Let's Talk About Killington

[snowman]

Tin man, I said I'm done. Yes, I did say they switched strategies for the A41. The skiing industry is fluid. Visits go up one place, down another all the time. It would take less than a 5% skewing of the numbers to show K as profitable when it's not. No one at the SEC is going to take you to court because skier visits went down 5% at one place and up 5% at another or that your costs changed to that degree either. I'm just saying it could be done, and done easily. ALSO, we have no SEC in Canada and yes we do get away with murder up here as a result. Take Bre-X for example. That was a bigger scam than Enron. NO ONE went to jail.

 

[threecy]

Just saw a posting for an AZ Challenge for Killington - I hope this defuses some of the excessive tension in here.

 

[deadheadskier]

There are only really 2 ways to run a business. Make cuts to get to profitability or spend money to drive sales. In a potential recessionary environment for this type of business the first is the ONLY choice.

The first statement is business 101, I agree with that. The second statement is false. The last major recession in this country occurred during the late 80's, early 90's. The two areas that experienced the most growth in skier visits during that time were Okemo and Sunday River. Those also happened to be the two areas investing the most in on mountain improvements at the time.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

You were talking sensibly until your last comment. You keep harping about Skyship stage 1. Have you ever skied down to it??? It's essentially the juggarnaught and a couple variations of it. It's CROSS COUNTRY skiing. The jug is god knows how many miles long and it takes a beginner ALL DAY to ski it. I skiied it in it's entirety once, about 20 years ago and still to this day remember what a painfully boring experience it was. What's more, I skiied it on a weekend and saw almost NO ONE on the lower half and this was when K was in it's hayday. Stage 1 uses a collasal amount of power to serve NO ONE midweek. What's more, the trails are likely still open anyway and you can catch a shuttle back if you really desire going X/C skiing. We had this same argument months ago over the fact NO ONE skis Pico midweek and the fact they're doing their bottom line and the environment a great service by shutting that down too.

That's a red-herring. Juggarnaut is truly a miserable experience. I pity you for the suffer-fest you must have endured skiing it top to bottom. But that's not what I'm talking about. Great Eastern and the old 4-Mile Trail (now called Home Stretch I guess?) are some of the best cruising runs at K. They also occupy the lowest 1000' of vertical at the mountain. Regardless of its usage mid-week, it's hard (disingenuous really) to claim 3000' vertical when people can't take advantage of that 5 out of 7 days a week for 3.5 months of your 5 month season. As far as I know, there hasn't been any announced shuttle back to the Basin or Bear Mtn base lodges. Add in the convenience factor this lift represents, cutting off 20 minutes of travel time, and they are flushing a major marketing asset right down the toilet.

As for Pico, I think they screwed the pooch on that one as well. Pico should be their low-priced locals mountain for the Rutland market. Install night skiing and offer cheap passes and student programs for the Rutland area. Build a park/pipe there, the whole shebang. Sugarbush was able to turn around Mt. Ellen (aka "Club North") with creative pricing and a commitment to making it THE choice for local families. Judging by the crowds I've seen there in recent yuears, they've succeeeded brilliantly. Powdr's apporach is to cut, cut cut. That isn't a way to grow a business, and the achievement of profitability is usually a phyrric victory at best . Employee morale is shot and you've proverbially eaten the seeds of your next year's crop b/c no one wants to go to a place where the malaise is so obvious.

 

[pepperdawg]

Stage 1 uses a collasal amount of power to serve NO ONE midweek.

Gotta agree with this portion of this debate.....(spelling aside)

 

[snowman]

The first statement is business 101, I agree with that. The second statement is false. The last major recession in this country occurred during the late 80's, early 90's. The two areas that experienced the most growth in skier visits during that time were Okemo and Sunday River. Those also happened to be the two areas investing the most in on mountain improvements at the time.

Hmmm. I can understand that. The reason why would be people who would normally fly out to Colorado might consider just driving to those close by areas to save money and experience the "newness". If you look closely they were stealing visits from other areas though that had already reached build out and Colorado/Utah et al. K is not capable of "building out". They can't really offer anything new that's going to drive new people there to experience it. You're not comparing Apples to Apples.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

Hmmm. I can understand that. The reason why would be people who would normally fly out to Colorado might consider just driving to those close by areas to save money and experience the "newness". If you look closely they were stealing visits from other areas though that had already reached build out and Colorado/Utah et al. K is not capable of "building out". They can't really offer anything new that's going to drive new people there to experience it. You're not comparing Apples to Apples.

That's simply not true. How about:

1) Replacing the painfully slow Skye Peak quad?

2) Replacing the equally slow Snowdon Quad

3) Setting out a bold vision for the interconnect with Pico?

4) A wholesale overhaul of the F&B operations which are characterized by lousy product at ridiculous prices

5) A commitment to having the longest season in the East

6) Setting a new strategic course for Pico that doesn't involve simply cutting costs.

Any or all of these would stir some excitement up among northeastern skiers. they've done none of the above, and have in fact moved bodily in the opposite direction.

 

[deadheadskier]

Hmmm. I can understand that. The reason why would be people who would normally fly out to Colorado might consider just driving to those close by areas to save money and experience the "newness". If you look closely they were stealing visits from other areas though that had already reached build out and Colorado/Utah et al. K is not capable of "building out". They can't really offer anything new that's going to drive new people there to experience it. You're not comparing Apples to Apples.

Whether there stealing skier visits from other areas or generating new ones doesn't matter. They still proved that an area can still invest heavily during an economic downturn and succeed. You might have some merit regarding people not traveling out west, but I would like to see some numbers regarding skier visits out west during that time frame to back it up. Truth also be told at that time, resorts out west were putting in High Speed Quad at a break neck pace.

