Local Press: Cannon to Make a Profit This Season and Plans its Future

[thetrailboss]

I love how on this board people assume that this is how one feels when someone dares to say that from the metro area, Loon is a better option. It is in most cases, which is what Ive been arguing all along. Sure Burke is a great hill, and if all things were equal traveling wise Id go there before Loon anyday. But it isnt equal, Burke is further, and in the eyes of most, not worth the 1:30 round trip, added gas, headaches with kids for a mtn thats really just as good and not better than most (See deadheadskiers post).

Ive listed the pros and cons for every mtn, and Burke just isnt worth the extra drive. If it was, dont you think more people would be there? Simple economics shows that Burke does not merit a large demand from major population areas for the reason I listed above. Sure its a good hill, but not good enough. End of story.

Then leave the skiing at Burke to us :wink:

 

[thetrailboss]

That because everyone rides the bandwagon and assumes Burke is automatically better.

Wrong. There is no assumption on my end. I can understand how you might feel that way, but speaking for myself, the comparison and contrast is based on my personal experiences at both as well as my personal preference. It's highly subjective.

Ive skied all the places I listed and stand by my statement. Different factors make up my decision, including travel time. Sunapee and Gunstock are only an hour as opposed to three to Burke from my old place in seacoast NH. Cannon is only 1 1/2 hours with better terrain. Waterville and Loon are 1:20 or so and much better for families/similar terrain. Pats is 45 minutes and super cheap.

No one resort is going to be everything to everybody. If you like the terrain at those mountains, then of course Burke or MRG is not going to be your thing. See my post above.

 

[2knees]

End of story.

who are you to decide what others opinion should be? the chosen one has spoken. we can all go home now.

 

[from_the_NEK]

BTW I'm happy to hear Cannon made a profit this year

 

[thetrailboss]

BTW I'm happy to hear Cannon made a profit this year

And it was either in that article or another that Burke was mentioned as having a record year for ticket and season pass sales.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

The point is, noone is going to bypass 6 other (and I would argue better mtns) than drive 3 hours up to Burke, coming from Boston at least. It doesnt have anything to do with "weather above the notches" or whatnot. Its just not worth it. Why would someone from Boston on a day trip (or even a weekender) drive all that extra distance, when they can get better skiing at Loon, Sunapee, Cannon, Gunstock, Waterville, or hell even Pats Peak, etc hours closer to home. While some of the mtns I listed might not seem better to you, Burke really is way out in the middle of nowhere compared to most mtns. It is what it is, theres no use in trying to spin it any other way.

Better? Not quite - at least not for Loon, Sunapee and Gunstock. Natural snowfall and crowds are the two biggest facts impacting snow surfaces on a typical ski day. Quite simply, the Ski 93 resorts (Cannon excepted) have little of the former and too much of the latter, when compared to Burke. I've spent many weekends at my friend's place in Sunapee, skiing a day up at Burke and then the next day down at Sunapee or some other place close in. Burke is classic Northern VT skiing, with a big, uncrowded mountain and ample natural snowfall. Sunapee and its neighbors ski much more like Southern New England - large drop offs from trails to the woods due to the man made base and scraped off skiing surfaces by 11:00. The contrast couldn't be more stark

 

[Tin Woodsman]

That because everyone rides the bandwagon and assumes Burke is automatically better. Ive skied all the places I listed and stand by my statement. Different factors make up my decision, including travel time. Sunapee and Gunstock are only an hour as opposed to three to Burke from my old place in seacoast NH. Cannon is only 1 1/2 hours with better terrain. Waterville and Loon are 1:20 or so and much better for families/similar terrain. Pats is 45 minutes and super cheap.

Im pretty good at exploring new mtns, its like the little kid in me. When Im somwhere new I only ride a trail once before moving on. I remember some nice hidden tree shots at Burke, but Im sure only being there a day I didnt begin to scratch the surface. But on the same note, you can argue that for pretty much every hill out there. Every ski hill has stashes..

