How do you feel about Cannon?

[skiNEwhere]

I know this borders on politics, but seeing as we have global warming discussions, I think this is appropriate as it pertains to skiing and the ski industry in general.

I've read a little bit at www.taxpayersforcannon.com but I don't feel this provides a balanced argument.

I'm especially interested in how NH residents feel about this

Can of worms: Opened

 

[Cannonball]

It is totally not worth starting this again. The site you referenced is managed by a member of this forum. He has a very specific agenda that is politically motivated. If you are seriously interested in understanding how people on this board feel about it do some searches and you'll find the massive threads that go back and forth for months. I think they people who are familiar with it aren't really going to be interested in rehashing that again. And definitely nobody else wants to see it.

 

[deadheadskier]

Take your pick of these thread gems.......it's been discussed ad nauseam

http://forums.alpinezone.com/showth...sill-Photos-(September-2010)?highlight=Cannon

http://forums.alpinezone.com/showth...sill-Photos-(September-2010)?highlight=Cannon

 

[Puck it]

Can we at least talk about erosion?

 

[skiNEwhere]

The issue with cannon, just like this site, is constantly evolving.

I haven't seen a discussion in quite a while, and there are new people on this site since the last time this was brought up.

I think you'd agree with me that the forums on here had been dead as of late?

 

[skiNEwhere]

Feel free to merge if you want though

 

[jimk]

As an out of state tourist from 500 miles to the south I like Cannon a lot. The few times I have been in that corner of NH it was because of Cannon, not Loon, or WV, or BW, although I visited some of them too. But Cannon was the draw that got me to come from far away. I appreciate state owned ski areas. I know they have issues with management, financing, infrastructure, etc. but most of them were opened long ago to help attract business to underdeveloped areas and all of the state owned ski areas I've been to in West Virginia, NY, NH, etc. still contribute to that goal IMHO.
Sorry for dipping into the can of worms.

 

[deadheadskier]

People are certainly free to discuss the topic, but there hasn't been much to discuss in a couple of years. Threecy and some state reps pushed hard a few years back to have the state lease the ski area. I actually went to the hearings. They were shot down. I occasionally read the snowjournal ski forum and the topic is still crowbarred in by threecy when he has the opportunity.

I imagine more discussion on leasing will pop up when/if the proposed changes to Mittersill happen.

 

[bobbutts]

You won't get any useful info here. Arguments devolve before that can happen. Moderators here (esp DHS) encourage that.

 

[deadheadskier]

No offense bobbutts, but you certainly like to take liberty in slinging mud at me whenever you get the opportunity. And that mudslinging has never once been provoked by me with a direct comment to you. I typically just ignore it, but what gives? You don't like me. I get it. No need to restate it for the umpteenth time.

 

[Puck it]

No offense bobbutts, but you certainly like to take liberty in slinging mud at me whenever you get the opportunity. And that mudslinging has never once been provoked by me with a direct comment to you. I typically just ignore it, but what gives? You don't like me. I get it. No need to restate it for the umpteenth time.

Maybe he just hates Ewoks?

 

[skiNEwhere]

Well this thread went sideways, although I'm sure some will says that's the only direction this thread could've gone from the getgo

 

[SIKSKIER]

Cannon:Live Ski or Die.

 

[ScottySkis]

It one of my fa orite mountains in the east. i wish i was closer to Canon.

 

[JDMRoma]

It one of my fa orite mountains in the east. i wish i was closer to Canon.

I Freakin LOVE Cannon.......how's that !

 

[EPB]

I see no good fiscal reason why Cannon should be operated by the state of NH.

• From a cash flow perspective, it really comes down to a choice between whether it makes more sense for the state to earn a predetermined amount of lease revenue per annum, or to take on the operating risk of running the business. Not only does operating risk include accounting gains and losses (net income) but this also includes capital expenditures (improvements) that the state would not have to worry about, go through the budgeting process ad nauseum, etc. Given the two options, taking the guaranteed positive cash flow and running for the next ~40 year lease term is an appealing option.
• Leasing ski areas appears to be a fairly common practice, e.g. IIRC, Boyne resorts entered into sale and lease-back agreements with one or both of their Maine ski areas and potentially many more. It's not as if leasing the property would create any waves across the industry due to its abnormality. Furthermore, a list of comparable leased properties/arrangements probably exists so taxpayers could be fairly well assured that the state would get a fair market rate for Cannon. Granted, the government can always screw this up, but it seems easier to trust them to get a lease agreement correct as opposed to getting the next ~40 years of mountain operations right.
• I'm not as well versed in this one as I could be, but I don't see how the Mt. Sunapee lease has been anything but successful from a fiscal standpoint (and potentially even a "public good" standpoint). History, to some degree, is on the side of leasing.

Granted, it's been a while, but the only argument for government operations that ever resonates with me is that people don't want to run the risk of having an idiot come in and run the place in light of negativity toward ownership groups such as Peak, SKI and ASC. While I get the concern, it ultimately has no effect on whether or not the lease/no lease decision from a money perspective. Furthermore, the state seemed to pick a pretty darn good partner in the Mueller's (?) at Sunapee.

As a wild card food for thought, didn't someone post here that Intrawest was looking to acquire another eastern ski area?

 

[Smellytele]

I could fight either side of the "issue". While I can see why people don't think the State should be in the business of business. I can also see that it is in the business to promote tourism in the region this is why is was developed in the first place well before any of the other ski areas in the area. Could they lease it now? Of course they could. My selfish issue with that is I used to ski at Sunapee when it was run by the state but have only skied it 3 times since the Muellers have leased it. It is more expensive and the clientèle has changed, as has the whole feel of the place. I must be in the minority with that because I believe they have way more skier visits now (maybe another reason I don't like it anymore). I could go on but may add more later.

 

[dlague]

Well, I am a New Hampshire resident and we skied Cannon for the first time (more or less) and I have to say - we liked it a lot! Frankly, I am not going to entertain politically charged discussions! BTW, I am ok with it all!

 

[Smellytele]

Furthermore, the state seemed to pick a pretty darn good partner in the Mueller's (?) at Sunapee.

Well the Mueller's did sue the state about some land issues. They wanted to build condo off the west side on some private property and wanted to connect to it.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ar...ski_resort_sues_state_over_its_lease/?camp=pm

 

[EPB]

Well the Mueller's did sue the state about some land issues. They wanted to build condo off the west side on some private property and wanted to connect to it.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ar...ski_resort_sues_state_over_its_lease/?camp=pm

What was the result? Who was ultimately fault? I think this refers to the west bowl expansion that has yet to materialize, correct? If the state really did re-neg on their promise, that's not on the Muellers, of course. It's ironic that the issue arose in '07.

As a side note, I wonder to what extent real estate/trail expansion issues are mitigated by the area's location in US forest land.