It ain't right I tell ya

[JimG.]

...would i be upset if MRG was boarder only as a skier? ignorance is bliss they say, but if i knew how good MRG is, i'd likely be a little miffed.

Actually, that might make me take up snowboarding.

Exactly! I'll speak for my buddy dmc here; he's a boarder who hates the MRG snowboard ban. But instead of just whining, he took up tele to enjoy the hill anyway.

Sometimes, if you can't beat 'em you join 'em.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

[quote="David MetskyAnd snowboarders are welcome at MRG, just not their snowboards.

It's not really a cause. At a cooperatively owned ski area like MRG where the membership have voted time and time again for the snowboard bad, what do you expect to accomplish? It's not like there aren't dozens of other resorts for you to choose from.

I don't expect to accomplish anything. I was just trying to stimulate a little summertime conversation about a winter topic. Another post on a different thread brought it to mind, so I wrote up the post to see if it would go anywhere. That's what this MB is all about isn't it. Every thread can't be what's your favorite whatever. Relax David.

 

[bvibert]

Ya see Bert it's even in the dictionary. Come on, snowboarders are people too.

Are there no riders in all of AZ to take up this cause?

Don't me wrong, I'm not anti-snowboard at all. I just think its the managments decision. By your logic anyone should be able to use the mountain on whatever equipment they want; skis, snowboards, ironing boards, kayaks, bob-sleds, the kitchen sink, etc.. :blink:

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

No kitchen sink Bert, just safe generally accepted alpine equipment.

 

[JimG.]

As with everything, it boils down to $...most resorts want to maximize customer visits, and they saw that snowboarding was the growing segment of the industry. If you remember back to the mid-80's, alot of mountains banned boards. Then somebody woke up and realized all the $ being left on the table. Those bans were overturned for profit.

At MRG, the profit motive is not really in play. Not corporate, so no stockholders to please. The shareholders are owners, and they are skiers who own to ski, not make money. These owners don't want snowboards, so there aren't any. Simple as that.

Discrimination has taken on an ugly meaning, but aside from the totally negative definition, it is also a synonym for "choice". When we choose a burger over a hot dog at a BBQ, we have discriminated. MRG coop owners have chosen to ban snowboards. They have the right to do so.

Whether you and I agree is irrelevant because, as was noted earlier, alot of skiers love the place because there are no snowboards.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

As with everything, it boils down to $...most resorts want to maximize customer visits, and they saw that snowboarding was the growing segment of the industry. If you remember back to the mid-80's, alot of mountains banned boards. Then somebody woke up and realized all the $ being left on the table. Those bans were overturned for profit.

At MRG, the profit motive is not really in play. Not corporate, so no stockholders to please. The shareholders are owners, and they are skiers who own to ski, not make money. These owners don't want snowboards, so there aren't any. Simple as that.

Discrimination has taken on an ugly meaning, but aside from the totally negative definition, it is also a synonym for "choice". When we choose a burger over a hot dog at a BBQ, we have discriminated. MRG coop owners have chosen to ban snowboards. They have the right to do so.

Whether you and I agree is irrelevant because, as was noted earlier, alot of skiers love the place because there are no snowboards.

Ur right, it is irrelevant if we agree or not. Everyone doesn't have to march to the party line. What's wrong with a little healthy debate? Everyone has chimed in with the MRG take, but does anyone know the deal at Alta, Deer Valley and Toas. I believe these are run for profit.

 

[bvibert]

No kitchen sink Bert, just safe generally accepted alpine equipment.

So you're going to DISCRIMINATE against me if I want to ride my kitch sink down the mountain? Maybe its my PREFERENCE to ride a kitchen sink.

Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners; discrimination against those with different preferences, snowboarders for example.

 

[JimG.]

Ur right, it is irrelevant if we agree or not. Everyone doesn't have to march to the party line. What's wrong with a little healthy debate? Everyone has chimed in with the MRG take, but does anyone know the deal at Alta, Deer Valley and Toas. I believe these are run for profit.

Actually, I do agree with you and do not support banning snowboards. I love skiing at MRG, probably my favorite area in VT; it would be better if I could ski with my boarding buddies though.

At Taos, the ban is in place because management thinks that snowboarders scrape up the steeper chutes rendering them useless; the lack of consistently deep snowfall and the lightness of what does fall is also cited. To me, that's lame.

Deer Valley is Deer Valley; it's the place for the hoity toity who don't want to be disturbed by the bohemian snowboarder types. Also lame, but the resort is kind of lame anyway.