I will agree with you that cutting expenses during an economic downtrun is the more logical decision, but it is not the ONLY decision as you put it. Plenty of areas did not follow that advice of yours and were successful in the past and plenty will do the same in the future if/when a recession happens.

 

[snowman]

That's simply not true. How about:

1) Replacing the painfully slow Skye Peak quad?

2) Replacing the equally slow Snowdon Quad

3) Setting out a bold vision for the interconnect with Pico?

4) A wholesale overhaul of the F&B operations which are characterized by lousy product at ridiculous prices

5) A commitment to having the longest season in the East

6) Setting a new strategic course for Pico that doesn't involve simply cutting costs.

Any or all of these would stir some excitement up among northeastern skiers. they've done none of the above, and have in fact moved bodily in the opposite direction.

No.

Case in point. I was going to go to Whistler in March but am now considering going to Revelstoke because it is NEW. Whistler IS building the peak to peak gondola which would make anything K would do for a Pico interconnect (which is the only real NEW thing K can do) look stupid and it still sparks no interest. Revelstoke is NEW. Your improvements are only going to serve the people who go there anyway. They're not going to drive any NEW business.

 

[snowman]

Whether there stealing skier visits from other areas or generating new ones doesn't matter. They still proved that an area can still invest heavily during an economic downturn and succeed. You might have some merit regarding people not traveling out west, but I would like to see some numbers regarding skier visits out west during that time frame to back it up. Truth also be told at that time, resorts out west were putting in High Speed Quad at a break neck pace.

I will agree with you that cutting expenses during an economic downtrun is the more logical decision, but it is not the ONLY decision as you put it. Plenty of areas did not follow that advice of yours and were successful in the past and plenty will do the same in the future if/when a recession happens.

Agreed. It's the ONLY decision for K, not everyone. If Revelstoke was to put in the 2 lifts they're putting in this year and stop due to economic conditions in the US it would be extremely detrimental to them. Okemo and SR were T bar hills (that no one had heard of )coming on the scene as NEW giants with heaps of new lifts and massive marketing. Although I like new lifts, I could care less if K put in a new 8 pack this year or not. I've already skiied the mountain and it wouldn't be new to me. Once they get their house in order, figure out what they need to do traffic wise and the economy upswings, they will do well to embark on a new lift program though

 

[Greg]

Although I like new lifts, I could care less if K put in a new 8 pack this year or not. I've already skiied the mountain and it wouldn't be new to me.

I'll just chime in with an observation that YOU might not be representative of their target skier demographic.

 

[millerm277]

Case in point. I was going to go to Whistler in March but am now considering going to Revelstoke because it is NEW. Whistler IS building the peak to peak gondola which would make anything K would do for a Pico interconnect (which is the only real NEW thing K can do) look stupid and it still sparks no interest. Revelstoke is NEW. Your improvements are only going to serve the people who go there anyway. They're not going to drive any NEW business.

Killington competes with the other NE resorts, comparing it to out West or Canada is not a valid comparison.

I can guarantee that if they built the Pico interconnect, it would spark a hell of a lot of interest in Killington, and would draw people from other areas.

 

[snowman]

I'll just chime in with an observation that YOU might not be representative of their target skier demographic.

No. I'm not. I'm actually way more interested in new lifts than the typical skier. I'd say 70% of K's recent traffic doesn't even know the difference between a regular and high speed quad. They just scratch their heads as to why one lift seems way faster than the other and don't give it another thought. Your argument logic seems to be completely opposite to the argument you seem to be trying to make.

 

[Greg]

No. I'm not. I'm actually way more interested in new lifts than the typical skier. I'd say 70% of K's recent traffic doesn't even know the difference between a regular and high speed quad. They just scratch their heads as to why one lift seems way faster than the other and don't give it another thought. Your argument logic seems to be completely opposite to the argument you seem to be trying to make.

Only someone as condescending as you would immediately assume the average skier can't figure out the difference between an HSQ and a fixed grip quad. :roll: Perhaps I give the human race too much credit though.

 

[snowman]

Killington competes with the other NE resorts, comparing it to out West or Canada is not a valid comparison.

It's a 110% valid comparison. Whistler and Revelstoke are in BC. They both cost the same amount for me to get to. Whistler is way more of a resort than Revelstoke (right now) and invests millions of dollars annually, but I'm interested in going to Revelstoke because it's new. It wouldn't matter if Whistler replaced 3 quads this year, it's still not new.

Is everyone here just arguing with me for the sake of wasting my time right now? These last 2 arguments don't even make any sense.

 

[Greg]

Is everyone here just arguing with me for the sake of wasting my time right now?

Of course. We all know how valuable your time is...

 

[snowman]

Only someone as condescending as you would immediately assume the average skier can't figure out the difference between an HSQ and a fixed grip quad. :roll: Perhaps I give the human race too much credit though.

Do you even talk to people on f'n chairlifts??? Good god! It's an observation thru 1000's of chairlift rides with 1000's of people, not an f'n condescending statement. :angry:

 

[Greg]

:angry:

Good. It looks like I rubbed you the wrong way. My work is done here... :lol:

 

[snowman]

Of course. We all know how valuable your time is...

It is valuable. I've got a lot of work that hasn't gotten done here arguing the finer points of the skiing industry with a bunch of people who I thought were interested, but it's growing more and more apparent they're just arguing with me for the sake of arguing. Now I have the owner of the site taunting me like an A$$hole? You need to take a step back and take a good hard look at your last 2 posts sir.

 

[Greg]

You need to take a step back and take a good hard look at your last 2 posts sir.

Thanks for the morality lesson. You should re-read some of the patronizing posts you've made the last few days and then get back to me.