You are putting into words a textbook example of "self selection". The statistics bear witness to this phenomenon for both the Boston market (via 93 and 89) and the New York market (for 91 and 87). Quite simply, for those whose skiing priorities don't revolve around the skiing experience itself, they "self-select" themselves as patrons of resorts that are closer to home. Maybe they don't like the longer drive with the kids, or maybe there are more shops and off-hill amenities. Whatever the case, it is a really difficult argument to make that from a pure skiing perspective, places like Loon, Waterville, Sunapee, Gunstock and Pat's Peak can compare with Burke. The same logic applies to those who shoose Mt. Snow, Stratton, and Okemo vs. the MRV, Stowe, Smuggs, and Jay. On any given day, the snow will be better, and the crowds smaller, in Northern VT than anywehre else in the East. Having larger mountains and deeper snow is not subjective in the least - it's quite easy to test this hypothesis.

In this day and age, convenience seems to outrank quality/diversity of terrain and the quality of snow surfaces. While that tells you much about the culture and times in which we live, it doesn't provide any insights as to which mountain is fundamentally better.

 

[ckofer]

Ok. I'll try Burke next year.

 

[jack97]

In this day and age, convenience seems to outrank quality/diversity of terrain and the quality of snow surfaces. While that tells you much about the culture and times in which we live, it doesn't provide any insights as to which mountain is fundamentally better.

Seems that part of this thread is hung up on semantics. IMO, "better" is relative to the consumer. Back several years ago, Cannon was the place I would go and I know the rest of my family would not enjoy it, for family trips we would go elsewhere. And I've known several parents who have echo the same opinion, some would go to loon or sunapee so that all can enjoy a day of skiing together.

BTW, thinking back on the season, I had one of my most enjoyable day after an ice storm, they had to close down half the mountain b/c the crew was still breaking off ice from the lifts, terrain was slick but I had a great time.

BTW2, I don't mean be singleling TW out or anyone else for that matter.

 

[riverc0il]

This may hold true from the Boston Metro, but from Central Mass or CT via 91, Burke is about the same drive as the MRV or Stowe. Maybe 15 minutes closer, at best. I know Burke gets high praise and I do want to try it someday, but it's tough to bypass the ski areas on the spine. Again, not to take anything away from the place, but I struggle with believing it's significantly better from a terrain and snowfall standpoint than the MRV or Stowe (haven't been, but...). I still want to give it a try someday.

I like Burke more than Bush *ducks* And I occasionally choose Burke over Mad River. Though I agree, the difference in perspective is much different coming up 91 (definite overnight from CT) versus 93 (just under 3 hours and day tripable from Boston).

Regarding the 30 trail comment from AdironRider, it all depends on a number of factors. Burke is FAR SUPERIOR to places like Stowe, MRG, Bush, and Jay on powder days when those places are crowded pending Burke picks up a similar amount of snow. Last season's Valentine's Day storm is the perfect example. I was lapping no lift line no competition instant refills every run at Burke while Jay's liftlines were maxed out. Burke does not have a high trail count, but it also has the lowest trail density out of any 2000 vertical mountain in New England. And the trees are simply sensational. I lived in StJ just down the road from Burke but had a pass at Jay, fair enough. But I still found my way to Burke a half dozen times a season when I knew it would offer better skiing. Not to mention, the mountain just has a vibe and attitude not seen at many other areas in Vermont save places like Magic. You don't go to ski Burke because you want 2200 vertical and the deepest snow. You go to Burke because you want a sensational, uncrowded, and reasonably priced skiing experience with stellar glades and good reliable snow quality.

 

[riverc0il]

The point is, noone is going to bypass 6 other (and I would argue better mtns) than drive 3 hours up to Burke, coming from Boston at least. It doesnt have anything to do with "weather above the notches" or whatnot. Its just not worth it. Why would someone from Boston on a day trip (or even a weekender) drive all that extra distance, when they can get better skiing at Loon, Sunapee, Cannon, Gunstock, Waterville, or hell even Pats Peak, etc hours closer to home. While some of the mtns I listed might not seem better to you, Burke really is way out in the middle of nowhere compared to most mtns. It is what it is, theres no use in trying to spin it any other way.

You can argue Cannon has better skiing (when the snow is right, the glades at Cannon are open half as long as Burke's glades) but you loose a little credibility suggesting mountains such as Loon, Bretton, Waterville, Gunstock, Sunapee, etc. have better skiing. Why would someone drive three hours to Burke from Boston? Because it is often superior skiing compared to NH ski areas except when NH has had recent snow and has its best terrain options open. Even then, NH trails get scraped off within two hours whereas Burke's trails stay fresh all day.