I forget the rational at Alta, but it's probably lame too.

Wow HPD, this topic really seems to have your shorts in a twist. What's up?

 

[ctenidae]

Regardless of what each mountain's stated justification is, it's a business decision, pure and simple. JimG's right- it all boils down to money. Taos thinks that banning snowboards preserves the chutes, which leads to higher skier days. Deer Valley doesn't like boarder fashion, so it believes the ban leads to higher hoi-poloi visits. Alta has some reasopn that leeads it to the same conclusion. MRG, despite what else they may say, believes the board ban helps distinguish them, or, to use the buzzword of the thread, it helps snow sports enthusiasts discriminate between them and other mountains.

The interesting thing is, no one really supports MRG's ban, but we're all resigned to it. As I said in the other thread on this topic- the only way to do anything about it is to pony up the $1,500 and buy a share. That's how you get to make a business decision- put up or shut up.

 

[hammer]

As I said in the other thread on this topic- the only way to do anything about it is to pony up the $1,500 and buy a share. That's how you get to make a business decision- put up or shut up.

I thought I saw somewhere that there were already some MRG shareholders who were snowboarders...

 

[Greg]

I thought I saw somewhere that there were already some MRG shareholders who were snowboarders...

Response #5:

http://skiing.alpinezone.com/articles/challenge/2004/response.htm?resort=madriver

That's last year's challenge, BTW...

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

No kitchen sink Bert, just safe generally accepted alpine equipment.

So you're going to DISCRIMINATE against me if I want to ride my kitch sink down the mountain? Maybe its my PREFERENCE to ride a kitchen sink.

Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners; discrimination against those with different preferences, snowboarders for example.

Sorry Bert, I didn't know you rode a sink. Now I feel bad.

 

[sledhaulingmedic]

There are bound to be a couple of shareholders who board. I don't believe that the ban is in their charter, so it could change, but it's just not likely.

I don't know the details of their charter, but I'd assume you'd need a majority (or possibly 2/3's) to vote to lift it. Not likely to happen until there are a lot more boarders owning shares. Also given that one individual is limited to a max of 4 shares, don't go looking for a trust fund baby snowboarder to buy up shares to load up the vote.

To quote Garth, from Wayne's World: "Change? We fear change!"

Or, as we say in the fire service:

"200 years of tradition, unimpeded by progress".

 

[ctenidae]

Not enough, apparently, to lift the ban. Plus, they dont' seem to want to, either.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

[quote="JimG
Wow HPD, this topic really seems to have your shorts in a twist. What's up?[/quote]

No, no, no, Jimmy G., you have me all wrong. I'm just exploring the issue with my fellow AZers because I respect your opinions in such matters, even my bud CPR27 :wink:

 

[JimG.]

No, no, no, Jimmy G., you have me all wrong. I'm just exploring the issue with my fellow AZers because I respect your opinions in such matters, even my bud CPR27 :wink:

8)

 

[bvibert]

Sorry Bert, I didn't know you rode a sink. Now I feel bad.

Its ok, I've come to terms with my odd preference...

 

[David Metsky]

The interesting thing is, no one really supports MRG's ban, but we're all resigned to it.

I support the ban at MRG and love that it's in place at Alta as well. I prefer the atmosphere at both areas more than any other place I've skied. It's hard to explain exactly why, but I enjoy skiing at those two places more than elsewhere, and yes, the lack of snowboarders is part of it.

I wouldn't want every place to ban snowboards, but I don't want everyplace to be alike either. I have friends who ride and I enjoy skiing with them at other areas as well. But I see nothing wrong with there being a few places that boards aren't welcome.

Healthy discussion is fine, but I don't see any likelyhood of change, at least at MRG. I can't speak for the others but I would be sad if the ban were lifted at Alta. It's part of the character of the area, the same as the slow chairs and the woods policy.

-dave-

 

[hammer]

I thought I saw somewhere that there were already some MRG shareholders who were snowboarders...

Response #5:

http://skiing.alpinezone.com/articles/challenge/2004/response.htm?resort=madriver

That's last year's challenge, BTW...

That's where I saw it!

 

[JimG.]

I wouldn't want every place to ban snowboards, but I don't want everyplace to be alike either. I have friends who ride and I enjoy skiing with them at other areas as well. But I see nothing wrong with there being a few places that boards aren't welcome.

-dave-

I respect your opinion on many topics and on this one and I've been waiting for someone to reply this way. I have a simple question: how would you feel if the same resorts altered their policies and banned skiers and only allowed snowboarding?