MLK Day .. Diversity .. An Open Request to MRG

[eatskisleep]

As much as I would like to see one day a year, where snowboarders are allowed, and maybe donate it to a charity, I don't think it will happen anytime soon.

I brought up the idea in the past, actually 2005:

Eatskisleep : Now I know that Mad River Glen is not extremely concerned with money but would you consider a "Boarder Day" (like say a non-holiday Wednesday) where snowboarders would be allowed on the lifts (but maybe not the single chair) just to generate some extra funds for the day and add a fun event that would probably generate a magazine article (free advertising at the same time)?
Eric Friedman : Actually we are VERY concerned about money! This is a very competitive industry with relatively slim margins and we take nothing for granted. I am constantly trying to find ways of increasing revenues and traffic, especially in our slower times. I have actually brought up this very idea to the co-op's board of trustees once or twice over the years (I have been MRG's marketing director for 10 years). My idea was to do it ion April Fools Day! The idea kind of went over "like a fart in church". The co-op board members are elected by the 1,700 odd skier-owners of the mountain. The shareholders CLEARLY do not want to allow snowboarding and the board reflects their views. While there was some very limited support for the idea the concern over the backlash and the "slippery slope" (allow this, then what?) more than offset any potential financial or public relations benefit.

 

[ctenidae]

I guess the share holders probably still cling to the notion of "Separate but Equal" concept. It's their house so to speak so I guess they can exclude anyone they like ... NOT that I am bitter or anything..

I don't think there's any "equal" element to it. Seperate, sure. I still don't understand the angst of snowboarders over MRG, though. I want to ride in the Kentucky Derby, but I drive a stock car. They shoudl allow me to drive. It's like wanting to play Pebble BEach with a croquet mallet. Or football with soccer shin guards. Or skydiving with an anvil.

Okay, maybe not the skydiving part.

 

[snoseek]

I guess the share holders probably still cling to the notion of "Separate but Equal" concept. It's their house so to speak so I guess they can exclude anyone they like ... NOT that I am bitter or anything..

It could be worse. you could be a boarder in new mexico with the only big resort not allowing snowboarding (taos). at least mrg is surrounded by areas as good.

 

[Phildozer]

I guess the share holders probably still cling to the notion of "Separate but Equal" concept. It's their house so to speak so I guess they can exclude anyone they like ... NOT that I am bitter or anything..

"Separate but Equal".

Are you *seriously* comparing not being able to ride a snowboard at MRG to racial segregation?

 

[Marc]

"Separate but Equal".

Are you *seriously* comparing not being able to ride a snowboard at MRG to racial segregation?

I can't believe the same guy that gets toasted while spraying his neighbor's house white with his homemade snowgun is actually formulated coherent sentences, right here before our very eyes!






The world really is ending.

 

[Phildozer]

I can't believe the same guy that gets toasted while spraying his neighbor's house white with his homemade snowgun is actually formulated coherent sentences, right here before our very eyes!






The world really is ending.

I have a ghost writer taking care of this particular thread for me.

 

[David Metsky]

Segregation is generally applied to people for who they are. MRG is restricting certain activities. Not the same thing at all.

 

[tjf67]

If MRG were to segregate it would mean they allow in another area. They flat out ban.

I like the idea of allowinf boarders once per year. I think it would be a hit

 

[nhski]

MMM .. racial certainly NOT but look up the definition of segregation and get back to me. I am talking about attitudes and how they are formed here. Come to think of it, when you call the ban a form of segregation it does seem to leave a bad taste in one's mouth...doesn't it ??

this is from Wikipeadia:

"Segregation means to separate from a group.

It may refer to:

Geographical segregation, separation of groups from a large population into different areas
Mendel's law of segregation, a genetic inheritance law which states that a character trait will be inherited from either parent but not a blend of both
Racial segregation, separation according to race or ethnic group
Religious segregation, separation according to religious affiliation
Security segregation, the separation of assets belonging to customers from the assets of the financial institution holding them
Segregated cycle facilities, separation of cyclists from the path of powerful drivers
Sex segregation, separation according to gender "

I have roughly followed this thread. The snowboarders complaining about not being able to board at MRG have their right to protest, but the deal is is that MRG is a private ownership. They can do with it as they please. I value private ownership and people's right to do with it as the please so long as they don't break the law. I do not think it is appropriate to compare banning snowboarders to anything racial.