Have you skied all these mountains? You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I couldn't disagree more, and I try to avoid taking people to task about which mountains are better when ever possible. Loon has more non-skiing stuff as does Bretton and distance is an issue, sure. But purely arguing terrain, snow conditions, quality of the trails, natural snow, groomers, trees, etc? Burke is much more consistent in its offerings, especially the trees and sustained quality of groomers than NH.

 

[riverc0il]

I would also argue that other than Loon or Waterville crowds aren't a huge problem, but Ive also never been to Stowe or Jay on a weekend.

Compared to skiing right onto the lift at Burke, Jay's lines have been known to get long at times...

No lines to speak of at Cannon. I wouldn't ski Loon for free on a weekend due to the lines.

 

[riverc0il]

There is a HUGE difference in variety and quality of terrain between Burke and Loon. A completely different experience. But if you want the Loon experience of crowds, lack of expert terrain, and long lines, and blah cruisers, then Burke is not the place for you.

Just so it doesn't seem I am singling out Adiron here .... Loon has expert terrain. Actually, Loon has some trails that are steeper than anything at Burke. They are pretty crappy scraped down trails with horrid erratic bumps where bumps are allowed to build up. But there is expert terrain at Loon despite crowds and snow conditions being far worse than Burke. Definitely a different experience though.

 

[AdironRider]

Dont worry Riv, Im pretty used to being the minority when it comes to opinion here. I get it often enough and have thick skin.

I guess I should clarify actually. Everyone seems to think I would take Pats Peak or Loon over Burke given all things being equal. Which I wouldnt. Ive skied all the places I listed, and my arguments were along the lines of why people would go to the places I listed and their reasoning. Burke is a good hill, but my arguments were that for the Boston Metro skier, its not good enough to drive 45 minutes - 2 hours past the resorts I listed to ski Burke when its not that much better. Sure theres better snow and less crowds, but if Im considering Burke or say Gunstock on an average east coast ski day, Im taking the 45 minute drive to Gunstock over the 3 hours or so itd take to get to Burke. See what Im saying? Seems like the trailboss automatically assumes that because I said Id prefer closer mtns, and frankly being alot closer does make a mtn better, that I wouldnt enjoy Burke. Not the case.

Shouldve seen this coming. Burke, along with the Bush, MRG, Hunter, and in some cases Whiteface all have a following on this board that cant stand criticism. I should know, I defended Whiteface for years here.

 

[deadheadskier]

IBurke does not have a high trail count, but it also has the lowest trail density out of any 2000 vertical mountain in New England.

cough saddleback cough

 

[thetrailboss]

Seems like the trailboss automatically assumes that because I said Id prefer closer mtns, and frankly being alot closer does make a mtn better, that I wouldnt enjoy Burke. Not the case.

I never made that assumption.

As to the other points, again, as I said, not one ski area can be everything to everybody. Burke wasn't your cup of tea, so be it. It doesn't have what you like or appreciate. I don't see that as a big deal. That just means more terrain for the rest of us. :wink:

 

[riverc0il]

AdironRider, you pretty much explicitly implied that the closer mountains were better. Go back a few replies, a lot of people read your message the same way.

 

[riverc0il]

cough saddleback cough

Given some reports from Saddleback that have appeared on AZ this season, I think Burke has less density. Saddleback seems popular with the Portland/Portsmouth day trippers. At least two reports this season indicated lift lines in the double digits for minutes waited.

 

[ckofer]

I'll bet most skiers in New England don't have a good grasp of Burke's location. On the other hand, Cannon is in your face when you approach it. Like I said, I will give it a try next year.

 

[deadheadskier]

Given some reports from Saddleback that have appeared on AZ this season, I think Burke has less density. Saddleback seems popular with the Portland/Portsmouth day trippers. At least two reports this season indicated lift lines in the double digits for minutes waited.

I would be one of the ones who mentioned double digit lift lines. However, the trail density itself was VERY low. If Saddleback's main lift was a Quad like Burke, there wouldn't have been any lines. There were no lines to speak of on the Kennebago T-Bar the day I went or the other T-Bar for that matter either.


I'd probably call it a draw....again only based off of others TRs from Burke.