTS of people doing very well in the Boston and New York City area. There is still money out there.

On the other hand, the economy of the rural areas where the ski areas are located has been clobbered. They have gone from having a solid manufacturing economy to a tourism economy or a near total welfare state. In my opinion, this may be the biggest game-changer. While city people always came to northern New England to ski, the hills were also full of locals. Here in northeastern Vermont, just about everyone I speak to over the age of 50 grew up skiing, and if physically able, continues to ski. But younger families just don't have the money. We went from skiing and/or snowmobiling being the leisure activity of most families to being the leisure activity of a small minority of families. The money simply isn't there.

In addition to the poor economy in rural areas, the cost of skiing has outpaced inflation - and for good reason. We now demand high speed lifts and massive snowmaking infrastructure. You just can't run a ski area for as cheap as you used to be able to run one. In a lot of ways, catering to a more well-to-do clientele has negatively impacted the less well-to-do since lift tickets are not priced based on one's ability to pay. Everyone is forced to pay for these upgrades whether or not they can afford it. I'm not saying that this is wrong. It just is what it is. But you can trace the closure of a LOT of ski areas to the arms race for snowmaking and lifts.

Bottom line, for the locals, less money is chasing a much more expensive product. I don't see this changing anytime soon.

Overall, there are a number of factors that limit growth in the ski/snowboard industry. Obviously southern states do not have much exposure to the sport so that gets rid of a fairly large part of the population. Economics plays a large role obviously since this sport is expensive and with something like 48% of US families of some sort of government program, well, that gets rid of another part of the population. Then there the risk averse that just plain fear the sport or do not like the cold and are hermits during the winter. With all that into consideration, I do think that we are near peak and there will be an eventual decline since aging baby boomers with start to slow down and unless they have kids who continue, growth will be minimal if not declining.

That being said, the industry is trying to attract new skiers and snowboards through January Learn to Ski/snowboard month, bring a friend and ski free, free gear with a lesson package, school programs, etc. I am not sure how effective those are but the "Bring a Friend" at Killington allows you to ski free while the friend pays $135 - obviously unless your a jerk that would be split and it is still a deal at less than $70. However, I think people fall out of the sport at a similar pace or they are one and dones.

As uphillklimber mentioned, growth with in families is really the best way to grow the sport. I have skied much of my life, my second wife learned to ski with me and lucky for me she is all in. We have four boys who have also skied since they were tikes, of the four, one has no interest in snowboarding again (warm weather guy). The boys that are older ski less often then they did when they were home. So we have even seen a decline in skier visits with in the family, but that could change. In addition to my immediate family, I have four siblings and three have families that ski. I would always talk to them about how much fun we are having as a family and they decided to take it up. We post a lot on FB and we know people that saw what we are doing and now ski, with one family in particular who went all in this year and spent about $2100 on gear. They even went to the ski show and looked and walked around in amazement.

With all being said, cost and risk are the two biggest hurdles especially when the lift ticket prices are inching closer to $100 and in one case over. Even the cost of gear is crazy to most, but you can easily spend the same of not more on MTB, Kayaks, SUP etc.

As far as expansion, as mentioned earlier Balsams would be significant in NE. However, there are other places like Ragged with Pinnacle Peak, Sunapee with West Bowl, Jay Peak with West Bowl, Waterville with Green Peak, Tenney resurrected and has plans to expand, Gunstock with Alpine Ridge which are all examples of planned expansions - whether they come to fruition is another story. Cannon and Pats Peak are examples of expansions that happened recently. There is also a rise in reopening feeder hills like Eustis and saving places like Whaleback, Lost Valley, Black of Maine now Tenney and possibly Ascutney. These places are being bolstered by the increase in cost of skiing IMO. While the more well off have Stowe, Sugarbush, and other likes of Killington. Those who are interested in skiing but do not want to spend and do not know of deals have places like the feeder resorts.

 

[MadPadraic]

What's the appeal of the backside of SR? Pitch?

Wouldn't it be fairly difficult to keep decent coverage on due to exposure?

Greater trail options off of any given lift, and some relief from the heavy crowds.

 

[Smellytele]

The appeal of SR??? The same could be asked of any ski area,FWIW.

IMO, the appeal of SR is that first of all, it is skiing. And they are oftenthe first with any meaningful terrain, as they are not afraid to blow snow.Second, while the runs are not as long as the loaf, they still have some decentlength to them. Then there is the variety. With all those trails stretched out allover the place, you can find a huge variety of trails. You can have straightand steep, or winding thru the woods over hill and dale, moguls, trees, pretty muchanything you want. And you won’t have just one tree run to choose from, thereare a good dozen or so to choose from, same with moguls, steeps, rollers, whatever.On any given day, I may be inclined to ski Vortex and I may do some laps there.Or I may be more inclined to ski some moguls. Some days, I simply do not knowwhat I want until I get started. I am sure to find it at the river.

If I have opportunity to ski a good many times, I’d like my pass and localmountain to afford me the opportunity for variety depending on my mood. Andenough variety that I don’t get bored in a day.

You misread his post - it asked "What's the appeal of the BACKSIDE of SR?"

 

[machski]

I'm not sure the river owns much on the backside, can anyone confirm? I do know that they own beyond Jordan Bowl, enough to double the size.

No, not enough to double the size. What they own beyond Jordan lacks the elevation and vert of Jordan. The plans for that are still in the offices from LBO's days, but I doubt they ever do that. Makes the resort even wider and without LBO's planned Jordan village, no sense stretching even further west without a base out that way.

 

[SIKSKIER]

Jordan is already way out of the way by road.

 

[machski]

Jordan is already way out of the way by road.

Yup, but you want to be even further West on another peak/trail pod? Just seems too remote without a base lodge over that way to push out further.

 

[Jully]

I would assume that any expansion out west would be supported by new real estate at a minimum, and a base area type deal with it.

All that makes it even more unlikely in my mind.

 

[deadheadskier]

I would think the smarter money would be on 4 season amenities in the South Ridge area.

 

[Jully]

Definitely smarter money. I doubt more terrain is going to pull visits from anywhere else.

 

[steamboat1]

I would think the smarter money would be on 4 season amenities in the South Ridge area.

K did this instead of South Ridge.:razz:

 

[deadheadskier]

It was a smart move by K. Smarter than the Interconnect too