 

[ctenidae]

It may be segregation, but it sure isn't Segregation.

 

[David Metsky]

My impression has always been the ban is the result of some "bad" experience on the skiers part with snowboarders.

The original reasons for the ban (derailing the Single, confrontation with Betsy) are not the reasons for continuing the ban. This is a common misconception.

The ban is in place today because it defines (along with slow lifts, essentially no snow making, little grooming) the character of MRG. That's it; nothing about scraping snow, rowdy boarders, bad feelings from before really enters into it. And since there are really no logical arguments against that, logical arguments aren't the way to change it. You'd have to change people's perception of MRG, and shareholder's perception in particular.

As such, there's no impetus to have a snowboarder day. It would serve no purpose for the people who make the decision. There's no olive branch to extend because the shareholders don't see boarders as the enemy. It's simply an activity that doesn't mesh with the character of the ski area.

(This must be the 10th time I've written a variant of this.)

-dave-

 

[ctenidae]

(This must be the 10th time I've written a variant of this.)

-dave-

There will be more, I'm sure.

Great marketing, though, the ban. We talk about MRG all the time.

 

[Marc]

There will be more, I'm sure.

Great marketing, though, the ban. We talk about MRG all the time.

Talk is cheap.





I'm not sure what I mean by that, but I thought if I said it with enough confindence, people would pretend it meant something to them too.

 

[ctenidae]

Talk is cheap.

So's your mom. Pretty sure that's not what you meant though.

I'm not sure what I mean by that, but I thought if I said it with enough confindence, people would pretend it meant something to them too.

Talk is cheap, though. Cheapest advertising there is.

 

[nhski]

I believe in private ownership. If their are truly a private club then they should not be open to the general public.

They are not a club, but a privately owned ski area. They can do with it as they please. If Cannon banned snowboarding, you'd have a completely different situation b/c they are owned by the state.

 

[David Metsky]

If Cannon banned snowboarding, you'd have a completely different situation b/c they are owned by the state.

Cannon bans hiking on the ski trails. I don't think state ownership really enters into it as this is about activities. The state makes all sorts of rules about what activities are allowed on their land at various times, If they felt they had a reason to ban snowboards (or sleds, or skis in terrain parks) you could argue with them through channels. But you'd get no traction if you brought up the discrimination issue because it doesn't apply to activities.

 

[nhski]

Cannon bans hiking on the ski trails. I don't think state ownership really enters into it as this is about activities. The state makes all sorts of rules about what activities are allowed on their land at various times, If they felt they had a reason to ban snowboards (or sleds, or skis in terrain parks) you could argue with them through channels. But you'd get no traction if you brought up the discrimination issue because it doesn't apply to activities.

To me, If cannon banned boarding it would be like a public golf course not allowing females to play. Public places have different sets of guidelines to follow vs. private places. The hiking issue is a safety reason, imo. Do you really think Cannon could get away with banning snowboarding? MRG only needs to say thats the way they want it. Cannon, i don't think could just say that, they would have to have a good reason. And yes i think discrimination could be brought up if they didn't have a valid reason.

 

[nhski]

The state makes all sorts of rules about what activities are allowed on their land at various times,

yes, but isn't cannon held to some sort of accountability just like Public officials are? They can't just do what they want when they want without any accountability.

 

[nhski]

If they felt they had a reason to ban snowboards

I think that is the crux of it, if they felt they had a reason, MRG doesn't have to have a reason.

 

[riverc0il]

MMM .. racial certainly NOT but look up the definition of segregation and get back to me. I am talking about attitudes and how they are formed here. Come to think of it, when you call the ban a form of segregation it does seem to leave a bad taste in one's mouth...doesn't it ??

Segregation is about people. Everyone is allowed to ski at Mad River Glen. There are a lot of good arguments (none that sway me) about allowing boarders to Ride Mad River Glen. The "segregation" argument is categorically false and illogical. No one is segregating any one, this is not separate but equal. This is no different than a Country Club or Night Club enforcing a dress code. You want to use someone else's facilities? You have to play by their rules. All people are welcome but equipment has been specified for use of the facilities. If you show up at Mad River Glen with a board, you would probably be offered either a free rental or lesson or something if you wanted to give skiing a shot I would guess.